posted February 27, 2007 03:01 AM         

quote:

---

Consent Bill Would Make Male Circumcision a Personal Choice

---

quote:

---

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) January 9, 2007 -- Nearly 3,000 federal and state lawmakers received proposed legislation via email, fax, and postal mail this week that would require men to be eighteen years old before undergoing circumcision. The bill proposals were submitted to lawmakers in Congress and sixteen state legislatures by members of MGMbill.org, a San Diego based health and human rights group.

Matthew Hess, the group’s president, said that MGMbill.org’s proposed legislation is designed to give men control over their own bodies. "Although some men may prefer to be circumcised, there are at least as many men who resent that part of their penis was amputated without their permission. Enactment of the MGM Bill would address this injustice by letting men make their own choices about circumcision when they become adults."

[b[Male circumcision is the only medically unnecessary surgery in the USA that is performed without obtaining consent from the patient.[/b] The latest statistics from the National Hospital Discharge Survey indicate that nearly 60% of U.S. newborn males are still being circumcised, down from an estimated high of 85% in the 1960s. Circumcision and genital cutting of girls has been prohibited since 1997 when the U.S. Female Genital Mutilation Act took effect, but that law does not apply to boys.

Charles A. Antonelli, Director of MGMbill.org’s Massachusetts state office, said that requiring a patient to give his consent before undergoing circumcision would help quell the growing controversy surrounding the practice. "A consent law would take circumcision out of the gray area," said Antonelli. "Adults would be free to undergo circumcision without restriction, and children would be protected from medically unnecessary circumcision until they reach the age of consent. I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with that."

As more activists speak out against circumcision of children, the legal landscape is beginning to shift. In an October ruling, a Cook County, Illinois, circuit court judge presiding over a parental dispute ordered that a 9-year old boy not be circumcised, writing that "the injury to the child as a result of an unnecessary circumcision would be irreversible." A week prior to that decision, a German court ruled in a child ritual circumcision case that male circumcision is only allowed in Germany for medical reasons, and a Finnish court handed down a decision in August declaring that male and female circumcision "are illegal under the same criminal law."

"Recent studies have confirmed that circumcision decreases sexual pleasure for most men," said Trisha Darner, director of MGMbill.org’s Oregon state office. "If men can choose circumcision later in life, why should they be subjected to this surgery as infants when they can’t give their consent? Men should have the same legal rights that women have when it comes to making decisions about their own bodies."

Arthur Coons, director of MGMbill.org’s Washington state office in Snohomish, emphasized that no man would be prevented from having a circumcision if he chooses it for himself. "Men will still be able to undergo circumcision for any reason if the MGM Bill becomes law," said Coons. "Our legislation only requires that the person being circumcised be at least eighteen years old to consent to the procedure. In my opinion, enactment of this law is long overdue."

State legislatures that received MGM Bill proposals included California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington. A federal version was also submitted to all 540 members of Congress.

---

Yeah, I really hope this passes, and the sooner, the better. Still, though, the bill that outlawed female genital mutilation took more than a year to pass (and it was only proposed in 1995!!). What a worthless country...

Ok, maybe no one else cares. Made my year, though.

posted February 27, 2007 05:54 AM         

I agree with you. It should absolutely be personal choice.

This litle rib kicker who will be here soon will stay intact, you can bring that to the bank. I even have a 'caregivers' consent form from a website, that explains how to care for my newborn boy, that I printed off and will keep in the diaper bag for 'well meaning' people who decide to tell me the things I 'need' to do to care for an uncircumcized penis..( pull back skin, etc) so I am ready. I should make him wear a t-shirt every day that says 'leave my willy wonka alone, that's the best care'.

I always appreciate the links you've left.. they have helped me bring more information to others, when they were thinking on this decision. The info may have even changed some minds! So that's exciting!
*When you're preggers, you find others going through the same things*

posted February 27, 2007 07:32 AM         

I have 3 boys and none of them are circumcised. I couldn't bring myself to hurt such a tiny baby, no matter what other people say.

On the other hand, my ex, who was circumcised at birth keep thanking the heavens that his mother did it when he was a baby, because, he doesn't have to deal with it and suffer the pain and remember the pain.

Admittedly, a cleanly cut male organ does look much better than one that is not. Just something about it. Perhaps that's just a personal opinion. Although, they all look alike when the man is excited.

Miss Muffet

posted February 27, 2007 09:51 PM         

That kid is super lucky.

(Thanks for the support, by the way. I'm always nervous about posting this sort of thing, lol. I'm so glad there are moms like you out there.)

Sunchild: I know, so awesome!!

