NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/misc/kids/31054

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 6.7 KB

Xref: sparky misc.kids:31054 soc.men:21702 alt.atheism:24217 alt.sex.wizards:4101
Newsgroups: misc.kids,soc.men,alt.atheism,alt.sex.wizards
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsk!noraa
From: [e-mail] (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Re: A few facts about circumcision
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 03:51:44 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 111

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Russ Nelson) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Keith E Gatling) writes:
>
>   So now...what do you have to say to a person who intends to have his kid
>   circumcised because he looks at his circumcision as *an advantage*?
>
>I'd say that you hadn't considered that the circumcision could turn into
>an emasculation.  It happens, it's scary.  Well, it scares *me* anyway.

When my ex- (yes, it's finally final) and I were expecting our first, we
discussed this, and agreed without much extensive debate, that we would
NOT circumsize our children if we had boys (or girls).  Everything was
settled....

Then, when my mother-in-law found out our decision, she was shocked.
After all, her three sons had been "cut," her husband was "cut," she
considered it more hygenic, etc. etc.  She wanted an explanation.
Fortunately, my mother talked to her before I did and told her that,
"Aaron has strong reasons for this, if you will listen to them."  So,
my mother-in-law wanted to know what reasons I had.

What I told her was something like this:

"Circumcision is not done for hygenic reasons.  The "hygenic" excuse is
after the fact justification.  Children from very poor countries who
bath in dirty water have fewer complications with their penises then
circimsized children in developed countries who bath regularly in clean
water.

"Circumcision is a painful operation.  Anyone who has witnessed a
newborn boy upon circumcision without anesthetic would swear that the
child had been near mortally wounded.  The child will then react as
though he was in grievous pain for days, just as any victim of violent
assault or post-surgery hospital patient.  The child is withdrawn, does
not sleep as he should, does not eat properly, is overly fussy.  This
can delay the necessary bonding between mother and child.  It impedes
proper nursing.  It can get parents and child off on the wrong foot.
The child cries too much, cannot be settled.  The parents can become
quite frustrated.  Not a great start for a life.

"The operation can cause serious damage and creates a substantial
unnecessary risk of infection.  Many children have lost their penises as
a result of such complications.  My own brother, who is now 16, had
serious problems up to age six as a result of his circumcision.  He kept
getting infections as a result of a small miscalculation on the part of
the doctor performing the circumcision.  The tip of the glans of his
penis had been burned and scar tissue kept forming--blocking the ureter.
My brother had two operations on his penis before he was five to correct
this problem.  When I was thirteen, I witnessed my brother screaming in
agony because he could not urinate.  He ended up being rushed to
the hospital and had an emergency surgery and catheterization.

"One of my close friends had a son who was circumcised and the child was
miserable for weeks.  He would not nurse and became malnourished and
dehydrated.  He cried constantly.  His mother became quite distraught
and cried over the decision to circumcise her son.  She and her husband
had not considered the implications of this operation.  She strongly
urged me not to circumcise my child if he was a boy.

"The foreskin serves a biological purpose.  It houses the glans tissue,
which, much like the tissue of the labia and vagina of women, was
intended to remain moist and NOT to make contact with anything other
than skin.  The nerve endings at the surface of the glans are
especially sensitive.  Removing the foreskin removes the moist housing
for the glans, removes the natural regulation of the ph of the surface
of the skin, causing a buildup of dry, dead skin at the surface.  The
net effect is that the glans of circumcised men is not as sensitive as
the glans of circumsized men.  Sensitivity is important for sexual
functioning and arousal.  Impotency can result from or be worsened by
circumcision.

"The worst part about performing an unnecessary operation on a child is
that the child has no say in what is being done to HIS body.  This is
an intellectual right.  It is analogous or parallel to women's
intellectual right to their bodies which give them the right to evict a
fetus they do not want from their bodies.  If a man decides at age 25
that he wants to be circumcised, then it was HIS choice--and he can
blame no one but himself if it doesn't turn out the way he hoped.  But
to take that right from a child is immoral.  You have no right to
perform unnecessary operations on your children.  You have no more
intellectual right to circumcise a young boy than you do to cut off his
arm or leg at birth.  The arm or leg serves a purpose--so does the
foreskin of the glans penis."

I told my mother-in-law that there were many studies that showed that
not only was circumcision unnecessary and deleterious, but that often
severe complications were the result.  I told her the library was a
good resource for much information on this topic.  I told her that I
resented my own circumcision for a variety of reasons....  1) I didn't
get to make the choice, 2) my penis is not as sensitive as it should
be, 3) I have difficulty in achieving orgasm from intercourse.  Several
women that I have had sex with were at first amazed at my ability to
continue intercourse for hours.  But eventually it got old and they
started to think that I was not really enjoying myself all that much
because I didn't have orgasms quickly or without some creative
manipulations.  After a while, I wanted to be able to have orgasms
easier, and when this did not come to pass, I started to resent my numb
penis.

My mother-in-law asked around and even checked a few books out of the
library.  By the time my son was born, she agreed that the circumcision
was an unnecessary risk.

In the hospital when my first son was born, the doctor said something
like:  "OK, now I'm ready to do the circumcision."  I said, "My son will
NOT be circumcised."  He replied, "Look, if it is a question of money,
I'll do it for free."  I told him, "This is a conscious decision, it has
nothing to do with money.  My son will not be circumcised."

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
[e-mail]