We researched it when expecting #1 - the Australian Royal College of Physicians position statement at the time (and now) suggested that routine circumcision was unnecessary, and we decided against it for a variety of reasons (not the least of which was that we had a girl). If #2 turns out to be a boy when it’s born, we won’t be circumcising this time either.
If I had a son here in Spain I wouldn’t do it in infancy, as it is neither traditional nor medically recommended. It could end up being necessary later, though: Middlebro had to have it when he was 10.
What, do American girls never date non-American guys? I understand being accustomed to circumcised penises, but I hardly see why anyone would need to “freak out” at the sight of foreskin…
I would and I have. Right here at home - in fact, on the very table I’m typing on right now.
(And before you say anything - the Mohel was an M.D., and he used a local anesthetic).
I needed one for medical reasons as an adult, I wouldn’t want my prospective sons to have to do the same.
I wouldn’t. Partly because I wasn’t and its not the norm in my culture, but more because infant circumcision is illegal in my country unless there are religious or medical reasons for it.
There are, and always have been, a certain percentage of uncut American men.
But beyond that, America culture is so repressed and hung up about nudity that there are women who never see a penis until their first sexual encounter, and probably some that freak out seeing a penis period, regardless of circumcision status.
I don’t get the “freak out” thing myself - they don’t look that different.
Why did you “freak out”? What’s to freak out about? If more people choose not to circumcise, then it will be more common to see “that”. “Because everyone’s doing it” is not a good enough reason to keep doing something in my opinion.
I have to say, having had both, that I prefer my men uncut.
Nope. When I was preggo with Junior I looked into it and Alberta Health’s official position is that there is ‘No Medical Benefit’.
So, it’s not covered by insurance, and would have cost me about $300 to have it done at my family doctor’s office - I can think of lots of things I’d rather spend $300 on.
Finally, my nephew is 8 - his circumcision was…botched. He has a lot of scar tissue, his wang doesn’t look like the other kids’ wangs, and he may need to get reconstructive surgery when he’s older depending on how things shape up.
Ugh.
Can we have a “maybe” option?
I’m 37 and I got circumcised five weeks ago due to foreskin issues. Yes, I am sitting here wearing tight underwear, to hold everything in so it doesn’t swing, and a gauze over my junk and I occasionally wince when things rub the wrong way. But I’m getting there 
Anyway, this has been something I have been thinking a lot about since my operation. I recently found out that some other men on my Father’s side of the family required the operation, meaning there is possibly something genetic going on. So perhaps a son of mine would also require it. The thing is, perhaps it isn’t obvious at birth and, well, right now I’d rather have been circumcised at birth than have it done with a local anaesthetic as a 37 year old.
So I’ve been asking myself what I would do. I’m really not sure.
For quite a few penises, you can definitely tell if they’re uncut, even when erect. However, you can’t always tell if they are cut.
Since both penises and foreskins vary in size - often not in proportion - it’s quite possible to sport a bone-hard erection with the foreskin still covering the glans. It probably also depends on whether you’re a shower or a grower, but being straight I haven’t exactly investigated that. If you’ve got one of those you’ll have to manually retract the foreskin to uncover the glans. It’s quite practical for masturbation purposes, BTW 
Example pictures (the first is from an ancient Greek vase, but spoilered anyway since it depicts sexual behavior and may be seen as NSFW):
[spoiler]https://www.ecu.edu/cs-cas/classics/images/Erotic-vase_1.jpg
newforeskin.biz
Incidentally, the ancient Greeks considered overly large penises to be unaesthetic and wanted the foreskin to cover the glans even when erect. No cite, though, so I may be misremembering this
ETA, to the poll: No. Definitely no. I can’t see a positive cost/benefit outcome, surgical genital modification should be done only after a qualified decision by the wearer of said genitals, and besides it’s rather uncommon here in Europe (except among Muslim or Jewish people)
Yep, someone needs to speak to these doctors about this. My urologist said I’d be back at work, with a bit of luck, after two days. After two days I still couldn’t wear clothes below my waist. The Swedish authorities apparently don’t allow you to be written off sick with a circumcision for longer than a week, so I had to take the second week out of my holiday allowance and luckily I have a job where I can work from home, so the third week I did that. By that time I was in a position to wear clothes again.
