UberDave…
Congrats on your new kiddo!
Also, disregard the naysayers. Take comfort in the fact that your son will never earn the nickname “Anteater” when the other boys in gym class see him in the shower.
It’s called “liposuction”. People pay lots of money to have it done.
As for the topic of the thread: I am amazed by how seriously people take what I myself perceive to be a non-issue. My mother’s rationale for having had it done to me was “like father, like son”. Personally, it’s never bothered me. It’s not a decision I’m ever going to have to make myself, though, as I have no children and intend to keep it that way… 
But to those who, as adults, ascribe various traumas and neuroses to the fact that they were circumcized as a child, these people need serious help.
Congratulations, UberFamily! I’m sure you’re son is going to be one gorgeous little boy, know matter what his penis looks like.
An aside: I’ve never actually seen an uncircumsised penis in real life. I think I was 19 or thereabouts before I even saw a picture of one. Yes, I was sheltered.
We went through this when I was expecting TinyTot, in the end I was so overwhelmed with information that I let his father make the decision, which was to circumsise. I think his decision was mostly based on how Nicholas would feel having a penis that looked different from his fathers and his peers. Of course, now he’s going to German school (the boys here aren’t routinely circumsised) so I imagine that one of these days we’re going to have to have a little talk.
I don’t know whether I should go into this now that you’ve already had it done, but… I think I know a thing or two about foreskins, being a gay Canadian male. The rates of circumcision are much lower here than in the US, so I’ve had some diversity of experience.
Sex with an uncut man is not appreciably different from sex with a cut man. People yammer on about hygiene, but my dad taught me to clean under my foreskin in the shower. How difficult could it possibly be?
Conversely, I’m given to understand that sex as an uncut man is different; since there’s more skin, there are more nerve endings. Also, less or no lubricant is required for masturbation, since you’ve got all this lovely soft skin between your hand and your glans.
My father is also uncircumcised, so that didn’t factor into it. But I really don’t see how it would enter into it. I also don’t see why you would want to cut something off your kid so he didn’t feel weird in high school. I got flak for being a queer genius, too, but I wouldn’t have wanted to change that.
I consider it unfortunate that your son was circumcised, but I hope it works out all right for him.
—>Wow… his wife calls up and says “now is the blessed moment, probably the most important moment of either of our lives, get your butt over here and drive me to the hospital”, and he stops to post on the SDMB first… Awesome!!!
seriously, though, congrats. And, like others, I can’t believe the intensity of opinion expressed by some of the participants in this thread…
I dunno, I guess it’s just an emotional issue for some people. Myself, I consider my foreskin a blessing, and when I think about it being cut off… well, horresco referens.
Kids will get mocked. It’s a fact of childhood. Whether it’s for their dick or not is really a non-issue. The fact of the matter is, circumcison makes the penis less sensitive, and therefore, sex becomes less pleasurable. End of story. The “naysayers” are simply the people that understand that in the long run, most people would choose heightened sexual pleasure over the opportunity to escape a particular flavor of childhood taunting.
I don’t mean to be harsh, but frankly, I feel very sorry for the child mentioned in the OP. He has had a very serious decision made for him, and he has no way of reversing it. Ever. At least if he was left uncircumcised, he could have decided to be circumcised later on, if he really wanted to.
Uh, no. Kids at a certain age are terribly sensitive about sexual issues, and being mocked regarding one’s unit would be particularly discomforting.
**
Let’s think about this…
First of all, I think the “more sensitive” if uncut is bullshit. From what I’ve read, it can’t be proven one way or another.
Secondly, if indeed sex was more pleasurable, wouldn’t that make the male tend to be a little quicker on the trigger?
So, in my mind, either it makes no difference sensory-wise, or at worst, it leads to a life of ridicule while in school and premature ejaculation at home, thereby condemning the lad to a miserable life because he married a beautiful woman who turned into a sexually frustrated harpy who eventually divorced him, took his house, his car, his boat and his favorite La-Z-Boy, and then married his best friend who happens to have a nice, exposed glans.
**
Then you shouldn’t’ve mentioned it. It’s done and over with.
