Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I need help to protect future nephew from cultural bias cutting

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I need help to protect future nephew from cultural bias cutting

    My sister is 8 months pregnant, they are planning to cut. I sent them information, gave them the new American Circumcision documentary to watch, etc. They refuse to watch it and didn't look at the information I sent them. I finally got to sit down and discuss in depth with my brother in law and I am at an impass. They don't believe the typical medical benefits argument, or argue that I am wrong that there are functions and sensation loss. The main reason they are doing it is because they want him to fit in and not be ridiculed. I do not have a good way to argue against this reason becuase I consider it to be a very minor thing, but to them it is the main reason they are doing it. I need help coming up with a good way to either make them realise the other reasons are more important, or that this reason isn't a good case for the circumcision. Please help a.s.a.p. I have already argued the statistics are going down, but we are in the midwest and the statistics are still 70% as far as I am aware here so my own data is working against me.

  • #2
    You may not be able to change their mind. Unfortunately, that can be the case. You can try, but that is all you can do. Piling on with the help of us may just get them to dig in deeper. That is what studies show on changing peoples minds. But if you want possible ways to appeal to them, here are some thoughts.

    So as far as they are concerned, as long as a majority of the population violates a person's human rights, it is OK to violate human rights? You can try the human rights angle. Compare it to female circumcision, where the same argument is used at times.

    I was cut, my brothers were not. No Problem. No trauma. Not even any discussion. Nor do I have any information it was in any way a problem for them.

    My sons are intact, and guess what, now a days, they do not undress for gym,, so no one even knows. Can't be ridiculed for anything unknown. More importantly, is that really how they want to raise their child? If someone ridicules you, accommodate them? Don't wear glasses because someone might call you 4 eyes? What if someone doesn't like red hair? Cut it off? Dye it for the rest of their life? Sounds like a pretty weak argument to me.

    What if he is short? Too tall? Not good at sports? there are an infinite way people (especially kids) will ridicule him in school. They cannot protect him against all of it. Why amputate the most important part of his anatomy for his and his future wife's sexual pleasure and function, just to appease imagined bullies? Would they put a daughter through plastic surgery because her breasts might be considered too small? Before you even knew? Before her sexual development was finished?

    Regards

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm sorry man, that's a really rough situation to be in because you feel like the more they know, the more they can be convinced. The problem is that with such a "taboo" topic, the more you talk about it, the more they see you as a loon - so it's a tough balancing act.

      I agree with greg. The human rights approach is the way to go. Plain and simple: you're not taking away his foreskin, you're taking away his CHOICE.

      Also, you can try the statistics angle even though it hasn't quite hit the midwest. Just mention that pretty much all men have their foreskin and that this is just a really weird thing that people still do in certain states in the U.S. - make them question it a little bit with this.

      Maybe use the tonsils argument. We don't take those out at birth even though they can get infected and occasionally have to be removed later.

      Additionally - the standing out thing is BULLSHIT now. As Greg mentioned, they don't make you undress anymore in schools. My dad used the same lame excuse when I asked him why he had me circumcised. "I just wanted you to be like everyone else." Well, guess what Dad? That was NEVER a situation I would have been in. Additionally, by the time that kid gets to college, the ratio will be at least 50/50 with his peers.

      Good luck!

      Comment


      • #4
        You may not be able to convince your relatives not to cut. It takes time to for people to absorb an education on intactivist issues. Young parents-to-be are running around like chickens-with-their-heads-cut-off buying things like cribs, baby car seats, walkers, diapers, sterilizers, and learning about breast feeding, and formula. Then there is all the doctor visits, and then some have to look into daycare arrangements. Parents-to-be are too busy to take up a lively interest in researching circ.

        However, if you prevail, your nephew will thank you…..and your sister and brother-in-law may very well also thank you at sometime in the future.

        I’ve found that it is the mother that usually makes the circ decision. In your case, it sounds like your brother-in-law is the holdout, but only you can decide if it is better to work on your sister or your brother-in-law.

