• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Circumcision Rate Falls to 33%

Gibberish

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,269
Location
San Diego, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
According to a recent study circumcision rates for newborn boys in the United States dropped steadily and markedly over the past 4 years, based on the largest review of U.S. rates ever done.

Circumcision rates fell from 56% in 2006 to 33% in 2009.

peaceful parenting: U.S. Circumcision Rate Falls to 33%

I did circumcise my two year old son. Perhaps not for the best reasons but at the time that is what my wife and I decided. We now feel obligated to circumcise an additional sons we may have just so they don't feel different from each other.

So do you all circumcise your sons? Is it for social, medical, or religious reasons?
 

Korimyr the Rat

Baby Eating Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
19,550
Reaction score
15,755
Location
Cheyenne, WY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm uncut. I intend for my sons to be uncut as well.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The circumcision rate is on the decline and for good reason: there is no need for it except in cases where there are real medical problems. In Canada circumcision used to be covered by public health care; now if you want one, you have to pay for it.

I was mutilated by doctors under the consent of my parents at birth, but if I have male children they will remain whole.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
32,215
Reaction score
36,199
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
All I know is, I'm cut and I wouldn't have it any other way...
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,990
Reaction score
9,844
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
When I have a son in a few years I'll study up on it before hand, if there are medical benefits to it I'll definitely consider it but if not, and in my opinion as of now with what tiny bit of research I've done there isn't, then there's no way I'd do it.
 

Gibberish

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,269
Location
San Diego, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
All I know is, I'm cut and I wouldn't have it any other way...

That's the same thought I had when we decided to circumcise my son. I'm circumcised and remember growing up what a taboo not being circumcised was and how it was labeled negatively by women. I don't think I had a single friend in high school that wasn't circumcised and this was only ten years ago.

I regret the decision for my son or atleast the reason for it. maybe it will have no impact on his life or he prefers being circumcised. Looking back I just don't like the idea that the decision was made based on social acceptance.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Why call it "mutilated by doctors" when it was purely your parent's choice?
Have you asked them about why they chose it?

:shrug:

On that note - adult-male circumcision is increasing in frequency. . .and from the opinions of men who've elected for it - quite a few seem to prefer that their parents had done it in infancy so they wouldn't have to deal with it as adults.

All of my kid's are circ'd for different reasons - and all of them were done so as a proper surgery, with anesthesia.
 
Last edited:

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,990
Reaction score
9,844
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
As infant circumcisions decrease I imagine it would only make sense that adult circumcisions increase.

You can always go get it done if you want to, but you can't get it undone. Seems simple enough for me.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,431
Reaction score
16,987
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
As infant circumcisions decrease I imagine it would only make sense that adult circumcisions increase.

You can always go get it done if you want to, but you can't get it undone. Seems simple enough for me.

Actually, foreskin restoration is possible and also becoming more common.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
It's probably because most Hispanic boys don't get circumcised and has nothing to do with anything else.

In addition to this:

In 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) stated that the medical benefits of male circumcision were not enough for the group to recommend that the procedure be made routine at all hospitals. As a result, some states began withdrawing Medicaid coverage for circumcision.

It appears the AAP has changed its stance in this 2010 report:

Advisory groups
in the United States need to carefully consider how recent
data on the preventive efficacy of adult male circumcision
might change current recommendations for care of newborns
and adolescents in the United States.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/119/4/821
 
Last edited:

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My sister did not have genital mutilation performed on her son, and I would never do it to mine if I had one.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Appeal to emotion. Its a surgical procedure, not a "mutilation".

"Mutilation or maiming is an act or physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, usually without causing death."

That is what non-medical circumcision is. It's for asthetic appeal and not much else. This definition is provable as it applies to circumcision, even if it's not in vogue or socially acceptable to say so.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
My sister did not have genital mutilation performed on her son, and I would never do it to mine if I had one.

"Mutilation or maiming is an act or physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, usually without causing death."

That is what non-medical circumcision is. It's for asthetic appeal and not much else. This definition is provable as it applies to circumcision, even if it's not in vogue or socially acceptable to say so.