Well, whatever your decision, just remember that the fireman is very magical. When you rub his helmet he spits in your eye.
Uh, it’s called that when you have it done willingly, yes. However, if you did it to someone else, it would probably be called assult or mutilation, or something of that nature. You apparantly missed the point of what I said entirely. I was refering to people doing stuff to other people for aesthetic reasons, not people having stuff done to themselves.
I suppose it could never be “proven” entirely unless someone was to mind-meld with someone else and experience their sensations. However, there is apparantly (and I say apparantly because I have not studied this deeply) some good reasons to believe that circumcision does indeed lessen sensation. As others have pointed out, circumcision removes a very sensative area. I can honestly say that the foreskin is a very sensative piece of skin.
So what? What if some guy doesn’t give a rat’s toenail if he’s quick on the trigger so long as it feels better? Isn’t that his decision to make, not his parents’ decision?
I mean hey, if people want to get themselves circumcised, that’s all find and dandy. It’s their choice. I find the idea that it would be done to someone without their consent repugnant.
I suppose the concept “humour” doesn’t mean anything to you?
I don’t believe circumcision is reversable. Operations claimed to be able to reverse circumcision create a simulation of a foreskin. If you have your son’s eyeball removed for aesthetic reasons, you can always have a glass eye put into the socket later. Does this constitute a reversal of the eyeball removal process?
I make no secret of the fact that I am totally against infant circumcision. One completely bogus argument in favor of infant circumcision is that infants are totally defenseless, whereas if you wait until the boy is older he might refuse. This argument can also be applied to “female circumcision”, castration, and the aforementioned infant eyeball removal process.
The aesthetic arguments are also totally bogus. I happen to think that the arms and legs of surgeons who peform infant circumcisions are ugly, but none of them has conceded to having his limbs removed even when I offered to use local anaesthetic.
The I want my son to get lots of blow jobs argument is too bizarre for me even to evaluate whether or not it is bogus.
The health/hygiene argument makes plenty of sense if you don’t expect your son to bathe, or teach him specifically to avoid washing his genitals.
Infant male circumcision is the result of hatred of young boys, both by females and by older males, and of general revulsion at the human body. Older males, physically and psychologically scarred by the procedure, inflict it upon younger males as a way of getting even, or of ensuring that they are not lacking what others have. I have no idea why females would support the procedure - if you don’t like fellatio you shouldn’t be performing fellatio, and nobody should be fellating a guy who doesn’t even bother to wash properly. Perhaps some women want some twisted kind of revenge for “female circumcision” (clitoridectomy, infibulation, and related barbarities) as practiced in East Africa, but in my experience most people know little or nothing about female genital mutilation.
As far as circumcision for older males goes - hey, I have no problem with it. I think it is bizarre; I would never have chosen it for myself if some butcher with a medical degree hadn’t made the decision for me. Then again, I would never choose to get a sex change, or a prince albert, or ritual scarification, and I think all those things should be legal.
Welp, I guess that settles it. My ex-wife hated my newborn son. I was incredibly jealous of his peepee. His squirmy, little pink body was revolting. I was going through another bout of foreskin withdrawals. So we did the only logical thing and decided to have him circumcized.
sigh
You’re right, it doesn’t. The concept of “humor”, on the other hand … 
Unless you live in Canada, Australia, Great Britain, India, or New Zealand.
Circumcise. Come on in to the modern age.
Again, thank you all for your comments and views on this matter. Condemned, condoned, vilified, or otherwise, I found all your remarks very enlightening. And, as Cranky mentioned early on, it does in fact raise passionate feelings about the procedure.
Our decision was a family matter, and I will not try to defend it here.
If you have not already, please check out the site mentioned by Punoqllads on page one of this thread. I suggest this because it is Cecil’s take on the subject.
And so it will not be completely lost, I do wish to point out that when I posted the orginal, I had in mind what I thought to be a comical, seemly absurd argument that circumcision should be done on the basis of future chances of receiving oral sex. It is of course, my fault for not being at all clear that I had my tongue firmly planted in my cheek. That you all offered serious, clear positions about the procedure I can only applaud and offer my own apologies for my lack of clarity.
Many thanks to those who passed along good wishes.