        I’ve learned a lot about what convinces by arguing the circ issue in the street booth at the Ann Arbor Art Fairs:

        In the street, the argument that convinces young fathers the most is the civil libertarian one. They agree when we say we believe that everyone should have the right to determine if they want to be circumcised or not when they reach the age of majority, especially since it is a irreversible decision.

        (I’ve also found that many young fathers don’t want to be caught dead talking about their son’s penis at all, but they WILL go along with talking civil liberties.)

        When you are talking about RIC with Americans, I find that it is better to call circ a “civil rights violation” rather than a “human rights violation.” Americans don’t believe that we have much in the way human rights violations in the US, and if we do, do-gooders and the legal system right the wrongs, right? For Americans, human rights violations are something that happens in shoddy dictatorships and third-world countries, not here. However, Americans DO believe that we DO have plenty civil rights violations in this country. We hear about a civil rights lawsuits every few days on radio and TV news. I reserve the term “human rights violation” to when talking about eradicating circ in an international context.

        You can continue with the circ-rate-is-dropping argument with your brother-in-law in two ways:
        1) You can say that, yes, the circ rate is still high in the Rustbelt, but the job growth is in in the Sunbelt and West Coast states. If your nephew moves to one of them, he is going to be in the minority for sure. The circ rate is about 23% in California, 17% in Oregon, 10% in Washington State, 10% in Nevada, 51% in Texas, and 31% in Florida.
        For a complete listing by state SEE:
        http://www.mgmbill.org/statistics.html
        2) You can tell your brother-in-law that the circ rate dropped precipitously in 1949 in the U.K. That’s the year that it was decided that the NHS would not pay for RIC. Men born right before1949, and were cut, are now 68 - 69 years old, and have gone through life feeling that they were sexually mutilated. Men just a year younger are virtually all intact.

        RIC is no longer practiced in New Zealand, and circ is down to 12% in Australia. Ireland never had RIC.

        You wouldn’t have wanted your son to be among the last killed in the Vietnam War. You don’t want them to be among the last to be circ’ed.

        My father, who was intact, had a simple solution to appearing cut when he was in a locker room with cut men. He simply kept his foreskin retracted to appear cut.


        Females are more convinced by pain and trauma arguments:
        1) Circ is excruiatingly painful.
        Doctors say they use anesthetic, but they don’t. There is no safe anesthetic for newborn babies, and the doctors don’t want to have to come out of the operation room and tell the parents their baby died from the anesthetic - even if a death only occurs in less than 1% of the cases.
        2) The pain of circ can interfere with the baby’s breastfeeding and maternal bonding.
        3) You can cite the Taddio study, which showed that circ’d boys have higher crying responses to immunization than intact boys, or than girls.
        http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio/
        Last edited by Science Monk; 09-17-2018, 09:40 AM. Reason: typos
        I declared myself finished restoring with 3/4 erect coverage (CI-8.5) in 2005. I primarily used T-tape, strapping up and around my waist.
        I've participated in NORM meetings in San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle (RECAP), and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

        Every doubt, reservation, or concern I had about my restoration was resolved by achieving additional foreskin LENGTH.....So just KOT !

        Comment


        • #5
          You may also want to see my previous posts on how circ affects the biomechanics of sex here:
          https://foreskinrestoration.vbulleti...4581#post14581
          Last edited by Science Monk; 09-17-2018, 09:29 AM. Reason: fixed URL
          I declared myself finished restoring with 3/4 erect coverage (CI-8.5) in 2005. I primarily used T-tape, strapping up and around my waist.
          I've participated in NORM meetings in San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle (RECAP), and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

          Every doubt, reservation, or concern I had about my restoration was resolved by achieving additional foreskin LENGTH.....So just KOT !

          Comment


          • #6
            Science Monk: Very good response!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by greg_b View Post
              My sons are intact, and guess what, now a days, they do not undress for gym,, so no one even knows.
              I think I would bring this up, I agree with it. I'm years out of high school and even back then people didn't get naked in the locker rooms. If their reason is "so he fits in" then you can just say he'll fit in either way, it's more important to make sure he wears boxers instead of briefs if "fitting in" is the main concern.

