to circ or not to circ

[s@hmommy]

Originally Posted by Galatea Do you really think that people use talking about circumcision in order to make others feel bad? I do not. I did not see that anywhere in here. Your original angry response quoted two people who were comparing mastectomies to treat breast cancer and one who was comparing treatment for male vs. female yeast infections. How is that inflammatory? They are very valid challenges to the idea of circumcision as a disease preventive, but they are not designed to anger nor are they inflammatory. Might I suggest that if it upsets you too much to ever read arguments against circumcision, then you should not read threads about circumcision. It is impossible to silence all discussion on the topic because you find it upsetting, and far easier for you to protect yourself by not clicking or responding.

Well if no one ever commented because it upset them then there wouldn't be much discussion, would there? I am giving you advice from the other side on how to help your cause, offending people doesn't work imo.

[Galatea]

Originally Posted by s@hmommy Well if no one ever commented because it upset them then there wouldn't be much discussion, would there? I am giving you advice from the other side on how to help your cause, offending people doesn't work imo.

But what was offensive?

[s@hmommy]

Originally Posted by Galatea But what was offensive?

I am speaking in general of the way some intactivists handle the comments that are repeatedly made that only evoke angry responses in these circ threads. If you are trying to get people to believe what you have to say why would you continually say things that you are aware will only make them upset? Don't you want them to listen?

Have you not noticed in my original comment I am open to considering leaving my unborn child intact, so what good are you doing comparing my initial choice with my first child to things you are aware make other circing parents upset? Being on the defensive constantly leaves little room to consider anything you are saying.

ETA- what would be offensive to a circing mom would for obvious reasons not seem so to someone who is not.

[Galatea]

Originally Posted by s@hmommy I am speaking in general of the way some intactivists handle the comments that are repeatedly made that only evoke angry responses in these circ threads. If you are trying to get people to believe what you have to say why would you continually say things that you are aware will only make them upset? Don't you want them to listen? Have you not noticed in my original comment I am open to considering leaving my unborn child intact, so what good are you doing comparing my initial choice with my first child to things you are aware make other circing parents upset? Being on the defensive constantly leaves little room to consider anything you are saying. ETA- what would be offensive to a circing mom would for obvious reasons not seem so to someone who is not.

But I am asking you for specifics. You say it is important not to offend, and yet I still don't know what is offensive. What are the the "things you are aware make other circing parents upset?"

[s@hmommy]

Originally Posted by Galatea But I am asking you for specifics. You say it is important not to offend, and yet I still don't know what is offensive. What are the the "things you are aware make other circing parents upset?"

Comparing to removal breast and/or labia, and labeling "baby mutilator" are the main ones that pop to mind, if I bothered to dig through those other threads I know there are more. Telling use it is a human rights issue is another, I simply don't believe and others agree, so it is useless to argue it if you are trying to convince someone why it is a bad idea when that "reason" really doesn't matter in the end. I am not saying you simply shouldn't offend, it will happen no matter how nice you are, but continually using those types of arguments sure aren't going to help.

[DesertRat]

Originally Posted by s@hmommy First, I want to say you are one of the few anti-circ momma's that I think is generally respectful while expressing your opinion, you are one of the few I would bother to take seriously. Now for an honest question- If you are trying to promote a cause and you see time and time again that specific comparisons only evoke angry responses, why do you (general to intactivists, not you specifically) keep using them? It seems at that point it is not about the cause because making someone mad is not going to make them listen to you. It appears to be more of a jab than anything.

Thank you! I appreciate that!

As far as the continuously rude remarks from intactivists-- I can only say it's because they let their passion for the subject get in the way of speaking respectfully. :shrug:

I believe 100% that parents who choose to circumcise believe they are doing what is best for their babies. But I'd like you to try to see this from my point of view. When I read how the benefits are minimal (and still being debated), and that cutting off the foreskin negatively affects sexual function, I can't justify to myself doing it to my child. And I have a hard time saying "it's the parents' choice to make" when it's not necessary. Except for circumcision, as a parent, I am not allowed to make a decision to have cosmetic surgery on my infant unless there's a birth defect or medical necessity. And the foreskin is not a birth defect. So I don't see it as my right to decide if it should be cut off. It's not so much that I chose not to circumcise my sons. It's that I realized it wasn't my choice to make.

Now, I know that parents who circ believe it is beneficial or they wouldn't do it. But I don't think the research supports that. I realize that it's totally legal to do, so the only way I'm going to convince others to leave their sons intact is to convince them that it's a better choice to leave it alone. (which is why I try so hard to be polite!)

