Thursday, October 12, 2006

Routine Infant Circumcision is Wrong.

This isn't something I usually just randomly discuss at dinner parties, but I think my blog is the perfect outlet for completely random thoughts of the day.

Routine circumcision on newborns is wrong. The fact that it is still practiced in the US and no one seems to question this barbaric procedure disgusts me. There is absolutely no reason that a doctor should be allowed to chop off perfectly healthy skin and erogenous tissue from a newborn baby's penis. I don't care even if it is being done for religious reasons. The only person who should have a say as to what happens to that boy's genitalia is the boy himself. No one should be making that decision for him. When that boy is old enough to decide if there is any benefit to being circumcised then so be it.

I am sure most people don't think twice about this topic or perhaps don't think it is anything out of the ordinary. That is unfortunate I suppose. So many people will march and fuss over abortion, yet they seem quite indifferent to the mutilation hundreds of thousands of baby boys have to endure every year.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love my foreskin.

12:21 AM  
Blogger Chicago_Sexbox said...

You go boy! lol

8:59 AM  
Blogger Eukolos said...

Your comment is well-said and should be said more often. As someone who tends toward the anti-abortion position (though not rabidly so), I am frustrated with the hypocrisy of those who are so passionate about that yet so completely indifferent to the circumcision question. And it's amazing how even gay guys often have had this thinking so deeply imprinted on their thinking that they don't even realize it. How often have we heard some guy say he doesn't like an un-cut penis? Something of beauty has been so disparaged that even those of us who should enjoy it the most often look down on it. (Of course, I am certainly not turned off by a circumcised penis at all, either, so I guess I'm a child of my culture to some extent as well...hehe).

3:07 PM  
Blogger equippedtofascinate said...

I can't say as that I've ever really put much thought into the subject. However, waiting does have it's complications as well. Many doctors, I've heard, will actually recommend not getting circumcised at an older age because of the pain and tenderness of the previously unexposed skin. You do make a good point though. Why does culture seem to think babies should be cicumcised? There is no benefit to it, what's wrong with a little extra skin?

4:53 PM  
Anonymous Tony said...

Well said.

To equippedtofascinate's comment, it makes just as much sense that a baby shouldn't be circumcised because of the pain and tenderness of the previously unexposed skin. It's obviously had less time to develop for the infant, but his foreskin also hasn't separated from his glans. And I'd suggest that the adult has a much better coping mechanism for the pain than a newborn. I don't understand how the pro-circ people don't get that.

5:35 PM  
Blogger Chicago_Sexbox said...

Tony has also brought up something I forgot to mention. At birth the foreskin is attached to the glans. In order to remove it they must literally rip it from the glans and then snip it off. I was going to post pictures to give people an idea but I didn't want the risk of ruining someones lunch, lol.

As for personal preference, I could care less if a guy is cut or uncut. That wasn't really the point of my post though. I just think a man should have the right to choose if he wants to keep his foreskin or not.

6:27 PM  
Blogger YoNoTePidoLaLuna said...

So when would you like a circumcision to take place? Its alot tougher to deal with getting one when you're an adult as by that point your penis has acquired a super sensitive head and not having that skin would irritate.

It seems like a "lose-lose" situation either way when bringing up this topic because if its wrong to do it on infants, my statements that I posted on the paragraph above would make for an argument to make it OK to do it on an infant. Its kind of like piercing a babies ears. I dunno. I say leave babies how they are.

I frankly don't see the need myself on circumcisions, even for sanitary reasons. I have foreskin and I keep my head clean.

1:18 AM  
Blogger Chicago_Sexbox said...

Well, I think you sort of answered your own question. There is no need for circumcision AT ALL except in extreme cases (phimosis, a condition in which the foreskin does not pull back and causes much pain and discomfort).

9:37 AM  
Blogger YoNoTePidoLaLuna said...

but u can deal with that "phimosis" really. I guess I have that..but its only aproblem upon penetration. See if I were to fuck bareback, it would have to be super lubed up or even better wih a condom cuz the skin won't pull back.

But I've been fucking for a while without a condom and I think u get used to the pain and eventually it goes away. It's just natural. Just like how women experience pain when first having vaginal sex

12:59 PM  
Blogger Chicago_Sexbox said...


4:42 PM  
Blogger MatadorMexicano said...

omg you guys rock!

and i have put literally 0 thought into this... so much so that i can honestly tell you i didnt know whether i was circumsized or not until one sexual encounter where the guy told me i wasnt. HA!

"its like a doberman.... let it have its ears"

5:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder if Mario Lopez is uncut. Mmmm.

1:32 AM  
Blogger Chicago_Sexbox said...

Gurl, he could have a vagina for all I care, I'd still fuck him! lol

11:34 AM  
Blogger bomitoni said...

are you having a case of foreskin envy? personally, i don't really give a rat's ass. to be honest w/ u, i am perfectly happy w/ my cut penis thank u very much.

11:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home