Circumcision?

[Claire236]

I've never started a thread in AIBU before as it can be quite scary so please be nice. My dh was circumcised as an adult for medical reasons & ds1 had to have an operation so has in effect been circumcised. ds2 (almost 5 months) is as nature intended but I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to have him circumcised. Firstly as that way he will grow up looking the same as his brother & dad which I think could make a difference to how he feels when he gets a bit older. Secondly because it seems more hygenic. I'm unsure due to the fact that ds1s op for horribly painful & I wouldn't want to put ds2 through that for no good reason. I haven't spoken to my GP about this so don't know when is normal to have it done or anything but I'd really like to know if people think I'm BU considering this.

"I don't understand why people are getting so upset about this topic. It is just a small flap of skin as a lot of people have correctly said, so who cares if it is there or not. "

Maybe the owner of the penis in question would care. So maybe the owner of the penis should be the one to decide whether this incredibly sensitive and useful "flap of skin" should be sliced off or not.

I thought that circumcision was now becoming less popular in America?

Where does the hygiene come into it? My DH and none of my friends DH's or male friends, to my knowledge, have never any issues with their bits...except one male friend who kindly passed along chlamydia to his gf.

gorionine thanks for that, I'll look up that procedure before we go to the specialist.

I'm really worried about getting it done and certainly wouldn't be doing it for anything other than medical reasons. My DS has said it's his willy and he doesn't want it done, which is so hard as he's right of course, but I have to make that decision for him based on his future sex life. Which, according to some, won't be as good because of it.

I don't want him in pain either so maybe this plastibell method might be the answer.

Strangely this has provided my exh an opportunity to actually be a parent and have a chat with him about it.

It's threads like this that remind me how important it is to criticize religion constantly and keep on saying that it is ridiculous barbaric bullshit. If you seriously think that your imaginary friend wants you to chop bits off your newborn baby then you are a fucking idiot.

Digging into the depths of my psych degree from many moons ago... can't remember the exact details but certainly the essence of one study stuck.

There was a study done that was looking at rates of crying in newborn baby boys and girls in the US. Found that boys in the first month or two cried much much more than girls did. Was attributed to differences between boys and girls.

Somebody then attempted to replicate the results in the UK and couldn't find any differences in the amount that boys and girls found.

Took a while for somebody to work out that the only difference between the US and UK boys was that the majority in the US had been circumsized, whilst they hadn't in the UK. Whether or not they cried at the time the circumsision was done, it meant they cried on average a lot more than they would have done had they not been circumsized over the next month or two (sorry, can't remember exact time) which is a long term effect for a new born.

I know everyone in favour of circumcision says it is 'just a flap of skin' and the side effects are minimal, but earlobes are superfluous flaps of skin and we don't cut them off for no good reason. In fact I'm sure people would think you quite mad to suggest it.

If you are going to get it done, do it quickly.

We had DS circumcised for religious reasons and it wasn't something I found easy but we used the plastibell method and while DS didn't like the injection to administer local anasthetic, after that he didn't appear to be in any pain at all (although it didn't look pretty until the ring came off about a week later). A friend of mine had hers done for cultural reasons (her DH is South African where it is standard, like US) and he was fine and seemed pain free too.

So I would recommend this method but they will only do it up to 6 months (around here anyway) and after that they will need a general anasthetic, which I personally would avoid, especially when there is no medical, or even religious/cultural reason - general anasthetics carry their own risks.
All clinics/hospitals use anasthetic of some kind, don't worry. Take good care of it afterwards as infection is very common, although easily treatable.
Good luck.

Sorry, but no they don't all use some form of anasthetic, thats why some babies go into deep shock.

Not to mention the fact that until its healed they are weeing into an open wound which is horribly painful! Quite frankly after giving birth I won't pee without pouring water because the pain of peeing on grazed skin is horrible. Whatever you do the baby is going to be peeing onto the wound and having to put up with it! That is the reason that the circumsised babies mentioned in the post further up cried more.

Please feel free to take a look at the video I posted up thread if you want to see what actually happens during a circumcision.

Am I the only person who thinks there is an irony in having an unnecessary operation on health grounds where post-op infections are very common?

And I find comparing inoculations with circumcision utterly bizarre

Dollytwat - please don't be concerned about 'ruining' your sons sex life. Personally I enjoy sex with a circumcised bloke more than an uncircumcised one - I am not going into detail .