Hi, Miss_Muffet - I just wanted to address this, if you're still around.

quote:

---

Admittedly, a cleanly cut male organ does look much better than one that is not. Just something about it. Perhaps that's just a personal opinion.

---

The circumcised male organ is, without exception, scarred and keratinized (calloused), resulting from the loss of the protective prepuce. Also, circumcision removes the majority of the specialized nerve endings in that region, together with several highly-specialized erogenous zones (mainly the ridged band and frenulum).

Here are some comparison pictures, for reference (warning: pictures of male genitalia):
http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/comparison.html

The difference is pretty plain to see.

Men in cultures that circumcise women often say that mutilated vaginae are 'prettier.' It's just cultural conditioning.

Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there. Thanks.

Dulce Luna - The supposed hygienic reasons for circumcision have all been thoroughly debunked ( http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/ )- all male mammals naturally have foreskins, and, as makes sense, nature does not make stupid mistakes (especially not in the all-important reproductive organs!).

The origin of the 'hygiene' myths, interestingly, stems from the concern for "Moral Hygiene" - in the Victorian era, when non-religious circumcision made its advent in the West, it was thought that masturbation was morally unclean, and caused all sorts of diseases (blindness, epilepsy, insanity, etc.) Circumcision was used as a punishment and "cure" for masturbation.

Ok, I'll stop before I get longwinded. Haha.

posted March 01, 2007 07:42 AM         

Yep, I'm expecting him anyday now. I'm the lucky one.

I found this website, I thought I'd add it here.
http://www.icgi.org/birth_care_providers.htm#breastfeeding

Oh.. here's a little story for you.

My son is intact, and he's twelve.
When I told my mother in law we were having a home birth, she said; "Well, how will you get the baby circumsized if you're at home?"
I thought because she knew me, it was weird of her to asssume I would circumcize...
My reaction was immediately.. "No baby of mine will be circumcized. I wouldn't do it to my girl, I certainly won't do it to my boys."
She of course, took her thirty year old mentality stance.. so I simply took it as an educational opportunity rather than a getting mad at her bullheadedness and stupidity, as I would have in the past.
I told her if she'd like to give me an informed opinion, I'd be happy to listen.... but that I have researched the matter fuly, therefore I know what I am talking about, so if she wants to recycle old information, it wasn't flying.
Anyway.. it ended up being a good opportunity for healing... her Doctor was God back in the seventies, right? She had a bad birth experience and a bad after birth experience...
Well.. my son was in the other room, and I referenced him, I said.. "Well, you know HE isn't circumcized, right? I would never make such a huge cosmetic decision for him."

posted March 01, 2007 01:32 PM         

or his/her Laws, for that matter?

posted March 02, 2007 12:03 AM         

You guys handled that situation better than I would have, for sure. Heh, I almost bit my aunt's head off a few years ago over the issue (she's a nurse, if you know what I mean...)

Mystic Melody, I hear you; I've heard so many horror stories about nurses and the medical industry in general. I guess that's what you get when you take the most arrogant element of society and give them a position of authority.

posted March 02, 2007 08:57 AM         

This is a topic we discussed in high school quite a lot. This guy had it done when he was 16 for medical reasons, and noticed no change. So I'm pretty indifferent about it - but to avoid any problems my baby's daddy can make the choice. Either way I wont get the blame

quote:

---

Men in cultures that circumcise women often say that mutilated vaginae are 'prettier.' It's just cultural conditioning.

Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there. Thanks

---

posted March 02, 2007 08:14 PM         

quote:

---

So I'm pretty indifferent about it - but to avoid any problems my baby's daddy can make the choice. Either way I wont get the blame

---

Lovely. If you go into it as willfully ignorant as you obviously are, you will indeed be to blame.

Sorry to be blunt, but it's the truth.

Seriously, watch that circumcision video before you have your son's most sensitive body part removed (without anesthetic). It's the very least you can do. And don't get one of those ones where they cut the sound out and put in soothing music - get a real one, where you can hear the screaming.

Allow me to address your points one by one.

quote:

---

Just want to point something out, sorry I'm about as pretentious as they get male and female circumcision are not the same...

---

It's not a matter of severity, but sovereignty. Whose penis (or vagina) is it? Who ought to be deciding how much of it is cut off?

Male and female circumcision are not quite the same, but that doesn't make either one of them right.

quote:

---

The male is primarily for hygiene, as far as I know

---

Wrong. But forget for a moment all the studies that have been done debunking the various old wives' tales and myths about this (which I will link in a moment); let's just apply common sense here: consider - do you seriously think that nature designed the mammalian penis to be naturally unhygienic and unhealthy?

