Jana 8: Now with Instagram

[AtlanticTug]

3 hours ago, HereticHick said:

"nobody"??

I find it hard to believe that your country has ZERO Muslim or Jewish residents.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision

For what is worth, 82% of men in United States are circumcised. Yes, rates are dropping.

 

 

Yeah, the rates are WAY below that, may even be under 50% currently. 82% is the prevalence which is biased because it includes older men.

Given how circumcision came to be widespread in the Puritan era, it's fairly surprising to me that it's continuing to be performed in the modern age. Especially with all the crunchy granola parents out there.

We did not circumcise our son, thankfully my DH had no issue with it so it wasn't a difficult decision.

[3SecondSideHugger]

12 hours ago, HereticHick said:

"nobody"??

I find it hard to believe that your country has ZERO Muslim or Jewish residents.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision

For what is worth, 82% of men in United States are circumcised. Yes, rates are dropping.

No back to the Jana speculation train. I have to say I'm pretty impressed with the long message in today's Instagram post. For a Duggar, she's pretty eloquent.

 

As you may infer from your Wikipedia link, there is a whole wide world outside of the United States. The country of heritage I am referring to has a rate of 6-7%, 3% of those being documented medically necessary ones later in development according to research. So yeah “nobody” is a stretch, but hardly any compared to US rate.  Also I fact checked and apparently less than 1% of referenced country is Muslim. Jewish population is a bit higher but I couldn’t get a percentage and it’s essentially confined to one major city.

On 2/10/2019 at 8:08 PM, Ms. Brightside said:

Thank you for saying this... i cannot count how many times I've been told I need to lower my standards or I will never find a man. But I am good at spending time by/with myself... I have hobbies I enjoy, I can watch whatever I want on Netflix, make whatever I want for dinner, go out of town on trips without checking with anyone else's schedule... and while it would be nice to share things with someone I love, I don't want to give up the lifestyle I have simply so I don't feel like a failure in the romance department. It is extremely hard to see my friends getting married and having kids when I don't even have a single romantic prospect, but it would be harder to be in a relationship with someone I "settled" for. My standards are my standards and I'm tired of people trying to make me feel guilty for that. 

We can't know why Jana is still single, but I hope she can find peace with her current situation. It's tough out there for single women in liberal circles... I can't imagine how much harder it would be in her situation, even if she is single by choice. The constant pressure and judgement must be exhausting. 

I was shocked I ended up marrying young as I never imagined meeting someone and getting married until my 30s. I had 0 boyfriends until I met my husband at 23. I then met my husband and we were married just over a year later. It was just like that and so *meant to be*. Truly never thought I would find someone like that because I was so good by myself, but then it happened. 

 

I also take offense when some single friends share stuff about how they’re happy their life doesn’t revolve around settling for some guy and they’re independent. Like hello, just because I met my match young doesn’t mean I settled or am not independent lol. Why can’t people just be happy and encouraging of their peers in all stages of life?! 

[SorenaJ]

Why anyone would choose (for non-medical reasons) to perform genital mutilation on their newborn baby is beyond me. 

[lumpentheologie]

On 2/11/2019 at 2:08 AM, Ms. Brightside said:

Thank you for saying this... i cannot count how many times I've been told I need to lower my standards or I will never find a man. But I am good at spending time by/with myself... I have hobbies I enjoy, I can watch whatever I want on Netflix, make whatever I want for dinner, go out of town on trips without checking with anyone else's schedule... and while it would be nice to share things with someone I love, I don't want to give up the lifestyle I have simply so I don't feel like a failure in the romance department. It is extremely hard to see my friends getting married and having kids when I don't even have a single romantic prospect, but it would be harder to be in a relationship with someone I "settled" for. My standards are my standards and I'm tired of people trying to make me feel guilty for that. 

Good for you for not lowering your standards.  I don't know why people assume it's better to be with someone who isn't what you want than to be alone.  It may be my introverted nature, but I've been miserable in a relationship and miserable alone and miserable in a relationship is A LOT worse. You seem to be pretty not miserable, though, so that's great!

Just a quick note: being in a relationship/getting married doesn't necessarily have to mean giving up on doing those things alone either. My husband and I watch Netflix separately as often as together, and whenever either of us feel moved to make dinner the other one is welcome to eat it too, but if we want something else we make or buy something else. We also each fairly regularly go out of town without the other one---we tell each other when we're planning to go, but it's not like we depend on the other one being around all the time. We basically live like roommates who are very much in love with each other and plan to keep being roommates for a good long while, and that works great for us. Being married doesn't mean you have to share everything; relationships are what you decide you want them to be.

[Iamtheway]

21 hours ago, TZmom said:

I hope this doesn't make me a leg humper, but I have to give them props for this.  

