Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Original article by Lillian Dell'Aquila Cannon and Darcia Narvaez. I'm sharing what was posted via Psychology Today. This was not written by 8manderz8

When I was pregnant with my first child, I just thought that circumcision was what you did, no big deal, and that every man was circumcised.  Then one day I saw a picture of a baby being circumcised, and everything changed.  Just one tiny, grainy photo was enough to make me want to know more, and the more I knew, the worse it got.  It turns out, circumcision really is a big deal.

Part 1 - Circumcision Surgery Myths



Myth 1: They just cut off a flap of skin.  

Reality check: Not true. The foreskin is half of the penis's skin, not just a flap.  In an adult man, the foreskin is 15 square inches of skin.  In babies and children, the foreskin is adhered to the head of the penis with the same type of tissue that adheres fingernails to their nail beds.  Removing it requires shoving a blunt probe between the foreskin and the head of the penis and then cutting down and around the whole penis. Check out these photos: www.drmomma.org/2011/08/intact…

Myth 2: It doesn't hurt the baby.

Reality check: Wrong. In 1997, doctors in Canada did a study to see what type of anesthesia was most effective in relieving the pain of circumcision.  As with any study, they needed a control group that received no anesthesia.  The doctors quickly realized that the babies who were not anesthetized were in so much pain that it would be unethical to continue with the study.  Even the best commonly available method of pain relief studied, the dorsal penile nerve block, did not block all the babies' pain.  Some of the babies in the study were in such pain that they began choking and one even had a seizure  (Lander 1997).

Myth 3: My doctor uses anesthesia.

Reality check: Not necessarily. Most newborns do not receive adequate anesthesia.  Only 45% of doctors who do circumcisions use any anesthesia at all.  Obstetricians perform 70% of circumcisions and are least likely to use anesthesia - only 25% do.  The most common reasons why they don't?  They didn't think the procedure warranted it, and it takes too long  (Stang 1998).  A circumcision with adequate anesthesia takes a half-hour - if they brought your baby back sooner, he was in severe pain during the surgery.

Myth 4: Even if it is painful, the baby won't remember it.

Reality check: The body is a historical repository and remembers everything. The pain of circumcision causes a rewiring of the baby's brain so that he is more sensitive to pain later  (Taddio 1997, Anand 2000).  Circumcision also can cause post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anger, low self-esteem and problems with intimacy  (Boyle 2002, Hammond 1999, Goldman 1999).  Even with a lack of explicit memory and the inability to protest -  does that make it right to inflict pain? Law requires anesthesia for animal experimentation - do babies deserve any less?

Myth 5: My baby slept right through it.

Reality check: Not possible without total anesthesia, which is not available. Even the dorsal penile nerve block leaves the underside of the penis receptive to pain. Babies go into shock, which though it looks like a quiet state, is actually the body's reaction to profound pain and distress.  Nurses often tell the parents "He slept right through it" so as not to upset them. Who would want to hear that his or her baby was screaming in agony?

Myth 6: It doesn't cause the baby long-term harm.

Reality check: Incorrect. Removal of healthy tissue from a non-consenting patient is, in itself, harm (more on this point later).  Circumcision has an array of risks and side effects.  There is a 1-3% complication rate during the newborn period alone (Schwartz 1990).  Here is a short list potential complications.

:bulletblack:Meatal Stenosis: Many circumcised boys and men suffer from meatal stenosis.  This is a narrowing of the urethra which can interfere with urination and require surgery to fix.

:bulletblack:Adhesions. Circumcised babies can suffer from adhesions, where the foreskin remnants try to heal to the head of the penis in an area they are not supposed to grow on.  Doctors treat these by ripping them open with no anesthesia.

:bulletblack:Buried penis. Circumcision can lead to trapped or buried penis - too much skin is removed, and so the penis is forced inside the body.  This can lead to problems in adulthood when the man does not have enough skin to have a comfortable erection.  Some men even have their skin split open when they have an erection.  There are even more sexual consequences, which we will address in a future post.

:bulletblack:Infection. The circumcision wound can become infected.  This is especially dangerous now with the prevalence of hospital-acquired multi-drug resistant bacteria.

:bulletblack:Death. Babies can even die of circumcision.  Over 100 newborns die each year in the USA, mostly from loss of blood and infection  (Van Howe 1997 & 2004, Bollinger 2010).

Isn't it time to think more carefully about whether we should be circumcising our boys?