While you have a hard time seeing why I care so much about what other people do with their kids' penises, I have a hard time seeing why parents believe this is even their choice to make. We both come from different experiences that color our views. But as I mentioned before, my DH wishes he had a foreskin. So while we can talk pros and cons all day long (and still never come to a solid conclusion), in the end I believe that only the owner of the penis should decide to be circumcised or not.

[Galatea]

Originally Posted by s@hmommy Comparing to removal breast and/or labia, and labeling "baby mutilator" are the main ones that pop to mind, if I bothered to dig through those other threads I know there are more. Telling use it is a human rights issue is another, I simply don't believe and others agree, so it is useless to argue it if you are trying to convince someone why it is a bad idea when that "reason" really doesn't matter in the end. I am not saying you simply shouldn't offend, it will happen no matter how nice you are, but continually using those types of arguments sure aren't going to help.

Why is comparing it to breast or labia removal offensive? Does it disgust you to think of breast or labia removal, but not foreskin removal? Are breasts and labia more valuable than foreskins? Says who? Do women have rights over their bodies that men do not have? Personally, I find it offensive that so many people seem to think they have rights over their son's bodies, and at the same time, deny those rights to their sons.

Circumcision removes healthy body tissue without the consent of the patient for possible future medical treatment of conditions that could be treated without circumcision. That is why it is wrong. I cannot make it any more plain than that.

If you are truly looking to learn about circumcision for your next baby, then you are going to have to realize that there is no way to do so without having your current beliefs challenged. Right now for you and others, circumcision is normal, what you do, what most people you know do, and what has been done for awhile, by parents who love their children and wish the best for them. For me, circumcision is all those things, and at the same time, the wrong decision, no matter to which arena you would like to restrict the discussion.

It's wrong medically because it doesn't prevent anything that could not be prevented without cutting, and because it carries real risks.

It's wrong ethically because it denies the man's right to determine what happens to his body.

It's wrong socially because there is no way to perform enough cosmetic surgery to make a child tease-proof.

It's wrong sexually because it removes functional tissue and nerves that do not exist elsewhere in the penis and which have function for the female in sex.

It's wrong financially because it wastes millions of dollars a year that could be used for real medical needs.

[DesertRat]

I will admit that even being as anti-circ as I am, every once in a while I'll come across some information that makes me stop and wonder if I really made the best choice for my sons. In the end, I remind myself that should my sons not be happy with my choice, they can still get circumcised later.

[s@hmommy]

Originally Posted by Galatea Why is comparing it to breast or labia removal offensive? Does it disgust you to think of breast or labia removal, but not foreskin removal? Are breasts and labia more valuable than foreskins? Says who? Do women have rights over their bodies that men do not have? Personally, I find it offensive that so many people seem to think they have rights over their son's bodies, and at the same time, deny those rights to their sons. Circumcision removes healthy body tissue without the consent of the patient for possible future medical treatment of conditions that could be treated without circumcision. That is why it is wrong. I cannot make it any more plain than that. If you are truly looking to learn about circumcision for your next baby, then you are going to have to realize that there is no way to do so without having your current beliefs challenged. Right now for you and others, circumcision is normal, what you do, what most people you know do, and what has been done for awhile, by parents who love their children and wish the best for them. For me, circumcision is all those things, and at the same time, the wrong decision, no matter to which arena you would like to restrict the discussion. It's wrong medically because it doesn't prevent anything that could not be prevented without cutting, and because it carries real risks. It's wrong ethically because it denies the man's right to determine what happens to his body. It's wrong socially because there is no way to perform enough cosmetic surgery to make a child tease-proof. It's wrong sexually because it removes functional tissue and nerves that do not exist elsewhere in the penis and which have function for the female in sex. It's wrong financially because it wastes millions of dollars a year that could be used for real medical needs.

You are entitled to present you opinion however you please, just know that you are losing peoples interest with your attitude surrounding the whole thing. I have no more to say to you if you think this is an effective way to approach someone who is on the fence on the matter.

[Galatea]

Originally Posted by s@hmommy You are entitled to present you opinion however you please, just know that you are losing peoples interest with your attitude surrounding the whole thing. I have no more to say to you if you think this is an effective way to approach someone who is on the fence on the matter.

I have noticed that you have not answered my questions about the relative value or offensiveness of labia, breasts and foreskins. I am beginning to think that you label offensive anything that challenges your current view of circumcision.

As to my attitude, you may be right, but ad hominems do not reduce the logical value of an argument. It would be silly for you to make a decision for your child based on your dislike of me. If your son came to you as an adult and said that he was unhappy to be circumcised, do you think he will care if you say, "The people who told me not to circumcise were all obnoxious, so I had you circumcised?"