How would mammals have gotten as far as we have with such a serious flaw in our reproductive organs?

Also, be aware that more than 85% of the world's men are intact - uncircumcised. America is the only industrialized country in the world that circumcises the majority of it's male infants for non-religious reasons. Circumcision is almost unheard of in Europe, Asia, etc.

quote:

---

the female kind is done to prevent her from...urr "straying", before or after marriage - there is also no medical benefit, and nowadays I think it's more about tradition.

---

The exact same is true of male circumcision. There is no medical benefit; it is done as a matter of tradition.

quote:

---

Plus it kills her sex life, which is basically the point - I did an essay on it in high school, and was thoroughly disturbed.

---

Please read the following quote by famous historical Rabbi Moses Maimonides, in regard to male circumcision.

"Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible. It has been thought that circumcision perfects what is defective congenitally. This gave the possibility to everyone to raise an objection and to say: How can natural things be defective so that they need to be perfected from outside, all the more because we know how useful the foreskin is for that member? In fact this commandment has not been prescribed with a view to perfecting what is defective congenitally, but to perfecting what is defective morally. The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and diminishes the pleasure is indubitable. For if at birth this member has been made to bleed and has had its covering taken away from it, it must indubitably be weakened. The Sages, may their memory be blessed, have explicitly stated: It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him. In my opinion this is the strongest of the reasons for circumcision."

Nice, huh? It's genital mutilation for the purpose of sexual repression.

In fact, male circumcision made it's advent in America as a cure for masturbation.

"In all cases of masturbation circumcision is undoubtedly the physician's closest friend and ally... To obtain the best results one must cut away enough skin and mucous membrane to rather put it on the stretch when erections come later. There must be no play in the skin after the wound has thoroughly healed, but it must fit tightly over the penis, for should there be any play the patient will be found to readily resume his practice, not begrudging the time and extra energy required to produce the orgasm. It is true, however, that the longer it takes to have an orgasm, the less frequently it will be attempted, consequently the greater the benefit gained."

-E.J.Spratling, Masturbation in the Adult, Medical Record, vol. 24. (1895): pp. 442-443.

quote:

---

Also the male equivalent to female mutilation is removing the head, which doesn't happen - unless the guy who's doing it has a shaky hand!!

---

Does the name David Reimer ring a bell?

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this:

"At age 30, during a physical exam, my doctor, noticing my long foreskin, stated this was an unhealthy situation that I would likely have problems with it, and advised that I be clipped. Having never studied circumcision on the pros and cons, I consented. He gave me no information on which to base an informed judgment. Neither did he give any information about what style he would employ, or how tight he would cut me, and I did not know enough to ask. …

In a couple of months the sensitivity began to decline and has continued to decline to this day. Sexual pleasure has been reduced by at least 70 per cent, both in intensity and the fact that the whole rage of sensation is completely gone. This is most logical, as two of the structures [foreskin and frenulum] were removed, and the only remaining structure, the head, has been toughened and desensitised by being deprived of the moist natural covering which God intended it to have, and is constantly exposed to the friction of clothing. … Circumcision has deprived me of much pleasure for the remainder of my life, has caused me physical pain and has been psychologically devastating. I no longer feel like a real man."

-- William E. Krueger, Winston-Salem NC, USA, open letter to newspapers and Intactivist organisations, 12 July 1993

and this...

"I was born in 1949 in a small town in Mississippi. My father and his four brothers were all intact (not circumcised), and thanks to a sympathetic doctor I was kept intact, too, as was my brother who was born a year later. The glans of my penis was exquisitely sensitive. My foreskin was used in all kinds of ways during sexual activity, and its inner surface was the most sensitive part of my penis (more sensitive than even the glans). Orgasms were so intense that my knees buckled if I climaxed standing up, and lying down my body would convulse as wave after wave of ecstatic pleasure rolled over my body from head to toe. I saw stars, flashing lights, my ears filled, and my legs stiffened. Following this period of orgasm (not a single moment but an extended period), I definitely understood the slang term of being “spent.”

