2007-05-06 09:51:21 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Newborn & Baby
Circumcision is in no ways a pretty site. But It is a parents decision. No matter what everyone else says and how many will disagree with it. It is better for them in the long run IMO. I am glad that I had it done with my son. And it wasnt just my decision, but his fathers too. My son is a healthy 1 year old boy that is very happy and full of life. And just because he was doesnt mean he remembers it. Everyone will have their opinions and we as mothers and fathers will do what is best for OUR children. What I hate is when these people start talking about if it was girls and etc. It is a totally different subject that should not even be brought up because it doesnt happen to girls in the US
2007-05-06 10:03:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 7⤋
Circumcision is a human rights violation, and the worst kind, as it is a violation of our newborn's rights. It is the worst kind of multilation. It is a functional, necessary, and sensitive part of our little baby boys penis, and we allow doctors to amputate it. Why? There are NO reasons! Because it is "cuter" or it looks more "like daddy's?".... that is just absurd. Would you give your newborn a nosejob, because you wnated it to look "cuter" or while your at it (the circumcision) why don't you have the doc make it bigger and hairier, so it really looks like daddy's. You say you do it for "cleanliness" reasons? Ok, well then, you better amputate your baby boy's fingernails, cuz god knows if you don't teach them HYGEINE then they are way more uncleanly and gross than you can imagine. And breeding grounds for infection.
We are starting off our boys by introducing violence to their genitalia, FOR NO MEDICAL REASON. How aweful, ignorant, and barbaric is that???
Yes, it is multilation: multilation of our son's, mutilation of their whole sexual selves, and mutilation of their trust in us, as their protectors and parents.
2007-05-07 10:14:12 · answer #2 · answered by teagansmummy 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
mutilation - 1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting.
2.to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.
of course, why does this even need to be a questionl, it's not a natural reaction to grab something sharp and cut a piece of your baby's penis off or anything. It's errogonous skin and there's nothign wrong with it, u take care of it like any other body part or else like any body part, it'll smell etc, any problem is rare and most likely can be dealt with non surgically and when it does amputation should be as rare as an arm, leg or ear, and it's not your body, so it's not your choice
2007-05-06 18:41:41 · answer #3 · answered by Mat 4 · 7⤊ 2⤋
I have always said, when having a 'soapbox' moment, than one of the first 3 things I'd do if I were prime minister is abolish the circumcision of babies. I think it's OK later in life, for medical reasons or when the recipient is old enough to give understanding consent.
A few years ago, a gay couple went to prison for mutilating each other's genitals - not my cup of tea, but these were consenting adults. However, innocent babies are mutilated daily in the name of religion or 'hygiene'. I think it's barbaric.
2007-05-06 16:57:30 · answer #4 · answered by roxana 1 · 11⤊ 3⤋
Yes it is a form of mutilation or castration.
2007-05-07 01:53:28 · answer #5 · answered by sheila l 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes, and of the first order, too! My ex and my son are not circumsized, and are very glad not to be (my daughter-in-law is happy about it, too). It is OK not to be circumsized as long as you follow the doctor's recommendations for stretching and cleaning the foreskin. Bubble baths are a bad idea, though!
2007-05-06 18:48:28 · answer #6 · answered by boogeywoogy 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Whether you call it mutilation or not, it IS an unnecessary procedure medical wise. The AAP quit recommending it in 1994. And NO other major medical organization in the world does anymore. There, as far as I'm concerned, is no other reason to have it done. To look like dad is a bit selfish on dads part-perhaps its dad that doesn't look like the son, since the son is the natural one? Because he will be teased in locker rooms? Before using that one mothers need to research just how many boys in this country are NOT cut now, the circ'd boys are more liable to be the odd man out. For cleanliness? Perhaps I should just teach my son to use soap and water? Or should I just tell him straight up Id rather cut off a valuable piece of your anatomy than to take the time with you? Because it looks better? Well hell, whos going to stand there looking at their sons penis? And how many are "pretty" cut or not?
2007-05-06 16:59:49 · answer #7 · answered by Betsy 7 · 8⤊ 6⤋
I did not circumcision my baby but i wish i did
2007-05-07 09:27:22 · answer #8 · answered by me and you 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No it's not mutilation. I personally have chosen to not circumcise my son but I don't belive it's mutilation either.
2007-05-06 16:54:50 · answer #9 · answered by I smile because of them ♥ 5 · 5⤊ 7⤋
I think it's the parents' decision... We chose not to have our son done and we have never had any issues.
2007-05-06 17:21:01 · answer #10 · answered by KaseyT33 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