By Anonymous - 29/10/2012 10:32 - United States - Levelland

Today, after I gave birth to our first child, my husband looked at the doctor and seriously asked, "When do you circumcise the baby?" We had a baby girl. FML
I agree, your life sucks 28 787
You deserved it 2 706

Same thing different taste

Top comments

Girls can be circumcised, but all forms of circumcision are outdated. But why are you surprised, you had a baby with this guy?


he was expecting a boy. unless you had the doctor tell you before the birth but was still hoping for a son.

You said this in the other FML.. Couldn't think of anything else?

They wanted first comment. Probably copy and pasted it. And I think OPs husband should know the female body since he had to have sex with a girl to make a baby.

Girls can be circumcised, but all forms of circumcision are outdated. But why are you surprised, you had a baby with this guy?

kut17 11

All forms are not outdated. Over half of the male population in the US is circumcised.

iseyixes 18

23- he was referring to girl circumcision.

#23- Just because half the US population is circumcised doesn't mean that it's not outdated. Mutilating the genitals of a baby boy should e illegal just like female circumcision is.

StalkerChick 13

41- Hmm I don't know about that. I guess there's no right answer for this situation. My granddad wasn't circumcised as a baby and elected to get it done in his twenties. He told my grandmother that he wished his parents would have had him circumcised as a baby so he wouldn't remember the pain from the procedure.

It's removing the highest concentration of nerve endings in the penis and taking the protective covering of the foreskin off the head. Without the foreskin, the head of the penis dries out more than it should and chafes. The procedure has no benefits that exceed decent hygiene and greatly reduces sensitivity. It's also a procedure which is done without anesthesia on baby boys. How is this not genital mutilation?

unknown_user5566 26

I think we can all agree that like many controversial topics, this boils down to personal choice and preference. There's no need to debate it since I highly doubt anyone will change their point of view due to an argument on FML.

MagicGiraffe 12

With the foreskin left on a penis, infection underneath it is much more prevalent. As for the dry tip part, nothing rubbing a little lotion on won't fix. ;)

Infection is more prevalent if you don't wash your penis. If you're a dirty bastard, you're more likely to get an infection, imagine that. That's no reason to mutilate a baby boys genitals.

Well actually, uncircumcised men are more likely to get Phimosis, a condition which results from inadequate cleaning because of the foreskin. More importantly, uncircumcised men are more likely to get squamous cell carcinoma in the penis. Cancer which is extremely rare (pretty much non-existent) in Muslims and Jews ( where circumcision is a must at young age) Female genital mutilation has more disadvantages than advantages.

Comment moderated for rule-breaking.

Show it anyway
oceanbeauty 17

They use a lidocaine injection into the tissue around the penis. That is a form of local anesthesia.

dreamer9614 3

I think the major difference here is we're talking about female circumcision. Which removes all or most of the external female genitals, because in some places women feeling pleasure during sex or sexual activities is considered dirty. They don't take half of a baby boys penis, and is not done to reduce or end pleasure during sex. Also female circumcision is usually done on teens or adult women, not babies, and can be forced. Pain is felt differently in babies, so while it hurts, it ISN'T scarring. I can't say the same for women that are held down and fighting the procedure.

Your response is stupid on so many levels. i will try to explain this the best I can. 1) The foreskin prevents you from cleaning it well enough to prevent this. Doesn't happen to many people, but when it does, it can be really bad. (can lead to urinary retention--> kidney Failure) 2) as for you comparing breast to penile cancer, well thats just dumb. (i'm really trying to be nice, but you called it upon yourself) cutting off your foreskin is nothing like removal of the breast (might as well remove the uterus and cervix too while you're at it) There are many issues the comes with removal of the breast (psychological as well as physical) Women only do it if they feel like they have increased risk. But circumcision is hardly invasive, hardly anybody misses it and it reduces the chances of penile cancer to nearly 0%. If there was a procedure as minimally invasive and and reduces the risks of breast cancer by that much tell me where?! I'm sure breast cancer would be practically cured.

#70 "is not done to reduce or end pleasure during sex." It was when it became the norm in the US. Look up the history of circumcision, it was done in the 1900s to prevent masturbation. It's only continued because people blindly follow outdated traditions. #74 1) Lies. That's all there is to say to that. 2) My example is absurd because the argument is absurd. Circumcision does cause psychological and physical issues. Your denying them doesn't make them less real. It is genital mutilation and should be banned.

My arguments are all backed up by certified medical research and taught to medical students. The only argument you have is that it reduces sexual pleasure (probably not even by much), and unless you've felt before and after, I doubt you would miss it. If it's done in a young age then no, it will not cause physical or psychological issue (It's not as bad as removing your breasts.) So stop whining about the removal of a small piece of skin (done for your own health) and grow a pair! If i had a choice between having it removed at a time i wouldn't even remember the pain to increasing my chances of infection/cancer (little it may be) Id choose circumcision everytime

#80- Yeah, YOU would choose circumcision. A shitload of people circumcized as babies wouldn't have chosen it for themselves. That's the whole point of the debate.

yet i know a shitload who would. And a more who didn't get circumcised wish they did. Guess that's why this is an argument. There are two preferences, I'm defending my preference with medical findings.