They do some horrible things and have horrible views that I don’t agree with at all and I think it is very important that they are critisised and called out for the shit they say and do, but nothing is all black or all white and the Duggars, like pretty much all people, have both good and bad ideas and do both nice and shitty things. 

Thinking one of them has a cute skirt, did a good decorating job, said something cool, did a nice thing or anything else positive does not mean you accept everything they’re about. This seems like a lovely idea (and her post didn’t mention Jesus once). And I don’t think saying so makes either of us a leg humper. 

[DillyDally]

Re the Valentine's Day video: Love the Jabbie cuddle (no leghumper, I promise), JD looks very happy and comfortable. But no shoes on the couch, please!!! 

Also, I found it a bit tacky they had to read out these messages via microphone, blasting their love messages through the entire house. But I guess that's the only way to make yourself heard during these huge family gatherings/in that huge living room. Also, I had to laugh at Josh (?) playing on his laptop and not paying attention. I do wonder how everybody is getting along with him...

[IReallyAmHopewell]

20 hours ago, AtlanticTug said:

Yeah, the rates are WAY below that, may even be under 50% currently. 82% is the prevalence which is biased because it includes older men.

Given how circumcision came to be widespread in the Puritan era, it's fairly surprising to me that it's continuing to be performed in the modern age. Especially with all the crunchy granola parents out there.

We did not circumcise our son, thankfully my DH had no issue with it so it wasn't a difficult decision.

Lots and lots of folks still circumcise. Anywhere that isn't trendy, upper middle class and largely white still does it. For the traditional reason of wanting him to look like Dad--i.e. not freak him out. All the young couples we know have circumcised their boys. None are Jewish or Muslim. Some find the foreskin "gross". It's a matter of socialization.

[Sullie06]

Jana responded to someone asking about Jill:

[QuiverDance]

On 2/12/2019 at 10:20 AM, SweetJuly said:

There are a few Jewish people who choose not to circumcise and go for an alternative naming ceremony ("brit shalom"). I do know some people who decided not to circumcise their sons. They are all secular Jews, some of whom are in interfaith marriages. I don't know how high the numbers are or if it's enought to call it a trend.

I am Jewish, but non-observant, and I am married to an equally non-observant Catholic man. When we first met, he considered converting (including getting circumcised) for my sake. I told him that it was not necessary for him to convert, and that I'd rather have him stay intact.

Now comes the tricky part. I know the existential importance of circumcision in Judaism. I know that criticism and banning of circumcision has often been an expression of anti-semitism. I know that ancestors of mine have died fighting for their right to practise their religion and circumcise their sons.

However, I personally consider (non-medically necessary) circumcision genital mutilation. If an adult decides to willingly undergo the procedure - fine, you do you. But the idea of doing it to a very young baby makes me sick to my stomach. So while I know how important this act is and while I'd feel horribly guilty, and would not even know how to approach the topic to my family, I could not have a son of mine circumcised.

I was very relieved when I found out we were having a girl because it saved me from having to make a very difficult decision and face a very uncomfortable situation with my family and community.

Thanks for your response!  It's really interesting, and I suspect it will become more of a trend in secular circles because even the American Academy of Pediatrics no longer recommends circ, though they do say that its risks outweigh its benefits.  As an American (IDK if you are), it's interesting to me because it's only within the last 10 years or so that this has become an issue of debate.  Before that, boys were just circumcised routinely.  

FWIW, I am a lapsed Catholic, and my son's father was raised Episcopalian.  I had very very strong misgivings about circumcision, but my son's father absolutely INSISTED upon it.  Like there was no debate, and he wasn't hearing my arguments against it.  Given that he was the one with the penis, and because I always deferred to him (so weird because I am not like that with anyone else in my life including my new DH), I well... deferred.  Going through with that is something I will always regret because I frankly tend to agree with you.  I hope my son doesn't end up resenting that decision, though knowing him I seriously doubt that will happen. 

13 hours ago, SorenaJ said:

Why anyone would choose (for non-medical reasons) to perform genital mutilation on their newborn baby is beyond me. 

I suggest reading the American Academy of Pediatrics position on the procedure.  It is by no means equivocal.  

 

[SilverBeach]

I found this on the American Academy of Pediatrics website:

"Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement.

I have no male children, no dog in the fight.  I just thought this was interesting. For certain controversial topics, facts don't matter to some anyway, such as with vaccinations. This is a TOPIC OF DOOM , so I'm backing away slowly now.

