Choosing to have your son cut or not

"Not necessarily lower if you have the preferred "high" cut." Are there studies on this?

I don't have a specific study to reference right now but it is well known that the route of infection for HIV is through the urinary meatus or the thin mucosa tissue of the inner foreskin and vagina.

A "high cut" circumcision removes mostly the outer foreskin tissue and retains the thin inner foreskin mucosa tissue with the incision scar well up the penile shaft behind the glans. A "low cut" circumcision removes both inner and outer foreskin tissues with the incision scar right behind the glans.

A "high cut" is usually the preferred cut since it retains the unique touch sensitive nerve endings of the inner foreskin; nerve endings that have particularly different sensations cf to the glans. Females experience very similar touch sensations with their homologous vestibule nerve endings.

@bbw4doc - Have to say that that particular study on it reducing HIV transmission is a reason I *wouldn't* push for circumcision. Why? The reduction is minor compared with the risk of someone thinking "I'm circumcised, I don't need a condom." If you want to minimize STI transmission you need to go with methods that work.

In areas where you can't get condoms or other very effective ways to cut your risk of STI then maybe the "circumcise men to reduce HIV" argument holds up.

@sophie00 - I certainly don't hate my parents. My penis still works, sex is still fun. I'm cut loose enough that my wife hasn't complained of chafing. My penis seems aesthetically attractive to me, but then again that's what I've been looking at for many years, so I imagine someone who has their foreskin considers their penis aesthetically attractive.

In areas where you can't get condoms or other very effective ways to cut your risk of STI then maybe the "circumcise men to reduce HIV" argument holds up.

It certainly doesn't hold up in areas with cultures that display higher levels of more or less accepted male promiscuity.

In fact it may even work specifically against reducing levels of infection because of a sort of 'magical thinking' engendered by being circumcised. Namely the idea that being cut infers the idea of invulnerability to infection or that being circumcised is a sort of vaccination.

This is not that much different a notion from the old (disproven) idea that circumcision prevents or at least greatly reduces male masturbation.

@moliere that's good to hear! I really hope my oldest has the same feelings on his penis as he gets older.

It wasnt until I saw a documentary "American circumcision" that it even crossed my mind that he might be very angry at us one day for having done this to him.

I think the worst part is the reasoning behind it. Dad is circumcised and because of this he wanted his son to be the same. Soooo so stupid. I've never seen my mom's or sisters vaginas, we all have different size tits and never once did I wonder or become upset with being different from them.

In the end what's done is done of course. I deeply regret it and just hope he's fine and without any issues as he gets older.

@moliere that's good to hear! I really hope my oldest has the same feelings on his penis as he gets older.

He will be fine and will probably like your decision.

Sophie00,

I don't hate my mom or dad for what was done to me. I do believe that US (and probably some Canadian) doctors, in the past, had a profit motive. That makes me angry. So wrong on so many levels.

I have three daughters, all adults now. I would not consent for them to have their ears pierced until they were 18 years old. I wanted to teach them to have a respect for their own bodies. I did not want them to do modifications to their flesh while I was responsible for them. This attitude was likely attributable to my circumcision history, although I never explained it that way to them.

@Morty said

I have three daughters, all adults now. I would not consent for them to have their ears pierced until they were 18 years old. I wanted to teach them to have a respect for their own bodies. I did not want them to do modifications to their flesh while I was responsible for them. This attitude was likely attributable to my circumcision history, although I never explained it that way to them.

You wouldn't let them have their ears pierced even if they wanted it? That's rather severe don't you think? Besides, at 18 years of age, they didn't need your consent any longer unless they were still being supported by you and you were a "my house, my rules" kind of guy.

Suppose they really liked your wife's pierced earrings? No pierced ears for them? My daughters loved jewelry and my earrings. At the time they were born, I had one earring in each ear. When they were about eight and eleven (I don't recall exactly anymore) they wanted to have earrings like mine so they both had them done tohgether. Except for fancy affairs, I always wore either a gold or diamond stud because I liked a little sparkle but didn't wear anything big because I didn't want to worry about anything getting caught on them. When I was about 40 I got a second piercing in each earlobe and all I wear is one or two simple studs and my hair often covers them. I still don't like big earrings.