I haven't read all the thread, but I feel for you having to make a medical decision for a child old enough to say they don't want it done, but possibly not old enough to make an informed decision - is there any way you could wait a while??

Jellybeans & others who are horrified that I might say I prefer sex with a man who is C - it's no different to saying I prefer tall men to short men. It's a difference. I am not asking all men to go and get cicumcised nor refusing to have sex with one that isn't!

I would not get my son circumcised though, not unless there was a very, very strong medical reason to do so.

ChippingIn - won't ask for TMI but I guess it depends on how fast it takes to get the man aroused. Someone else suggested the foreskin was "in the way".which made me chuckle.

"I also think it's much nicer for the woman."

Thanks ScaredOne for putting the question I was considering asking. One of my other thoughts was "in what way" had commeuneimage's two Jewish lovers been "best".

Again, it might cross a personal boundary so don't answer if you don't want to, c, but was it, by any chance, that they took more time before and during ? Which might suggest some lessening of sensation...

"As for it causing loss of sexual pleasure, I can only say ... I reckon it's a complete myth."

It would be exceptionally difficult for your Jewish lovers to compare...

Someone else (much earlier) wrote
"although I tell them to wash face, arms, legs, tummy, bottom there isn't a foreskin-specific element to that. Nor even a willy-specific element. Surely this is normal?"

I don't remember when my Mum first mentioned it (*) to me but yes, it was brought up, and as someone else hinted, it depends on the ages of your DS's (similarly, any discussion about "dirty old men" hanging about in public toilets, is another conversation at some other age as a "just in case" story, because they won't go into the Ladies with Mum forever).

(*) my dad died when I was ~6 and in any case, he spent more time in the British Legion club than at home before that, so I got the essentials from my Mum - however it was hardly 'new' to her since she'd been married and widowed in 1939, and had my half-brother to bring up, alone, before her second marriage, much later, to my dad.

"I don't go around talking to men about their foreskins as I am female."

quite understood, Mum2lovelyboys, that you were relating information discussed between DH and his friends

"inflammation and infections are what I mean"

Thanks for the clarification. I don't know whether any groups of people have a greater susceptibility, but I had to go searching (found a Dr Rockoff (!) on one medical website, and understand there are at least 2 or 3 different possible conditions, but in 50 years have not encountered them, nor heard any friends or acquaintances mention similar problems).

"Circumcision is a radical step and should only be used as a last resort. The foreskin is a valuable part of normal male genitals and should not be removed unless absolutely necessary."

I'll have to hunt down the source as I had copied and pasted it from some other website.

I feel confident it sums up the views of many men in the UK. Of course, if it needs to go, for medical reasons, that's quite different.

WebDude - it doesn't have anything to do with how quickly the man gets aroused, not at all. In 'some' men the foreskin does 'get in the way' I am not at all sure why you are chuckling over that??

TMI alert - if the fit is a little snug, when the bloke is C you can still feel him moving in and out, sometimes with a bloke who isn't C it feels like the foreskin is in one place and the shaft is moving inside that, inside you, so not a lot of sensation.

Oral is also nicer IMO with a bloke who is C - more solid, less moving bits...

However, it's not enough of a deal that I'd ask beforehand and as I said before - there is no way I'd want/need/expect/ask a man to have this done simply for these benefits and certainly wouldn't have my DS C'd....

Oh good god, tell me how I end up having these conversations with people I barely know, on a public forum....

Horses for courses.

Out of the 30plus men I have slept with, at least five had been circumcised, two for religious reasons and three for medical. I can honestly say there was no extra pleasure, sensation, time or anything with a circ and only more ease with a uncirc on a quickie....also I prefer the look of an uncirc but then maybe that's because the first few I had ever seen had been uncirc?

Besides cutting your son's penis for the possibility that it may or may not give them a better sex life is weird.

Thank you for the video suggestion KickArseQueen, but I do know what happens, I did thoroughly research it before having it done to my son. While some religious circumcisions are done without anasthetic, no clinics or hospitals will do it without anasthetic, which is what I was telling OP - certainly she would have the option of her DS being given anasthetic, which I'm sure she would choose, so don't think it's necessary to mention circumcisions done without.

The plastibell method does NOT mean they are peeing into an open wound, and I would have thought that if DS was in agony every time he peed afterwards, he would have at least whimpered? As it was, he was entirely normal afterwards. I can only go on that.