Edited February 13, 2019 by SilverBeach

[HurricaneBells]

The same is true in Australia. When my now in their twenties nephews were born, it was routinely done at the hospital unless you chose not to. However due to an infection aged 4, one had to have it done at that age instead which i found much worse and i never wanted to have to put a son through that. By the time my 4 yo son was born however it was no longer routine and hospitals would only do it for medical reasons. There were juts one or two private clinics that would do it but it cost hundreds of dollars that i simply did not have and it forced the decision in the end. Plus its easy to think you will do this or that but once he was in my arms, i wasn't going to have anyone hurt him unnecessarily so happy to let go.  With hindsight, i dont think there is a real difference other than he has to keep it clean properly. I guess at least the majority of their generation will not be circumcised and it will be the norm not the exception when they are older. Meh.

Edited February 13, 2019 by HurricaneBells
missed a word

[AussieKrissy]

On 2/3/2019 at 5:32 PM, Chewing Gum said:

Also, once they're married their views tend to change quite rapidly...

I would rephrase that to our views (of them) change rapidly. 

Once  married we see more of who they really are. I think her beliefs are the same as everyone else, she just has not shown them. 

[3SecondSideHugger]

44 minutes ago, SilverBeach said:

I found this on the American Academy of Pediatrics website:

"Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement.

I have no male children, no dog in the fight.  I just thought this was interesting. For certain controversial topics, facts don't matter to some anyway, such as with vaccinations. This is a TOPIC OF DOOM , so I'm backing away slowly now.

I do my research on controversial issues, and with minimal digging you’ll find the AAP’s position and research about circumcision was internationally criticized and several of the involved authors published rebuttals/ wanted a debate and it was basically a mess. The research used for their position evidence was also weak/ not that relevant. I also think the research around this is mostly outdated and too specific in scenarios from what I can tell. Outside of religious circumstances, this is procedure is still really only common in America... *daily reminder that a world exists outside of the United States*

10 hours ago, lumpentheologie said:

Good for you for not lowering your standards.  I don't know why people assume it's better to be with someone who isn't what you want than to be alone.  It may be my introverted nature, but I've been miserable in a relationship and miserable alone and miserable in a relationship is A LOT worse. You seem to be pretty not miserable, though, so that's great!

Just a quick note: being in a relationship/getting married doesn't necessarily have to mean giving up on doing those things alone either. My husband and I watch Netflix separately as often as together, and whenever either of us feel moved to make dinner the other one is welcome to eat it too, but if we want something else we make or buy something else. We also each fairly regularly go out of town without the other one---we tell each other when we're planning to go, but it's not like we depend on the other one being around all the time. We basically live like roommates who are very much in love with each other and plan to keep being roommates for a good long while, and that works great for us. Being married doesn't mean you have to share everything; relationships are what you decide you want them to be.

I kind of have two social circles- one that is upper class and one that is average middle class. I find the upper class couples to be much more independent and frequently don’t expect their spouse to do things with them generally because they have demanding and high paying jobs so they are busier. Whereas many of my friends in the other circle seriously won’t do anything without their spouse.... I’ve really noticed it the past couple years as the majority of my friends are married now. Obviously not the case and not trying to generalize,  just something that I really noticed amongst my friends being in my late 20s!! 

[AtlanticTug]

1 hour ago, SilverBeach said:

I found this on the American Academy of Pediatrics website:

"Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement.

I have no male children, no dog in the fight.  I just thought this was interesting. For certain controversial topics, facts don't matter to some anyway, such as with vaccinations. This is a TOPIC OF DOOM , so I'm backing away slowly now.

They were heavily criticized internationally as as been noted.

Also the transmission of STIs is really misleading. Almost all the research and data on the matter is drawn from subsaharan Africa, where hygiene of genitals is vastly different than in the developed world, mostly due to a widespread lack of clean water and therefore showers and baths which are a daily (if not multiple times daily) occurrence in the west. 

[TZmom]

2 minutes ago, AtlanticTug said:

They were heavily criticized internationally as as been noted.

Also the transmission of STIs is really misleading. Almost all the research and data on the matter is drawn from subsaharan Africa, where hygiene of genitals is vastly different than in the developed world, mostly due to a widespread lack of clean water and therefore showers and baths which are a daily (if not multiple times daily) occurrence in the west. 

Gah.... don't get me started on the frequency of showers. People in North America shower Too. Damn. Much.

[SilverBeach]

5 minutes ago, 3SecondSideHugger said:

I do my research on controversial issues, and with minimal digging you’ll find the AAP’s position and research about circumcision was internationally criticized and several of the involved authors published rebuttals/ wanted a debate and it was basically a mess. The research used for their position evidence was also weak/ not that relevant. I also think the research around this is mostly outdated and too specific in scenarios from what I can tell. Outside of religious circumstances, this is procedure is still really only common in America... *daily reminder that a world exists outside of the United States*

Can you share some of your research? We like links and quotes here and share them often. I find this all so interesting, again no dog in the fight so no preference. I do think that we are aware that there is  a world outside of the US, but as an American I don't think that a practice primarily done here in and of itself makes that practice invalid. 