Pierced ears are about as benign [a flesh modification as you called it] as you can get. They are easy to remove, and if you decide you don't want the pierced ear any longer, just leave the earrings out and they will usually close up in less time than it takes a bad haircut to look better.

Morty, good doctors tend to not have many problems keeping busy, and back when we were young most doctors had their own practices and you didn't have the MBA types trying to work out ways to "enhance value" (and assuming most doctors are like the ones I know well any push from above without a solid medical reason would be "go time"). More likely is that they didn't see any big negatives medically and "it's what we've always done" so they keep on doing it. Humans in general do tend to be prone to magical thinking.

Morty, good doctors tend to not have many problems keeping busy, and back when we were young most doctors had their own practices and you didn't have the MBA types trying to work out ways to "enhance value".

Depends on what prices doctors were charging for circumcisions. They were a quick and easy procedure to perform in any case.

As for price: I read in the WWII memoir 'Helmet for My Pillow' by Robert Leckie, that upon volunteering for the Marine Corps right after Pearl Harbor, one of the requirements for marines was to be circumcised. Leckie wasn't and when he went to his doctor for the procedure, his doctor patriotically waived the normal fee of $100.00 (in 1941 purchasing power). Which was not an inconsiderable sum back in those days.

Calculating the 1940 price into 2020 prices, that would give a current price of $1800.00. (https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1940?amount=1)

So c'mon, that is a nice sum. It would still be a nice sum even at half the price.

More likely is that they didn't see any big negatives medically and "it's what we've always done" so they keep on doing it. Humans in general do tend to be prone to magical thinking.

I agree. And most American doctors are probably circumcised themselves or have men in their lives who are circumcised and think very little about doing them because they enjoy the aesthetic and functional benefits of circumcised penises.

I googled the cost of c circumcision.

For a Mohel to do a circumcision at a bris on a week old infant, the cost is between $400-$800.

Having circumcision done on an adult with general anesthesia is $2500-$4000

I'm very suspicious of medical practitioners when there is money to be made. A couple of days ago I went to the dentist who said he thought I should have a bunch of elective procedures done to "build up" six of my teeth. When I asked him what that would cost he estimated, out of pocket for me, about $16K! I asked him if he had just purchased a boat. I think he believed I was his "low hanging fruit."

Susie, As to the pierced ears: yes, at 18 they could do as they pleased. I let them live in my house, and they generally abide by my "rules" without complaint. They have respect for me because I taught them to respect their own bodies. I regarded them as precious to me, and consequently, I am precious to them.

Morty: I once heard a veterinarian mention that the ideal vet clinic is when you're getting tons of female cats to be sterilized. It's the same minor surgery every time, you can perform many of them, it pays every time etc. I suspect it's the same with circumcision: not much risky or difficult, same every time...

I googled the cost of c circumcision.

For a Mohel to do a circumcision at a bris on a week old infant, the cost is between $400-$800.

Having circumcision done on an adult with general anesthesia is $2500-$4000

Perhaps I should have Googled instead on relying on a memoir.

In any case, too bad you cannot see how low my jaw dropped. And incidentally how circumcision seems to have outstripped inflation by 200% as well. Don't tell me it's not a pretty good racket to get a piece of.

Regarding circumcision and EVERY OTHER TOPIC posted on Zity. Her Highness has to correct you.

LOOK AT ME !!! See how smart I am. I will point out your lack of education every chance I get.

She LIVES in Zity to show off and demean people.

Narcissistic to say the least. Its absolutely exhausting !!!!!!!!!

Its absolutely exhausting !!!!!!!!!

Members have absolutely no obligation at all to read posts, nor to respond if it is exhausting to them. ha ha.

What should be part of this discussion is, are there any women out there who are grossed out by the sight of an uncircumcised cock, or at least unwilling to suck one because it's uncircumcised ?

Because if there is any kind of percentage who are, those uncut cocks ain't gonna have as many possible mouths to suck on them, as opposed to their cut counterparts. And then, consider if uncut men wouldn't mind being sucked by men. And men's preferences for the cocks they suck.

I for one, since I don't get many opportunities to BE sucked, would want as many possible opportunities as i can to be sucked. And I've never been turned down for BEING circumcised.

