Hmmm. I don't object to circumcision, but it seems to me that this is one of those "If there is a disagreement, the inaction side should win" subjects.
Is there a side that isn't chockablock with Internet-enabled crazies?
Well, if the judge was really wise he would have offered half a foreskin to each parent to see which one loved the kid more.
Can you halve a round foreskin with a straight-edge and compass?
I believe the knife is curved and there are no compasses used in a bris. Perhaps a masonic circumcision.
I kinda want to know how the legal case came about in the first place. A contract isn't the usual way this gets done!
No compasses? The little point is just begging for the pee-hole.
I'm curious why it seems like it's often the mother who's opposed, father for. Like the argument about spanking? ("I got spanked, and I turned out fine.") Not that I don't think both parents should get a say, just that I can't summon a really strong opinion (strong enough to have a legal battle, anyway) about a body part I don't have.
I think that's got to be part of it on the men's side -- most American men old enough to have kids are circumcised (stats off the top of my head, but I think? Way, way more common than the alternative in my age bracket, and then rates dropping to maybe 50-50 now, so while there are a lot of uncircumcised Americans, they're mostly pretty young?) And you figure the vast majority of circumcised men are going to believe there's nothing wrong with their own personal dicks, which might lead to being pro or anti circumcision for their own kids, but is mostly going to rule out believing that circumcision is an important negative. Once the generation of uncircumcised kids is old enough to be having their own kids, we'll probably see more committed anti-circumcision men.
And I could see having a strong opinion despite not having a dick of my own -- it's still my kid, and I still worry about injuries. I still end up at the no big deal either way position: on the anti side it's obviously ridiculous to think that minor surgery on everyone is necessary for a dick to work properly and be healthy; on the pro side literally every man I've ever had sex with was circumcised and it didn't seem to have done any of them any meaningful harm. But if my sense of the facts were different, I might have a stronger opinion.
I'm generally pro-circumcision, but 4 years old way too old for it. Kids that age can remember.
stats off the top of my head,
Topical
Also, decisions about the baby default to the mom, or at least, she's supposed to be the one worrying about cloth diapering and organic free-range sippy cups and that sort of thing. So she's going to hear the pro/con arguments (which tend to focus on cons), whereas the dad just has the personal experience to go by.
11: You have to figure that at 4 years old the kid gets anesthetic and maybe a Valium; it shouldn't be too traumatic.
6: It's not in the story, but I assume that they were either divorced or never meaningfully partnered at the time of birth, which ended up in a legal custody agreement from day one. If she was anti and he was pro from the beginning, then it'd make sense for circumcision to be a negotiated term, which she reneged on.
Very loosely relevant; and a topic on which some here have had opinions in the past: "Monkey Day Care: Growing up as a child research subject."
11: Less so than taking him off-roading and then hiking in Death Valley in the middle of summer, anyway.
That would be my guess, too, which is why it's annoying that at least in some of the coverage it's made out to sound like this was just a disagreement and the judge took the dad's side or something.
I was close, but wrong. They didn't split up until the kid was a year old (and still uncircumcised). Parenting plan provided for the father to get the circumcision done, but he didn't get around to it until the kid was three (and some doctor said it was a good idea), at which point the mother had developed her anti stance.
So, disagreeing with myself in 15: while I think it's NBD for an infant, if you don't get it done in infancy and it's not really medically necessary, leave the poor kid's genitals alone. I wasn't taking sides, because I figured the father had had a consistent position all along, but if he couldn't get around to it before his kid was three, I have no interest in his pro-circumcision values.
Given the way this rolled out over a number of years it is really difficult for me to see this as anything other than adults (including but not limited to the parents) cruelly using this kid for their own ends. The parents of course as parents are the most responsible for letting everything reach this stage of madness but woah all the other adults sure deserve massive condemnation as well. God it would majorly suck to be the judge on this one. Wonder at what point the judge would consider the kid's age and increased risk of complications to weigh against a surgical procedure?
I've forgotten why I was circumcised late (I think I was even older than this kid). I remember it, and it fucking hurt. But I turned out...well, I do cut the penises off little boys, but in the grand scheme of things, balancing all other deeds, I think that might still count as "fine."
