Circumcision

[kellyb]

I would agree, so long as you are comparing like with like. I.e. a ritual circumcision of a boy performed under similar conditions (and with similar implements) to a circumcision performed on a girl.

I worded myself just so, adding in "in terms of loss of sensitivity or sexual function" to keep it simple.

 

[Henners]

I'd go so far as to say that there's no evidence that a majority of female circumcisions are significantly "worse" in terms of loss of sensitivity or sexual function than a majority of male circumcisions.

Did you not read this Margaret Atwood poetry, then?

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian...96/atwood.html

Should I put a tick under "apologist" for you?

 

[Darat]

Did you not read this Margaret Atwood poetry, then?

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian...96/atwood.html

Should I put a tick under "apologist" for you?

I think you will find that kellyb is very much against all genital mutilation.

Also rather than a piece of poetry a piece of research:

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2837

...snip....

Circumcised women experience sexual arousal and orgasm as frequently as uncircumcised women, according to a study in Nigeria.

The researchers also found no difference in the frequency of intercourse or age of first sexual experience between the two groups of women. These findings remove key arguments used to defend the practice, they say.

Friday Okonofua and colleagues at the Women's Health and Action Research Centre in Benin City studied 1836 women, 45 per cent of whom had been circumcised.

During the operation, all or part of the clitoris and the labia are removed. Proponents of female circumcision claim it makes virginity at marriage and marital fidelity more likely. Opponents condemn it as dangerous and painful.
...snip...

The point for bringing this up is that many people who support either implicitly or actively male genital mutilation do not support female genital mutilation even though by the reasons they give for supporting (or not interfering) male genital mutilation can be applied directly to female genital mutilation.

It is an attempt to try to help them realise that their reasoning is failing them in this instance.

 

[Henners]

I'm a NewScientist subscriber, so I read it every week.

Couldn't get to the end of Margaret Atwood's poetry book, though. Too stressful. There are worse poems than that one. The woman is clearly a complete nutter, and I mean that as a compliment.

If I misunderstood KellyB, I apologise unreserevedly, of course. Sometimes I'm too curt and a bit stupid.

 

[Kaylee]

http://www.clitoralunhooding.com/
http://www.femalegenitalrefinement.com/procedures/hoodectomy.php
http://trishwilson.typepad.com/blog/2007/03/female_genital_.html

Non-Onion links, OK.


The first two links don’t cite any peer-reviewed studies.


The last link mentions a university and a scientist's name which makes it possible to track the study down. Coincidentally (or perhaps not ) the last link is the only one that makes it clear that this type of surgery is really only for women with a medical disorder called clitoral phimosis.

Why do so many women have difficulty reaching orgasm? A new study suggests that, for some, an anatomical disorder may be to blame. Researchers at Boston University School of Medicine report that roughly one quarter of the women they have treated for sexual dysfunction have clitoral phimosis, which means the hood of skin surrounding their clitoris is too tight or there is no opening in the skin for the glans of the clitoris to protrude for stimulation. The scientists, who were led by Irwin Goldstein, presented their findings at the Female Sexual Function Forum, a four-day meeting in

Boston of physicians and therapists that ended Sunday.


<snip>


Clitoral phimosis is roughly equivalent to an uncircumcised man with an extremely tight foreskin. Such men often cannot achieve an erection because it is painful; the condition is easily remedied by circumcision or surgical loosening of the foreskin. There is no standard treatment for clitoral phimosis, although some women have undergone surgery to increase the exposure of the clitoral glans.

So IMHO, this is really a different issue altogether because in this thread we're talking about whether it's in a healthy baby’s interest to be circumcised. The last link makes it clear that a female hoodectomy (removing the prepuce) should only be considered for women with a medical problem.


The first two links, as far as I can tell, are really just PR material for some doctors who are not making this clear. It would be easy after reading their web sites to assume that a hoodectomy is an elective procedure that is reasonable for any woman to consider having, and I think that is irresponsible.

 

[Cainkane1]

I sure got circumsized when I was a baby and I feel violated.

 

[ponderingturtle]

No, you are not getting it. Not all FGM includes infibulation. There is a huge variety of tissue removed and cut. This is all classed as 'female circumcision' or FGM, along with infibulation. There are rough groupings used, such as Type I and Type II, but as Linda and KellyB were discussing, the exact details of the damage done are hard to determine from these broad categories.