Yeah man, I'm just angry because I had a piece of my dick cut off. It's not like there are peer-reviewed articles about the problems circumcision causes or doctors who refuse to perform the procedure because it's not helpful or anything. It's not like it can leave scarring or cause deformities or problems getting erections. Good job calling me out on that. (If anyone needs links to said studies, I'll be happy to provide them but FML isn't letting me post them.)

My brother, who had a heart condition, was circumcised at 16 years old. He vowed when he had kids and if be had a son he would circumcise him as a baby so he wouldn't have to go through that pain and have any memory of it. I'm not giving my opinion on the subject (I know how fast the FML sharks attack if you have an opinion) but I think it goes to show that the benefits outweigh anything else in terms of circumcision.

TheDrifter 23

Basic facts people seem to be missing: Three foreskin contains 30 percent of the penis' nerve endings. Both major complications listed from foreskins have occurrence rates under 1 in 250,000. Meaning a million boys would have to be circumcised to prevent 8 such combined incidences. Also, the erectile dysfunction rates among circumcised men over 45 are six times higher than uncircumcised. Courtesy of the American Journal Of Medicine.

LiterOfCola 16

Every person I've talked to about it in real life (girls, friends) agree that uncircumcised penises look worse. True, there's not that much of a medical reason to do it, but why would you not want to make your dick look better and cleaner? (I know this is an opinion) I am glad it was done to me, and how again is it scarring or mutilating? Is removing tonsils mutilation?

'A piece of my dick' Stop being over dramatic, you make it seem like you penis lost half it's size. It was done when you were a baby, you don't remember shit of it. Do PM me those studies. These problems occurred mostly in the past due to untrained hands. Go to a doctor who knows what they're doing, risks of such things is close to nil. Besides like I said, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages any day. Risks of penile cancer vs slightly less pleasurable sex. Besides, whether the foreskin does make a huge difference in sexual pleasure or not was not proven. It's not like a guy could grow foreskin and say 'well you know, sex does feel better now' And yet when you hear of people getting circumcision at older age, they always regret not having it younger and pledge to make that decision for their kids. Why would they do that if they liked being uncircumcised better?

To callyn. Saying it's mutilation and should be banned is like someone saying abortion is evil and should be banned. Both are controversial subjects that share one thing in common: a choice. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it should be banned all together. Personally, I don't like abortions. Does that mean they should be banned across America? They happen and it's for the best for some girls (IE rape, incest, threatens the life of mother and baby). I've come to accept that girls get them and it's their choice. If a parent wants to circumcise their baby boy, it's their choice. We live in a place where we have these freedoms and you bitching about circumcision won't change that fact.

unknown_user5566 26

97- I sincerely hope your comment doesn't start an abortion debate on top of this circumcision argument. To everyone: As I said in my last comment (47), this all boils down to personal preference and opinion. Some people think it's a good thing, some don't. Is it really worth arguing back and forth and calling each other names? Obviously no one has changed their stance on the issue.

raraisbang 12

Every guy I know that is uncircumcised is perfectly fine with it, but that's just my experience. I chose not to get my son circumcised due to personal preference, and we've had no problems with him so far. In my opinion, as long as you're hygienic it shouldn't pose a problem under normal circumstances.

98 - I hope it doesn't either. I only brought it up as a comparison.

flutter4 7

He sounds like he has a sense of humor

Exactly so glad genes like his are helped to further spread by people like the OP

They can circumcise females, but most never live through it. It involves cutting off the clit.

No, most girls live through it. In some pasts Africa all girls are still circumcised.

UncleMuscles 5

Actually, that's called genital mutilation, and it's not a good thing.

unknown_user5566 26

That sounds incredibly painful. Why remove something that allows many women to experience pleasure?

Because in that culture women are not supposed to feel pleasure. It's a horrible thing. Don't research it if you have a weak stomach.

StalkerChick 13

Also, the ******** is considered a manly body part in some cultures. If a girl is still 'intact', it will be near impossible to find her a husband.

unknown_user5566 26

I try to keep an open, unbiased mind when it comes to learning about different cultures, but **** that. If anyone came near my downstairs with a sharp object I'd punch them in the face. I feel bad for the girls who are oppressed in ways like that.

It is really sad one of the women on America's next top model was a victim of it and her story was hard to hear.

theuglywhitekid 3

you can circumsize a girl too, its just illegal and hast been practiced by the english/americans since the 1500's

MolesterStallone 13