Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Circumcision but no Circumcision Party

446 replies

thefruitwhisperer · 29/12/2010 10:58

DP is turkish but he and his family were all born in the UK and dont practise Muslim traditions apart from Eid. My DP is the only one who does Ramadan and thats only every couple of years when he can be bothered. They celebrate xmas and easter etc.

Ive agreed to have our month old baby circumcised as thats what DP wants and I agree that there are plus points, but Im an atheist so I would like all religious connotations taken out of the situation. I think thats a fair compromise (esp as its going to be quite hard for me, Im really scared) and I would like it to be a quiet decision between DP and I. His family will know the baby has been cut, why do we need to celebrate it in a party that is more for the sake of getting presents than it is anything else. I dont want the gifts.

DP has admitted that the only reason his family circumcise their babies is for social reasons, everyone has it done, everyone has a party, everyone gets money as gifts. Ive compromised on the actual circumcism, and I really really dont want to have a party. I will feel as though Ive sold my babies foreskin. Add to that, if theres no religious reason for it, why are we even doing it - and the only answer I can see is cultural/social/peer pressure reasons. I just dont see any reason to celebrate this pointless operation (obviously only pointless in this instance, I can understand where it is necessary medically or in religious circumstances) other than to show off that we have conformed and then get some money. Children who have their appendixes out dont have parties. I mean, I could equally argue that we have the baby christened catholic, my family all are and dont go to church.

AIBU to have the operation but draw the line at a party? I think DPs family are all going to be disappointed with me. And his grandparents apparently disowned his uncle for the same thing.

OP posts:
ChippingInSmellyCheeseFreak · 26/01/2011 14:24

A boy should have a penis like his Fathers - what a lot of shite. Pathetic justification for mutilation. Should we slice bits of girls breasts or give them enhancements to be like their mothers?

thefruitwhisperer have you made a decision yet?

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 16:06

Nobody said "should". You need to quote people properly if you will then go on to use expletives like "shite". Hmm

DS is not circumcised, like DH. That is not why we decided not to do it, but I had read at the time that it is a good thing for growing boy's genitals to resemble his father's re his self-image and sense of identity (not sure of the terms here). That is all I have said.

Imho, the very small chance of anything going wrong during circumcision is offset by the protection it provides from life-threatening diseases like AIDS and penile cancer.

There are so many other things to get worked up over that, seriously, I say let parents circumcise their children if they so wish. Almost certainly, the only cost will be a moment's pain and a few days' discomfort, and it might end up saving the kid's life.

MsBethel · 26/01/2011 16:57

You've seen statistics on the matter then?

I presume you have, because otherwise it would be absurd to conclude that "the very small chance of anything going wrong during circumcision is offset by the protection it provides from life-threatening diseases like AIDS and penile cancer".

MrSpoc · 26/01/2011 17:00

Come on your about to chop aprt of your son's tackle off for no good reason and you want to celebrate with a party.

MrSpoc · 26/01/2011 17:03

CoteDAzur your having a laugh with the arnt you

Imho, the very small chance of anything going wrong during circumcision is offset by the protection it provides from life-threatening diseases like AIDS and penile cancer

If it was that bad then nature would not of provided, us men with this magnificent hood of protection. Just make sure it is cleaned regularly and you will have no problems.

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:05

Imho, the very small chance of anything going wrong during circumcision is offset by the protection it provides from life-threatening diseases like AIDS and penile cancer

This is the complete rubbish I have read, written by a Muslim surgeon. There is absolutely NO PROOF that having a foreskin can increase the chances of AIDS (actually it should say HIV) or penile cancer. Or STD's. In fact, the foreskin is there to protect the penis from infection.

Why don't some people actually understand that??

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 17:09

I can't be bothered to dig up statistics, but maybe you would.

The fact is that any problem following circumcision in qualified hands is extremely rare, and rates of contracting AIDS for example are significantly lower. This has been shown to be true over and over in studies involving thousands of people.

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:14

You don't 'contract AIDS' by the way. I will take no notice of any written study which mentions 'contracting AIDS' or 'Catching AIDS' because it is factually incorrect...therefore negligable.

