• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -26
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Supposedly is super safe and has health benefits, I once compared it to female genital mutilation and ooh boy was I corrected.

    Edit: the above is far from an endorsement. Some of yall could use some practice critical reading.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      655 months ago

      The health benefits are overblown and the evidence is largely from flawed studies. While not as debilitating as clitoris circumcision, it’s still genital mutilation and it’s regularly done in the US for no good reason beyond cultural pressure.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        235 months ago

        Thanks. I researched circumcision extensively when my son was born. These comments are from people who have literally “no skin” in the game.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Same. Don’t let anyone make you feel bad for not doing it. I don’t know how old your son is, but mine’s 25 and I’ve never heard any complaints. He never got an infection, and never got bullied over it.

          It’s a simple procedure they can get done as an adult if they’re unhappy with their penis, and at that point it’s their choice, which imo it should be.

          eta for anyone on the fence: they can always remove the foreskin if they want, but growing it back is another matter.

    • CashewNut 🏴󠁢󠁥󠁧󠁿
      link
      fedilink
      32
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      There’s health benefits to removing the appendix and tonsils too - so why isn’t it done wholesale on every kid born?

      Because it’s fucking barbaric chopping bits of you up without necessity.

      On top of that as science has progressed - guess what? They think both the tonsils and appendix have a purpose. They’re important for immunity.

      But there was never a fucking doubt that the foreskin has a purpose in human beings. So the removal of it for “health benefits” really is scraping the fucking barrel.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -115 months ago

        No. It’s not done because it’s invasive surgery. Like, are you for real?

        Ask anyone who had their appendix rupture if they wish it could have been removed while they were barely aware of the world and had nothing else going on in their life.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -45 months ago

            It’s a major surgery. But I’ve worked with a guy who had his removed preemptively after watching his brother’s rupture. It’s rare, though, because again, it’s major surgery to remove that ticking time bomb.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          There is strong evidence that it causes long term trauma. Just because you can’t remember something doesn’t mean it doesn’t have an effect on you. They literally strap you down, rip open the skin, and chop it off without any kind of pain management.

          It is absolutely insane. Go watch the procedure on YouTube or something to understand what actually happens. Then take into consideration you’re likely seeing a “best case” outcome.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -25 months ago

            No. Everything you said is wrong or unproven. Just stop making shit up or floating around these bizarre internet cults.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -15 months ago

                Lotta bad science in there.

                1. Pain is only shown in the control group with zero management.
                2. Behavioral tests were animals exclusively, with no pain management.
                3. The fact that there are people online upset about their dicks doesn’t necessarily relate to circumcision and could be multiple factors like mate rejection, erectile disfunction, sense of lack of control in the rest of their lives.

                The reasons go on and on for what could make a person blame something they perceive as outside themselves for the bad in their lives. Ex: “My dick doesn’t work not because of work stress and substance abuse! It must be because I was circumcised!”

                After the 4th bit of bad science in a row, I stopped reading their article because it was only going down hill from there as more conclusions got based on the initial studies. The author also called into question the validity of the study done in Africa, but this is rebutted by the CDC last year in their open letter regarding criticism of their stance.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      If you were uncircumcised now, would you choose to have it done at your current age? No. Then, why do it to a baby without their consent? It’s a bodily autonomy issue.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I chose to when I was 13 because ejaculating felt like my urethra was going to rip in half. If I somehow made it like that another thirty years I would absolutely have it done again.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          9
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          My father had to have his removed for the same reason (I know this because we had a conversation when I was pregnant with my son and said I wasn’t going to have him circumcised). That can happen, and I’m sorry it happened to you.

          I still didn’t have my son circumcised, and would make the same decision today because those issues are comparatively rare. It sucks a lot if you have to go through that, but preemptively removing the foreskin seems harsh considering how rare complications are.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            25 months ago

            I don’t disagree with you at all. I have two sons, first one is circumcised due to medical advice from our doctor and our second one isn’t. I try to inform myself as much as possible but ultimately depend on medical professionals that I trust to help me make the best decisions I can. I’m certain I’ll never get them all correct but I do my best to be informed. I’m fairly certain the online narrative of vitriol towards circumcising isn’t aimed at medically advised procedures but the loudest voices seem to be the most ignorant towards the realities of life’s nuances. While it is mostly black and white their is still some gray area that gets lost in what I assume is well meaning commentary.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          15 months ago

          Sorry that happened to you. It may have been God’s way of telling you to stop masturbating. /s All jokes aside, it should always be the individual’s choice.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            45 months ago

            I agree it should be the individuals choice and when medically necessary. Sometimes I feel the narrative swings too far the other way as there are medically necessary reasons.

            For context I don’t recognize uncircumcised penises when compared to my own even as a young teen. The head of my dick extended beyond the foreskin before I was circumcised. I had three strands of skin that connected between the head and skin around top of the shaft. One of the thinner strands tore once when I got an erection. The other two were significantly larger strands and would stretch and pull the head of my dick to the side when I got an erection. That bent angle hurt like hell inside when I ejaculated and just getting a boner would hurt from the strands of connective skin.

