Hello! Community Page
- www.noodad.com/ Jump to website »
-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- This is very true. The nipples crack and bleed--not a pretty site.
- But Mickey doesn't have them mouse teeth like Chuck has, look at his ferocious set of nibblers! Ggrrr!
- make sure your whole house is empty, buy her sexy short skirts and tops then have a romantic candle light dinner in the dinning room. after you guys are done, start making out with her right there,...
- 1. Be reassured that some women wait until a little further along, in case of an early miscarriage. If this is a concern for you consider waiting until after the first three months, when the rate...
- One of the early signs of pregnancy is extremely sensitive, sore breasts. Some women's breasts become so sensitive, in fact, that the sensation of a nightgown against them is unbearable.
2 years ago
2 years ago
1. There is no medical benefit to doing so. Some myths persist, such as circumcision helps with hygiene, but that\\\'s not true.
2. For us, there is no religious reason to do so either.
3. While I am circumcised, I don\\\'t buy the argument that you should circumcise just because the kid should \\\"look like dad\\\" or \\\"look like the other kids in the locker room\\\". That\\\'s silly.
4. Something like 80%+ of the world does not circumcise.
5. My wife did some research into why circumcision became a \\\"standard\\\" practice in the US. Based on what she found, it became widespread not all that long ago, in the 40s or 50s when there was a big to-do in the national discourse about masturbation. The argument went that masturbation felt better when uncircumcised, so if you didn\\\'t want your kid in the bathroom for 5 years whacking it when they were teens, circumcise \\\'em.
This argument is so stupid I don\\\'t think I need to remark further.
6. If you haven\\\'t seen a picture of a freshly circumcised penis, go find one. You\\\'ll instinctively cross your legs looking at it. *shudder*
2 years ago
we unknowingly sold our son\'s foreskin for fetal tissue research.
just glad to do our part...
2 years ago
My husband and I didnt circumcise our son for a few reasons.
I did some research just like Dans wife and came to the same conclusion, that there is really no medical reason for circumcision, as reported by the American Pediatrics Association. The stuff about hygiene and such only happens to a very small number of boys. And as such should be taught how to clean themselves by their father.
My husband is not. Seemed silly to do it at that point.
We also have no religious reasons to do so.
And though this may seem a controversial statement to some, I believe it to be mutilation of the male genitalia for no good reason whatsoever. People say its a useless piece of skin, whats the big deal? Well the big deal to me is, if people were lining up their baby girls to have parts of their labia removed, there would be a giant uproar.
2 years ago
2 years ago
We circumcised our son. I admit, it was done with little research other than it was what we were used to. But now we have a second son on the way. Is it going to create more problems if we don\'t circumcise our second one?
2 years ago
2 years ago
My reading of the AAP report was \"the risks are low, but the benefits are also low\"
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
2 years ago
There are cells in the foreskin that produce a substance that KILLS AIDS on contact. These cells are not found anywhere else in the body. There are many studies and they say many things. Here is a link discussing these studies:
http://www.circumstitions.com/HIV.html
You have saved you son an incredible amount of unnecessary pain (from which many babies go into shock because of and YES, babies have DIES due to circ). Someone asked me why we didn\'t circ our son.... my answer to him \"If when he is 18 he wants to chop off part of his penis, he can do it then!\"
2 years ago
Who do you think you are? Madonna?
:grin
2 years ago
2 years ago
Unclean...There is NOTHING UNCLEAN about an intacted penis. Do you wash under your balls? I would venture to guess you said yes. There is nothing more difficult to keeping an intacted penis clean then that.
Like Dad like son.... Are you going to stand next to him, drop trow and compare? Well if you are then OK. If not... what difference does it make.
While your son may have been given a local, those are just as dangerous in a newborn as the surgery itself. Babies DIE from anastesia and surgery or post operative infection. The procedure is totally cosmetic. Would you give your newborn daughter breast implants so she can be like her Mom?
2 years ago
2 years ago
You need to educate yourself before telling me I am foolish or irresponsible.
From what I remember, freedom of speach still is in effect. As for the rest of your dribble... it\'s just that. Have a good one!
2 years ago
Here\'s the abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?c...
And a good article from Dept. of Health & Human Services:
http://www.womenshealth.gov/news/english/602421...
Hope that is helpful.
As for the original question, we did not force circumcision on our son, for a number of reasons, fundamental human rights being the primary one.
2 years ago
2 years ago
He is horrified at the thought that, should he have been born American, his parents most likely would have thought they had the right to cut HIS foreskin off when he was too young to defend himself.
This is a very personal choice. Why do some people think it should be the parents\' choice, when the foreskin being cut off belongs to the baby? I really don\'t understand.
Personally, I feel very thankful that I was lucky enough to marry an intact guy (hubby has lots of other great qualities as well! :grin ).
