A family says their newborn son nearly bled to death and is fighting for his life after he was circumcised at a New York City hospital.

Tim and Gabrielle Groth said their son, Cole, underwent the circumcision at NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital in Manhattan, where he was born on March 31.

  • pulido@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why do parents keep choosing to cut up the genitals of their baby boys?

    Is it because the dad had his penis cut up for him, and therefore he must do it to his son because “nothing is wrong with his dick”?

    • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s due to lack of education about not cutting it and indoctrination of what has been societal norms. It’s much less nefarious than you think on the part of many parents. Most people don’t generally think about this ahead of time and research it.

    • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      In America at least most people don’t really consider it until the kid is born. Then in the post birth rush of things happening someone asks if you want to circumcise your kid. Most Dads will say “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “HE IS BORN OF SIN! We must circumcise him to discourage sinful behavior!”

      Most people really don’t think too deeply about most things, try not to over think it

      • bluewing@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        In the US, it’s very often the mother’s decision, because the nurses will ask her. Fathers mostly get very little say in the medical care of their children in the US at nearly any age if the mother is present.

    • entwine413@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It depends on the day for me whether increased sensitivity would be a good or bad thing for me. But that’s mental illness and the accompanying drugs for ya.

        • AntY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I looked into this claim a couple of years ago. I couldn’t find any well executed study that showed this. It’s mainly a talking point that people who argue for circumcision claim is true, but I couldn’t find any scientific support for this.

          • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was unclear. Circumcision predisposes you to STD transmission iirc, but I also couldn’t find anything.

            • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because its the opposite actually. Circumcision reduces risk, inclusive of STIs as well as UTIs. Its a significant, but partial, reduction in risk. This has only been shown with PiV sexual activity and not with PiA sexual activity, which could be an important factor.

              https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8579597/

              Adult circumcision works out well, including for a family member who did it in his 30s due to severe phimosis (which is also linked to penile carcinoma).

              I think the only appropriate answer to circumcision is not at birth, only for a clear medical need until they are an adult, and at that point it’s their decision.

              But I doubt you’ll find anything peer reviewed that suggests an increase in STIs after circumcision, I’ve only ever seen the opposite, and I did a lot of reading on it before my son was born.

              • Captain_Buddha@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                This is the correct way of looking at it. At birth should not be the time to do this… it should be done later in life, by the person’s own choosing.

        • ryannathans@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Largely beneficial for UTIs, which is the leading infection in young boys. UTIs in young children are often hard to diagnose before spreading to the kidneys

          Then later in life when getting too old to wash yourself the benefit returns again

      • wicked@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        “It depends on the day whether more pleasure would be a good or bad thing for me”

        That’s a more precise version of your statement, I think.

        • entwine413@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Regardless, I’m circumcised, and if I was more sensitive in most situations, I wouldn’t last long enough for my wife’s toy to push her over the edge (I can get her off without it, but I’m too big and she’ll be sore for a week.

          Like, my prozac can be performance enhancing.

          • Bezier@suppo.fi
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The subset that wants it removed could still get that done later, right? Those who don’t aren’t given the option. Putting it back is a bit more difficult.

  • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I married a woman of jewish descent, she’s not religious in any way though. It was alarming, the amount of people coming up to us and asking us about our child’s dick. Why do people think it’s any of their business? Since they over stepped and asked, I gave them the full answer, complete with how idiotic it is and how anyone who still practices it is a backwards ass religious nut, and how all those other reasons like hygiene are bullshit myths.

  • FistingEnthusiast@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Circumcision is barbaric and backwards

    Religion doesn’t get a free pass either. Superstition is no basis for mutilating babies

    America is one of the only places in the world that still thinks this disgraceful practice is OK.

    All because they followed the ideas of a nutter who made cornflakes…

    Shit’s fucked

    • RejZoR@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m sure someone will jump in and mention hygiene, like we haven’t invented fucking soap some 3000 years ago…

      • Airowird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        FYI, in those 3000 years time, we have found another use for soap besides sticking your dick in it!

    • pulido@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow, mods are really going to censor this guy for saying “Oy Vey”?

      What group of people do you think would shout the loudest and pull the most strings to make sure it’s still legal and encouraged to mutilate the penises of newborn males?

      Jesus fuck, even on lemmy we can’t criticize them.

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, the first time I heard of people protesting against “mutilating children’s genitals [in North America]”, I thought it was a protest against circumcision. I thought, “Wow, we’re finally moving society forward!”

          …nope. It was backwards again.

      • AceSLive@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not for the newborn it isn’t. Something as personal as your own genetals should be your own personal choice, but in this instance the owner of the penis gave no consent.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is usually not the personal preference of the person operated on.

        There are a lot of medical decisions that simply should not be left in the hands of parents, and this is one of them, if not the score leader.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not a medical decision. The procedure is completely unnecessary and unwarranted without a diagnosis.

    • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with you fully but there’s a discrepancy that needs to addressed. Now, before you get the wrong idea, I’m NOT defending or excusing anybody here. The medical staff and the parents should be held responsible for nearly killing this newborn. Child genital mutilation of any kind should be banned.

      Now, with that out the way, Male circumcision and female genital mutilation (or FGM, which is what I believe you’re referring to when you say ‘only applying to girls’) are not directly comparable. Male circumcision typically only removes the foreskin of the penis whereas FGM removes the both the clitoris and labia (I shudder while typing this out). It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

      Again, this sort of thing should be banned and no child should suffer from the decisions they had no say in.

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        FGM removes the both the clitoris and labia

        There is an entire horrifying spectrum of FGM, not just what you posted.

      • Tedesche@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m curious: the person you replied to didn’t say they were comparable, so why did you feel the need bring it up?

        In my experience, people who point that out when no one has made the comparison are usually insecure about an issue that affects men getting attention and potentially eclipsing the issue affecting women. Like people who point out that female victims of domestic violence die more often from their assaults during discussions about male victims of domestic violence.

        You sure you wanna be that person? Try harder not to be, please.

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m fine with adults mutilating their foreskin, but I want the decision left up to the individual. Having the parents do it when they are a baby leaves the individual with no choice

      • fishos@lemmy.worldBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ll just say it’s very clear you’ve never seen what a botched circumcision does to a penis. You also don’t seem to know the biology of the male genitals very well either if you think it’s “just skin”.

        Why don’t we instead focus on “bodily autonomy”? No one should have unnecessary medical procedures done against their will and without their consent. It’s a pretty simple rule that applies to everyone and covers most of these issues simply.

      • moonlight@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

        More like removing the glans and foreskin, but that doesn’t make it much better. There are definitely varying degrees of awfulness, but it’s all bad.

        While there are some truly evil and horrific practices like removing the clitoris or sewing the vulva shut, some female genital mutation is “just” removing the clitoral hood, which is directly analagous to the foreskin.

        Most people can agree that this practice is deeply wrong, and that it is still genital mutilation. And so I think categorizing male genital mutilation separately as “circumcision” is downplaying it.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

        That is very much not accurate. Genital mutilation (of both genders) generally focuses on removing the ability to obtain pleasure from sex while maintaining reproductive capability.

        Circumcision is roughly analogous to clitoral hood amputation (one type of FGM). The foreskin also contains a substantial number of sensory nerves (Meissnar’s corpuscles, and ~10k-20k nerve endings specialized for pleasure). Additionally, the glans (head) is subjected to the external environment in a manner which it was not adapted for, resulting in formation of thickened, layer of skin to protect it. These two things, taken together, result in greatly reduced sensory and pleasure capabilities in the penis. The reason for its commonality in the US is the historical puritanical belief that sexuality is wrong and desire to repress sexuality in little boys.

        FGM is wrong. So is male genital mutilation. Inflicting either on those who can not consent is a crime against humanity that should not be accepted as commonplace.

        • seemefeelme@infosec.pubdeleted by creator
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree it should not be performed on a non-consenting individual, ESPECIALLY KIDS, but please do not claim the result is guaranteed to reduce sensitivity, as it is simply not true. Source: I am living proof the opposite can actually happen!

          I had phimosis and experienced paraphimosis which can result in losing the whole thing. A circumcision was one of the best decisions of my adult life. It is NOT a sexual death sentence or designed to be only that. It can in fact be a saviour.

          • stetech@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Most genital mutilation on kids is not done due to necessity.

            It’s like saying we should perform mandatory surgery on everyone, but most everyone has to undergo it with no tangible benefit, just unnecessary risk – is it cool that we know how to perform the procedure in cases that medically necessitate it? Obviously. Does that mean there is a reason everyone needs it? Of course not.

    • reactionality@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      My dude you LITERALLY just heard about a baby almost dying from a circumcision?? Which cis girl is born with the apparatus to undergo a circumcision. I’m waiting.

      “instead of only applying to girls” you’re on some goofy shit, shitstirrer.

        • reactionality@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only”

          ARE YOU FUCKING BLIND? REREAD THEIR MESSAGE YOU IMBECILE.

            • otp@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              LMAO…that comment got removed.

              I expected that commenter to not reply (out of embarrassment, because most people with that kind of attitude tend to be too small to admit their mistakes).

              Instead, it seems like they doubled down…what did that comment say? Ahaha

              • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                It should be in the modlog.

                He basically just copy pasted “only” a bunch of times then questioned my reading comprehension and called me an imbecile.

      • quetzaldilla@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        How can someone be so confidently incorrect?

        When you see a comment you disagree with, start by taking the time to research their claims.

        • reactionality@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only” “only”

          ARE YOU FUCKING BLIND? REREAD THEIR MESSAGE YOU IMBECILE.