Fewer baby boys being circumcised in the U.S.

[nevadamedic]

Story Highlights
• Growing number of U.S. parents declining to circumcise sons
• Experts: Immigration patterns play the biggest role in the decline
• U.S. one of few developed countries where majority of baby boys are circumcised
• Circumcision remains the nation's most common surgery

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/18/circumcision.decline.ap/index.html

This was under their breaking news?!?!?!?! :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

its a slow news day.

[nevadamedic]

Either that or our societies getting so bad that we actually are concerned about this. :dunno:

[eighballsidepocket]

Our middle son and daughter-in-law opted to not have their son circumcized at birth.

They are not Jewish, and are or were not influenced by foreign cultural influence.

They did a lot of research and felt that the positives for our grandson verses the negatives didn't add up. Plus they were new parents, and were apprehensive about the proceedure on their little baby boy. "Oh the trevails of parenthood!"

I think in retrospect, they would have gone the circumcision route if they could reverse the past. Our grandson is now almost 5 years old.
****
Here's one problem.

The uncircumcision means that there's extra hygenic cleaning to be done as there is that additional fold of skin over the male organ that needs to be pulled back and cleaned.

For a toddler or little boy, this isn't a proceedure that he will do very well or often or at all on his own. Infections, rashes etc, can happen under that skin area on the organ if Mom or Dad isn't attentive to help there son learn how to daily keep clean there.
*****
Now I've heard one possible upside to the circumcision debate in recent years, and it involves the intimate sexual side of life.

There may be some advantages in the pleasure factor of intimate sexual intercourse for the uncircumsized, but that maybe debatable. I don't know how substantiated. Maybe Kinsey did some research on it.
******

My son and his wife didn't make the decision in what I would estimate as an objective way, but more in the subjective realm. They didn't want their first born to be "cut" in any way. "Typical sensitive, first parents trauma of decisions.". This is not unlike baby's first shot. Our daughter-law-was cringed and was in tears when their son got his first shot at the pediatrician's office. She's not that way anymore, but it still bothers her. It even bothers me to see my grandson get anxious or have to face the necessary sting of a needle.

They were, as many young, new parents are; apprehensive about their baby going through the proceedure, and I think in retrospect, would have opted for the circumcision if they had the choice again.
*****
I sure don't personally remember the pain of my cicumcision surgery. No doubt there was pain, but it doesn't come up in my memory as a trauma now that I'm in my late 50's.
*****
I still think from a hygenic standpoint, it is a blessing and gift from parents to their sons to opt to do the circumcision. The quick momentary discomfort goes away quickly and the healing is so very fast on a new born too.
The years of life ahead of ease of being able to hygenically keep that area of one's body clean with much ease, can't be overlooked.
*****

[Pale Rider]

Had I never been circumsized at birth, I'd have had it done later on my own. It's far cleaner, and greatly increases the sensations during sex.

I really can't imagine why a man would want all that excess skin hanging down there anyway.

[Hagbard Celine]

I can't decide if it's a good thing or not. Most women prefer a circumcized penis, but there's something that irks me about chopping-off the tip of my future son's penis without his permission. I can't quite put my finger on what it is...maybe that's because it was lopped-off before I was old enough to decide for myself. :dunno:

[Pale Rider]

I can't decide if it's a good thing or not. Most women prefer a circumcized penis, but there's something that irks me about chopping-off the tip of my future son's penis without his permission. I can't quite put my finger on what it is...maybe that's because it was lopped-off before I was old enough to decide for myself. :dunno:

For cryin' out loud Hag... you're not "chopping the head of his dick off,"... :laugh2: You're just getting rid of a lot of excess skin that serves no good purpose.

[Hagbard Celine]

For cryin' out loud Hag... you're not "chopping the head of his dick off,"... :laugh2: You're just getting rid of a lot of excess skin that serves no good purpose.

How is it done? Do they take like a cigar cutter and *snip* the foreskin off? And why would we be born with foreskin if it didn't serve a purpose? I can only imagine that having foreskin would increase rather than decrease the feeling during sex. There'd be more slidin' and sloopin', which is always good. :D :laugh:

[Pale Rider]

How is it done? Do they take like a cigar cutter and *snip* the foreskin off? And why would we be born with foreskin if it didn't serve a purpose? I can only imagine that having foreskin would increase rather than decrease the feeling during sex. There'd be more slidin' and sloopin', which is always good. :D :laugh:

I believe they just cut it off with a scalpel. And when pre-modern man ran around naked, the foreskin was like a guard for the head of his dick. People don't need it now. We wear underwear and pants. And it does impede sensation during sex, because the most sensitive part of the johnson is the head, and when it's covered with skin, the sensations are greatly reduced. Women have even remarked that a circumsized pipe felt better than not.