This is a vague impression from stories like this, but are American doctors weirdly flippant about recommending circumcision for non-infants? It's hard to tell from the story, but one doctor recommended circumcision for medical reasons, then another one thought the first one was wrong, but it might be beneficial anyway, and there's nothing in the story indicating that there really is an unambiguous medical need.
While I still think it's NBD if you want to circumcise your kids for social/religious reasons, there's something really screwy if doctors are recommending unnecessary surgery to parents of uncircumcised boys because the doctors think circumcision is sort of generally beneficial rather than individually medically necessary.
Most male doctors are going to be in the age cohort likely to be circumcised. And they're likely doctors who do it themselves so I would assume they're inclined towards it.
25: Anecdotal, but: I was recently talking to my grandma, whose son (my uncle) was uncircumcised, and she says he had problems with infections and such well into early adolescence. But even then, their doctor advised against the surgery and recommended that he clean the area more thoroughly and more regularly.
On a related note: kind of weird to talk to your grandma about dongs.
A lady in the streets, very well informed about penis cleaning at family meets.
Huh. I haven't needed to be involved with Newt's bits since diaper age, but he doesn't seem to have any trouble.
Our son was not circumcised at birth. When we adopted him at seven months we decided he didn't need one more painful pre-memory, so he isn't.
He did get some minor infection in the first year or so, which I tried to look it up on a health web site. I recall trying to follow the diagnostic details and thinking, all the other articles about skin problems have photographs, and that would be very helpful. I wonder why it doesn't -- oh yeah, never mind.
22: Maybe he was trying for Worst Ostensibly Practicing Jew, Parental Division.
There's the thing about it reducing AIDS transmission, which is a real reduction but one of those things where it's hard to explain the statistics. I have a friend who circumsized her sons for that sole reason, and it's one of those percent-of-a-percent-of-a-percent risks, but the risk reduction sounds like a large number.
Eh, the thing with the pro-circumcision side is that all the arguments sound like anti-vaxxer screeds. "Sometimes the foreskin doesn't come down all the way!" "He might get cancer at some point!" "Infections!" "Social approbation!" "Religious reasons!" etc. etc. It's always a moving target, there's never anyone who's just willing to say "I know this is all bullshit, but I'm doing it anyway." And it's so far outside what any reasonable person would consider the bounds of ethical treatment:
-No medical need.
-Pain.
-Possibility of serious complications.
-Sordid, creepy Victorian anti-sex values.
Eh, whatever, mutilate your kids however you like, there's not much I can do about it.
I vehemently disagree with Smearcase.
35: You could break into the maternity ward, cut all the locks off the cages, and set the penises free to run in the wild.
Anyway, "The 4-Skins" is a great band name, but not as good as "Rudimentary Peni"
Someday I'll open an Italian deli called "Rudimentary Penne"
Near my parents' house, there's a Dong's Karate, whose name gives rise to disturbing mental images.
Fun with emulsions! A San Francisco apartment at 70 degrees per the thermostat will not result in room temp butter willing to slide into an Italian meringue without an assist from a pan of simmering water and a hand mixer.
My mother remarked lately that she had just had trouble when making a cake, the batter was uncooperative and she wasn't really happy with the result - afterwards it occurred to her that she had used cheap butter and she resolved never to buy it again. (The "good" butter would be Kerrygold and it definitely melts more easily, etc.)
42: The warrior must take advantage of any weapon to hand. So to speak.
The coldest emulsion I ever mixed was in summer in San Francisco.
Eh, the thing with the pro-circumcision side is that all the arguments sound like anti-vaxxer screeds the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The version of Natilo's claim I think is right: there are benefits to infant circumcision, but absent a culture where infant circumcision is routine, none of the benefits would be considered significant enough to start the practice.
Is it just me or is raspberry curd pointless? Definitely not going in the eventual cake. Also not convinced by this butter cake recipe, suspect I'll end up using my standard but hey gotta experiment a bit.
Using local clover butter, excellent stuff just have to take account of local climate and leaky old building. Came together gorgeously.
Yeah, but lots of adults listen to the vaccination arguments and then decide of their own free will to get vaccinated for things. Circumcision not so much - that's something that people only decide to do to other people who are too young to object. Funny that, if the arguments are so convincing and intellectually robust.
Not really. When my son was too young to object, he ate much, much healthier food than I would ever willingly eat.
The AAP also says:
Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns, the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it...
Emphasis added, of course.