I'm not getting into the rights/wrongs of it, I just wanted to give OP some practical (hopefully helpful) advice as someone who has some experience of it so that if she does it she can choose the "best" option for her son.

Both my DS' recovered from plastibell within 5-7 days. No pain relief required as they were NOT in pain. A simple bath and soap to the area each day to keep it clean. My DS1 has suffered more pain by scuffing his knee when falling of his bike.

Snorbs you're an uncirc'd man so your view on the sexual side of this subject is very one sided. Maybe you need to talk to men that are circ'd and see what they have to say. From what research I have done, there is no scientific proof that sexual pleasure is any less for a circ'd man. My DH is Jewish and part of a large Jewish community. Not one man has said to him that they wished to be uncirc'd. I personally prefer the look and the feel of a circ'd penis, as many women do. My DH certainly carries it off well

"Not one man has said to him that they wished to be uncirc'd."

a) not an option
b) if it is considered "the norm" within some religious group, why would anyone dare suggest something so "against the grain"
c) having grown up in that condition, I would consider it strange to express a wish to change (in either direction) for the sake of it.

As for proof, there are bound to be some changes because the glans no longer has the foreskin for protection against accidental rubbing within underwear, at the very least...

I'm not working in the field, but came across some 240 references. From some of the links it would appear to be an anti-c. website whereas my search was for studies on loss of sensitivity. There is a rather full-on comparison of 'uncut' and 'cut'.

Seems many of the research papers are dated (1980s through to mid/late 90s) but were reviewed in 2005, presumably for accuracy.

Oh, and as for being one sided (as is suggested about Snorbs) - one might suggest that someone married to a 'cut' male where religion has been the cause is also likely to be one sided as many of the people within the circle of friend might be similarly religious and thus being 'cut' is the norm, and how many wives will complain about their DH {they would surely keep past experiences to themselves, for the sake of their marriage, even if there were past 'uncut' lovers who gave them considerable pleasure too}.

webdude I now know why you have your name. It's so easy to google and come up with all these references, it's a highly debatable subject.

(FWIW, I hate using Google - even hate the media using it in place of 'search' - not sure anyone else would care but in terms of search engine, the country where it ranked highest was the UK. I tend to recommend MetaCrawler as it pulls in results from several search tools, but it doesn't have a "UK only" option).

M2two - name is more to do with me building websites to be honest. I was shocked at how many references there were (simply because, with no past 'problems' myself, I had not gone looking for sites about medical issues concerning the penis, and that was the first site I viewed). I also have to point out it covered the aspect I was most curious about - sensitivity (or possible loss of it, because of changes, necessary to protect the glans).

It's clear there will be strongly held views (perhaps mostly from a religious angle) that there's a minimum of, or 'no' pain, and it is 'good hygiene' as well as tradition, while many 'uncut' men such as myself will be unlikely to alter our view that it is only ever necessary on medical grounds.

Well, I'll agree to differ with you M2two, but you can surely see that if you suggest a view is too "one sided" you should expect a response in a similar vein.

What I find shocking is the casual reference to a child's recovery as if 'recovery' is a non word. Recovery meaning healing.....and healing from something unnecessary.

Just to add another take - a poster referred to her DS having to go through painful 'stretching' procedures when his foreskin was too tight, etc. and wished she'd done the circ sooner.

My nephew was circumsized at birth (lives in the US, very common culturally), and at 2 years old got an infection around his glans, which worsened if he got an erection - he had to be stretched 3 times daily and it became very red and inflamed, so circumsizing isn't always the best answer, as it can still happen.

Blimey, looks like I'm a lucky old dude then!

Both my brothers were circumcised as newborn babies, and my younger brother at least has never forgiven my parents for what he feels was an unnecessary intervention which he definitely feels has affected his sensitivity. My older brother is less forthright in his views on this, but the distinct impression is that he is not happy that it was done either.

There are studies which show that interventions such as circumcision without adequate pain prevention can permanently lower the individual's pain threshold due to changes in various of the spinal pain receptors.

Unless or until it proves medically justified, I wouldn't even consider it.

soapsy How would your younger brother know it's affected his sensitivity?

posieparker 'recovery' for want of a better word. My DS' were never in any discomfort or pain. They couldn't feel anything going on down there. If you had a DS who needed his foreskin removed then the plastibell method wouldn't have to worry you or anyone else in that situation. I'm not asking for anyone to agree with my actions. I'm just talking of my experience.