              They probably won't change their mind, but at least you can point out that their argument is wrong and the reason they are doing it is actually some deeper psychological reason that they don't understand, and therefore maybe they should make the decision based on their irrational bias.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by PalloTown18 View Post
                Science Monk: Very good response!
                Thanks, PalloTown18.
                Small notes of thanks...and Likes...keep me posting.
                I declared myself finished restoring with 3/4 erect coverage (CI-8.5) in 2005. I primarily used T-tape, strapping up and around my waist.
                I've participated in NORM meetings in San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle (RECAP), and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

                Every doubt, reservation, or concern I had about my restoration was resolved by achieving additional foreskin LENGTH.....So just KOT !

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hey thanks for all the great responses guys. I am definitely using some of your suggestions to try to convince them. I ended up sending him a bunch of information, and even though he said he has an open mind to it, and that he read the information, the way he responded to the information doesn't reflect that. His response being "all of the studies I sent have less than 3000 total people, the population of the nordic countries is less than the population of our state so therefore the information isn't valid, it is an extremely small percentage of the world population opinion compared to the total population, there will always be studies trying to disprove things and say things are good or bad, psychological studies are flawed because did not take children's background into effect." It seems to me rather then consider the possibility the information is true, he is set on finding reasons why the studies are not reliable. I eventually responded with the human rights arguments and how I fail to see the relevancy of population size to the issue. Unfortunately I am becoming more convinced that they are just not open to the idea that it could possibly be wrong. Any time I bring it up with my sister she shuts down, gets upset, and says talk to him. I'm afraid there might just be some people in this world who value conforming to social norms over what makes logical sense. I don't know if I will ever be able to see them in the same light if they go through with this. I can at least tell myself my parents didn't know any better, but to just outright refuse when someone so close to you is putting themselves out there is just weighing on my heavily. I think it comes down to his defense mechanism, and his denial is so strong its overpowering reason. Trying to tell him that won't do the situation any good though.

                  Anyway thank guys, I really appreciate it.

                  If you guys keep giving me good ideas to debate this, I will keep trying
                  Last edited by deja_ale; 09-17-2018, 11:16 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Science Monk View Post
                    You may also want to see my previous posts on how circ affects the biomechanics of sex here:
                    https://foreskinrestoration.vbulleti...4581#post14581
                    I briefly explained the mechanics and functions of foreskin to him already. Mostly just that it protects the glans and creates a gliding motion during sex. I did not get too far into the details of the actual mechanics because their argument for circumcision is mostly based on conforming to social norms and fitting in.

                    When I asked "so it is more important for your son to fit in then to negatively effect his sex life for the rest of his life" the response was "well when you put it like that...yea i guess."

                    This response does not necessarily mean he believes me that it does have an effect and there are functions, I just don't think people like to hear they have been damaged, and their brain finds a way to refuse to accept it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It can be frustrating. Maddening even. So, if he thought that most were intact, then he would leave his son intact, presumably. Sounds pretty arbitrary and rather single issue minded. Not to mention totally ignoring what his son might or might not want. Which , of course, he has no idea.

                      One thing you can still do is be there for your nephew, when he is of an age to make his own decisions, you can let him know about restoration. Some men in your situation have even let the parents know that they have material prepared to give their son when the time comes, as a last ditch effort to make them reconsider. I have no idea if it was effective, but I wish I had known about restoration earlier, so there is that.

                      You tried. That is all anyone can do.

                      Regards

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Perhaps your brother-in-law is really more concerned that his son won't match HIM than anything else.

                        Please let him know that there are will ALWAYS be differences that will need to be explained to your son. You are big and hairy, and he is small and smooth. First and foremost, little guys are going to be fixated on THAT BIG difference. Your young son might not even notice foreskin or not for many years.

                        Young males once again get interested if they match their fathers and older brothers once they enter puberty themselves, but by that time they should be able to understand the difference.