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 17:14

Deciduousblonde - I hope for your sake that you are very young. In anyone else, your inflammatory bolded brand of ignorance is quite sad.

Here. Read and learn.

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 17:16

English is not my mother tongue, you dingbat.

Do please try to bring yourself to excuse my misuse of a word Hmm

MrSpoc · 26/01/2011 17:23

CoteDAzur - if these statistics are that bad then surly in the UK we would be advised to get our hoods chopped off. in my 30 years i have never had a problem with mine and have never once had a doctor say "how is your hood, becareful not to get that AIDS" I think your fake studies are made up by someone with an agenda

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:24

I don't give a flying fig what your mother tongue is. There is a significant difference between HIV & AIDS and failure to see that is very dangerous indeed.

The articles claiming that cases of HIV are less in circumcised males is also dangerous, as studies have proved that this has actually made people think that they no longer have to practice safe sex. They are the dingbats.

MrSpoc · 26/01/2011 17:25

This study was done in SOuth Africa where AIDS is a real problem for them.

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 17:33

I would think AIDS is a real problem for its sufferers everywhere.

The fact is that circumcision reduces chances of getting HIV from an infected woman. I'm sorry if this is not what some wanted to hear, but it is the truth.

As I said before, DS is not circumcised so I don't have a dog in this race, so to speak. There are pros and cons, and it is up to the family to decide.

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:34

MrSpoc, there are studies which state that penile cancer is so rare that studies cannot be conclusive with regards to circumcision pros/cons.

Circumcision rates have heavily declined with regards to 'routine' operations in the last few years, thank goodness.

The real studies show that as long as you keep yourself clean it really doesn't matter whether you have a foreskin or not..and the supposed 'benefits' of not having a foreskin go out the window.

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 17:35

Deciduousblonde - So you have decided to stick with your prejudice and ignore scientific studies & facts? Shock

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:36

No, I have been reading scientific studies and facts about this for several weeks due to a conversation I was having with a friend of mine about this very subject.

I just haven't stumbled across the same ones you have.

CoteDAzur · 26/01/2011 17:37

LOL @ "real studies" Grin

As opposed to the "unreal" ones? Like, all those studies involving thousands of people that don't support your silly insistence that circumcision does not lower risk of HIV transmission?

MrSpoc · 26/01/2011 17:38

your having a laugh. If this is a serious issue as you are trying to make out, then here in the UK there would of been advice handed out to all new born babies.

Now in South Africa HIV / AIDS is rife and i can understand the need to give advice, but i do not belive for one second that removing your hood offers better protection. I was always taught in biology that your hood was there to "wait for it" provide protection (but always use a condom).

monkey9237 · 26/01/2011 17:39

Hi Marantha

FGM is illegal in the UK (for a few years now - assume you mean the UK but I have not read the whole thread, sorry if I am wrong) but there have not yet been any convictions. Last week there was a case of a doctor that had been struck off for performing FGM, who had asked to be reinstated. His case was turned down thankfully.

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:39

What prejudice do I have, pray tell?

monkey9237 · 26/01/2011 17:39

Oh no, really sorry, I see you are talking about boys, Sorry.

Deciduousblonde · 26/01/2011 17:41

Precisely MrSpoc.

Men are being told that, basically, as long as you haven't got a foreskin you will be protected against HIV?! hmmm..reminds me of an article I read about men only having sex with virgins to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS.

MrSpoc · 26/01/2011 17:41

Studies are always doen by people with an agenda. the main studies that i would take seriously are the ones that come from UK National / Goverment bodies and had nothing to do with religion.

So why is your study more conclusive than the studies that Deciduousblonde has been reading?

Bunbaker · 26/01/2011 17:42

"rates of contracting AIDS for example are significantly lower. This has been shown to be true over and over in studies involving thousands of people."

I imagine that this statistic is offset by the fact that this is done for religious purposes, and perhaps men of those religious persuasions don't display the same sexual behaviour patterns as uncircumcised men.