Excerpt from: Land of Yu-phonia

I did not write this. I love this piece. Click the link below the excerpt to read the entire piece.

Land of Yu-Phonia
by Rosemary Romberg (Wiener)
illustrations by Linda Tagliaferro

I once went to visit a far off land. As soon as I arrived there I noticed that the people all looked just like us except for one thing. Hardly any of them had ears. On the sides of almost all of the people’s heads were small holes surrounded by small scars where ears should be. I imagined that this was probably an unusual breed of people who were born that way.

I had been visiting for a few days when I came upon a group of children. All of them were earless, just like nearly all the inhabitants of Yu-Phonia. Some of these children stared at me with fascinated curiosity. I soon realized why. I have ears. Soon a woman came along and scolded the children. “It’s not nice to stare at people! Now, go away and leave her alone!”

……..

Click below link to read the rest

http://peacefulbeginningsrosemary.wordpress.com/circ-information/land-of-yu-phonia/

Advertisements

Joseph4gi: blame game

(Side note: I never realized we are the same age. It’s cool)

http://joseph4gi.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-circumcision-blame-game.html?m=1

click the link for the entire article and diagrams

For what other medical treatment or procedure are parents in a position of entitlement to “decide” at whim, without any kind of clinical indication or medical diagnosis? For what other surgery are surgeons slaves to demanding parents? Do parents actually wield so much power?

Aren’t parents usually given the power to choose a method of treatment for their children AFTER a doctor has determined that there is some kind of clinical or medical necessity?

For these reasons and more, I believe Jonathon’s image is a false paradigm. This delusion of “parental choice” is a false paradigm invented by doctors, the trade unions they belong to, and it is perpetuated by the media.

In the special case of circumcision, however, physicians get away with profiting from this non-medical procedure on healthy, non-consenting individuals, by pawning off their responsibility on parents. Doctors push the paradigm of “the great parental decision” forward, and the media helps perpetuate it.

In their latest statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics came very close to, but stopped short of recommending infant circumcision for all infants (contrary to popular belief). Despite touting over and over again that “the benefits out weigh the risks,” they must still admit that the “benefits are not enough to recommend the procedure,” concluding that “the final decision should be made by parents.” (This was their exact position in their last statement in 1999.)

The result is a spineless, non-committal statement that sounds like an endorsement, if not outright recommendation, but is actually nothing more than self-absolution of professional responsibility, and the undue placement of an onus on parents.

Mja phimosis: This link used to work….

https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2003/178/4/treating-phimosis

The link above used to be a valid link. It showed a picture of a normal intact infant penis and an abnormal intact infant penis with true phimosis.
Basically, they showed slightly pulling back… Normally a non-retractable I can’t foreskin when pulled back slightly will pucker like lips and have a healthy pink look.
For true phimosis, when the foreskin is slightly pulled back the lips of the foreskin flatten out and look strained and white-ish and does not pucker like puckered lips.

(these are my own words above as the link above is now only for member use and I am not a member. I am only writing what I remember. I am not a dr or a scientist just someone who has been reading for 5 yrs on the intact boy because I am a mother.)

I found a link that works. It’s for a site in Canada
http://www.cfp.ca/content/53/3/445.full

——-
phony phimosis diagnosis: http://www.drmomma.org/2010/01/phony-phimosis-diagnosis.html?m=1

——
http://www.isrn.com/journals/urology/2012/707329/

“Phimosis is nonretraction of prepuce. It is normally seen in younger children due to adhesions between prepuce and glans penis. It is termed pathologic when nonretractability is associated with local or urinary complaints attributed to the phimotic prepuce. Physicians still have the trouble to distinguish between these two types of phimosis. This ignorance leads to undue parental anxiety and wrong referrals to urologists. Circumcision was the mainstay of treatment for pathologic phimosis. With advent of newer effective and safe medical and conservative surgical techniques, circumcision is gradually getting outmoded. Parents and doctors should a be made aware of the noninvasive options for pathologic phimosis for better outcomes with minimal or no side-effects. Also differentiating features between physiologic and pathologic phimosis should be part of medical curriculum to minimise erroneous referrals for surgery.”

……..

“11.2. Conventional Male Circumcision

In this case, the phimotic foreskin is totally excised. Circumcision is one of the oldest elective operations known in humans. It started as a religious/ritual sacrifice [90]. But gradually it became a routine neonatal procedure in USA and in some countries of Euro pein view of its reported hygiene and cancer-preventing benefits [91]. It cures phimosis and prevents recurrence [92]. It also prevents further episodes of balanoposthitis and lowers incidence of urinary tract infections [26, 93–95]. But it is besot with its own innumerable short, and long-term problems. Pain, difficult recovery, bleeding, infection, psychological trauma, and high cost are seen with circumcision [96, 97]. The literature is full of reports of morbidity and even deaths with circumcision. Besides, circumcision could lead to keloid formation. Possibility of decline in sexual pleasure for both circumcised males as well as their female partners due to loss of erogenous tissue has been reported [96, 98–105]. With advent of newer plastic surgical procedures for phimosis, this traditional surgery is gradually getting outdated. Circumcision is to be avoided in children with genital anomalies where the foreskin may be needed for later corrective surgery for the anomaly.”