When I was 19 I was experiencing normal adolescent feelings of not fitting in and decided that one way to be like my peers was to make my penis look like theirs (virtually all of my friends were circumcised). So I talked my father, doctor, and insurance company into elective circumcision. Conventional wisdom at the time (which is still around today, unfortunately) said that there was no difference between being intact and being circumcised. Common sense should have told me otherwise, but I was young. Following circumcision, the constantly exposed glans dried out. The surface became calloused rather than delicate, and although the nerves were still there below the surface, the calloused, dry, and thicker skin of the glans definitely decreased sensation. In addition, the lack of moveable skin on the penis made sexual activity more difficult and usually required the use of lubricant (saliva or artificial) to avoid too much friction. I married, and sexual intercourse was difficult for my wife and me. We had to make sure that there was enough lubrication (natural or artificial) to avoid the discomfort of friction for her, but not too much lubrication or I could not have enough glans sensation to reach orgasm easily. Orgasms were still possible, of course, but they were not nearly as intense as when I was intact. I understand the metaphor that someone has offered of going from color to black and white. Needless to say I was not happy!

In 1987 I discovered a chapter in a book at the public library stating that non-surgical foreskin restoration was possible. I wrote off for the directions and fashioned homemade devices to restore my foreskin and protect my glans again. My glans has resensitized and become a moist mucous membrane once again. The loose skin (which looks very natural and functions surprisingly naturally, too) makes masturbation and intercourse easy and more enjoyable for both myself and my wife. I tell people that my sex life on a scale of 1 to 10, intact, was a 10. Circumcised it was a 3, and restored it is a 7. I’ll never have a 10 again (only God can design the perfect penis!), but a 7 is a heck of a lot better than a 3!"

(P.S. I have two intact young adult sons who are both grateful they were kept that way.) --- David, Maryland

People dismiss male circumcision as "just a little snip" and that it's "just a piece of skin." It's a nice lie they tell themselves to continue to condone the practice, when it truth, it's more than just a piece of skin. When an infant is circumcised, he is robbed of about 51 percent of his penile skin -- between sixty and ninety square centimetres of sensitive tissue. That much skin anywhere else on a person's body would contain some 2.1 metres of nerves and have about 50 nerve-endings. But the foreskin is much more sensitive, containing some 73 metres of nerves and 1,000 nerve endings.

Cutting it robs that part of his body of protection, hardens the remaining tissue, and destroys any number of hormone triggers. This is not just "a piece of skin." It's an important part of his genitals, and one cannot realistically argue that taking away all those nerve endings and the lubrication provided by the foreskin doesn't affect his ability to enjoy sex.

I hope you read this; I'm sorry to be so brutal about it, but I'm circ'ed, and I know very well just how nasty it is. A lot of men never knew anything different and don't know what they're missing. But seriously, if you care about your son at all, don't excise part of his penis at birth. At the very least, let him make an informed decision of his own when he is old enough to do so.

I so hope this bill passes.

Links for further information:
http://nocirc.org/
http://www.circumcision.org/
http://www.noharmm.org/
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/
http://www.circumstitions.com/
http://sexuallymutilatedchild.org/
http://www.cirp.org/

posted March 02, 2007 08:16 PM         

quote:

---

In all of biology, the nonengineered individual is the strongest. All
of his parts are there for an excellent purpose.

---

- Ronald Poland, MD (American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force
Committee on Circumcision)

quote:

---

We ... cannot allow females or any group of patients to be
mutilated. I'm afraid that this is even more basic than religion.

---

- John C. Nelson, MD, AMA Trustee
(in American Medical News, Vol 39,
no. 40, October, 1996)

quote:

---

Whatever is done to stop the terrible practice of
circumcision will be of tremendous importance. There
is no rational medical reason to support it. It is high time
that such a barbaric practice comes to an end.

---

posted March 03, 2007 02:45 AM         

An article incorporating this specific information in a slightly more compact way and sent to some parenting, pregnancy and women's (and men's!!) magazines would be very informative. And since you like researching so much, Johnny...

posted March 03, 2007 06:44 AM         

I wish *someone* would submit such a well done article *somewhere*.

You really should.. be a penis pioneer!

posted March 03, 2007 09:56 AM         

But then, neither of us own a penis.

That said.... I have made two of them, and there's no way I'd take that chance based upon even a fraction of what I read ( and seen.. now and before) compared to the 'benefits' that are non existent.

posted March 03, 2007 11:30 AM         

quote:

---

Also, be aware that more than 85% of the world's men are intact - uncircumcised. America is the only industrialized country in the world that circumcises the majority of it's male infants for non-religious reasons. Circumcision is almost unheard of in Europe, Asia, etc.

---

quote:

---

Lovely. If you go into it as willfully ignorant as you obviously are, you will indeed be to blame.

---

quote:

---

"Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question...

---

quote:

---

None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished.

---

quote:

---

Nice, huh? It's genital mutilation for the purpose of sexual repression.

In fact, male circumcision made it's advent in America as a cure for masturbation.