Nine out of ten circumcized males elect to have their sons circumcised. Interestingly, only 75% of uncircumcised males choose NOT to have their sons circumcised. Uncircumcised men are twice as likely to become infected with HPV. Transmission of HPV to one's female partner is a known cervical cancer risk in women. Recent studies have shown that circumcision drastically reduces one's chances of contracting HIV (female to male). Also protects against chlymidia and syphllis. Discovery Health "Why Circumcise?"

Those facts would belie it's being referred to as sexual mutiliation.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Nine out of ten circumcized males elect to have their sons circumcised. Interestingly, only 75% of uncircumcised males choose NOT to have their sons circumcised. Uncircumcised men are twice as likely to become infected with HPV. Transmission of HPV to one's female partner is a known cervical cancer risk in women. Recent studies have shown that circumcision drastically reduces one's chances of contracting HIV (female to male). Also protects against chlymidia and syphllis. Discovery Health "Why Circumcise?"

Those facts would belie it's being referred to as sexual mutiliation.

An amputation of an arm is mutilation when it's not under the patient's consent and it's not done for medical reasons. When it's done for medical reasons (i.e. life saving) with the patient's full knowledge, it's not mutilation. Saying it's not mutilation just because it's a surgical procedure is disingenuous. There are plenty of instances of torture in human history that involve surgical procedures, and we would indeed call them mutilations.

Second... saying that most males don't regret being circumcised is also disingenuous, given that they never had the chance to grow up with an alternative. Most are circumcised at birth so they grow up relating to their scarred penises as normal (hence the asthetic rejection of uncircumcised penises). All this means is that we have several generations that not only are unaccustomed to what a natural penis looks like, they actually reject natural looking penises.

The populism argument does not fly.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
An amputation of an arm is mutilation when it's not under the patient's consent and it's not done for medical reasons. When it's done for medical reasons (i.e. life saving) with the patient's full knowledge, it's not mutilation. Saying it's not mutilation just because it's a surgical procedure is disingenuous. There are plenty of instances of torture in human history that involve surgical procedures, and we would indeed call them mutilations.

Second... saying that most males don't regret being circumcised is also disingenuous, given that they never had the chance to grow up with an alternative. Most are circumcised at birth so they grow up relating to their scarred penises as normal (hence the asthetic rejection of uncircumcised penises). All this means is that we have several generations that not only are unaccustomed to what a natural penis looks like, they actually reject natural looking penises.

The populism argument does not fly.

Makes no difference to me if you want to call it genital mutiliation. It certainly denigrates the term, though. I didn't mention the aesthetics. You did. Oh, and apparently 15% of circumcised males may possibly have felt that way. Also never said that males regret having had it done. And certainly never used the populism argument. Are you just kinda' throwin' stuff against the wall and seein' if it sticks?

I listed some sound medical justifications for the procedure. I don't really care. I don't have one.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Makes no difference to me if you want to call it genital mutiliation. It certainly denigrates the term, though. I didn't mention the aesthetics. You did. Oh, and apparently 15% of circumcised males may possibly have felt that way. Also never said that males regret having had it done. And certainly never used the populism argument. Are you just kinda' throwin' stuff against the wall and seein' if it sticks?

I mentioned the asthetics because it's important as a cultural consideration. People are hiding behind medical justifications when they are minority causes for the procedure. Most people want it done because it's socially acceptable, it's an asthetic norm, and they don't want their children to be ostracized. Also, because the father had it done at birth, he relates to his circumcised penis as normal, which is why he would want to convey the same normalcy to his baby boy.

Circumcision was popularized because of Catholicism, Islam, and Judaism. It's the same reason why the UN endorses it, because it's a cultural norm, and it reduces the risk of contracting HIV by an miniscule percentage. This doesn't change the scientific fact that it's an unnecessary procedure the vast majority of the time.

I listed some sound medical justifications for the procedure. I don't really care. I don't have one.

I am not glossing over the real medical situations where it is needed. I'm talking about the vast majority of the time where it is not needed and falls under the category of an elective procedure.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I mentioned the asthetics because it's important as a cultural consideration. People are hiding behind medical justifications when they are minority causes for the procedure. Most people want it done because it's socially acceptable, it's an asthetic norm, and they don't want their children to be ostracized. Also, because the father had it done at birth, he relates to his circumcised penis as normal, which is why he would want to convey the same normalcy to his baby boy.