                        The explanation is simple: You explain that circumcision was once thought to have medical benefits, but when it became evident that that was not the case - that circumcision actually had very damaging effects - it was discontinued in favor of being naturally whole and healthy.

                        David
                        World As Monkey Island
                        Last edited by Science Monk; 09-19-2018, 03:02 PM.
                        I declared myself finished restoring with 3/4 erect coverage (CI-8.5) in 2005. I primarily used T-tape, strapping up and around my waist.
                        I've participated in NORM meetings in San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle (RECAP), and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

                        Every doubt, reservation, or concern I had about my restoration was resolved by achieving additional foreskin LENGTH.....So just KOT !

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Remember to tell your parents-to-be the reason American circumcision got started in the first place:

                          Some Victorian-age doctors thought it would be a remedy for the moral self-polutuion of masturbation.

                          David
                          World As Monkey Island
                          I declared myself finished restoring with 3/4 erect coverage (CI-8.5) in 2005. I primarily used T-tape, strapping up and around my waist.
                          I've participated in NORM meetings in San Diego, Los Angeles, Seattle (RECAP), and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

                          Every doubt, reservation, or concern I had about my restoration was resolved by achieving additional foreskin LENGTH.....So just KOT !

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Science Monk View Post
                            Perhaps your brother-in-law is really more concerned that his son won't match HIM than anything else.

                            Please let him know that there are will ALWAYS be differences that will need to be explained to your son. You are big and hairy, and he its small and smooth. First and foremost, little guys are going to be fixated on THAT BIG difference. Your young son might not even notice foreskin or not for many years.

                            Young males once again get interested if they match their fathers and older brothers once they enter puberty themselves, but by that time they should be able to understand the difference.

                            The explanation is simple: You explain that circumcision was once thought to have medical benefits, but when it became evident that that was not the case - that circumcision actually had very damaging effects - it was discontinued in favor of being naturally whole and healthy.

                            David
                            World As Monkey Island
                            The problem is convincing him that it has damaging effects. I am afraid the denial is so strong that no matter what evidence or studies I show proving it has damaging effects, he will just deny it and play it off as methodologically flawed studies and there are not enough of the fringe group of people who feel that way to convince him it's a reality. The "I'm fine, so he will be fine" mentality, even though he doesn't know what its like to be intact. I think it's just his defense mechanism acting in an extreme matter of denial to the point that no matter how much evidence there is, there just has to be some reason that evidence is not correct.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by deja_ale View Post

                              The problem is convincing him that it has damaging effects. I am afraid the denial is so strong that no matter what evidence or studies I show proving it has damaging effects, he will just deny it and play it off as methodologically flawed studies and there are not enough of the fringe group of people who feel that way to convince him it's a reality. The "I'm fine, so he will be fine" mentality, even though he doesn't know what its like to be intact. I think it's just his defense mechanism acting in an extreme matter of denial to the point that no matter how much evidence there is, there just has to be some reason that evidence is not correct.
                              OK, that helps with understanding. It sounds like he cannot face the fact that his sex life was damaged. That explains a lot, if true. This might help you:

                              http://amygilliland.com/wp-content/u...f_Men-copy.pdf

                              You can try arguing along the lines of

                              1) Parents do not have the full right to make decisions for their children, but have only specific partial rights. Specifically, they can make decisions in the best interest of their children when the decision must be made before the child is old enough to decide for themselves. There is no need to circumcise as an infant, it can wait.

                              2) Why amputate a healthy body part with no medical reason indicating that it should be amputated, when his son can wait. What is driving this need to amputate a healthy body part, if it is because he feels a need to dismiss the value of the body part, why does he feel that way? Is it because he cannot face the fact that his sex life could be better? A morally better alternative would be for him to let his son decide later, and, if he wants to find out what he is missing, restore his foreskin, instead of amputating his son's.

                              I do not have the wording right, because I do not know what you have discussed exactly, but that is the general path you could try, changing the content to work better, as you see fit.

                              It may not work, biased, irrational people have strongly set viewpoints, changing their views is very difficult.

                              Regards

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X