Fight against Aids- Do you think twice about circumision?

[Adria]

I have the read a couple of the threads in realation to the circumcisions to help fight Aids.
I'm not asking if you agree on the article, but wether it has made you think more about getting it done if you had a son.
I was always at the opinion that in Australia we have fantastic medical care, if boys get an infection and clean running water to clean ourselves regular. But in listening to it, (i heard it on the news first) it has made me think twice if i have a boy next.
Of course i morally believe in teaching children safe sex practices, who doesn't?
I also undertsand it prevents, not makes them invinceable. But i also see immunisation this way as well.

My question is simply, does it make you think twice about circumision? It has for me, we are still talking it over.

[rynosmum]

Nope.

The moment I laid eyes on my son, I knew that my instrinct was to love and protect him. I could not bring myself to have any harm or pain brought upon him. No circ here.

[Mister Noodle]

Actually, the various studies have been shown to be essentially flawed, and there's no demonstrable correlation.

I'll dig up the links if you're interested.

Even it were effective, it's still not justifiable. Otherwise you could successfully argue for total mastectomy at birth to eliminate the risk of breast cancer (guaranteed to be 100% effective), or a clitoridectomy to ensure that girls would never be tempted to recreational sex of any kind. Testicular cancer is a big risk - you could at least remove one of them, and halve it - and the same goes for ovaries.

There's all kinds of body parts that can potentially become diseased... yet we do not remove them. The foreskin should be no exception.

[aardvark]

Only a pressing current medical need would make me ever vaguely consider circumcision, and even then only when all other alterativ options had been exhausted.

And as far as I am aware, the "Circumcision helps prevent AIDS" argument has been dismissed in reputable circles as complete bunkum.

[WeThree]

I think putting money into safe sex education and practises, particulary in third world countries instead of wasting it on 'studies' such as this would be a much more sensible option in the prevention of AIDS.

[kiah]

Actually, the various studies have been shown to be essentially flawed, and there's no demonstrable correlation.

I'll dig up the links if you're interested.

Even it were effective, it's still not justifiable. Otherwise you could successfully argue for total mastectomy at birth to eliminate the risk of breast cancer (guaranteed to be 100% effective), or a clitoridectomy to ensure that girls would never be tempted to recreational sex of any kind. Testicular cancer is a big risk - you could at least remove one of them, and halve it - and the same goes for ovaries.

There's all kinds of body parts that can potentially become diseased... yet we do not remove them. The foreskin should be no exception.

I agree..id be annoyed if my son decided to book me in for clitorectomy...does he hav the right to make that decision for me...bloody hope not! :eek: I'll be leaving his foreskin right where it is....

[melfunction]

If he wants to be circ'ed when he old enough to make the decision for himself, then go for it.

Until then, over my dead body.

[the_queen]

Those ridiculous studies never put any thoughts in my head except "how ridiculous, who would believe such tripe". :)

[Aquamarine]

Whether this study is right or wrong doesn't change my opinion on circumcision.

I personally don't think that I have the right to remove any part of my child's anatomy.

It is up to my son's to decide whether they want circumcision or not.


Circumcision hurts just as much whether you're a baby, child, teenager or adult so I will let my children decide on this issue wholey and support their OWN choices.

[Pippi Longstocking]

Those ridiculous studies never put any thoughts in my head except "how ridiculous, who would believe such tripe". :)

:yes: Same here. And even if they were believeable, I would still not consider circumcision. I would hate tot hink that my boys would grow up to be naive enough to rely on circumcision as a form of std prevention. Safe sex practices are a much smarter choice.

[MotherNurture]

The reality is the studies have been highly flawed, and the primary one that's been touted so far (the other two have yet to be published or peer reviewed) was refused publication by The Lancet because on ethical grounds...it was later self-published in a second-rate, somewhat new primarily online journal called PLOS.

In addition, the studies have nothing to do with infant circumcision; they only apply to very high risk male populations in certain areas of Africa where there are oodles of cofounding factors (like the prolific practice of "dry sex" where women use chemicles, herbs, newspaper, etc to heat, dry, and tighten their vaginas to please their partners by eliminating natural lubrication...making sex much more abrasive and the vagina more prone to tears).