Part 2: Hygiene and STDS



Part 3: Social, Sexual, Psychological Realities



Part 4: Circumcision Ethics and Economics



Part 5: What is the greatest danger for an Uncircumcised Boy?



Part 6: Why Continue to Harm Boys from Ignorance of Male Anatomy?



  • Mood: Disbelief
Add a Comment:
 
:iconfallencruxisangel:
fallencruxisangel Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
I wish people knew this :( My boyfriend is circumcised and just isn't as sensitive as he'd like during sexual events. He feels like it's his fault he doesn't get turned on enough and feels bad because he worries I'll think it's my fault :( He has said many times he's not sensitive and it takes alot to get him off. I'm glad you're sharing the truth :) Maybe it will help some men in the future so they don't have to feel that way ever :)
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm sorry for the late response. Thank you for sharing you and your boyfriend's story - it's rough enough that people think it's acceptable to violate a person's bodily rights when they're unable to fight back, but when people pile on saying that nobody cares about being circumcised, that no men really care about this sort of thing, it's always good for men and those who love them who actually DO care to speak out and share the truth!
Reply
:iconfallencruxisangel:
fallencruxisangel Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
:) I'm just glad there are people out there who can make a difference where I cannot. Thank you for that!
Reply
:iconyellowshinygoldfish:
yellowshinygoldfish Featured By Owner Oct 17, 2012
I was arguing with a pro-circumcision person and he agrees with circumcision just because the sites he quotes have references, he doesn't even read opposing views and hangs on to circumcision religiously like a christian gambles all his/her hopes on the Bible but the difference is that after-death believes are personal while circumcision is something the baby has to go through by brutal force.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Oct 19, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
That sounds frustrating :( It's hard to try and keep an open mind about your opponent when they're trying their hardest to keep their own mind firmly shut.
Reply
:iconyellowshinygoldfish:
yellowshinygoldfish Featured By Owner Oct 20, 2012
It felt like talking to a wall.
Reply
:iconfivedollarponies:
fivedollarponies Featured By Owner Sep 25, 2012
I honestly never saw the logic behind circumcising a baby to make them more 'clean'. I mean, like, even if foreskin was inherently dirty, surely it's better than sticking an open wound in a diaper? :o
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Ergh yeah, haha. That's the last thing anyone would think to do, wouldn't you think? Yikes
Reply
:iconannikalynn:
AnnikaLynn Featured By Owner Sep 24, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I saw a documentary about how this poor boy's penis got severed off during his circumcision and his parents decided to go along with some crazy doctor's idea of passing him off as a girl. He ended up with some serious gender identification issues and eventually found out what happened and starting living as a man. This doctor also decided to study him and I believe he molested him as his sibling. The saddest part is that he killed himself as a result of all the pain it caused him during his life. :saddummy: This isn't the doc I saw on it, but here ya go. [link]
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 26, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Mm yeah, I've heard of that story. So sad and an unnecessary death. :(
Reply
Hidden by Owner
Hidden by Owner
:iconitoruna-the-platypus:
Itoruna-The-Platypus Featured By Owner Sep 21, 2012  Student Filmographer
You're right. Please hide my comment. By the way, you have some good points.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Done, and thank you. :)
Reply
:iconitoruna-the-platypus:
Itoruna-The-Platypus Featured By Owner Sep 22, 2012  Student Filmographer
It pisses me off when people see the truth about this cruel practice, and still don't care. All these points are very valid.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I know what you mean, it's super frustrating, but it's like that for everything. Evolution has the Creationists, Secular Government has the Religious Fanatics, etc. Super frustrating :/
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
I'm sorry but Myth 4 is a myth itself.

"Reality check: The body is a historical repository and remembers everything. The pain of circumcision causes a rewiring of the baby's brain so that he is more sensitive to pain later "

Reality check:
I'm about as sensitive as a cinder block.

Crusaders, above all all others, need to keep it simple and only stick to facts so that their agenda is not corrupted with desperate bias and creationist-type assertions.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Hm, the way they worded it certainly made it sound like it was absolutely true for every circumcised person out there, didn't they?
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2012
Yes indeed they did and that's a problem. If the cause is just, why would there be a need to deceive?

Make sure pacifiers are banned too.

