Wanna stir up some heated debate in a room full of mothers? Just mention the word "circumcision," then stand back and watch the room sizzle. Issues involving religion, sexuality, mutilation, torture - all pack this debate with a polarizing punch.
Now adding even more fuel to the flames is news that the CDC may issue recommendations that all infant boys be circumcised to help prevent the spread of HIV. The potential move - expected to be announced by the end of the year - is based on evidence in Africa that circumcision can lower the rate of HIV by as much as 50 percent in heterosexual males.
"What we've heard from our consultants is that there would be a benefit for infants from infant circumcision, and that the benefits outweigh the risks," Dr. Peter Kilmarx, chief epidemiologist for the CDC HIV/AIDS Division, told the New York Times.
There's lots of debate over the studies being considered by the CDC, how high the prevention rates are and more. But if there is evidence that circumcision could in some way - no matter how small - prevent your son from getting HIV someday, why wouldn't you do it?
Plenty of moms will give you plenty of reasons why not.
Among them is Melissa Barger Baern, mother of twin boys, who takes great issue with the potential guidelines. "I simply do not understand the American attachment to circumcision, which the CDC seems to have fallen into," she says. "I am not a particularly crunchy-granola kind of mom. I'm pretty strongly pro-western medicine, generally. But the idea that human boys are born with a body part that must be immediately removed is nonsensical."
Even if it could prevent HIV? "I'm confident that my two intact boys can learn to avoid HIV by behavioral practices," Baern answers.
follow BettyConfidential on... 
Partners... |
My oldest had it done in the pediatricians office when he was just a couple of weeks old. A child that small is going to cry, of course, but they also cry when they get shots. Should we stop giving babies shots because we might be putting them through pain? They're also not going to remember it. Just the same as they don't remember the !@#$% of the needle during their first vaccinations. It's not as if we are taking our 5, 6, 10 year old sons and having them cut. It's a highly routine, safe, quick procedure. Only takes a few minutes and it's over.
Personally I would have never considered leaving them intact. Like Manicmommy, I've never even seen an intact penis. It wasn't something I put thought in. And if I had it to do over, I'd do the same thing. I don't care what the crunchy mom's think. They don't like my opinion, I don't like theirs, but everyone is entitled to their own thoughts.
When my son was born, he was the only boy child out of 5 that didn't cry almost constantly the first 12 hours. I asked the nurse why mine wasn't crying like the others. She said plainly, "It's because you didn't have your son circumsized."
My husband was cut. He always resented his parents for making that decision for him. We in America are conditioned to the look of circumsized penises. It's simply not normal. I know those parents that have already made this decision for their boys, will keep arguing their points, but maybe future parents can think about this and learn a bit more before deciding on this permanent disfigurement.
For more information, !@#$%.nocirc.org
I don't work for them, just sharing info.
Imagine some poor young guy getting the "OMG" treatment from his young lady!
If the CDC also recommends it, I don't think I'd hold out just because I think it's more natural. Who's gonna have to live with it...the 'naturalist' Mom, or the baby boy, anyway?
This is a cruel unnecessary procedure and all the "benefits" can be achieved through much more modern and dependable means.
He is fine. The other boys have seen it, he's not embarrassed, it's no big deal to anyone. His big brother (24 and engaged) has no had no problems. No one has PSYCHOLOGICAL problems for gawds sake, except obviously some of you women! Eeek! A penis as it was meant to be! I run frightened from the room! Feel bad potential lover, feel baaaaaaaaaad!
The CDC is recommending this based on an African study, where sanitary conditions are poor and little information is given as to how to prevent Aids/Stds. Thank the Bush Admin for some of that, with their abstinance only programs rather that helping with condoms and information.
Frankly, it's a barbaric practice, based on real reasons (sanitation in the old days) that got turned into a religious thing thousands of years ago and is no longer a valid reason to damage your baby boys.
Psychological aspect....Geez.
Returning user?
Login to add your comment.
New user? Register to add your comment.
jump to top
Did Karl Lagerfeld actually - gasp! - APOLOGIZE to Adele? Unreal! — Buzznet
Trend alert! What do you think of Sophia Bush's royal blue gown? — Celebuzz
The rapping princess is back - and on 'Ellen!' — Buzznet
Courtney Cox, Angelina Jolie + other actresses who have put on their director's caps! — Celebuzz
What are Drake and Justin Bieber doing together? — Buzznet
Booty not brains + 9 other commandments of casual sex. — College Candy
Is Reese Witherspoon planning on having another baby soon? — CelebrityBabyScoop
Did you know these 12 actors have won Grammy Awards? — College Candy
Miley Cyrus and Kelly Osbourne team up to help their furry friends! — Buzznet
Miley is out, Selena is in - for Adam Sandler's 'Hotel Transylvania,' that is! — Celebuzz
From Our Partners...
love+sex
celebrity
celebrity
Betty Confidential
home | contact us | about us | membership | link to us | 
| advertise with us | jobs | press | privacy policy | terms
Copyright © 2008-2012 Desha Productions, Inc. All rights reserved. (w3)
