Comments on: “Intactivist” Group Lobbies CDC Against Circumcision

By: CDC Considers “Universal Circumcision” to Fight HIV Cases : Eco Child’s Play

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:15:55 +0000

[...] of the groups lobbying against such a blanket recommendation is Intact America, a newly-formed group in the U.S. with the aim of lowering the circumcision [...]

By: Denise

Denise — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:10:43 +0000

I had an uncle who went through circumcision as an adult and he was in pain. I don’t know the reason why he did that but it was something he wanted done. I have heard other married women speak of their husbands who were not circumcised and wished that they were. It is a personal choice of the parents and maybe even an economical one. I believe it is a painful experience and we have yet to learn what the repercussions are. Child labor and delivery is a difficult thing and painful too but I don’t feel that pain today but I know my body is changed from that experience. I think having children in your twenties is the best time as a woman’s body usually can bounce back into shape but for some men to say they feel a lot more than a circumcised man makes me wonder, how do they know that?? My uncle never made such a statement (I doubt that he would have said that to anyone other than his own wife though) but who knows for sure if it is true?

By: Denise

Denise — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:53:52 +0000

I feel this decision should be made by the mother of the child. My son was circumcised the day after he was born as were all of my sisters sons, except one. That nephew had many itchy infections and was not being cleaned properly as his mother was very squeamish. She did not understand that she was to keep clean that area constantly. All the other boys never experienced that trouble and my other sisters and I were only concerned with the first week of healing around where the foreskins had been removed. My husband and all of his 5 brothers were also circumcised but none even remember it at all, as they were babies too. No, we are not Jewish nor Muslim but Catholic and this was done strictly for health reasons too. I don’t understand how it would keep HIV at bay but I do see how it would prevent other types of bacteria from spreading, especially to women. Just keep the area very clean as you would keep you hands and mouth as clean as possible. If there is no water to clean with or to drink, I don’t see how anything is safe from bacteria…HIV does not wash away either. Bad oral hygiene and bad sexual habits most likely will help someone contract HIV and all the other diseases out there. I, for one am glad my hubby and son and now grandson have been circumcised.

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:26:29 +0000

It is not foreskin that spreads disease, it is sexual promiscuity that spreads it. I have not spread a disease because I have not slept with anyone but my wife of 25 years. As long as I keep my sexual practice within the realm of that union, I will never contract nor spread an STD.
The same argument is used by gun control advocates. Take away all guns because then murder and violent crime rates will go down. It is not the gun that spreads murder or violence…it is the heart of men that does.
This is a religious and moral matter very simply because personal responsibility for ones actions and choices is at the core of the problem. We always look at changing the peripherals; remove guns, remove foreskins, etc. when what needs to change is the hearts of men who commit acts contrary to the Will of God.

By: 2Shaye ♪♫

2Shaye ♪♫ — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:59:08 +0000

Sorry, I’m sitting here nursing a baby with only one hand free to type, but someone (somewhere) said there’s “less pain and emotion involved” for infant circumcision than there is for adult circumcision. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but WHY do we assume that a baby can’t feel the same extreme pain and discomfort AND emotion that an adult male is capable of? Then they’re expected to sit in their own urine and feces during the healing process. This just seems like an odd argument, yet I continue to hear it from those lobbying hard for instant infant circumcision.

By: Earth_Mommy

Earth_Mommy — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:21:55 +0000

There was a great article in Mothering Magazine regarding the HIV/Circum. debate. I have three girls, so never had to get off the fence regarding the debate. That said, I fully support parental decisions on both sides. You have to do what you feel is right for your child and your family.

Ok, got my flame suit on

By: An Anonymous Female

An Anonymous Female — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:17:22 +0000

C. King,

I can tell you from personal experience that circumcised men do not make better lovers – they make difficult lovers. All else being as equal as possible (no two people are 100% the same) I would chose the intact man hands down, every time.

Oh yeah, I’ve had both and know what I’m talking about. I’m not just whining – circumcised partners don’t come close being as good in bed as intact partners. I’m not saying circumcised men can’t be adequate – they can, it’s just that as groups, intact men are far better than circumcised men.

I’m sorry that from what you write it seems you were prematurely retracted by a doctor who was possibly a pedophile and that this led to embarrassment and consequent foreskin problems. However, I do not feel that the few and far between problems with the foreskin (and they are rare in males who haven’t had injuries to their penises at a young age by ill-informed adults), or even your own sad personal story justifies cutting off functional, healthy tissue from people who are too young to consent.

By: Mark Lyndon

Mark Lyndon — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 15:02:36 +0000

For C King. If there are six African countries where circumcised men are more likely to be HIV+ than intact men, then how exactly is circumcision going to help? Someone doing what Jacob Zuma is going to get HIV anyway, and there’s evidence that men who are already HIV+ are 50% more likely to infect men if they’ve been circumcised.

I don’t have time to answer all your other points, but I disagree with almost everything you say. Just a couple of things.

The new testament of the Bible specifically says not to circumcise.

Europe doesn’t circumcise (except for Muslims and Jewish people), and they have significantly lower rates of STI’s (including HIV) than the USA.

I’m intact btw, and I’ve never had any of the problems you talk about.

For Binary Blonde: There are intelligent educated women who think they have a religious duty to have part of their daughters’ genitals cut off, and they will passionately defend the practice, and insist that they’re doing their daughters a favor. Doesn’t make it right.

There are also plenty of Jewish men who resent having been circumcised. I believe that everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want part of their genitals cut off.

By: Cate Nelson

Cate Nelson — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 14:07:10 +0000

Hi Frank. I knew I could count on you and Hugh7.
@Binary Blonde: For the record, you’re not hijacking the comments section. My blogs on circumcision have become stomping ground for people of all opinions on the matter and in the comments, there have been respectful arguments. Obviously, because the two aforementioned commenters have become familiar to me. (And I so appreciate them!) I thank you for opening up and contributing here.

By: Binary Blonde

Binary Blonde — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 07:13:09 +0000

*sigh* And now I’ve gone and done what I said I wouldn’t do. Which was to take these comments off topic… again. So, if anyone has anything to “point out” to me about my religious views on circumcision from this point on, please contact me privately as I will not be commenting (hijacking?) here further. There is a contact form on my blog. Though, I can’t promise I’ll reply, I’m a little busy putting my son at the center of my world.