(October 7, 2016 at 12:31 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:25 pm)Irrational Wrote: Maybe it's because they're clean enough down there, so they don't have to. But if it's really dirty it needs a wash, then I would hope that they would give it a wash first before having their partner go down on them or whatever. Nothing you're arguing about is really in favor of circumcision anyway, but just alerts to the importance of maintaining good hygiene.

And by the way, it's not like cut penises are not probably going to get rather dirty after just 12 hours of not being washed. Cut penises get sweaty as well.

As I said. There are pros and cons to both cutting and not cutting. When a parent is faced with that decision, I just hope they will do what they think is best for their son and not get demonized for it by other people. Whatever that decision might be.

Why should the parents be the ones to weigh the pros and cons? Shouldn't the individual decide that for themselves?

Semi related...theres a fantastic chapter in "Packing for Mars" by Mary Roach, that addresses human hygiene, and the hilarious and thorough experiments that we put together for the space program.  Hygiene, not something that crosses your mind much when you think of space exploration....but I'll be damned if they didn't bust it down to the nuts and bolts, lol. 

Bathing as practiced in the us...a fetish.  Just some tick, some nervous reaction to "the unclean". I;m an equal offender on that count, lol.  Wonder where that comes from......

(October 7, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:10 pm)Rhythm Wrote: LOL, good god.  Someone decides to do that shit to themselves just to get some nutjob girl to go down on them?  That;s pretty much the definition of a bad decision.

To be clear, I'm not saying I would make my husband go wash himself before we had sex if he was uncut (he is cut). 

I'm just saying I can see how it would make sense that I might get more UTI's because of it. So far I have never had one.

My wife makes me, but that's because she gets UTIs easily. I'm happy to do it, doesn't take too long. If I were circumcised she'd probably still make me clean it before sex because penises get dirty whether you are cut or not. Most of the time they are in underwear, and they'll get sweaty because of that. The lack of a foreskin doesn't mean you magically don't sweat down there.

Again I think I need to point out to people in this thread how easy it is to clean an uncircumcised penis. You take the foreskin, pull it back, and clean as you normally would. It's not hard. I don't understand the point about elderly people not being able to do it, unless they can't clean themselves at all, at which point a nurse really should know how to clean an uncircumcised penis. It honestly sounds like nurses and doctors who look after elderly people need training in how to clean uncircumcised penises rather than going straight to circumcision as a solution. I can't imagine a scenario where a elderly man can still clean himself but can't pull his foreskin back.

(October 7, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Jesster Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:31 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: As I said. There are pros and cons to both cutting and not cutting. When a parent is faced with that decision, I just hope they will do what they think is best for their son and not get demonized for it by other people. Whatever that decision might be.

Why should the parents be the ones to weigh the pros and cons? Shouldn't the individual decide that for themselves?

They can. But as I said in my first post here. While circumcision is a simple and quick procedure on a baby, it is not that way when done on a grown, mature penis. So that's another thing that parents have to weigh. Get it over with while it's quick and easy, or let them make their own decision when it would be a more severe procedure, and possibly expensive? 

The pro of the first option is that it's quick and easy and usually paid for by insurance. The pro of the second option is that they get to make the decision themselves. And the con of each is that they lack what the other has.

How many people have it done later in life though? Are the any stats on that, because that needs to be take into consideration too.

(October 7, 2016 at 12:39 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Jesster Wrote: Why should the parents be the ones to weigh the pros and cons? Shouldn't the individual decide that for themselves?

They can. But as I said in my first post here. While circumcision is a simple and quick procedure on a baby, it is not that way when done on a grown, mature penis. So that's another thing that parents have to weigh. Get it over with while it's quick and easy, or let them make their own decision when it would be a more severe procedure, and possibly expensive? 

The pro of the first option is that it's quick and easy and usually paid for by insurance. The pro of the second option is that they get to make the decision themselves. And the con of each is that they lack what the other has.

Sure, it's easier when they are infants. That doesn't mean the choice belongs to the parents (which was the point of my question). In a previous post I related it to removing the appendix, so I'll bring that up again now. The appendix can cause a lot of problems later in life. It can be argued that it would be better to take it out early on before it becomes an issue. Should that also be the choice of the parents?

(October 7, 2016 at 12:38 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: To be clear, I'm not saying I would make my husband go wash himself before we had sex if he was uncut (he is cut). 

I'm just saying I can see how it would make sense that I might get more UTI's because of it. So far I have never had one.

My wife makes me, but that's because she gets UTIs easily. I'm happy to do it, doesn't take too long. If I were circumcised she'd probably still make me clean it before sex because penises get dirty whether you are cut or not. Most of the time they are in underwear, and they'll get sweaty because of that. The lack of a foreskin doesn't mean you magically don't sweat down there.

Again I think I need to point out to people in this thread how easy it is to clean an uncircumcised penis. You take the foreskin, pull it back, and clean as you normally would. It's not hard. I don't understand the point about elderly people not being able to do it, unless they can't clean themselves at all, at which point a nurse really should know how to clean an uncircumcised penis. It honestly sounds like nurses and doctors who look after elderly people need training in how to clean uncircumcised penises rather than going straight to circumcision as a solution. I can't imagine a scenario where a elderly man can still clean himself but can't pull his foreskin back.

Yeah, I dunno. That's just what she was telling me. Maybe when you're old you just kinda forget, or don't think about it... or generally just don't shower as often anymore because you don't have the energy. So it gives it more time for stuff to accumulate between the folds of the skin in that area.

The pro, is that it would be terrible to do later in life?  Not much of a pro...why do it in the first place - to an infant -or- an adult? That there is either no benefit, or at best a negligible case-by-case benefit in reference to the habitually unclean..which won't stop them from being habitually unclean - their cut penis will be dirty too..... seems to just get swept under the rug.

Constantly looking for reasons to snip the tip...lol. Why?

(October 7, 2016 at 12:39 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Jesster Wrote: Why should the parents be the ones to weigh the pros and cons? Shouldn't the individual decide that for themselves?

They can. But as I said in my first post here. While circumcision is a simple and quick procedure on a baby, it is not that way when done on a grown, mature penis. So that's another thing that parents have to weigh. Get it over with while it's quick and easy, or let them make their own decision when it would be a more severe procedure, and possibly expensive? 

The pro of the first option is that it's quick and easy and usually paid for by insurance. The pro of the second option is that they get to make the decision themselves. And the con of each is that they lack what the other has.

The pro of the second option should weigh more than the pro of the first option. If not, the implication then seems to be that you don't value (as much as other people) the right of a person to keep their body parts intact unless there's an urgent medical reason or they consent otherwise.

(October 7, 2016 at 12:42 pm)Jesster Wrote:

(October 7, 2016 at 12:39 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: They can. But as I said in my first post here. While circumcision is a simple and quick procedure on a baby, it is not that way when done on a grown, mature penis. So that's another thing that parents have to weigh. Get it over with while it's quick and easy, or let them make their own decision when it would be a more severe procedure, and possibly expensive? 

The pro of the first option is that it's quick and easy and usually paid for by insurance. The pro of the second option is that they get to make the decision themselves. And the con of each is that they lack what the other has.

Sure, it's easier when they are infants. That doesn't mean the choice belongs to the parents (which was the point of my question). In a previous post I related it to removing the appendix, so I'll bring that up again now. The appendix can cause a lot of problems later in life. It can be argued that it would be better to take it out early on before it becomes an issue. Should that also be the choice of the parents?

I don't know anything about appendixes or appendix removal, but it sounds like it would be a much more invasive procedure than a circ. For that reason, I would say it probably isn't worth it to remove it just for preventative purposes.