Beyond the bris: post by young Jewish man

Very interesting read: from perspective of a circumcised Jewish young adult male.
http://www.beyondthebris.com/2012/03/me-but-not-my-son-young-jewish-man.html?spref=fb&m=1

Excerpts: please click the above link for full article.

By AL RUBENSTEIN

I am 21 years old, Jewish, and opposed to circumcision. I attend college in Indiana. I grew up in a small Southern town where my family was one of a handful of Jews. My parents were born and raised Jewish. I was circumcised when I was eight days old by a mohel at a brit milah.

My Jewish identity was always very important to me growing up. I went to synagogue a lot, spent my summers at a Jewish summer camp, had a bar mitzvah, and in high school was part of NFTY (North American Federation of Temple Youth). I went to Israel for a semester in high school. When I was a child and teenager, I was always proud to be Jewish, to be a part of G-d’s chosen people, to be in a culture that valued life and not death. I’m also a person who finds the idea of permanent body modification disturbing. I feel G-d made us the way we are for a reason. Every organ has a purpose. Even our imperfections are a sign of our individuality. When I found out I was circumcised, I was horrified.

………

It was difficult to talk to anyone about my feelings. When I did, I never got the support I was looking for. I had spoken to my parents about my own circumcision when I was 16. They didn’t take me seriously. My mom talked only of how difficult it was to get a mohel for me in our location. My dad laughed at my feebly spoken facts. In the end, they told me not to worry about it because it would be a long time before I had children. I felt defeated by that conversation. They made me feel I was wrong—that what I’d learned about circumcision and about the purpose and function of foreskin wasn’t true.

All I wanted from my parents was for them to say it was okay. That perhaps I had a point. I understood why my parents did this to me. I just needed some support. The conversation I had with my parents made everything worse. I still felt in my heart that what had been done to me was wrong, and that circumcision was a terrible thing, but I also felt I needed to accept the fact that I was circumcised and that one day, when I had sons, they would be too.

I finally broke out of the trap last summer when I realized two things. First, that people won’t care whether or not I circumcise my sons! Second, that it’s possible to undo some of the damage done by circumcision through a process called foreskin restoration.

…………..

No matter what, I can’t cut my kids. I will never know the advantages of being intact—how much difference this really makes—but I do know skinning a baby’s penis is wrong. I will give my sons the choice I never had. My boys will feel proud of what they are—Jewish and intact!

I also realized I had to do something about my penis. In the end, this is a very personal issue for me and waiting to make my stand when I have my first son isn’t enough. A lot of my feelings about circumcision come from feeling mutilated and less than human as a consequence of this procedure. So, I began restoring. Through consistent stretching of the remaining skin on the shaft of the penis, it’s possible over time to regain some of what I’ve lost. It can’t bring back everything—it cannot regrow nerves—but it does give me control over the issue. It’s making it so that when I look down there, I’m not focusing on what I’ve lost, but instead I’m fascinated by what I am gaining. It has allowed me to move on with my life, taking comfort in my own restoration.

……………..

Here are a few thoughts for dads and moms about talking to their circumcised sons. If your son ever comes and tells you he is angry or depressed because he was circumcised, be there for him. I think having someone to talk to, and who understands, would make all the difference in the world. Tell him about foreskin restoration and if he decides to do it, you support him. Even if he is worrying about having to circumcise kids he won’t have for another twenty years, these issues are very real to him, don’t dismiss them. Make sure he knows that if his circumcision is ever bothering him, he come to you and talk about it. I don’t feel like I got this support from my parents, but I hope you can give it to your son, if he goes through what I went through.

Future parents—if you aren’t sure about cutting your kids, please consider my experience. You don’t have to do it. I am not saying your child will feel like I do, but he might. I promise you he will be happy if you leave him be. He will be able to live life to its fullest because he will have every part he had coming out of the womb. He only gets one life on this planet. Give him the chance to experience it the way he is meant to.

…………….
A Comment on that article

(name removed)
And an intact Jewish male can always opt for brit milah at any time in later life. To choose milah for oneself after 21 years of age, believing that it is a mitzvah, and out of loyalty to the Jewish people and to millenia of Jewish tradition, carries a great deal of existential meaning. To cut a screaming newborn boy who cannot comprehend at all what he is experiencing, carries no meaning except cruelty to an infant.

Intactivism is NOT about abolishing Jewish circumcision. It is NOT about “forcing” spouses to experience marital intimacy with an unkosher penis. It is ONLY about delaying brit milah until it becomes an informed adult choice. Here’s hoping that Reform and Conservatice synagogues will accept without reservation congregants who had chosen to remain intact.

20120326-175743.jpg

20120326-175746.jpg