[anjulibai]

My cousin's second and third eldest sons were uncircumcised at birth. But as they got older, they kept getting infections over and over again, so at ages 5 and 6, they had to get circumcised. It was awful for them, and they were in a lot of pain. My cousin had her younger sons circumcised at birth after that. DH and I didn't want my boys to go through with that, so we circumcised or two boys at birth as well. 

DH is circumcised and says he's never really thought about it much. He's not known his penis to be any different, so it's never bothered him one way or the other. 

[SilverBeach]

5 minutes ago, AtlanticTug said:

They were heavily criticized internationally as as been noted.

That's fine, there are often differences of opinion in the medical community, although criticism in and of itself doesn't invalidate anything. Research and facts do. I don't care enough to research this further, but if anyone wants to share links or quotes, that would be great.

[3SecondSideHugger]

https://academic.oup.com/pch/article/20/6/311/2647311

there is a balanced viewpoint from Canada (*as always*)

 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177076

this is interesting about a high prevalence HIV country and circumcision methods - mentions how the effects differ between practice methods in regards to hiv prevention 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2807391/

basically says there are some benefits but research unclear 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17441692.2016.1184292?scroll=top&needAccess=true

A 2016 article analyzing the CDC and AAP’s research and positions 

 

 

I’m not anti-Circumcision, I’m just saying to do your research because just because it’s cultural tradition doesn’t make something right 

[AliceInFundyland]

I don’t have a huge feeling on this either. However, the authors of that last article (Morten & Earp) seem to have a bit of “pro man” slant to many of their academic pursuits.

[SilverBeach]

2 hours ago, 3SecondSideHugger said:

I’m not anti-Circumcision, I’m just saying to do your research because just because it’s cultural tradition doesn’t make something right 

Or wrong.

[3SecondSideHugger]

40 minutes ago, SilverBeach said:

Or wrong.

Lol waiting for any of  those research and quotes you claim to love to provide any constructive input

[3SecondSideHugger]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478224/

Here’s one responsive article to the criticisms of the CDC policy where they specifically address each concern. 

There is a lot of back and forth between international medical experts on this. It’s not a clear issue, but overwhelmingly parents should be informed of benefits/risks before making a major medical decision. The problem is that the procedure is much more painful and complicated in older kids/adults.

I actually have a child patient at work that is about to miss a full month of school because he is getting a circumcision following frequent UTIs which led to a kidney infection. 

I’m truly 50/50 on this issue but when I see comments implying since most of America does it as tradition, it must be good... nope. I choose to use my brain and research.

[SweetJuly]

I'm from Israel, but have lived much of my life in Europe. The overwhelming majority of men who are neither Muslim nor Jewish here are intact. Somehow European males - and men in many other parts of the world - manage to keep clean and live with their foreskins without constantly contracting or spreading infections.

What I do find interesting is that the fact that a very sensitive part of the male body is removed is often downplayed so much. How little regard we have for male physical integrity.

I'd like to propose the following thought experiment:

There are many variations of Female Genital Mutilation. Of course, the worst form, infibulation (removal of all external genitalia and stitching the wound together) is absolutely horrific. And the removal of the clitoris on its own is terrible enough. Male circumcision is not comparable to these mutilations.

However, there are also "milder" versions of female circumcision where "only" the clitoral hood and/or inner labia are removed. This is actually an operation that some Western women undergo willingly in order to "improve" the appearance of their vulva. Some women also undergo this surgery for medical reasons (uncomfortable, makes certain activities difficult, etc.) It's also easier to keep the vulva clean that way.

Thus a mild form of female circumcision - removal of clitoral hood and inner labia - could theoretically be justified in our eyes as well. It's the equivalent of what is done to males.

Nevertheless, if such an operation were performed on a female infant we'd rightfully be outraged.

Why are we ok with it being done to a male infant then?

The answer is: We're used to it. Our religion commands it or our culture expects it. Habituation and societal pressure perpetuate the practice. Something that can seem absolutely shocking to an outsider can be the most normal thing in the world for you if you're used to it. And you'll keep finding reasons for hanging on to that practice, even (and sometimes especially) if it is being challenged.

[luv2laugh]

I wonder if this is going to end up like the famous peanut butter thread?

That being said, if I have a son, I will not circumcise because I don’t want the baby to experience pain. Research has discussed the affects in the brain on the “pain memory” of RIC routine infant circumcision.

I had an steroid joint injection in my back (despite being in my 20s my back is bad), and I received far more anesthesia than the babies undergoing RIC will have.

Edited February 14, 2019 by luv2laugh