Also, the believed protective mechanism of male circumcision is that it removes so much mucousal tissue containing Langerhans Cells which are thought to be receptive to the HIV virus. GUESS WHAT? Women's vulvas, including clitoral hood, inner labia, etc also contain THE SAME CELLS and at least one study has shown that FEMALE CIRCUMCISION decreases HIV risk for women...but, don't expect any studies selecting groups of little girls for genital reduction surgery vs. remaining intact to further determine it's implications on HIV infection in women. No, that's already considered a blatant human rights violation.

In answer to the question, no, all things considered even if it's true that excising mucousal tissue from the genitals of high risk adult men in Africa provides some protection by removing sensitive, delicate, sexually-functional tissue and leaving the glans to dry/thicken making it tougher and less suceptible to infection I wouldn't consider cutting my son any more than I'd consider cutting my daughter.

I will give my son the benefit of the doubt; I won't assume that he'll be too dumb or lazy to take other much less invasive precautionary measures. If he, as an adult, decides he wants to have high-risk sex in a high-risk area without condoms then, certainly, circumcision should be an option available to him.

HIS BODY, HIS RISK, HIS SACRIFICE, HIS CHOICE.

Jen

[Mister Noodle]

Women's vulvas, including clitoral hood, inner labia, etc also contain THE SAME CELLS

Nice point. I'll remember to use it in future.

[draught]

In short - "no". Now that I have a son I have thought about circumcision for the first time - very briefly - to decide "no". The idea that circumcision might reduce Aids strikes me as slightly ridiculous - I prefer the concept of education and protection. And of course my little angel won't be having sex anyway!!!:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

[Mamaduke]

My question is simply, does it make you think twice about circumision? It has for me, we are still talking it over.
No no no...Not at all :no:

[Mamaduke]

And of course my little angel won't be having sex anyway!!! :laughing:

Mine either...I've even enrolled them at an all boys secondary college to keep temptation away!!! ;)

(I'll let you all know how that works out for me!):rolleyes:

[kristi001]

i dont think Aids is a Big enough issue in this country to make it a reason for circumcision.

If i lived somewhere where aids is a major concern then i proberly would.

[Little Gorilla]

I was watching a TV show on SBS about a month ago...can't remember what it was called....anyway, it has been proven in Africa that circumsising males does lessen the spread of aids and now most males are being done. AIDS in Africa is a whole different ball game to AIDS in Australia.

The Dr they had on speaking about it said that for countries like Australia, the UK etc....it would make virtually no difference to our AIDS numbers if we started circumsising all our boys.

[ziggie]

Actually, the various studies have been shown to be essentially flawed, and there's no demonstrable correlation.

I'll dig up the links if you're interested.

Even it were effective, it's still not justifiable. Otherwise you could successfully argue for total mastectomy at birth to eliminate the risk of breast cancer (guaranteed to be 100% effective), or a clitoridectomy to ensure that girls would never be tempted to recreational sex of any kind. Testicular cancer is a big risk - you could at least remove one of them, and halve it - and the same goes for ovaries.

There's all kinds of body parts that can potentially become diseased... yet we do not remove them. The foreskin should be no exception.


You rock Mr N!!!! :yelclap:
Well said IMO!!! And my DH thinks you're pretty cool too...:cool:


No way does it change my opinion. Maybe if I lived in Africa, where every second person has AIDS, but not in Australia.

[hillbaby5]

education is the best key or just keep it shut on the topic and pls dont compare male circ with female circ there is a huge difference !! read about it
i dont even wanna think of the diseases that will be around when my kids are sexually active. good luck to yours

[hillbaby5]

I have breast cancer thank you and if i could have seen into the future I would have had a total masectomy!!!!!!!~!!!~!!!! so i could be around for my 2 children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! be careful! wat you wish for




You rock Mr N!!!! :yelclap:
Well said IMO!!! And my DH thinks you're pretty cool too...:cool:


No way does it change my opinion. Maybe if I lived in Africa, where every second person has AIDS, but not in Australia.

