Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Multicultural families

Here's where to share your experience of raising a child or growing up in a multicultural family.

Original poster

Muslim DH, just had DS. I don't want to circumcise

197 replies

LittleMissRayofHope · 09/02/2015 18:48

I don't want to do it.
I don't see the need or point.
As far as I am concerned it is a completely unneeded surgical procedure that removes a part of my sons body without his consent.
DH does want it done though.

There is a likely split up on the near horizon as well and I'm worried that even if I refuse he could just do it during contact one time. He is on both cert and as its a private procedure he wouldn't need my consent would he?

OP posts:
CultureSucksDownWords · 13/02/2015 19:59

I guess I just can't understand why a specific culture or religion is enough reason to cause parents to remove parts of their babies' bodies when it is not medically necessary.

If someone suggested cutting off a bit of my son (or a daughter) I would be astounded and of course say no. If a religion demanded it I would question the validity of that religion or at least the validity of that part of the religion. If a member of my family attempted to force me to do it, I would do everything in my power to prevent it. It doesn't matter if the body part is a foreskin, an earlobe, a little toe, an appendix or anything else that was suggested.

ArcheryAnnie · 13/02/2015 20:00

But it seems in particular western culture that does not understand how important cultural or religious vales are.

This is utter bullshit, and I say this as an immigrant, and one who has a faith.

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:03

I'm giving you another perspective to the argument. You asked for health benefits so I gave them . noone circumcises for these reasons but there are health benefits as a bonus even if you don't think these benefits are important.
People circumcise for religious cultural or medical reasons.
Unless you are in a relationship with someone who wants to circumcise you have no idea of the pressure to get it done.
As I said before mist of the men in my family have it done for medical reasons so I decided to agree to it. I don't regret it.

Hakluyt · 13/02/2015 20:05

Infant circumcision is widely practised in Australia and the US among non Muslim, non jewish people too. Am I being a western imperialist by condemning them too? Oh, and by condemning FGM?

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:08

Annie that is my opinion ..

keepitsimple0 · 13/02/2015 20:09

I don't think all cultures that don't cut are western obviously they are not.

circumcision is prevalent in the US. apparently, about 100-200 babies die each year due to it.

But it seems in particular western culture that does not understand how important cultural or religious vales are.

I think people understand, but we aren't talking about wearing a turban or hijab here. this is an unnecessary and painful medical procedure. Sometimes you have to look at a culture and say, well that's crazy.

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:09

Fgm is different and illegal. It is never done fo medical reasons

keepitsimple0 · 13/02/2015 20:10

It is never done fo medical reasons

but it is done for cultural reasons.

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:11

Keepitsimple I suspect more people die from not having it done.

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:12

Yes cultural reasons. It is illegal in UK as it has no health benefits and causes alot of physical harm .

Hakluyt · 13/02/2015 20:14

"
Keepitsimple I suspect more people die from not having it done."

What are you basing that statement on?

HermioneWeasley · 13/02/2015 20:16

There might be medical reasons to cut someone's leg off, but we wouldn't think it was acceptable for a religious whim.

The fact that there are sometimes medical reasons to do something, doesn't mean we should do it when there aren't.

Hakluyt · 13/02/2015 20:16

There wr no medical reasons for removing a healthy foreskin. You were arguing that it's OK to do it for cultural identity. The ar people who argu the same strongly for FGM- thwt their girls will not be accepted in thei society otherwise. Exactly the same argument.

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:17

The health benefits I've already mentioned
But they weren't important.

Iflyaway · 13/02/2015 20:18

Sorry you're going through this.

As for the pp who said "If you're anti-circ. you shouldn't have kids with a Jewish or Muslim guy" (can't copy and paste), well, you need to have the convo before getting pregnant. To find out his feelings about this.

I was married to a Muslim man and he did NOT want his son to be circumcised......thank god!

iniquity · 13/02/2015 20:21

Fgm is done to women in poor countries that can't get married otherwise although I don't agree with it I understand why the mothers agree to it. I don't want to repeat my reasons for allowing circumcision as I feel like a Brocken record.
If you can't see the difference between fgm and male circumcusion then there is no point me replying.

