The discussion continues… Male Circumcision.

Any topic about sexuality will usually produce a debate about Male Circumcision.  My podcast covering the documentary film Are All Men Pedophiles?, is no different.  It all started with a comment asserting that males that were circumcised at birth may develop into pedophiles.  Sounds absurd right?  Yet, there’s people out there in the world that believe this is true.  I often take surveys from men of all stature about the subject.   Forget the common misconceptions about foreskin, the less common is much worse! In spite of what we know about circumcision today, cultures that are new to the procedure get drawn into the folklore,  such as the case with Rwanda and the Invisible Condom myth.  It’s not as if it’s limited to Africa either.  I was speaking with a male friend of mine, he actually believed that unless you’re circumcised, you shoot blanks.   When I asked why he believed this and what data he was using to support his belief, he just rattled off that it was something that he’d heard.  Yikes.  When I responded with a snarky remark that he probably believed that Mountain Dew made you sterile, he agreed, it did!  Then he proceeds to inform me of the yellow #5 (tartrazine) causing everything from shrinking your testicles to affecting birth rates in the U.S.   *headdesk*  Even when you point out the obvious urban legend and the FDA seal of approval, it’s a conspiracy!   I’m well aware that several advocacy groups have called for banning food dyes such as Yellow#5, attributing it to food allergies and alleged underlying causes for ‘hyper-activity’ in small children.    Yet, I haven’t seen a scrap of hard-evidence that it’s magical sterilization ingredient purposely placed by the Federal Government for the purpose of population control.

 

Intact America offers a few of these ‘Myths’, even then there’s much to be analyzed for the evidence to lend to the facts.  To counter, circumcisioninformation.com refers to the anti-circumcision folks as being part of a Cult.

It’s no wonder people just parrot off the highly subjective ‘reasoning’ of advocates on either side.  People tend to side with what they believe to be true, no matter how much data you offer to the contrary.

 The American Academy of Pediatrics  issued this guideline ( Circumcision Policy Statement ):

Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement.

This was the approach my OBGYN and Pediatrician took when addressing at the birthing center where I delivered my son.  In essence, my ex-husband left the decision up to me.  He preferred the circumcision based on all the a-typical reasoning.  He wanted his son to have a penis much like his own.  He personally considered the uncircumcised penis to be ‘ugly’ therefore abhorrent to sexual prowess.   When the pediatrician rattled off the above statement contrarily, I disagreed.  In an era of personal hygiene and advanced knowledge of male anatomy, I didn’t see the risks involved with leaving my infant all-natural.    Even one of the largest studies conducted in the U.S. wasn’t very convincing.

 Based on our findings, a complication can be expected in 1 out every 476 circumcisions. Six urinary tract infections can be prevented for every complication endured and almost 2 complications can be expected for every case of penile cancer prevented.

 

Why you ask?  It just seemed like a statistical certainty.  Besides, I’ve had a urinary tract infection more than once in my life-time and removing parts of my Vagina wasn’t offered as a preventative measure.    The infection is treated as if more severe in infants because of the side-effects and symptoms.  See:  Urinary Tract Infection in small children vs. Adults.   Still, you can root out the cause and treat it.  My son would learn to walk and play outside, that also carries a risk.  I hadn’t considered cutting off his legs to prevent it.

So why did I ultimately choose the procedure for my child?  Aesthetics.  Pure and simple.  This alone makes me a horrible mother, and a genital mutilator!  Oh my!  I’ve had these conversations with my son, he doesn’t regret my decision nor do I.  Still, other people feel quite passionately about the subject.  It’s as if their whole world has been forever changed as they mourn that little piece of skin.  Maybe THAT’s what causes sexual deviance.  Not the actual procedure but the mind-fucking people do to themselves.

What I find most fascinating about those types is that they are usually the first to criticize a Vagina in its natural state.  As if the character of a Vagina is a constant and cloned from the ultimate perfect specimen.    Just like the penis has a character, so too does the Vagina!  Imagine that?  Hypocrites.    I’m bi-sexual, I do it too.  Just like there’s ugly people among the population, there’s ugly vagina and penis.

But… But… Sin Jones, doesn’t that make you a hypocrite too?  YES, it does but mostly I’m a REALIST.  At least I’m honest about it.   I figured I’d give my son a fighting chance with the ladies.  Let’s face it, most women think the thing is the ugliest part of a man’s anatomy, even if she doesn’t spend a whole lot of time squatting over a mirror.    I’ve been with men that have never had a woman just stare at their member like it was the most beautiful thing she’d seen, it actually makes them uncomfortable like it’s a shameful abnormality that should be hidden under the cover of darkness.     I don’t pity those types, I revel in their excitement.   I’m a fan, all shapes, sizes, colors, circumcised or not.   I’ll admit though, I actually prefer the cut.    It may have even played a role in my decision for my child subconsciously, I can be honest about that too.

To even call it mutilation is bullshit if you ask me.   Altering it slightly isn’t the same thing as say, smashing it with a hammer or severing it from the body.   See the difference there?

If you’re one of these types still crying over your lost foreskin, tell me why?

Are you really traumatized or are you creating your own trauma?

Sin Jones

Advertisements