Need some info on circing

[abunchoflemons]

heres what i know. no real difference but military said more issues with not keep clean for uncir in some war situations in one read I found. easier to clean for me with brachial plexus to circumcise. two different ways to do it bedsides like Jewish way. my mom had boy not cir in school and didn't want to do breaks because rest of boy were cir. I read uncir more pleasure for girl but can hurt guy as tip is more sensitive. penis cancer higher for Uncir than not. heals faster if you cir when little than wait and do later.

[abunchoflemons]

if protected intercourse it takes more to use condoms for uncir. my cousin had horrible issues and my bro did so that was a factor too for me for uncir..

[tajordon]

Great info! Thanks for the links and facts. I'll keep doing my research!

[DesertRat]

I think the idea behind circ'd men being "cleaner" is that smegma forms under the foreskin in an intact male. (women also produce smegma-- it's totally normal) So an intact man would have to push back his foreskin and rinse underneath it, usually in the shower.

For babies and young boys, the foreskin is attached to the penis. So nothing is forming underneath the foreskin. The foreskin is not retractable until sometime before puberty, but on average age 10. There's more of a hygiene issue with circ'd babies because the circumcision creates an open wound that it peed and pooped on. Intact babies and boys are protected by their foreskin and are VERY easy to care for.

The way I see it, you could cut part of me off to be "cleaner." However, as a woman, I've learned what I need to do to keep myself clean. And because there are benefits to having a foreskin, I don't believe it's worth cutting it off just so save a man a few minutes in the shower.

[lynn97]

Originally Posted by DesertRat I think the idea behind circ'd men being "cleaner" is that smegma forms under the foreskin in an intact male. (women also produce smegma-- it's totally normal) So an intact man would have to push back his foreskin and rinse underneath it, usually in the shower. For babies and young boys, the foreskin is attached to the penis. So nothing is forming underneath the foreskin. The foreskin is not retractable until sometime before puberty, but on average age 10. There's more of a hygiene issue with circ'd babies because the circumcision creates an open wound that it peed and pooped on. Intact babies and boys are protected by their foreskin and are VERY easy to care for. The way I see it, you could cut part of me off to be "cleaner." However, as a woman, I've learned what I need to do to keep myself clean. And because there are benefits to having a foreskin, I don't believe it's worth cutting it off just so save a man a few minutes in the shower.

Totally off-topic but I never knew what this stuff (the smegma) was called for my body. I just thought I was weird for it being there and I clean it out in the shower. Thanks for the info on this front.

Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

[chandni3]

The main benefit is lower risk of urinary tract infections. The insert my midwife gave said 1 in 10 circ boys will have a urinary tract infection and I believe it's like 1 in 6 uncirc boys will have one. Other benefits are minimal, some lower risk of contracting some STDs and HIV. There are other things to to consider like the type of circumcision if you're going to do it and who will do it and making sure proper pain relief is given. If you don't really want to than don't let anyone pressure you. They may make a fuss at first but they'll eventually forget about it. I believe the only good reason to do it would be a religious one or if they developed numerous UTIs but then it can be done later. More and more baby boys are not circ nowadays.

[birdinhand]

This is from an info sheet I give to my classes:

Appropriate Use of Interventions: Routine Infant Circumcision (RIC) What to Know: • Although a number of studies suggest that circumcision may be of some benefit in adulthood (a reduced risk of rare penile cancer and decreased risk of HIV infection in some populations), no evidence confirms that circumcision needs to be performed in the newborn period in order to prevent conditions that present in adulthood. • Because the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recognizes RIC as a cosmetic procedure, not all insurance companies will cover it. • Worldwide 30% of males are circumcised, most of them Muslim. • In the US, 2014 is the year when more males will be left intact than circumcised. Why People Choose to Circumcise (usually not medical in nature): • Parent has a strong desire for infant son to look like his father (dad is circumcised, so baby is circumcised). • Religion (Jewish or Muslim). • Belief that a circumcised penis is cleaner (less than 20% of European men are circumcised, and they somehow keep clean). • Hearing the story of someone needing circumcision later in life and feeling RIC would be better now, to prevent a later problem. • More uncircumcised infant males will experience urinary tract infections in the first 3 years of life, but protective effects of circumcision diminish over time. • There is a 2–10% complication rate associated with RIC. A 2% complication rate means circumcising 1,000 urologically normal infant males will prevent 9 cases of urinary tract infection, but cause circumcision complications in 20 babies. • Although practitioners advocate a number of pain-management strategies, no pain medication completely eliminates the pain newborns feel, and babies also experience post-circumcision pain. How to Make Your Decision: • Balance facts with feelings and try to be open as you educate yourself. • Look for additional information in books, online, and from your practitioners. • Check to see if your insurance covers the procedure. • Ask your pediatrician his or her medical opinion on circumcision.

[blessedwifenmama]

This is an excellent article that discusses the benefits and risks of infant circumcision. One thing I like most about it is that although the author is clearly against circumcising infants, she explains things in a non-judgmental tone and avoids using inflammatory language (such as "genital mutilation", etc), which is often found when reading intactivist articles/posts. As a mother who deeply regrets having my son circumcised, I don't need to be told that I've mutilated my son's body and ruined his sex life for the rest of his life. I really threw my DH for a loop when I told him that if this new baby is a boy, we won't be having him circumcised. If he pushes the issue, this is the article I will be showing him.

[DesertRat]

Originally Posted by chandni3 The main benefit is lower risk of urinary tract infections. The insert my midwife gave said 1 in 10 circ boys will have a urinary tract infection and I believe it's like 1 in 6 uncirc boys will have one.

Statistic vary depending on the source, but 1 in 10 and 1 in 6 is WAY too high. Most sources quote something less than 1% with a VERY SLIGHT increase in intact boys. (which means 100 babies have to be circumcised to prevent on boy from having an UTI) However, here a really interesting article about how the foreskin protects against UTIs. It's theorized that the reason the initial study showed an increase in UTIs in intact boys is because the study was done during a time when mothers were taught to forcibly retract their son's foreskin, which likely caused the introduction of bacteria. If you've ever see how tightly closed a baby's foreskin is, this makes total sense to me.

http://www.drmomma.org/2009/12/how-f...ainst-uti.html

[MyLovely]

Just wanted to point out that I am a very staunch intactivist, I just feel that sweeping the research under the rug doesn't make us look very good. I haven't looked in depth at the African studies, because they in no way translate to the western world. The risk of UTI is lower, but as we all know, it's absolutely no big deal to take some antibiotics. As for penile cancer, I pointed out that the risk is already so very small, the risk of severe complications from circumcising are undoubtedly higher.

All in all, this is the sort of issue where you have to hunt to find evidence to support it, and the "pros" aren't really all that applicable in the first world, where condoms abound, we have great healthcare and access to showers.