[link]
Reply
:iconhaze3p0:
Haze3P0 Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I was never circumcised and neither was my brother. I plan to never do it to my kids in the future.
Reply
:iconn7-commander:
N7-Commander Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012  Professional
I read this and if I ever have kids, I will never, ever circumcise them.
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2012
Good, because you're not supposed to, only medical professionals.
Reply
:iconlightpony:
LightPony Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
[link]
[link]
[link]

I am putting a few less biased links for someone who wants to read about the issue. Mind you: I am not Jewish and I oppose Circumcision. Then why I am doing this? Because I want people to read more about this issue before getting a final opinion.
Reply
:icondametora:
Dametora Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
> "Less biased"
> Presents American articles and a statement from a pro-circumcision organization

oh ok
Reply
:iconlightpony:
LightPony Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
If you paid attention, the sites I linked clearly showed both pro and anti arguments. The site OP used only used Anti arguments and the author made clear she was against it.

By the way, which of my sources you think is biased? Is it Science-Based Medicine? The ABC science? The Globe and Mail? Or are you talking about them showing an argument from a Pro-circumcision organization?

If it's the latter, then you should know that it's normal to a non-biased article to show things from both sides.
Reply
:icondametora:
Dametora Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
But the sites failed to mention the pro arguments are unsupported by science. It's not bias to state this fact - no medical organization in the world supports circumcision, except for the AAP, because circumcision rates lowering costs them money. They recently released a statement in support of it, when previously they released a statement in support of female circumcision so they wouldn't have to explain male circumcision.

American sources are biased because America is a pro-cutting culture that flat out ignores and denies or minimizes any medical finding against male circumcision - just ask any doctor, most of them don't even know foreskin has a use.

Anti arguments are based on the pro arguments because the pro arguments are medically unsound, as decreed by the most of the international medical community.
I mean, fuck the first link promotes "hygienics!" when anyone with a brain can tell you there's bacteria all over you and circumcision only removes a statistically insignificant amount of bacteria - it's not actually cleaner and most bacteria on you is completely harmless and good for you. It even lists preventing cancer as a benefit even though it admits the ASC says that's bullshit that nobody should believe. It fucking compares circumcision to simple ear-piercing (which is also bad when nonconsensual but no where near the same level).
The other two discuss the AAP entirely, failing to mention several major issues with the AAP's recent statement.
The links all paint circumcision as no big deal and definitely beneficial. This is bias.
Reply
:iconlightpony:
LightPony Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
Uh... no.

[link]

If you really read the other sites, then you know that the medicine stance is: there is small risks and there is small benefits. Saying that all the pro arguments are unsupported, when many of them are made by the same people who said the anti ones is... well...

Besides you were a bit unfortunate in this phrase: "no medical organization in the world supports circumcision." If you paid attention, the anti sites said that "no medical organization in the world supports ROUTINE circumcision". That means that there is no strong evidence that everyone should be circumcised. This doesn't mean that circumcision should be banned.

Also your second statement:

"American sources are biased because America is a pro-cutting culture that flat out ignores and denies or minimizes any medical finding against male circumcision - just ask any doctor, most of them don't even know foreskin has a use."

You really can't say something like that without hard evidence. That is dealing in extremes, something very hard to prove or justify.

And yes, promoting hygienics can be listed as a good thing. While that is unnecessary in countries which have basic sanitary conditions, in other countries it can help in fighting uncleaness.

And you are mostly wrong on this: "The links all paint circumcision as no big deal and definitely beneficial. This is bias." They all showed both pro and anti arguments. Being biased isn't taking a stance. Being biased is taking a stance while ignoring all other arguments, or only using arguments you can refute. In this submission, per example, does it say a single good thing about circumcision? Nope, nothing. This is bias.

However the sites acknowledge vantages of circumcision... and acknowledge disavantages as well. It is mixed up and they don't try to exactly completely crush the right in one or another.

It all can be summarized here: "Even if you believe potential medical benefits outweigh the risks, does that justify doing an elective procedure to remove a piece of the child’s skin without his consent?" <- This is a extract from the first site.

Mind you, I am playing devil advocate here: I think that circumcision is a needless body harm and parents shouldn't do that. But being unable to see any good in the others points of view is even worse.
Reply
:icondametora:
Dametora Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
So I can't say that circumcision is bad without bias, even though medical organizations throughout the world do just that, even go so far as to ban infant circumcision?

