does male infant genital mutilation (aka "circumcision") now happen just due to conformity?

Question

this is about what is most correctly termed nowadays as the type of cosmetic surgery called routine circumcision (removal of the foreskin due to genuine medical problems such as a correct diagnosis of phimosis is therefore outside the scope of this question). that it is cosmetic surgery is also the reason why i am asking this under the beauty section in 'skin and body'.

first it was religion

then we became affluent and stopped believing that

then it was medical advice

but research has now refuted routine removal of the foreskin as being beneficial - it is actually more beneficial to have one and protects from the things that removal of the foreskin was supposed to prevent in the first place, such as urinary tract infection.

now it seems to be just conformity why parents still ask for their infant sons' foreskins to be cut off.

am i right though? is it mainly conformity now?

responses from personal experience thanks. take the time to introspect.

please have a look at my other questions too. i am in australia when i ask questions all you pple are asleep:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ar9jVb0K8w99xvbd.rKi4Yjsy6IX?qid=20060707080635AAefmYo
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ao3.ybyzgSu3vK42STq5dTvsy6IX?qid=20060707022548AADYazH
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiktTdWzU9fjnznRgXqruovsy6IX?qid=20060706010959AADVTg3

Answer 1

Yes, it is genital mutilation. There is no good reason, Canadian health care stopped paying for the procedure years ago. A lot of people are misinformed about this.

Answer 2

There are reportably benefits to male circumcision. The potential area between the foreskin and the glands penis can harbor pathogens and is difficult to cleanse. This can lead to an increase risk of infections (including urinary tract infections) to a male and to his female parteners. Also, occassionaly the foreskin may become inflammed and may actually strangle the glands penis. However, risk of infection is low if the person practices acceptable personal hygiene and astute parents should be able to recognize the rare enstragled penile head in time for it to be fixed. So, yes, the primary reason for circumcision is societial pressures, not for medical reasons. However, the medical reasons provide the parents with a better justification for putting their little man through a painful and potentially deforming procedure than the traditional reason of "so that he will look like the other boys in the locker room."

Answer 3

I decided against having my son curmcised. I feel like it is purely a cosmetic thing(you would not subject your daughter to breast implant as child). In all of the resource I have done I have found that having the surgery done lessens the chance of infection or complications. This surgery also lessens sexual feeling because extra nerves are removed. I did not feel that I should subject my son to something so invasive just so he looks like other boys. Nowdays worldwide about 40% are curcumsized. So i dont think it will be long before most boys are left natural. Until then Im pround of the choice I made for my son(his dad is curcumsized if that matters). I also do work in a toddler childcare setting and there are a few that are not curcumsized. Hope this helps!

Answer 4

I am personally glad that my parents decided upon it, some 30 years ago. Back then it was still considered for medical reasons and better hygene. I would say that it is done for several reasons. There are still people who believe that it is mandated through God's word in the Bible. There are still people who believe, like my parents, that it is done for medical reasons. Ultimately it is the parents choice, but I would not jump to the conclusion that its done mainly out of conformity.

When you drive down the road, pick up a magazine or turn on your television... do you see advertisments trumpeting the wonders of circumcision? When you go to parties do peers bring up the discussion of should you or should you not circumcise your infant son? No, you don't. To say that its conformity, well there has to be an outside force or ideal that you are conforming too. Everyone makes there own decisions.

As I said at the beginning, I am personally grateful that my parents chose it. I really don't like the looks of being non-circumscised... it just looks plain nasty. It looks like you are still an animal. A chimpanzee swinging from the cages at the zoo, playing with yourself and throwing poo at onlookers. I would rather be set apart from that. :)

Answer 5

When the issue came up with my sons, now 10 and 13 I asked the doctor what he suggested. He said it was personal preference unless it was done for religious reasons, ie. if you are Jewish. It is NOT a medical necessity. I chose not to have it done because I figured God put it there for a reason and why put my babies through unnecessary surgery.

I am in my 40's and back then it was just common practice to do it. I personally have never seen an adult male who was not circumcised.

Answer 6

Although you may believe that it protects from certain infections, I have never seen evidence of that. I wondered this same question before my boys were born, and asked countless (shameless) questions, because I wanted to do what would benefit THEM in the future. Both of my family doctors gave me personal opinions (because I asked) that it is better to circumcise; my pediatrician also agreed. In my questioning, I also asked many other parents - I was surprised by their response. Several women told me that they have experienced countless vaginal infections due to their husband's foreskin (lack of circumcision).

I believe that it is a personal decision that should be made without condemnation from either camp of belief. As for me, I decided to circumcise my boys... and haven't had any complications or regrets since.

Answer 7

When I (female) was expecting a child, I knew if it were to be male, I would have him circumsized. Same as Dad but that's not the reason. My personal opinion (female again) is that they are prettier that way and virtually never smelly. Practically speaking, it would be easier for me as a mother to give baths.

Also had sexually active (elsewhere) ex-husband who passed on papilloma which lurked underneath foreskin.

Atheist. But I have read lately that there is new research for health preference for circumcision but can't give a well-informed answer.

Therefore, it's a combo of cosmetic/health/hygiene. No single reason would have been enough.

It was a girl!

Answer 8

Its for hygiene purposes,as people aren't as clean as they should or could be.This lessons the incidence of infections.

Answer 9

Uhm, if you aren't circumsized, it doesn't do anything bad.

Answer 10

no pain, no gain.