A family says their newborn son nearly bled to death and is fighting for his life after he was circumcised at a New York City hospital.
Tim and Gabrielle Groth said their son, Cole, underwent the circumcision at NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital in Manhattan, where he was born on March 31.
The only reason a scalpel should be anywhere near a person’s genitals is to treat a serious health issue. Which includes dysphoria.
cut off usefull natural things without consent…win stupid prizes
It depends on the day for me whether increased sensitivity would be a good or bad thing for me. But that’s mental illness and the accompanying drugs for ya.
It’s also preventative for some stds, iirc
Largely beneficial for UTIs, which is the leading infection in young boys. UTIs in young children are often hard to diagnose before spreading to the kidneys
Then later in life when getting too old to wash yourself the benefit returns again
I looked into this claim a couple of years ago. I couldn’t find any well executed study that showed this. It’s mainly a talking point that people who argue for circumcision claim is true, but I couldn’t find any scientific support for this.
I was unclear. Circumcision predisposes you to STD transmission iirc, but I also couldn’t find anything.
Because its the opposite actually. Circumcision reduces risk, inclusive of STIs as well as UTIs. Its a significant, but partial, reduction in risk. This has only been shown with PiV sexual activity and not with PiA sexual activity, which could be an important factor.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8579597/
Adult circumcision works out well, including for a family member who did it in his 30s due to severe phimosis (which is also linked to penile carcinoma).
I think the only appropriate answer to circumcision is not at birth, only for a clear medical need until they are an adult, and at that point it’s their decision.
But I doubt you’ll find anything peer reviewed that suggests an increase in STIs after circumcision, I’ve only ever seen the opposite, and I did a lot of reading on it before my son was born.
This is the correct way of looking at it. At birth should not be the time to do this… it should be done later in life, by the person’s own choosing.
“It depends on the day whether more pleasure would be a good or bad thing for me”
That’s a more precise version of your statement, I think.
Im Not sure if sensitivity always equals pleasure
Which is why I think sensitivity is the wrong word.
But he’s talking about sensitivity not pleasure?
Regardless, I’m circumcised, and if I was more sensitive in most situations, I wouldn’t last long enough for my wife’s toy to push her over the edge (I can get her off without it, but I’m too big and she’ll be sore for a week.
Like, my prozac can be performance enhancing.
The subset that wants it removed could still get that done later, right? Those who don’t aren’t given the option. Putting it back is a bit more difficult.
But hey, on the plus side, they helped cure him of… I mean prevented… I mean…
What again?
I’m sure someone will jump in and mention hygiene, like we haven’t invented fucking soap some 3000 years ago…
FYI, in those 3000 years time, we have found another use for soap besides sticking your dick in it!
That’s not what I… nevermind. Wording matters. :D
Circumcision is barbaric and backwards
Religion doesn’t get a free pass either. Superstition is no basis for mutilating babies
America is one of the only places in the world that still thinks this disgraceful practice is OK.
All because they followed the ideas of a nutter who made cornflakes…
Shit’s fucked
Any cosmetic body alteration should only be done according to the will of the body-haver.
Poor little guy is brand new to the world and just wants sleep, warmth and food. Instead he gets this 💔
At the will of the people who are supposed to be keeping him safe from harm…
🥒✂️
there’s another pointless bullshit stone age tradition that’s long overdue for going the fuck away forever
christopher hitchens (R.I.P.) says it better than anyone ever has or will:
Oy Vey
Haha, best response here.
Wow, mods are really going to censor this guy for saying “Oy Vey”?
What group of people do you think would shout the loudest and pull the most strings to make sure it’s still legal and encouraged to mutilate the penises of newborn males?
Jesus fuck, even on lemmy we can’t criticize them.
Why would you let them carry out that retarded procedure?
Genital mutilation should be 100% illegal instead of only applying to girls.
I agree with you fully but there’s a discrepancy that needs to addressed. Now, before you get the wrong idea, I’m NOT defending or excusing anybody here. The medical staff and the parents should be held responsible for nearly killing this newborn. Child genital mutilation of any kind should be banned.
Now, with that out the way, Male circumcision and female genital mutilation (or FGM, which is what I believe you’re referring to when you say ‘only applying to girls’) are not directly comparable. Male circumcision typically only removes the foreskin of the penis whereas FGM removes the both the clitoris and labia (I shudder while typing this out). It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.
Again, this sort of thing should be banned and no child should suffer from the decisions they had no say in.
I’m fine with adults mutilating their foreskin, but I want the decision left up to the individual. Having the parents do it when they are a baby leaves the individual with no choice
I’ll just say it’s very clear you’ve never seen what a botched circumcision does to a penis. You also don’t seem to know the biology of the male genitals very well either if you think it’s “just skin”.
Why don’t we instead focus on “bodily autonomy”? No one should have unnecessary medical procedures done against their will and without their consent. It’s a pretty simple rule that applies to everyone and covers most of these issues simply.
It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.
That is very much not accurate. Genital mutilation (of both genders) generally focuses on removing the ability to obtain pleasure from sex while maintaining reproductive capability.