---

If this stigma is removed, would there still be porn, sex toys, prostitutes etc etc What would there be left? Well no circumcision that's for sure.
Gone off on a tangent there.

posted March 03, 2007 08:03 PM         

quote:

---

It is not unheard of. But no one's expected to do it, unless for religious reasons.

---

Non-religious circumcision is unheard of in most of the world - it is even illegal in much of Europe. I've talked to lots of European guys - they've all told me they think it's a crazy, stupid thing to do.

Check this out; a post from a European on this forum (she lives in Sweden; it's illegal to cut babies, there):

quote:

---

I was almost thrown off the chair with horror when I began to read this topic!

I had no idea this was common in the States!
I have never heard of this being done to anyone in Sweden and when I read this topic to Hubby he thought all the circumcised men never could experience a "joyful" masturbation!

Well who are we(me and hubby) to talk about what the circumcised feel and not feel but for me that little piece of skin is important for added "joyness" (for men).

I totally agree with Pixel on this topic.
And washing the penis the right way keeps it clean no nead for any cutting to achieve this.

---

Wish I was Swedish...

But, then again, if men were meant to have foreskins, they'd be born with them.

quote:

---

In my experience, I have never heard complaints by those who have been circumcised

---

Well, you have now.

Like I said, you're experience sounds limited as far as circumcision goes. I don't mean that as an insult, or anything - I just hope that, if you're ever put in a position where you're making permanent and irreversible choices regarding someone else's genitals, you don't just base your decision on limited hearsay. There are no second chances, here.

That's why I hope this bill passes; so that the decision will be left in the hands of the only person who has any right to make it - the owner of the penis.

quote:

---

only by those who haven't.

---

With all the misinformation out there, there are guys who feel that being circumcised must be better, or why else would it be so common. They're misinformed, but, if they want to get cut, let them do it when they're old enough to make an informed choice for themselves. Like I said, whether you know it or not, there are many men who are angry that they were circumcised against without their consent - that's how this bill got started, after all.

quote:

---

Decrease is different to ending some one's sex drive.

---

Oh, absolutely. Female mutilation is horrid, and I would do anything to end it. I'm not arguing there. But, because one is worse, it doesn't make the other ok, or lessen the effects for those impacted by it.

quote:

---

I understand where you're coming from Johnny, and I am starting to agree. But you are biased, no doubt there I'd prefer to hear opinions that cover both sides.

---

Oh, yes, I'm biased. I'm a male who was cut against his will - I rather think I'm biased in the only way that matters. The "other side" is biased because circumcision is a huge industry in the US - it's the most common surgery performed, and, with the sale of the leftover foreskins, it is a multi-hundred-million dollar-a-year industry.

Yeah, they sell them, for $4,000 a pound. They're used in expensive facial creams. check THIS out: http://www.ediets.com/news/article.cfm/cmi_701678

quote:

---

All that is about to change, now that I have added a facial "regeneration system" -- TNS (Tissue Nutrient Solution) Recovery Complex by SkinMedica -- to my regimen. As it turns out, babies' bottoms are no longer considered very cutting edge in the world of skin care. Where it's at is baby foreskin.

That's the key ingredient in TNS Recovery Complex, a raspberry-colored goop that retails for $125 a half-ounce. The box says it's made from "human fibroblast conditioned media," which I suppose is what you call snips and snails and puppy dog tails when it costs $4,000 a pound.

---

$4,000 a pound. Medical industry, anyone?

There are no 'opinions' in objective matters like this one - there is only truth and falsehood.

Not trying to be confrontational, but I doubt you'd say something like that to me if I was a *female* victim of sexual mutilation. I can't help but find it sort of offensive. Not angry or anything; just, y'know... It hurts when something that you feel has drastically impacted your life for the worse is seen by society as "one side of the coin."

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to read these long posts, lol. Makes writing them worthwhile.

posted March 03, 2007 08:10 PM         

quote:

---

my opinion on it, is I would do it for my child, Its hard to believe anything you read anymore, how do they know the loss of sensation is because of the circumcision? you say the clean issue is BS, but I dont think it is, maybe ill change my mind on the issue if i ever have kids, but i just have the stern feeling about it, i feel it'd be wrong not to...

---

Please, God, let this bill pass.

Ugh. People who can't even understand grammar are allowed to make irreversible decisions about other people's sexuality. Make me so ******* mad.

"A stern 'feeling' about it." How lucky your son will be, to have a mother with such 'stern feelings' about his penis.

You obviously didn't read any of the information Pix or I posted. "How can you know the loss of sensation is caused by circumcision?" Here's a thought - read something, instead of just talking! But, I guess then you couldn't be willfully ignorant anymore, so think carefully about it!