When I hear my American friends (with their circed hubbies) mention having to use artificial lube in order for sex to be comfortable, and then STILL have problems with soreness/not being able to \\\'o\\\'/etc (not problems I have any acquaintance with, since dh is the only guy I\\\'ve been with, and he\\\'s intact), I can\\\'t help but be amazed that any parent would cut off part of their child\\\'s genitals and thus alter their sex life without that child\\\'s consent.
2 years ago
[B]AAP Neutral on Circumcision[/B]
The AAP does recommend against circumcision as a \\\"routine procedure.\\\" This is an important distinction. An intervention procedure would be the opposite and would be used to treat a problem. A routine procedure would be a procedure that is done as a matter of course in the birth process such as heel sticks.
They do give a nod to religious and cultural circumcision but there is a reason for this. The AAP\\\'s Taskforce on circumcision has been anywhere between 60% and 88% Jewish for 25 years or more. They are simply protecting their own turf. Additionally, all members of The Taskforce has written articles promoting circumcision before their appointment to The Taskforce. Only once has a physician who has written negatively about circumcision been nominated and he was refused membership.
[B]Your Kid, Your Decision[/B]
To believe this, you have to accept that men have no inherent rights of their own. Certainly we believe our bodies to be involate and it is our right to not have anybody take our body parts without our permission. Well, except for a man\\\'s foreskin, right? Why that singular exception? Why can\\\'t we take female genital parts? Certainly the genital parts are the most personal and private of body parts. Certainly the foreskin will not affect the parents so why should it be their decision to discard it?
[B]Dad/brother is Circumcised[/B]
The implication is that the child is going to suffer psychological/Emotional rammifications if he doesn\\\'t have matching genitals. What effect will it have? Will the child be traumatized? Depressed? Obsessive? Compulsive? Gay? Can you name one thing?
How will this manifest itself? Will the child have crying spells? Aggressive? Depressed? Sexually obsessed? A sexual predator? A pedophile? Can you name a single aberant behavior caused by the son not matching the Father/brother?
[B]The Procedure is Painless[/B]
Not according to the AMA. In a study done in 1999, they found that circumcision is always painful even with the best method of pain management. In a 1997 study, they found that 77% of infants were circumcised with nothing administered for pain at all and that less than 4% got the most effective pain management method. Few babies get any pain after care at all and those who do only get Tylenol. I find it odd that adult men will resist a vasectomy with full anesthesia and after care medication but yet will offer up their newborn for a much more invasive and painful procedure without a second thought.
[B]Circumcision Protects against HIV/AIDS[/B]
Yes, there were recent studies that showed this but there have some significant problems with those studies. first, the studies were scheduled to run 23 months and were discontinued after only 11 months. The men in the intervention group (circumcised) were circumcised at the begining of the study meaning they were \\\"out of action\\\" for the first 4 to 6 weeks of the study. In other words, they got a \\\"head start.\\\" While the reports of the study were reported in the popular media as having a 61% protective factor, in actuality there was only a 1.8% difference in the two groups. That\\\'s barely significant!
Additionally, the studies have not been published in any reputable medical journal nor have they passed independent peer review. We do know that The Lancet, the journal of The British Medical Association refused to publish it and it is suspected that the study was shopped to other reputable medical journals with equal results. In the end, the authors paid to get it published on an on-line only journal that was established only a year earlier. This on-line journal states it was established to publish studies of dubious scientific value.
Also, in a letter to the editor to the May 12th edition of The British Journal of Urology, the author revealed that the increased condom useage of the circumcised men went up from 22% to 36%, the exact percentage to achieve the results they attributed to circumcision. They also stated that the circumcised men with two or more sexual partners was reduced from 42% to 33%. With these two developments, it would appear that the circumcised men were at a higher risk of contracting HIV/AIDS.
[B]Women Prefer the Circumcised Penis[/B]
This is simply an outdated notion. The women saying this are in the 18 and over age group when the circumcision rate for The US was 80% - 92%. They simply are not familiar with the natural penis. Conversely, the women being born now will see a completely different male genital landscape. The circumcision rate for The US in 2007 will be less than 50% and in some areas, substantially less than 50%. for instance, the West Coast Region will have a less than 30% circumcision rate. Texas will be 25% or less and Florida will be 35% or less. Natural penises will rule and women will be very familiar with them and will have no irrational fear of them.
Lets look at some fears that haven\\\'t been mentioned:
[B]Infections[/B]
This is probably the most feared reason for circumcision but it is an irrational fear. The bacterial and fungal (yeast) infections males get are the exact same bacterial and fungal infections that females get. They are treated with the exact same medications and the prognosis of successful treatment is the same for males as for females. Circumcision is only used as a treatment for genital infections because it is socially acceptable. It is not used as treatment for females because it is not socially acceptable.