On the other hand, i've turned away some of my uncut counterparts. On another website, i for one indicated straight up that I suck cut cocks only. Now I do know there are men who prefer uncut ones, but like, you would have to weigh the chances of an uncut cock wanting to be sucked vs those interested vs those turned off by them.

Uncut is a dealbreaker for me, especially because there are plenty of cut cocks out there to be sucked, and to each his own. Put it this way, I'd rather suck a flaccid cut cock than an erect uncut cock, but that's just me. Although, i tend to think others of both genders may tend to feel similarly. Just sayin.

I have a playmate who, once upon a time, was sucking an uncut cock. Then he started tasting something strange. Turned out to be blood from the foreskin. Can be pretty scary. Needless to say, he stopped sucking uncut cocks after that. And it didn't encourage me any to start.

What should be part of this discussion is, are there any women out there who are grossed out by the sight of an uncircumcised cock, or at least unwilling to suck one because it's uncircumcised ?

I think women who are like that that are only going to be American and I have seen a few American ladies on videos who were very rude and nasty about uncircumcised men. i think they are a minority though to be like that. I know a lot more American ladies are just not used to uncircumcised penises and they have nearly always just seen circumcised ones so they think uncircumcised penises look odd. It is just not the same in Britain and Europe, I just have a few friends who prefer circumcised men but they still like uncircumcised men too and they are not horrible about them. I have never heard of any other British ladies being like that about uncircumcised men either because it is just normal.

Uncut is a dealbreaker for me, especially because there are plenty of cut cocks out there to be sucked, and to each his own. .

If this is a deal-breaker, then don't go looking for your preference outside of the US. You won't find much to your liking, except if you were to go to Muslim nations.

I googled the cost of c circumcision.

For a Mohel to do a circumcision at a bris on a week old infant, the cost is between $400-$800.

Having circumcision done on an adult with general anesthesia is $2500-$4000

Why on Earth would you need general anesthesia for that? It's away from the core of the body, it's quick, and should be easily handled by a local nerve block as long as you have the capacity to not freak out.

Moliere: My cousin was cut under general anesthesia, at 6-7 years old. Maybe it's less trauma to be knocked out while being cut. I thought like you that on an adult, where anesthesia risks are higher than on a child, they'd use local.

I have no son but if I had one I don't want that he was circumcised.

I am not circumcised too and it is generally not considered as a good practice in France except for medical reasons.

I have a son. The issue of circumcision never came when he was born 30 years ago.

I would not have let him been cut. I am not cut myself.

Circumcision is not a tradition in France, except for jewish or muslem people.

Having a foreskin has never been a problem for me, neither for urinating or having sex. I kind of enjoy the protection it gives to my penis. And I have the feeling that many women, including American girls, enjoy having an uncut boyfriend.

Uncut is a dealbreaker for me, especially because there are plenty of cut cocks out there to be sucked, and to each his own. Put it this way, I'd rather suck a flaccid cut cock than an erect uncut cock, but that's just me. Although, i tend to think others of both genders may tend to feel similarly. Just sayin.

So the actual person is irrelevant it's just the cock that is important? How bizzare!

How can sucking a cut or an uncut cock be any different, the end result is the same whatever... And when the foreskin retracts behind the glans of an erect uncut cock then there is little difference anyway.

Why on Earth would you need general anesthesia for that? It's away from the core of the body, it's quick, and should be easily handled by a local nerve block as long as you have the capacity to not freak out.

I believe it's considered a major procedure on an adult. Apparently local doesn't work very well due to the blood flow in the penis.

I believe it's considered a major procedure on an adult. Apparently local doesn't work very well due to the blood flow in the penis.

I had it done as a day old infant and I am definitely glad I have no memory of it. Doesn't sound like any fun at all to me. I can imagine the heal time isn't something to look forward to either.

Routine/ritual male infant circumcision is child abuse, a blatantly violation of children's bodily integrity right.

No medical academy in the world dares to recommend it.

Even biased USA APP doesn't.

All them qualify it as "non therapeutic" surgery.

Unfortunately, the CDC (Center of Disease Control) does endorse circumcision.

https://www.webmd.com/baby/news/20141202/cdc-endorses-circumcision-for-health-reasons#1

I suppose the CDC will endorse cutting off the tongue to save us all from oral sex next.