There isn't any good in their POV, because they don't make sense - the African studies were flawed and their results were purposely misreported, there is no logic in amputation for "cleanliness reasons", people have gone years without bathing and with foreskins without gaining severe problems, using and promoting circumcision in lieu of condoms or antibiotics is insanity, water is all you need to wash your genitals unless you have nasty water in which case circumcision will not deter nasty water, studies promoting infant circumcision have been soundly debunked by many medical authorities and the practice banned on these grounds. What logic is there to looking into the health benefits AFTER you do surgery? There isn't! Yes, I am unable to see good points where there is no logic. Otherwise, why not do the same for female circumcision?

Just because this article is against infant circumcision and points out why and that the benefits are myths and gives reasons as to why, doesn't make it biased. Otherwise any debate in which a person refutes another is biased and thus not worth listening to. "But but but but but you're not listening to how it's a PROVEN baby at 3 weeks!!! YOU'RE BIASED BECAUSE YOU ARGUED AGAINST THAT, so I'm gonna show you some links of people saying this is true with studies done purely for promoting a pro-life agenda so we can be NON-BIASED here!"
Reply
:iconlightpony:
LightPony Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
Paragraph 1: Partly correct. You can't say that it's bad without looking for the good. You can say that anything is bad... but you can't be close minded about it.

And you really need to prove that second part. From what I see, many of their stances were of disapproval or neutrality... but very few actually suggested banning it.

Paragraph 2: That would be true if you think that they have the same hygiene habits as we do. Not all people on the world usually takes a bath once a day. In fact, a lot of people here on our country also doesn't take good care of their bodies. The numbers of cancer are living proof of this.

Of course I don't accept that circumcision should be used in place of education. In my OP that would be the same was cutting legs to avoid traffic accidents. But you and me still can't deny that in some places it would be beneficial.

...are you getting now what I am talking about? Check that last paragraph carefully. I disapproved something, gave a reason why it was silly but I actually accepted something in favor of it.

Also, you know that there was never been enough data to check about female circumcision, right? Because different from male, people didn't really invest money in researching about it, because it was never a tradition around here.

Paragraph 3:

It is when it's closes the eye to the others points of view. Since you like to deal with extremes, I will show you a quick example:

Person A: X is bad because of Y.

Person B: X is bad because of Y. While I accept that X has Z good things, Z still doesn't surpass the cons of Y.

See the difference? Both implied that X is bad, but Person B actually acknowledged the other part point of view. Person B is more open minded and far better prepared to discuss than Person A.


...unless you are really implying that there isn't a single good thing about X. Unless you are implying that you are 100% right, that everyone that disagree with you is wrong, has been bought or is a moron. I really hope this isn't what you truly believes.
Reply
:icondametora:
Dametora Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
And let's think about this for a second

You're asking me to see the good

in a human rights violation.

See what you're doing here is the equivalent of asking me to "see the good" in Exodus International or Focus on the Family.

Or to "see the good" in people who bomb Planned Parenthood clinics.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icondametora:
Dametora Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
Scandinavic countries have it banned, Dutch and Australia pediatrics organizations are pushing for a ban, Germany has just banned ritual circumcisions.

I don't take baths once a day and I'm perfectly fine. Water is all you need for your genitals, no amount of circumcision will change that. You do not scrub or soap the genitals. You don't need to take a shower or a bath. You just need to wipe it clean, and that's really all there is to it. Amputations for the purpose of hygiene is illogical. I do deny it's beneficial because lack of proper cleaning will still be lack of proper cleaning regardless of circumcision status, and the American Cancer Society agreed. Bacteria lives on you, forever, lots of it, most of your surface area is bacteria. If you don't rinse properly, no amount of removing skin will stop any possible illness. It is illogical to think so.

There was never enough data to check into male either. They just did it and made stuff up about it to support it later. And that's not conjecture - that is actually what happened. It was supposed to cure seizures before. Female circumcision was a tradition here for a while to cure shit like masturbation and womb hysteria and as part of "natural female maturation". Yeah, it happened. It has tradition. And no, the two are not different: they do the same things, have the same excuses, have the same traditional backing, have people wanting to look after they leap in regards to benefits.
And are you saying it's logical to look for benefits into amputation on a whim, after we've begun doing it? That's not logic, that's inhumane, insane, and dangerous.

Yes, actually, that is what I believe! So sorry, looks like I do not have to automatically give respect to inhumane and illogical practices! Because respect is earned, and it has done nothing to earn my respect. I have found nothing but refutations for every so-called point that says "circumcision is good do it now or else!!1". Not even for phimosis - because a dorsal slit is the most extreme that is needed, and phimosis is rarely a problem for men who have it. If a guy wants to get cut, that's his business, just like any woman opting for circumcision is free to do so. That doesn't make their cosmetic surgery "beneficial!!1".
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Fair enough :) Thanks for sharing the links!
Reply
:iconlightpony:
LightPony Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
No problem. ^^
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012
Suddenly, I feel very appreciative of my untouched flap of skin...