OK, things were slightly complicated by me getting an infection, but still.
My father, myself, and my brothers were all circumcised (dad in the late '30s and the rest of us in the 60’s and 70’s). When my son was born in 2004 we decided not to do it.
I don’t think it’s that big a deal, and it never bothered me that I was done (in fact in my generation, I think I would have felt odd if I had not had it done). But my wife and I didn’t really see any reason for it, medical or otherwise, and non-circumcision is a lot more common now than in the past so it’s not like he’ll be unique in the locker room. Plus, if he really wants to get it done later, he could always make that decision himself.
My son was circumcised. Right or wrong, two factors weighed in my decision. First, a friend’s brother had to be circumcised in his 30’s–pure hell. (Since then, my brother-in-law had to be circumcized at 60–beyond hell.) Sure, th.e odds were slight, but I didn’t want to take the risk. Second, I was raising a stepson. The books I read said circumcision was totally unnecessary if the boy moved the foreskin to wash very carefully. My experience with my stepson was that he didn’t even wash his face carefully. That seemed like reason enough to me. His dad was more of the “no yucks from yutzes in the locker room” philosophy.
But having wrestled with all sides of that decision, I wouldn’t fault anyone for whatever decision they arrive at.
My Dad and his brothers weren’t cut, they had some problems with hygiene and oversensitivity so my dad had my brother and I circumcised.
For my own sons, I weighed both sides, and then had them circumcised.
Where are people getting these horrifying stories about the procedure? Have they witnessed it first hand or going to some butcher in a 3rd world country?
Our obstetrician performed it in his office a couple days after birth. He administered a little local anaesthetic, then snip, it was done. No crucifix position, no pain, no crying, and it lasted no more than 5-10 seconds.
People should consider the pros and cons for themselves but the fear mongering of the procedure should not influence that decision.
Hard to imagine if you’ve never had an uncut penis (except when a week old). Basically, the tip of the foreskin is amazingly sensitive. Not in a bad way, it doesn’t hurt when pressed, but, well, a lot of fun can be had there. I don’t have that anymore and I will miss it, but for me the pros have outweighed the cons.
FWIW, these days it’s not always clamp & cut. My son was circumcised about 3 months ago, and they used local anesthetic and this thing called a “plastibell” which is a sort of snap-on ring that cuts off blood flow to the foreskin and it dries up and falls off after a couple of weeks.
Honestly, afterward he seemed much more disturbed by farts and needing to burp than the circumcision; it just wasn’t an issue for him from what we could tell.
Oh, and it’s not like circumcised ones are insensitive and leathery like an old belt; there’s still plenty of fun to be had there!
Couldn’t have said it better myself. This was my line of reasoning exactly when I decided to have my son circumcised. I could have lived with the decision either way, but the pros outweighed the cons for me.
I’m working my way through this thread and I need to stop and address this. Thicker? What does that even mean? Higher red blood cell count? Cite please?
In normal healthy infants (not pre-term), red cell count and hemoglobin level are generally highest perinatally and then drop off somewhat in the first weeks. PT, PTT, platelet count, and fibrinogen levels (which are all involved in clotting) are stable from birth onward and don’t really change. This is the most convenient chart I could find for now - I’m not at work or I’d transcribe our normal ranges from the computer.
As for the OP and my answer to the question, I think this is more or less my argument so I’ll just second it:
[QUOTE=Jophiel]
I did the research and felt the medical benefits tipped the scales towards doing so and the (largely emotion-based) counterarguments didn’t really resonate with me. Had the risks been greater or whatever, I could have gone the other way as I don’t feel exceptionally strongly about it but I’ve no second thoughts about the decision I made.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t have kids yet, but if I end up having boys I think that’s likely to be my decision, unless their father has a strong opinion against it. We haven’t discussed it yet, so I don’t know what he thinks.
Heh I was thinking: not sensitive? If it was any more sensitive, I’d be in trouble. 