My mom made me get circumcised at 16 and I was not in love with her decision at the time, to say the least. After some years and sexual active-ness, I’ve grown to love and I’d recommend it for any boy hopefully earlier than later like I had. It was humiliating and painful but at the end of the day my penis Is better without foreskin. You’re a good writer!
Loading...
My boyfriend who was born in 1950 didn’t get circumcised unfil he was 11 because his parents couldn’t afford it back then and I suspect his anxious anal retentive mother couldn’t stand washing his nasty penis as a child
Loading...
It's certainly understandable that a teen boy might resent his mothers decision to have part of his penis taken off. On the other hand, I think your mom was considering the situation from a woman's perspective, and knew exactly what she was doing. I think you understand what she trying to accomplish now, too, and I'm glad you don't harbor resentment and ill will toward your mother. Some guys never understand, never get it, and as a result, never get past anger and resentment.
Loading...
If a mother was to look at it as having her clitoral hood removed what is exactly the same as having a foreskin removed would she then be so keen to have her child circumsised?
Circumsision is not something that needs to be done at any age unless it's for medical reasons, the simple answer is to teach the child/teen how to retract the foreskin to clean properly and then they have the option to keep it retracted all the time of over the glands what ever they prefer.
Circumsision is not something that needs to be done at any age unless it's for medical reasons, the simple answer is to teach the child/teen how to retract the foreskin to clean properly and then they have the option to keep it retracted all the time of over the glands what ever they prefer.
Loading...
I'm a 45+ uncircumcised male and in all those years have never don't that, if I boy can't learn how to his penis away correctly then something is wrong lol
Circumsision is a form of genital mutilation!
Circumsision is a form of genital mutilation!
Loading...
Only a monster would want to have a teenage undergo MALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
I know many of you on here claim that you or your child "had" to be circumcised at an older age than birth but, rarely does anyone ever give a reason of why such a pleasure robbing medically unnecessary surgery would be done.
It is 100 PERCENT NORMAL for a foreskin to not retract until later in the teen years. Doctors who force a foreskin back or who don't understand that there is no such thing as child phimosis are guilty of malpractice.
Left alone, men's foreskins will ballon when urinating (normal), remain unretracted until well into puberty (normal) and eventually retract on their own (normal).
No medical intervention is required.
As far as "looking like the other guys" is concerned. During WWII virtually 100pct of US men were INTACT. Then, circumcision became a popular way for doctors to make money.
So, there was a transition period - years where not every All 'Murican Male had an assembly line MALE GENITAL MUTILTATION. Further, those WWII era men didn't go get circumcised to look like thier sons. Therefore, there was a transition period where fathers and son did not have the same MALE GENITAL MUTILATION status.
Yes, some teenagers do live in a community where MALE GENITAL MUTILATION is still brutally forced on the majority of infants. Then, if they have parents with common sense, they find themselves in the showers (for a few years) with males whose parents were lied to about all the benefits of MALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
Males whose parents are smart enough to not have the GENITAL CUTTER give them MALE GENITAL MUTILATION should explain the massive damage that they were saved. Explain to them that the average human male lives to be about 90 years of age and that showering with others is only for about 3 to 4 years in school.
With the proper information, most males would be very happy to understand how they were saved from the GENITAL CUTTER in the hospital.
Not every boy in the high school showers has the same weight, height or penis size. Why would we worry so much that every boy be GENITALLY MUTILATED?
Yes, there are some studies that show in Africa HIV transmission from female to male is reduced by 60% after MALE GENITAL MUTILATION. Those studies were paid for by the makers of the one time use MALE GENITAL MUTILATION kits.
So, with only a 60% reduction, a condom is still required.
After MALE GENITAL MUTILATION, if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
Then again,
If a man eats breakfast and if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
If a man has ever ridden in a car and if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
If a man sleeps lying down and if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
Further, despite the studies showing the wonders of MALE GENITAL MUTILATION in stoping the spread of HIV, it's not working. Even in areas where a huge percent of men have allowed the GENITAL CUTTERS to MUTILATE them, the rate of transmission hasn't gone down.
The cost of a condom given to a male is 2 cents. Paying for MALE GENITAL MUTILATION costs about $150.00 each.
So for the price of one unaffected MALE GENITAL MUTILATION, 7,500 condoms could be purchased.
The goal in Africa is to MUTILATE 100,000,000 (one hundred million men). That's enough money to buy 750,000,000,000 (Seven Hundred Fifty BILLION) condoms. Three are only 1.3 billion people in Africa (half of them are males).
650 million African men with 750 BILLION condoms would give each male 1,150 condoms each. That's enough condoms for every African male to have sex three times a week for the nex 32 years.
There is no valid medical reason to allow GENITAL CUTTERS to MUTILATE men.
I know many of you on here claim that you or your child "had" to be circumcised at an older age than birth but, rarely does anyone ever give a reason of why such a pleasure robbing medically unnecessary surgery would be done.
It is 100 PERCENT NORMAL for a foreskin to not retract until later in the teen years. Doctors who force a foreskin back or who don't understand that there is no such thing as child phimosis are guilty of malpractice.
Left alone, men's foreskins will ballon when urinating (normal), remain unretracted until well into puberty (normal) and eventually retract on their own (normal).
No medical intervention is required.