Circumcision is roughly analogous to clitoral hood amputation (one type of FGM). The foreskin also contains a substantial number of sensory nerves (Meissnar’s corpuscles, and ~10k-20k nerve endings specialized for pleasure). Additionally, the glans (head) is subjected to the external environment in a manner which it was not adapted for, resulting in formation of thickened, layer of skin to protect it. These two things, taken together, result in greatly reduced sensory and pleasure capabilities in the penis. The reason for its commonality in the US is the historical puritanical belief that sexuality is wrong and desire to repress sexuality in little boys.
FGM is wrong. So is male genital mutilation. Inflicting either on those who can not consent is a crime against humanity that should not be accepted as commonplace.
I agree it should not be performed on a non-consenting individual, ESPECIALLY KIDS, but please do not claim the result is guaranteed to reduce sensitivity, as it is simply not true. Source: I am living proof the opposite can actually happen!
I had phimosis and experienced paraphimosis which can result in losing the whole thing. A circumcision was one of the best decisions of my adult life. It is NOT a sexual death sentence or designed to be only that. It can in fact be a saviour.
Most genital mutilation on kids is not done due to necessity.
It’s like saying we should perform mandatory surgery on everyone, but most everyone has to undergo it with no tangible benefit, just unnecessary risk – is it cool that we know how to perform the procedure in cases that medically necessitate it? Obviously. Does that mean there is a reason everyone needs it? Of course not.
It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.
More like removing the glans and foreskin, but that doesn’t make it much better. There are definitely varying degrees of awfulness, but it’s all bad.
While there are some truly evil and horrific practices like removing the clitoris or sewing the vulva shut, some female genital mutation is “just” removing the clitoral hood, which is directly analagous to the foreskin.
Most people can agree that this practice is deeply wrong, and that it is still genital mutilation. And so I think categorizing male genital mutilation separately as “circumcision” is downplaying it.
I’m curious: the person you replied to didn’t say they were comparable, so why did you feel the need bring it up?
In my experience, people who point that out when no one has made the comparison are usually insecure about an issue that affects men getting attention and potentially eclipsing the issue affecting women. Like people who point out that female victims of domestic violence die more often from their assaults during discussions about male victims of domestic violence.
You sure you wanna be that person? Try harder not to be, please.
FGM removes the both the clitoris and labia
There is an entire horrifying spectrum of FGM, not just what you posted.
My dude you LITERALLY just heard about a baby almost dying from a circumcision?? Which cis girl is born with the apparatus to undergo a circumcision. I’m waiting.
“instead of only applying to girls” you’re on some goofy shit, shitstirrer.
“only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only”
ARE YOU FUCKING BLIND? REREAD THEIR MESSAGE YOU IMBECILE.
Look in a mirror and try again dipshit.
LMAO…that comment got removed.
I expected that commenter to not reply (out of embarrassment, because most people with that kind of attitude tend to be too small to admit their mistakes).
Instead, it seems like they doubled down…what did that comment say? Ahaha
It should be in the modlog.
He basically just copy pasted “only” a bunch of times then questioned my reading comprehension and called me an imbecile.
How can someone be so confidently incorrect?
When you see a comment you disagree with, start by taking the time to research their claims.
Pretty sure in Egypt they still cut off the clitoris’ of preteen girls as tradition.
“only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only”
ARE YOU FUCKING BLIND? REREAD THEIR MESSAGE YOU IMBECILE.
“Days after Cole’s birth, doctors placed a stent in him to address a known heart disease he was born with.”
I would wager that if the kid has heart disease and a stent, they likely put him on blood thinners as well. Source: Am on blood thinners following a stent.
How much do you want to bet the asshats who suggested circumcision were blissfully unaware of what happens when you cut someone who is on blood thinners?
Why do parents keep choosing to cut up the genitals of their baby boys?
Is it because the dad had his penis cut up for him, and therefore he must do it to his son because “nothing is wrong with his dick”?
In America at least most people don’t really consider it until the kid is born. Then in the post birth rush of things happening someone asks if you want to circumcise your kid. Most Dads will say “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “HE IS BORN OF SIN! We must circumcise him to discourage sinful behavior!”
Most people really don’t think too deeply about most things, try not to over think it
In the US, it’s very often the mother’s decision, because the nurses will ask her. Fathers mostly get very little say in the medical care of their children in the US at nearly any age if the mother is present.
It’s due to lack of education about not cutting it and indoctrination of what has been societal norms. It’s much less nefarious than you think on the part of many parents. Most people don’t generally think about this ahead of time and research it.
Don’t forget the people who think they have to do it because the sky daddy they invented told them to.
ding ding ding
Male genital mutilation.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Unless you’re some religious nut job, there is zero benefit and a lot of harm you can do by circumcising. So stop doing it.
This is a general statement, and not factual. To say there is zero benefit (across the board): wrong. There are benefits, medically, for specific people with issues that warrant it. I had a later-in-life circumcision for medical problems, so I know. To say it is something you should do to a newborn: very wrong. This is something that has a fucked up history, and should only be done when needed (or wanted, I suppose) later in a person’s life… of their own choosing.