ArcheryAnnie · 13/02/2015 20:25

What's the difference, then? Apart from these health benefits of male circumcision, which are negligable?

Hakluyt · 13/02/2015 20:42

"The health benefits I've already mentioned
But they weren't important."

Say more about them. Tell me the circumstances in which you would be happy for your sons not to use condoms because they are circumcised. Tell me the circumstances in which you think it's sensible to cut off a bit of a person rather than learn to wash it properly.

CadmiumRed · 13/02/2015 21:36

I am actually considering cutting off my feet because however well I wash them my Converse always smell in summer, and I keep getting athletes foot between my toes.

My In-laws are Muslim, no-one has shown the slightest interest in whether or not the DSs are circumcised. (not).

Norland · 13/02/2015 22:13

IME, wives of men who have been cut, tend to trot out the line that 'it's fine, never been a problem, great...'

Then there are those who witter on about their 'culture'

Male Genital Mutilation, where defenceless babies have an essential part of their genitalia removed, for the sake of satisfying the 'cleanliness' requirements of a bunch of goat-herders from 4,000 years ago, in a temperate climate such as that of the British Isles, is barbaric.

As the happy owner of a penis and a foreskin, allow me to offer a little insight.

The glans penis, is very sensitive; it's also easily damaged (try raking a nail over your husband's exposed GP and watch him jump).
The foreskin is essential for pubescent boys and their masturbation habits (20-times isn't unusual for a 14-year old) and whilst the foreskin can and does get sore under such an onslaught, it's nothing to what the glans penis can suffer.

At the age of 18, a friend of mine suffered a tightening of his foreskin, he could not longer pull it back; it's not rare, so he had a circumsion. Naturally he had to show us all and answer questions.

  1. Although he was a bit sore after the operation (this is 1982 I'm talking about) the pain was mostly gone after 2-days.

  2. He found masturbating - 18 year-old boys still do this even with a girlfriend - to be less satisfying.

  3. He also found that his GP became de-sensitised. Not to the point where he couldn't ejaculate but his orgasms were less intense

(I'm parpahrasing here and you can possibly guess his actual wording at the time)

He wasn't particularly bothered about losing that bit of him but neither was he pleased.

OP, if you can avoid this barbaric assault on your son, please do. If he feels the need to undergo a degree of self-mutilation to appease the deranged thoughts of somebody who has been dead for over four millenia when he's older, at least he can make that choice of his own free will.

sleeponeday · 13/02/2015 23:22

My husband is Jewish. He didn't want DS circumcised.

It's culturally supported in many places, as has repeatedly been said, for women to suffer FGM. No, circumcision isn't as bad, but does it have to be that bad, for it to be cruel? I can't imagine a situation where I would let someone cut away part of my child's genitals unless they had some awful condition that made that in their interests. A healthy child and his sweet, perfect little body, just for social reasons? No way.

It's the child's body. The only cutting there should be, without medical need mandating further, is the umbilical cord. It's not done in the best interests of the child, so why do it?

TywysogesGymraeg · 14/02/2015 10:01

One more question, then I'm buggering off...

Can anyone explain why the mother's opinions are more important than the father's here?

dementedpixie · 14/02/2015 10:06

Maybe because they are trying to stop a bit of their sons body being unnecessarily removed!

keepitsimple0 · 14/02/2015 10:08

Can anyone explain why the mother's opinions are more important than the father's here?

because the mother's opinion is more in line with current medical practice: don't do unnecessary medical procedures to people who are both weak and cannot consent.

that'd be my guess.

Norland · 14/02/2015 11:34

TywysogesGymraeg Sat 14-Feb-15 10:01:42

One more question, then I'm buggering off...

Can anyone explain why the mother's opinions are more important than the father's here?

One more question, then I'm off to football; would somebody defending this practice of mutilation, explain why it's more important to defer to a parent's wishes to remove a naturally occurring part of baby's body, than allowing said baby to grow up and decide for himself?

Tell you what TywysogesGymraeg, given there is a plethora of substitute milk products, shouldn't society arrange for all girls to have their mammary glands cut out before they have the chance to develop breast-cancer? At least Angelina Jolie was old enough to decide for herself.