[B]Circumcision Has No Effect on the Penis[/B]
Research simply does not support this urban myth. Research shows that circumcision has a significant impact on the sexual practices of men. It also shows that circumcision induces early impotency. That is born out in the sales figures of impotency treatment drugs in circumcising countries and non-circumcising countries.
[B]Circumcised Men Will Be Thankful to Their Parents[/B]
As these issues become more of a public perception, that is highly unlikely. Men with their natural genitals are overwhelmingly satisfied with their state. A 1991 survey by Journeyman Magazine found that only 3% of genitally intact men had ever even considered circumcision for themselves and only 6/10ths of 1% had acted on it. That tells us that 994 out of 1,000 are either happy or satisfied with being allowed to keep their foreskins.
[B]Hygiene[/B]
The myth is that circumcised men have difficulty maintaining genital hygiene. This is simply not true. For infants and children, the foreskin is not naturally retractile and the inside of the foreskin can not be cleaned unless the foreskin is forcibly retracted which can be permanently damaging. The penis of an intact child is cleaned exactly the same way as a circumcised child. For an adult, the foreskin is simply grasped between the forefinger and thumb and retracted and then the intact penis is cleaned the same way as the circumcised penis.
[B]Its a Breeding Ground![/B]
Well, yes it is. But that is a good thing. The preputial space of intact males is an anerobic environment the same as the female genitals. There are \\\"good\\\" bacteria and \\\"bad\\\" bacteria. The good bacteria keep the bad bacteria in check in the male the same as they do in females. That is part of the immune system for both.
[B]Foreskins Stink[/B]
Well, yes they can. But there is a reason for that. With the myths surrounding the foreskin, some intact men practice \\\"extreme hygiene\\\" and destroy the anerobic environment. Antibiotics can do the same thing. There are two simple cures for this. First is to quit the extreme hygiene and re-establish the beneficial colonization. This can be accomplished two ways. For children and adults, they can apply plain unsweetened yogurt to the penis several times a day for a few days or the adult men can have sex with a woman and transfer her anerobes to himself.
[B]Intact Penises are Cheesy[/B]
The intact penis exudes a natural emolient called smegma. This substance is easily rinsed away with plain water just as it is for women who also produce smegma. With normal daily hygiene, it is no more noticeable on men than it is on women.
[B]Circumcision prevents Penile Cancer[/B]
Well, no, it doesn\\\'t. There might be some difference but that is very controversial. The rate of penile cancer is higher in the predominately circumcised US than in Scandanavian countries where circumcision is unheard of. To give you an idea of the prevalence of penile cancer, in a US city of 50,000 people with all intact men, statistically a case of penile cancer will occur once every 156 years. This is a rate of 1:110,000. The death rate from complications of infant circumcision is 1:7,000 so more than 14 infants will die for each man saved from penile cancer.
Penile cancer (squamous cell cancer in situ) is simply a skin cancer like the cancers people get on their faces and arms from sun exposure and is treated the same way. The cancerous growth is excised in the doctor\\\'s office under local anesthesia. Unless it is ignored and not treated for years is it fatal.
There is a new development in penile cancer though. This cancer is caused by the human papilloma virus the same as cervical cancer. Merck Pharmaceuticals has introduced a vaccine for HPV and it promises to make penile cancer even more rare.
.
2 years ago
1 year ago
1 year ago
In a report published in the British Medical Journal, a majority of women reported that they had less dry vaginal problems and more satisfying orgasms with intact men.
Let's have sex as Nature intended...intact.
1 year ago
There is now a noticeble lack of irritation of the previously exposed glans and meatus and this is certainly more comfortable for me and the glans is delightfully sensitive now.
Unfortunately, as a society it has taken us far too long to learn that we really should leave our babies as nature intended.
I have'nt heard that there has been any dramatic increase in all those 'nasty' conditions in the now mostly intact males in the UK where circumcision went out of style in the early 1950s.
1 year ago
The hospital said it could be done over the next day or so, so I asked many people. The only "for" answers I got were from Grandma's, and friends who gave me the "like father like son" argument. After three different physicians assured me it was not necessary, and was more philosophical than medical, I decided not to have our son cut. Now, in 18 years, he may disagree with my decision, but if any male who is trying to decide will search the WWW and see pics and video ( and they are out there) and still decides to circumcise, more power to them.
And yes, I am circumcised, but often wonder why and how different it would be.
1 year ago
To circumcise a a baby is makes as much sense as cutting out any other organ or tissue to prevent a health problem related to it. You wouldn't remove a baby girl's chest tissue to prevent breast cancer. This country has been brainwashed for generations. Routine circumcisions is outdated and ignorant.
1 month ago
3 weeks ago