[hillbaby5]

does it matter! it an individual choice!

[ziggie]

I have breast cancer thank you and if i could have seen into the future I would have had a total masectomy!!!!!!!~!!!~!!!! so i could be around for my 2 children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! be careful! wat you wish for

I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to be disrespectful to anyone. :o

[LA62]

I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to be disrespectful to anyone. :o


Well

What can i say!!

yeah my best mate in the whole world had breast cancer!!!

soooooo choose your words very carfully:shame:

And mister noodle ..WTF

this thing eats away at you, your family & friends how can you compare.....:mad:

[ziggie]

I have breast cancer thank you and if i could have seen into the future I would have had a total masectomy!!!!!!!~!!!~!!!! so i could be around for my 2 children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! be careful! wat you wish for


And for the record, my mum has cancer too, and I'm not making light of the situation. I was just agreeing with the point made, which was unneccesary (SP?) medical procedures are simply that: Unneccesary (sp?).
As I have to watch my mum's battle, I can totally sympathise with you, but this is about circumcision, not anything else.

[hillbaby5]

:gloomy: did you not read wat mr n said!!
I am just sick of the judgements made.
both my boys are circ they didnt feel a thing neither my hubby its my choice y cant people leave it alone.

[aardvark]

does it matter! it an individual choice!

Precisely. It is an individual choice.

The choice of the individual to whom the foreskin is attached.

[reAllytee]

Does AIDS factor into my decision ?
No.
Like many others if i lived in countries like Africa etc then maybe it would but we live in a very lucky country.

[ziggie]

:gloomy: did you not read wat mr n said!!
I am just sick of the judgements made.
both my boys are circ they didnt feel a thing neither my hubby its my choice y cant people leave it alone.


I'm going to stick up for Mr N here, by saying this is a parenting forum, for people who have kids, or are trying to have kids. Mr N is in the second category, so he has just as much right to be here as we all do.
In another thread, a member is saying that bubhub is nasty.... well it's posts like yours that maje it so. We all have the rights to our own opinions, and it's not fair of you to be name-calling.
I did read Mr N's post, and if anyone comes near my sons foreskin, I'll fight them off with a stick.

[hillbaby5]

Precisely. It is an individual choice.

The choice of the individual to whom the foreskin is attached.
the choice of a mother to protect her child is that ok with you maybe i should have asked your permission

[the_queen]

both my boys are circ they didnt feel a thing
how do you know?

Routine infant circumcision, for the purpose of "preventing future disease/infection" is exactly the same as routine infant mastectomy, for the purpose of "preventing future disease/infection"


Obviously this is an emotive issue for you.

[Pippi Longstocking]

the choice of a mother to protect her child is that ok with you maybe i should have asked your permission

I personally take my role as mother and protector very seriously. Which is why I, like Ziggystardust said, would beat anyone off with a stick if they even looked sideways at my sons genitals - particularly if they happened to be holding a scalpel.

Yep, I protect my kids alright!

[LA62]

i have an opinion!!!!!
2 cut breast off is only when you dont have a choice

[Mister Noodle]

Then why, if you had daughters, would you not make the same 'personal decision' to 'protect' them, by lopping bits off them?

Why only boys? Why only foreskins?

[hillbaby5]

how do you know?


Routine infant circumcision, for the purpose of "preventing future disease/infection" is exactly the same as routine infant mastectomy, for the purpose of "preventing future disease/infection"


Obviously this is an emotive issue for you.

read all the posts!!!!


my boys and hubby dont remember a thing
y do you wanna ask em im not pro anything your choice is your choice im just ****ed that it was compared to the preventing of breast cancer!!!!!!!!!

[aardvark]

the choice of a mother to protect her child is that ok with you maybe i should have asked your permission

And maybe you should have got your sons' permission before allowing a perfectly normal part of his anatomy to be removed? Perhaps they will grow up and sue you and your partner for allowing it to be done?

[Bron]

OK, I'm closing this thread.

Thanks to those who contributed in a positive manner.