Circumcision was popularized because of Catholicism, Islam, and Judaism. It's the same reason why the UN endorses it, because it's a cultural norm, and it reduces the risk of contracting HIV by an miniscule percentage. This doesn't change the scientific fact that it's an unnecessary procedure the vast majority of the time.

I am not glossing over the real medical situations where it is needed. I'm talking about the vast majority of the time where it is not needed and falls under the category of an elective procedure.

I can certainly understand a parent making the "tie-breaker" reason "to conform to cultural norms." There's nothin' meaner than kids in locker rooms unless it's a snake. ;-)
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I can certainly understand a parent making the "tie-breaker" reason "to conform to cultural norms." There's nothin' meaner than kids in locker rooms unless it's a snake. ;-)

And my whole point is that we would consider it a mutilation if it weren't a cultural norm that came into fashion due to religion. In Europe circumcision only happens where medically necessary, same as in Asia, South and Central America, and most parts of Africa (where UN policy hasn't pushed the cultural norming process of circumcision). It's on the decline in North America but still fairly accepted here.

I think in a couple of generations it won't be a cultural norm here anymore.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,662
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
And my whole point is that we would consider it a mutilation if it weren't a cultural norm that came into fashion due to religion. In Europe circumcision only happens where medically necessary, same as in Asia, South and Central America, and most parts of Africa (where UN policy hasn't pushed the cultural norming process of circumcision). It's on the decline in North America but still fairly accepted here.

I think in a couple of generations it won't be a cultural norm here anymore.

You could be right about it becoming less and less popular. Yet the American Academy of Pediatrics has apparently backtracked from their 1999 report. See my post above. As to calling it genital mutiliation, yeah, I suppose if it weren't considered a cultural norm, we'd call it that. But today it is a cultural norm. Calling it genital mutiliation is over the top.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,596
Reaction score
22,536
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
...geesh is it odd looking to see an uncut wiener.

20020227-4427nmr.jpg


Especially when it has buck teeth and legs!
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,916
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You could be right about it becoming less and less popular. Yet the American Academy of Pediatrics has apparently backtracked from their 1999 report. See my post above. As to calling it genital mutiliation, yeah, I suppose if it weren't considered a cultural norm, we'd call it that. But today it is a cultural norm. Calling it genital mutiliation is over the top.

The benefits are marginal, and the AAP is a cultural institution just as it is a scientific one. You will not find comparable agreements in places like Asia where circumcision is not the norm. I am not claiming they are lying... I'm just saying that they're more likely to support any minute evidence for circumcision and exaggerate the benefits. It's kind of like how the WHO endorses circumcision in the African continent as a means to reduce the risk of HIV/AIDS by something like 10%, even though unprotected sex, anal sex, contact with sex workers, and exposure to IV drug use have much, much higher risk. It suggests that you can engage in these behaviors as a circumcised man and not have to worry as much. It's preposterous.

I admit that calling it mutilation is my moral view and that it's subjective, but saying that I'm over the top for believing that, I think, is really being unreasonable. Circumcision existed, historically, to prevent ease of masturbation, and to declare one's convenant with God. (In Christianity this largely comes from Old Testament thinking, which is also a reason why circumcision is on the decline, as more people are adopting New Testament interpretations.) The minute medical preventative benefits are just trumped up scientific reasonings to back cultural norms. Because men have never had a sexual liberation movement as women had in the 50's and 60's, I don't think the issue of male circumcision has really come under heavy scrutiny yet. But one day it will.

There is no good medical reason why this procedure should be performed automatically at birth. It is done at the request (and payment) of parents who do it for cultural reasons, and the medical justifications that people try to put forth are really pathetic, like hygiene. Only a few cases are for real medical reasons.
 
Last edited:

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,720
Reaction score
53,491
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"Mutilation or maiming is an act or physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, usually without causing death."

That is what non-medical circumcision is. It's for asthetic appeal and not much else. This definition is provable as it applies to circumcision, even if it's not in vogue or socially acceptable to say so.

Orion. You are doing the same thing that Chuz did with definitions. You're equivocating them. Calling it mutilation is exactly as Crippler described. An appeal to emotion logical fallacy. You can be against it for the reasons that you state, but you're not doing your position any good by doing this.
 
Top Bottom