            All that to say the doctor told me I was getting a circumcision but other than those strands of skin I already appeared circumcised to my knowledge. I was left with scars on the head and shaft tissue from where they were cut off though.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -125 months ago

        Not a real comparison. A baby is given some sugar water and already lives in diapers. They don’t even bleed after it’s done, and you just put some jelly on the front of the diaper for the first few weeks. They experience no discernable discomfort.

        An adult male has gone through puberty and has a life that doesn’t involve sleeping through 18 hours of it and getting changed every couple of hours. The risk of infection is greater because you are an adult who doesn’t get the luxury of having every single need met 24/7 and getting to rest through your entire recovery.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          135 months ago

          Exactly. Babies can’t consent to have their bodies altered. Unless it is medically necessary, it should not be performed.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -85 months ago

            That’s not the criteria for making medical decisions for your child, though. You have a kid, you know this. We make decisions that might have lasting physical ramifications for them for years.

            I believe in vaccines and vaccinated my kid, but if someone felt the risks of them were too high, we don’t call it child abuse. And if someone delayed vaccinations, that’s not child abuse either.

            We can phrase things in extremes like abuse all day, but it doesn’t make it true. Injecting babies with modified hepatitis c in the first 12 hours of their life sounds like assaulting a child unless you know those words just mean they got a vaccine.

            I think the reason people don’t give a shit about online circumcision protesting is because most of them are cringe sycophants, using the worst language possible to alter someone’s opinion on the issue.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              6
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Watch a video of a circumcision and get back to me. If it’s not necessary, it shouldn’t be done. When my son was born, circumcision shouldn’t have even been an option. The “cringe sycophants” are the religious and miseducated nurses that asked me if I wanted it done.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -15 months ago

                I’ve seen it live. No video was needed. It’s not a decision to be made in the room, though. We were asked at the 20-week appointment by our doctor. She went through the merits and downsides. She was also younger than my wife and I, so it’s not just old-school doctors who ask or think there’s merit. She didn’t push either way, though.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  65 months ago

                  We weren’t asked until after birth. I was prepared and it had been discussed. But I’m sure many are unprepared. That’s why I’m advocating on here. Know before you go. Don’t look back in hindsight and think “oh well.”

        • @Cockmaster6000
          link
          85 months ago

          You are profoundly uninformed and clearly huffing copium to deal with the fact that you chose to mutilate your own newborn sons penis. Great work bro.

            • @slackassassin
              cake
              link
              15 months ago

              Who’s more obsessed, those who leave well enough alone or those who perform drastic, unnecessary, life-altering surgery as soon as a baby enters the world?

                • @slackassassin
                  cake
                  link
                  15 months ago

                  Less than you have. And it takes zero action to not cut a babies dick. Whereas it takes a special kind of obsession to do so.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -15 months ago

                    Some people believe in doctors, the CDC, the World Health Organization, and countless other institutions, and some people don’t. You’re the latter, and the last 4 years taught me that people in your camp are wrong about too many things, but also that you need to be told you are wrong before you get emboldened by your recklessness and idiocy.

                    It also showed me that you’re depraved sycophants that are almost always projecting some weird perv shit.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          85 months ago

          It’s a totally valid comparison.

          Removing the foreskin has real ramifications for not only looks but sexual pleasure (which, by the way, was why it was popularised by puritan Christians in the US – the original point was to stop teenage boys from masturbating by making it less pleasurable).

          Cutting off the foreskin at birth takes something from a man that he can’t really restore later, whereas doing nothing gives him the bodily autonomy to make that decision later. You can always remove it if you want, but once it’s gone, you can’t just grow it back.

          A baby is at your mercy and has no choice in the matter.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -95 months ago

            No, you only have a short window to make it a nothing surgery vs. a week+ recovery time.

            A baby will always be at their parents’ mercy. And if a parent feels the medical benefits outweigh the risks, they get to make that choice.

            Also, I don’t get why people keep bringing up Kellog and his ilk. It’s irrelevant. WHO and the CDC both cite benefits. That’s relevant enough for a person today without pretending the reasoning has to be based on old information.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      85 months ago

      It is as safe as any similar procedure, and comes with inherent risk. There’s a reason people talk about “botched circumcisions” which do indeed happen.

      The health benefits aren’t even a full percentage point difference. We are talking minuscule differences, and most of it is based on bad science. How can I know this? The studies were often done on grown adults, in third world countries. Disease is already rampant there, and considering rape is so prevalent in many of the areas that anti-rape condoms were created and distributed, there are no social barriers in place to prevent the spread of disease. And finally, they tested to see if there was disease spread almost immediately after the procedure had fully healed. Meaning the men who didn’t get circumcised had been fucking around for a much, much longer time than the circumcised men.

      And FGM is a pretty good allegory. We are talking about Male Genital Mutilation, why wouldn’t Female Genital Mutilation be similar? Because it’s normalized in some first world countries? You’re removing double the nerve endings when you remove foreskin vs destroy the clit, I’d say they line up close enough.

      Look at it this way, we all agree declawing cats is super safe and has health benefits. But it’s being outlawed all over the place because it’s barbaric. But we still cut baby dicks. It’s pretty fucked up.