I mean EGADS, this custom is just... vicious.
Reply
:iconhattieforest:
HattieForest Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Professional Writer
This makes me sick. It made me sick before, but some of this I didn't know. I plan on having children, and I will never do this to my son, or sons. As my mother said when she told me about how she refused to let the doctors do this to my brother, "There is no way in hell I'm letting some ignorant asshole torture my baby!"

May I re-post this?
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Certainly. Please feel free to spread the information - the more people know, the better!
Reply
:iconhattieforest:
HattieForest Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Professional Writer
Done :)
Reply
:icondandabug:
Dandabug Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012
Fascinating presentation! At the risk of being vulgar, I will say this makes me glad my parents opted for keeping me in one piece. ;)

There was, of course, a time in history when circumcision was a potentially healthful practice (right along with not eating pork or shellfish) and religious customs were created to support them, but now these practices are outdated and harmful in light of modern advances in technology and overall understanding.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I wish I could take credit but the original article was from Psychology Today. :)

Certainly right about religion being a big influence on it, and in the US I think there was something about doing it to prevent masturbation as well. Pretty messed up.
Reply
:icondandabug:
Dandabug Featured By Owner Sep 18, 2012
Ah yes, the crusade to prevent "Onanism" as it was called... Christine O'Donnel, you'll have to pry my private parts from my cold, dead hands!
Reply
:iconcassini90125:
Cassini90125 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012
The practice should be banned worldwide, period. It's utterly barbaric. If the religious nuts object, too frikkin' bad, they can just live with it. :x

I was never subjected to this idiocy, and when I came to understand what it was all about I thanked my parents for not inflicting it on me.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Agreed. That's great about your parents - my husband wasn't so lucky, but I suppose that's what happens when people believe the myths. :/
Reply
:iconcassini90125:
Cassini90125 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012
As far as I'm concerned the foreskin evolved for a reason, and I seriously doubt that the reason was so that people could chop it off and use it as an offering to Allah or Jehovah or whatever you call it. How did the child's parents tolerate their helpless infant's screaming in the days before anesthetics? Did they convince themselves that he was screaming with joy because of his sacrifice to the lord? Did they believe that if the child passed out from shock and pain it was because the holy spirit had entered him and he was in a state of enrapturement? And what, precisely, did their god get out of it? Sadistic satisfaction in knowing that people were willing to mutilate their own children to make him happy? Perhaps after the foreskin was desposed of one of his heavenly servants collected them so that the lord could stitch them together to make himself a cloak or an umrella? WHAT RATIONAL PURPOSE DOES THIS PROCEDURE SERVE??? None. Absolutely none. It needs to be banned. :( :x
Reply
:iconasecretoutlet:
asecretoutlet Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012
wow, I honestly am enlightened by this... I had no idea. No way will any future child of mine have to go through this... I wasn't going to anyway, but now that decision is reinforced.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
That's great! Be sure to check out the other links at the bottom, they have lots of great information!
Reply
:iconbatvomit:
BatVomit Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012   General Artist
I'm glad to live in the UK where most men do not have to go through this. I don't see the point of cutting it off, it wasn't broken in the first place, you don't need to alter it, especially if it's causing the baby that much pain.
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Exactly!
Reply
:iconbatvomit:
BatVomit Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012   General Artist
Even if I lived in the states or somewhere where the circumcision rate is high I would avoid it. Uneeded stress on someone so young.
Probably a bad comparrison, but it makes me think it's like forcing someone to get a nose job. Their nose was fine, but one person dislikes it so they're being forced to alter it painfully.
Reply
:iconfivedollarponies:
fivedollarponies Featured By Owner Sep 25, 2012
Seems legit. :nod:
Reply
:icon8manderz8:
8manderz8 Featured By Owner Sep 17, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I'd say that's a fair enough comparison. I've also heard it compared to forcing someone to remove their eyelids, because just as eyelids serve a purpose, the foreskin serves one as well.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:icon8manderz8: More from 8manderz8


Featured in Collections

Journal Stuffs by tobysq


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
September 17, 2012
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
1,195
Favourites
22 (who?)
Comments
124
×