The thing is that there are lots of FGM that is much much worse than male circumcision. You totaly ignored that in this post

I also noticed Linda has started whining about how the reality(TM) of FGM is much worse than male circumcision. Obviously this is the case because of those special details that she knows about, but refuses to let the rest of us in on I have a feeling that what she means is FGM is much worse than male circumcision as performed in the West. That is a totally unfair comparison. FGM is practiced in the West by plastic surgeons on consenting adults, safely and with no long term health problems

It is much worse in many cases. The debate is over what percentage of cases it is clearly much worse.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'd go so far as to say that there's no evidence that a majority of female circumcisions are significantly "worse" in terms of loss of sensitivity or sexual function than a majority of male circumcisions.

And it is difficult to say that as there seems to be rather a lot of grouping things together that are entirely different

 

[ponderingturtle]

The point for bringing this up is that many people who support either implicitly or actively male genital mutilation do not support female genital mutilation even though by the reasons they give for supporting (or not interfering) male genital mutilation can be applied directly to female genital mutilation.

It is an attempt to try to help them realise that their reasoning is failing them in this instance.

The problem is also that there would seem to be a lot of missunderstanding about what exactly female circumcision entails. I think most would agree that the total removal of the clitorus is not a very good analogy for a male circumcision. So a major part of this is a missunderstanding of what female circumcision actualy entails, at least in many of the cases.

 

[Kaylee]

If you don't want your son to be circumcised, why do you think you need to find research to support your decision given that the various medical associations consistently conclude that it is not medically indicated?

In this hypothetical situation? For the ammunition to protect myself against the incredibly intense pressure to carry on the tradition.

If the assertions in the links to my post #98 are correct than I would think circumcision is not only merely not medically indicated or necessary, but that it should be strongly discouraged.

You can checkout any time you like, but you can never leave.

So true.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

You think it's a terrible thing to do unless there's a great medical need, and she thinks it's not that big of a deal?

I'm guessing that Linda and perhaps other people reading my posts think that when I'm not arguing with them about circumcision, I'm getting "Ban Circumcision Now!" T-shirts and flyers printed. I'm not. On a scale of 1 to 10 of nasty things parents do to their children, I'd give it a 3 or a 4, about the same as indoctrinating them with religion. If the subject comes up I'll argue my point of view vigorously, but I don't seek out parents and physicians who do these things and start ranting at them.

My strongest objection is to circumcisions performed without effective anesthesia. That means a dorsal penile nerve block or ring block, not just EMLA cream. I would like to know what Linda would do if she saw a physician performing a circumcision on an infant in the manner LossLeader is going to have his child circumcised in the near future. Any comment Linda?

Quite frankly, I don't give a toss about Jewish or Islamic culture when it comes to this issue. Jews and Muslims are living in a developed Western country so they should have their ritual 'medical' procedures performed to the same standard as everyone else would be expected to have them performed. That means effective pain relief and a competent surgeon in an appropriate facility, such as a hospital.

I would also like to see American physicians actively discouraging infant circumcision. This should of course be supported by the appropriate medical associations, such as the AMA and AAP. This is a custom that was introduced and promoted by American physicians. They should bear some of the responsibility for getting the levels down to something approaching what the evidence supports, about 1% of infants.

So, given Linda's recent comments, I am struggling to see a huge difference in our opinions. Even more puzzling is why she has decided to ignore all my direct comments and questions to her, no matter what the subject, only responding to a third party. Is this acceptable behaviour in America or Canada? I can't imagine any of the Americans and Canadians I met while I was in the US/Canada recently thinking that it was.

 

[fls]

The point for bringing this up is that many people who support either implicitly or actively male genital mutilation do not support female genital mutilation even though by the reasons they give for supporting (or not interfering) male genital mutilation can be applied directly to female genital mutilation.

It is an attempt to try to help them realise that their reasoning is failing them in this instance.

But are any of those people here?

Loss Leader has stated that he doesn't have an opinion with regards to FGM. I don't know if Z has made any specific statements and he isn't really participating in this part anyway. I don't recall Ponderingturtle supporting male circumcision, and those issues that he has brought up about FGM seem to be of the sort that most people find unacceptable. And I don't support either practice. So who are you addressing your concerns to?

Linda

 

[fls]

In this hypothetical situation? For the ammunition to protect myself against the incredibly intense pressure to carry on the tradition.

Ah, then you would do well to use biased sources, if it's not likely that those opposing you will know different.

If the assertions in the links to my post #98 are correct than I would think circumcision is not only merely not medically indicated or necessary, but that it should be strongly discouraged.

That's the point of selecting only that information that can be presented in such a way as to support your point, instead of a representative offering. It looks like you're on the right track.

Linda

 

[Loss Leader]

I would like to know what Linda would do if she saw a physician performing a circumcision on an infant in the manner LossLeader is going to have his child circumcised in the near future.