I’m sorry, I hadn’t considered that it might be done later to correct a problem. I honestly hope you weren’t offended.
No worries! I took no offense worth you not speaking your own mind… I just wanted to give my own thoughts on the matter.
These exchanges are why I love Lemmy.
Oh, fuck off, nerd.
/s
🍿
This has to be qualified more strongly. Most of the medical benefits of circumcision are apparent only after puberty. There is no medical reason to circumsize a baby.
I agree.
It’s ironic because the whole reason I’m even here on lemmy is because I was permabanned from reddit for telling someone to crawl back in their hole because they were defending circumcision while claiming female genital mutilation was abhorrent. As if mutilating a penis is perfectly fine but don’t dare mutilate a vulva.
I know this isn’t the main topic here but it just reminds me that body shaming men is okay but body shaming women isn’t. Especially when it comes to sex organs.
Yeah, I love how everyone loves “big dick energy” and “small dick energy”, but if someone said “loose pussy energy” and “tight pussy energy” it’s practically a hate crime lol.
Weewoo
Cleeerp cleeerp
Turn around and put your hands behind your back.
STOP RESISTING
Wait… We’re still arresting people for hate crimes?
From recent news I thought committing hate crimes and war crimes should get me a political appointment! I must be doing this wrong.
Hate crimes? No we just decided that your tattoo and lack of criminal record means that you’re a highly connected member of a Venezuela street gang, acting as a foreign operative and combatant on US soil.
Don’t say goodbye to your kids, they’re going with you, unless you can arrange for childcare for the foreseeable future in the next 2 minutes over the phone.
☹️
Oh, and we would tack on a hate-crime charge, plus vulgarity for mentioning body parts in public, but you’re not getting a court date anyway, so don’t worry about those.
How about we just stop insulting anyone’s genitals instead?
That’s the point.
I feel like your argument loses something by being stated backwards. It (and Hacksaws reply) comes off sounding like you are more angry at women than the patriarchy and want to be able to mutilate and body shame them. Rather than what I hope and assume is the case, that you want all genitals protected from mutilation and shaming.
Yeah maybe I missed the /s but I just wanted to show that body shaming and genital mutilation is fucked up and society’s (patriarchy) acceptance of it against men is pretty shitty overall. It would be much better if nobody got body shamed or mutilated non-consentually.
I’m just bringing up the double standard. You’re correct in your assumption that I don’t want ANY genitals being mutilated.
But it’s not patriarchal that circumcision is normalized for aesthetical reasons. Women circumcise their sons because they don’t like uncut penises. I’ve NEVER heard a man say anything like that outside of not wanting their child to feel different because other boys are all circumcised. Women do it for aesthetics. Men do it because of a fear of being different. There’s a difference.
It shouldn’t be done at all but the idea that uncut penises look gross is inherently a woman thing.
I’ve never heard a woman say they did or would have their baby boy circumcised because uncircumcised penises are gross, or any other version of aesthetic reasons. The religious reasons are rooted in the patriarchy, as is the “need” to look like one’s father and male relatives.
In the case of female circumcision, it’s a way of enforcing the position of women as property, making it more apparent if she’s ever had sex so her virginity can be sold to her husband. In its most extreme forms it can require she be cut open in order to give birth, and resewn each time. It can block clumps of menstrual blood and lead to infection and sepsis. In less extreme versions it can prevent her from feeling any pleasure during sex, in order to prevent her from having any except that imposed by her husband.
Aesthetics are the most often cited reason for male circumcision in the USA. It is rarely medically necessary, and only religiously motivated among Jewish people.
Fathers wanting their boy to look “like all the other little boys” is aesthetics
It would be aesthetics if fathers did it because they think it looks better. But that’s not what’s happening. They do it over fear that their sons will be ostracised for having different looking dicks. That’s a social reason, not an aesthetic one.
Anecdotally, I’ve known more mothers who fought for their child not to be circumcised than fathers. I fully encourage men to put their feet down on this issue too. This is very often a battle that the parent who cares more wins on.
Men do it because of a fear of being different.
I think a lot of people make a very reasonable argument that a huge reason this anxiety even exists is because of patriarchy
Sometimes it not some patriarchy conspiracy. Just sometimes.
Nobody said it’s a conspiracy. It’s practically a natural phenomenon. Why would anybody be afraid that their child would look different from the other boys? Because they don’t want the other boys to bully him. Why do we all know that the other boys would bully him? Well, the good news is there’s a lot of research on this topic but the unfortunate thing is if you wanna learn more, you’ll have to engage with a word you don’t seem to like for some reason.
It’s the same reason men want their sons to play sports and do manly things. Most of the dads pushing the patriarchal agenda aren’t doing it out of some hyper masculine superego, they just want their kids to fit in. The really sad part is that it’s because they know what it’s like to not fit in. They perpetuate the trauma because they were traumatized.