As far as "looking like the other guys" is concerned. During WWII virtually 100pct of US men were INTACT. Then, circumcision became a popular way for doctors to make money.
So, there was a transition period - years where not every All 'Murican Male had an assembly line MALE GENITAL MUTILTATION. Further, those WWII era men didn't go get circumcised to look like thier sons. Therefore, there was a transition period where fathers and son did not have the same MALE GENITAL MUTILATION status.
Yes, some teenagers do live in a community where MALE GENITAL MUTILATION is still brutally forced on the majority of infants. Then, if they have parents with common sense, they find themselves in the showers (for a few years) with males whose parents were lied to about all the benefits of MALE GENITAL MUTILATION.
Males whose parents are smart enough to not have the GENITAL CUTTER give them MALE GENITAL MUTILATION should explain the massive damage that they were saved. Explain to them that the average human male lives to be about 90 years of age and that showering with others is only for about 3 to 4 years in school.
With the proper information, most males would be very happy to understand how they were saved from the GENITAL CUTTER in the hospital.
Not every boy in the high school showers has the same weight, height or penis size. Why would we worry so much that every boy be GENITALLY MUTILATED?
Yes, there are some studies that show in Africa HIV transmission from female to male is reduced by 60% after MALE GENITAL MUTILATION. Those studies were paid for by the makers of the one time use MALE GENITAL MUTILATION kits.
So, with only a 60% reduction, a condom is still required.
After MALE GENITAL MUTILATION, if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
Then again,
If a man eats breakfast and if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
If a man has ever ridden in a car and if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
If a man sleeps lying down and if a man properly uses a condom his risk of getting HIV is almost zero.
Further, despite the studies showing the wonders of MALE GENITAL MUTILATION in stoping the spread of HIV, it's not working. Even in areas where a huge percent of men have allowed the GENITAL CUTTERS to MUTILATE them, the rate of transmission hasn't gone down.
The cost of a condom given to a male is 2 cents. Paying for MALE GENITAL MUTILATION costs about $150.00 each.
So for the price of one unaffected MALE GENITAL MUTILATION, 7,500 condoms could be purchased.
The goal in Africa is to MUTILATE 100,000,000 (one hundred million men). That's enough money to buy 750,000,000,000 (Seven Hundred Fifty BILLION) condoms. Three are only 1.3 billion people in Africa (half of them are males).
650 million African men with 750 BILLION condoms would give each male 1,150 condoms each. That's enough condoms for every African male to have sex three times a week for the nex 32 years.
There is no valid medical reason to allow GENITAL CUTTERS to MUTILATE men.
Loading...
Blah! Blah! Blah! Same old same old. Nothing new here. There are a lot of other aspects to this that don't get discussed much, if at all. Here's one: I used to know a couple of uncircumcised guys when I was a teen, and they did something they called charged shots. That is they would pull their foreskins forward, pinch them closed, and pee in the foreskin until it ballooned, then when they couldn't hold it any more, release it, and all the pee would come out in a big gush. They also did long shots, in which they would pinch their foreskins partly closed and see who could pee the farthest. Then there were side shots, trick shots, loop-the-loops and others. This was fine out in the woods when we were hiking, but at home in the bathroom? They both said they missed the toilet bowl. A lot. And one's mom had complained about pee in the floor repeatedly, and couldn't figure out why he kept missing. So, by all means, don't have your kid circumcised IF YOU LIKE TO CLEAN UP PEE!
Loading...
The very simple answer there rather than perform genital mutilation on them is to simply teach them to pull there foreskin back when they pee like I was and problem is solved no more pee on the floor!
Loading...
You obviously didn't read the post you replied to. The post said they were intentionally holding their foreskins closed. This was willful. It was something the boys used their foreskins to do intentionally. It was a behavioral problem not a physiological problem. Teach them to do whatever you want, but when they get out or your sight, they're going to do what they want to, up to and including peeing in the floor, and as long as they have a foreskin, charged shots. I believe anyone who calls circumcision "genital mutilation" has their own agenda in mind.
Loading...
Removal of the foreskin is equal to removal of the clitoral hood and labia minora, that is classed as FGM so why isn't circumcision classed as the same when not done for a medical reason?
Circumcision is a procedure that should only be performed if the foreskin to tight or causing infections there is simply no need to perform it for any other reason at that age, as I said if a child is taught at a young enough age to retract it when he pees and the parents explain why he needs to do it then all will be fine, boys will be boys I mean would you cut off his feet if he was to persistently walk in mud and bring it in the house? No you would teach them to whipe there feet or remove there shoes!
Circumcision is a procedure that should only be performed if the foreskin to tight or causing infections there is simply no need to perform it for any other reason at that age, as I said if a child is taught at a young enough age to retract it when he pees and the parents explain why he needs to do it then all will be fine, boys will be boys I mean would you cut off his feet if he was to persistently walk in mud and bring it in the house? No you would teach them to whipe there feet or remove there shoes!
Loading...
My mother seen me peeing in the yard one day. Later she asked me if I was having problems with my foreskin as it had not retracted. I was 12 at the time. She commented that the doctor needed to "snip the tip" so that my foreskin would retract. Sounded painful. She commented that the "head of my peter" needed to be exposed such that I could give her grandchildren. "It needs to be done!", she exclaimed. After much persuading I reluctantly agreed. She called the doctor and made an appointment.
Loading...