You know, I've examined the manner in which circumcisions are carried out by doctors in hospitals and the manner in which the mohel did my first son's. I have to say that even without pain medication, I find the mohel to be much more humane.

In a hospital setting doctors will strap the baby to a board, hopefully cushioned. Then they'll futz around with whatever pain management they're using and then perform the circumcision. I think the usual procedure takes five to ten minutes. At the bris, the entire procedure - including placing the baby on the pillow, restraining him by hand, all of the prayers, all of the clamping and all of the cutting - took about a minute.

Since it appeared to me that my son was far, far more distressed at being held down than by the actual procedure, I have to conclude that the bris is the most humane of the options.

 

[ponderingturtle]

But are any of those people here?

Loss Leader has stated that he doesn't have an opinion with regards to FGM. I don't know if Z has made any specific statements and he isn't really participating in this part anyway. I don't recall Ponderingturtle supporting male circumcision, and those issues that he has brought up about FGM seem to be of the sort that most people find unacceptable. And I don't support either practice. So who are you addressing your concerns to?

Linda

I have admitted to being willing to be convinced that some forms of FGM might well be moderate enough that I would find them acceptable. I am unconvinced of this, but it might be that the worst forms get over represented in the media and some forms are acceptable.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

<snip>

It is much worse in many cases. The debate is over what percentage of cases it is clearly much worse.

Relative to what? Western infant circumcision? Yes, I agree. To male circumcision in the same culture? No, I think they are often as brutal and dangerous as each other.

 

[Darat]

The problem is also that there would seem to be a lot of missunderstanding about what exactly female circumcision entails. I think most would agree that the total removal of the clitorus is not a very good analogy for a male circumcision. So a major part of this is a missunderstanding of what female circumcision actualy entails, at least in many of the cases.

Not any lack of or misunderstanding on my part.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

You know, I've examined the manner in which circumcisions are carried out by doctors in hospitals and the manner in which the mohel did my first son's. I have to say that even without pain medication, I find the mohel to be much more humane.

In a hospital setting doctors will strap the baby to a board, hopefully cushioned. Then they'll futz around with whatever pain management they're using and then perform the circumcision. I think the usual procedure takes five to ten minutes. At the bris, the entire procedure - including placing the baby on the pillow, restraining him by hand, all of the prayers, all of the clamping and all of the cutting - took about a minute.

Since it appeared to me that my son was far, far more distressed at being held down than by the actual procedure, I have to conclude that the bris is the most humane of the options.

So you don't imagine there is any pain when the foreskin is ripped from the glans? Or when the foreskin is stretched? Or when it is cut? How about after the procedure? Do you think the infant goes into shock at all? How painful is the wound for a few days after the procedure? What about when the baby pees - do you think that might hurt quite badly? Do you think about these things at all?

How do you know the mohel is competent? Is there a professional organization of mohels you can check they are members of first? What if something goes wrong, such as excessive bleeding - how close are you to a hospital?

 

[Darat]

But are any of those people here?

Loss Leader has stated that he doesn't have an opinion with regards to FGM. I don't know if Z has made any specific statements and he isn't really participating in this part anyway. I don't recall Ponderingturtle supporting male circumcision, and those issues that he has brought up about FGM seem to be of the sort that most people find unacceptable. And I don't support either practice. So who are you addressing your concerns to?

Linda

By the way it's much easier to be direct about these matters - you could have just said "Do you mean me?" and if you did I would say "Yes from your posts I have formed that opinion about your position regarding FGM v MGM".

If you say you don't hold such a position then of course I have to believe you but would suggest that you try to be clearer and more direct in how you answer questions posed to you.

 

[Loss Leader]

So you don't imagine there is any pain when the foreskin is ripped from the glans? Or when the foreskin is stretched? Or when it is cut?

Whatever pain there is would be prolonged by having a doctor do the procedure in a hospital.

How about after the procedure?

My son exhibited no signs of pain or discomfort at all from 30 seconds after the bris until now, two years later.

Do you think the infant goes into shock at all?

No.

How painful is the wound for a few days after the procedure? What about when the baby pees - do you think that might hurt quite badly?

My son exhibited no signs of pain or discomfort at all starting thirty seconds after the procedure.

Do you think about these things at all?

Yes.

How do you know the mohel is competent?

Referrals.

Is there a professional organization of mohels you can check they are members of first?

Yes.

What if something goes wrong, such as excessive bleeding - how close are you to a hospital?

Less than a ten minute drive. Since I once had to drive to the hospital because we couldn't wake my son up, I am familiar with the route.