[darin]

Many folk opt 'not' to do something as a sign to themselves they are non-conformists; those are immature folk.

[nevadamedic]

Had I never been circumsized at birth, I'd have had it done later on my own. It's far cleaner, and greatly increases the sensations during sex.

I really can't imagine why a man would want all that excess skin hanging down there anyway.

You would have done it yourself? :eek: What if you over circumsize yourself? :laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

I believe they just cut it off with a scalpel. And when pre-modern man ran around naked, the foreskin was like a guard for the head of his dick. People don't need it now. We wear underwear and pants. And it does impede sensation during sex, because the most sensitive part of the johnson is the head, and when it's covered with skin, the sensations are greatly reduced. Women have even remarked that a circumsized pipe felt better than not.

You've convinced me. I'm all about pleasing the ladies :D

[nevadamedic]

I believe they just cut it off with a scalpel. And when pre-modern man ran around naked, the foreskin was like a guard for the head of his dick. People don't need it now. We wear underwear and pants. And it does impede sensation during sex, because the most sensitive part of the johnson is the head, and when it's covered with skin, the sensations are greatly reduced. Women have even remarked that a circumsized pipe felt better than not.

Move over Dr. Ruth :laugh2:

[Pale Rider]

You would have done it yourself? :eek: What if you over circumsize yourself? :laugh2:

You know what I mean... :argue:

[nevadamedic]

You've convinced me. I'm all about pleasing the ladies :D

That's hard to do when your still a virgin :laugh2: Hell you probably still close your eyes when you see boobies on tv :laugh2:

[Pale Rider]

You've convinced me. I'm all about pleasing the ladies :D

Damn right... :laugh:

[Hagbard Celine]

That's hard to do when your still a virgin :laugh2: Hell you probably still close your eyes when you see boobies on tv :laugh2:

keep telling yourself that pops.

[darin]

And it does impede sensation during sex, because the most sensitive part of the johnson is the head, and when it's covered with skin, the sensations are greatly reduced.

I'm pretty sure with the increases in size (length/girth) during an erection, the tip of the p3n1s should become exposed. The skin would slide back, allowing the head to see daylight, so to speak.


Women have even remarked that a circumsized pipe felt better than not.

From what I recall, the increases in sensation are because the head of the uncircm'd p3n1s becomes 'harder' around the 'rim' - that's the sensation women (some women) would enjoy compared to a softer uncircm'd.

[nevadamedic]

I'm pretty sure with the increases in size (length/girth) during an erection, the tip of the p3n1s should become exposed. The skin would slide back, allowing the head to see daylight, so to speak.



From what I recall, the increases in sensation are because the head of the uncircm'd p3n1s becomes 'harder' around the 'rim' - that's the sensation women (some women) would enjoy compared to a softer uncircm'd.

That is an image I didn't want in my head, thanks Darin! :slap:

[nevadamedic]

keep telling yourself that pops.

Pops? Im only a couple years older then you.

[Hagbard Celine]

Pops? Im only a couple years older then you.

Shows how much we know about each other's personal lives doesn't it? :poke:

[Hugh Lincoln]

It's a freakish genital mutilation foisted on us by Jews. It has no medical justification. My son will not be circumcised.

[5stringJeff]

I am. My first son is, and my second son will be as well, primarily for hygenic reasons.

[Pale Rider]

It's a freakish genital mutilation foisted on us by Jews. It has no medical justification. My son will not be circumcised.

I don't think there should be a religious connection to it at all. It's just cleaner.

If I was born with skin hanging down over my eyes, I'd want it gone. If I was born with skin hanging out over my toes, I'd want that gone too. My johnson is no different. I don't need unneeded skin hanging down over that either. Get rid of it.

[Trigg]

All of my boys are, mainly because my husband is and I didn't think anything was unusual about it at the time.

My sister's Finnish husband thought it was horrible that we circumsized our boys since it just isn't done over there.

Medically they say it's cleaner and men who are done are less likely to get AIDS from an infected woman. I even read an article about grown men in Africa getting the procedure in order to cut down on the infection rate.

[Hagbard Celine]

It's a freakish genital mutilation foisted on us by Jews. It has no medical justification. My son will not be circumcised.

I think it's a relic of the time before humans wore clothes. It protected the penis from debris and whatnot. Now that we wear clothes, I agree, we don't need it anymore. Plus, most women prefer it and we all know that's what's most important ;)

[nevadamedic]

[QUOTE=Hagbard Celine;79315]I think it's a relic of the time before humans wore clothes. It protected the penis from debris and whatnot. Now that we wear clothes, I agree, we don't need it anymore. Plus, most women prefer it and we all know that's what's most important ;)[/QUOT

Someone already posted that. I kknow more then you think about you, I checked your myspace. :laugh2: