I agree with the ear piercing too!

Oh ear piercing in babies is horrid! Not to mention chavvy.

I agree with that statement now. When I was younger, I had my daughter's ears pierced.. she has never really wore earrings up until the age she is at now - which is almost 9. I won't pierce our future daughter's ears.

I agree, to look the same sounds completely ridiculous to me, if their child has a different hair colour to mum and dad, will they dye their hair to avoid a simple question, a child is likely to ask why boys and girls have different parts, so I don't see how a slightly differently looking penis would be a problem, especially as a mans penis would look very different to a little boys!

If I have boys, I'm pretty much set on the circumcision idea. I come from a jewish family and I am jewish - although I'm not really considered a practising Jew - there are still things I like to...continue - as part of that cultural background within my family. I mean, the Jews have been doing it for..oh...a couple years now (give or take a few hundred)...and usually i question things in the bible/torah but this is one of the things I'll consider reasonable.

LOL if that's reasonable, what do you consider unreasonable?

The thing about circumcision is that we see female circumcision as an absolute atrocity, but yet we don't bat an eyelid at male circumcision. I don't get that.

Some Jewish Priest still eat and drink the blood of the clipped foreskin.
Which is valuable, and has been used in products. I think lotions and what not.

A misconception is the Jews invented circumcision. They absolutely did not.
It predates them by far. The Canaanite Philistine (Palestine) is derived from Phallus.
Except that a Philistine is a circumcised Phallus.

Judaism and Judao-Christianity are continuations of the very ancient druid/sumerian pagan traditions.

I honestly can't understand why anyone would want to chop off part of their perfect son in a painful precedure just because they want them to look like their dad?
theres some fab tshirts out there for uncircumcised babies 'may the foreskin be with you' and 'if boys were ment to have foreskins they'd be born with them'

My son was circ'ed at 2 days old. At the time I regretted it immediately because he was in pain and it looked horrible. But looking back I think it was the best decision. It was a personal decision. My father was furious with me for doing it. But in the end I am happy with the decision I made. I have never slept with a man who still had their foreskin so I honestly wouldn't know what the difference was in that sense.

At 2 days old?!? I think that's shocking! Did they even give him an anaesthetic (although I know I wouldn't want to give a 2 day old a general anaesthetic if it wasn't absolutely necessary!)?

Here circumcisions are done under general anaesthetic with a caudal block (similar to an epidural) for pain relief, when the child is about 6-9 months.

You might find it shocking, but that's typical, Alison. It's not usually done months later here.
I don't know what they do for the anesthesia to be honest, but I've never asked anyone with a son about it.

I am not saying I agree with it necessarily, but it's what people do here... it's unexpected NOT to.

My doctor stated that they give the child a local anesthetic to lessen the pain. My son was also circumcised when he was 2-3 days old. Personally, I refuse to sleep with a man who is un-circumcised. The few men I've encountered with a foreskin obviously did not know how to maintain good personal hygiene in that area so I said no to every one after that. lol

So what, if you fell in love with a man and he happened to not have had part of his penis cut off, you'd refuse to sleep with him?! That's insane!
I mean that is nasty if they don't know how to clean it but I have never run across that problem.

People don't get their appendix taken out unless there is a problem. Why chop a part of your penis off for no reason? I realise it is now mainly a cultural thing but wow, it's beyond me.

Since the sex would happen long before I was in love with him, yes, if he had an uncircumcised penis, I would not go there. Call me shallow, that's ok...I've already been married once. I have no desire to get married again...if I want to have sex, then it will be with someone I'm interested in sexually and it would only be with a circumcised man. My ex-husband and I were swingers for over 10 years....I turned down every uncircumcised penis I came across. I just can't do it.

Well wouldn't you get offended if someone looked at your vagina and was all, 'errr, it's ugly, I'm not going there!' ? ;D

I mean you could be missing out on some great sex.

Hehehe...if they didn't want to go there cuz my vagina is ugly, then that would be OK! Turnabout is fair play! :)

To be honest I doubt a little local anaesthetic would do much to ease the pain.

The fact that that's how it's done in another country doesn't make it any less shocking. Or for that matter, does it make it right. In some countries it's considered 'normal' to perform female genital mutilation... but the fact that that's how other countries do it doesn't make that any less shocking to the rest of us, nor does it make it right.

I'm not against other parents choosing to have their child circumcised (although I wouldn't do it personally), if it is done in a method which involves minimal pain, minimal distress and as little risk as possible (like we do in the UK, with a general anaesthetic and an effective method of pain relief in form of a caudal block) but I do think that performing such an operation without any anaesthetic (or at best with a little local anaesthetic, which believe me, won't do much to ease the pain!) is child cruelty and I can't understand why anyone would want to inflict pain on their child in that way.

Well, like I said, I wasn't suggesting I agree with it, just that it is considered atypical in the US to not have it done.
I'm sure a lot of people probably don't realize how it is so much less common in other parts of the world. (not to say that's an excuse-just reality)

I can see why you'd see that as ridiculous and I'm not saying I disagree-but people just don't look at it that way here. It's an old attitude I guess, from when people insisted it should be done for hygiene, etc.

Of course, if I'd guess, I imagine more new parents are opting out as time goes on, since many are challenging
traditional wisdom' and the choices they can make within our healthcare system in general-as they are with childbirth, vaccinations, etc.

Here, circumcisions are done before baby goes home. Usually day two. Local anesthetic is "recommended" by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

they dont give the babies any pain killer REDFRAGGLE. i know that b/c my cousin had her on circ'ed when he was 2 days old too and boy was he pissed!!!

Of course he was pissed. He was probably in agony. Agony inflicted by his parents, the people who are supposed to protect him!

6-9 months?! No wonder the poor kid is in pain, they are much more mobile then. Here, they are done before baby goes home, which is within two days.

That's a ridiculous statement. Newborn babies feel pain in just the same way as a 6 or 9 month old does. It has nothing to do with how mobile they are.

I've given anaesthetics to quite a few children for circumcisions, and like I said further up the thread we usually give a general anaesthetic plus a caudal block (and injection in the back which works in a similar way to an epidural and takes away any pain below the waist). I have only seen ONE child have a circumcision without a caudal block (the parents refused it) and that child woke up from his anaesthetic in AGONY, screaming his head off. It had nothing to do with his mobility, he was lying in a bed not moving about at all and he was in pain. He needed fentanyl (a drug similar to morphine) to treat the pain. That SAME pain is felt by babies who have the procedure done at 2 days old. The difference is that it sounds as if American babies don't get any proper pain relief at all, which I personally think is incredibly cruel.

You're absolutely right. I didn't mean for it to seem like I'm saying newborns don't feel pain. I was only trying to contrast the fact that American babies are circumcised much earlier than other places. I too think it's cruel to do it without pain relief, but I'm not sure how they do it here, as far as the pain relief goes, anyway.