Crumb coat on, in the refrigerator for a brief firm up.
There is a Rudimentary Peni song on Sirius channel 41 *right now.*
My son will not willingly eat buttercream, and at the moment that is a real drag. This despite his vast and unceasing willingness to consume tartines à la dairy queen, and trust me I make those with epic quantities of butter.
53: "Hey, we noticed insurers were thinking about dropping coverage for routine circumcision!"
The last part of the statement continues by saying that third party payment is well justified. I just didn't continue the paste job.
Circumcision seems so obviously culturally driven to me that I have a hard time climbing into the world view of someone advocating for it as a routine procedure on otherwise healthy boys. When it is traditionally done on children (i.e., not infants) the pain typically seems to be incorporated into a larger ritual framework. Still potentially a major drag for the kid! But in this instance the pain and potential trauma seem only to be functioning within the patents' special snowflake fucked up ness. At that point I'm totally off board.
This is probably an artifact of the reporting, but it seems odd to me that it would be resolved on pure contract interpretation grounds, I'd think in this context there'd be an additional best interests of child layer. Maybe the one doctor's opinion was enough to resolve that in this judge's mind but seems tenuous to me with a conflicting expert opinion submitted as well.
35 is more or less why I have an opinion about this at all. As is universally known, I am never having kids, and I'm not really contemplating mohel training, so why have an opinion on circumcision? Because when some idiot decides his argument depends on telling me I'm "mutilated," I suddenly find myself just bursting with opinions.
I think circumcision is NBD enough that if it's an integral part of your cultural/religious practices it's fine, but otherwise it is non-consensual body modification there's no reason to do it. Lowering risk of AIDS/STDs seems to only hold in places with very high infection rates and an unwillingness to use condoms, so it seems like a silly reason to do it. Condoms are far better at preventing STDs than circumcision.* There's also a small risk of a botched circumcision, so if infinitesimal medical risks are important to a person, I'm not sure they should tip one in favor of circumcision. Growing up around mostly uncircumcised guys, infections aren't really all that common if parents teach their sons how to clean properly, which maybe they aren't. In this specific case, I agree with 21, but not 34 or 37.
*Really, castration is probably the best way to completely eliminate risk of unwanted sexual side effects.
The intensity of circumcision arguments is a fascinating thing to me; I know two couples, friends, who stopped speaking over an argument on the subject. Both have daughters only.
I'm generally against the practice on its merits, and LBish on my evaluation of the stakes, but find the tendency of intactivists to assert stupid and untrue arguments so annoying that it almost sways me to the other side. The tendency of the anti- side to characterise my own personal pecker and others like it as "mutilated" has a similar counter-persuasive effect (ahem, 35).
FWIW, aside from all the other crazy circumstances of this particular case, I think some phimosis-related urinary obstruction has been claimed. So.
I'd just like to point out that 62 is peened by 60.
Not being worried that you might accidentally cause a baby while drunked up is completely foreign to me.
63: Peenage regretfully acknowledged.
I do not often regret being peened. But circumcision, as we so often see, creates opportunities for regret.
I think it's NBD for an infant
I still think it's NBD if you want to circumcise your kids
I think circumcision is NBD
NB DEEZ NUTS!
60, 62: Eh, whatever. Take out the cultural background and you're talking about something that's just as much a mutilation as clipping someone's earlobe off, it's just less noticeable in public.
I'm sure folx who've undergone Artificial Cranial Deformation as infants didn't (and don't) consider themselves mutilated, but that doesn't mean they're not.
I'm sure folx who've undergone Artificial Cranial Deformation as infants didn't (and don't) consider themselves mutilated, but that doesn't mean they're not.
Authoritatively spoken, Zippy.
FWIW, aside from all the other crazy circumstances of this particular case, I think some phimosis-related urinary obstruction has been claimed. So.
Even if it's not urinary obstruction, I for one have some degree of intermediate phimosis which I didn't notice until I started wondering if it would impair sexual intercourse. Which it does... sex would be impossibly painful without a condom. I don't know how common that is, but I should probably get a circumcision one of these years at age 30-something.
I have two friends who have had to circumcise their older children -- seven and eleven -- because of...I don't know what reason. Maybe obstructions? Maybe something else? In one case, it had to do with complications related to having an erection*, I know. I also have a friend who recently had to be circumcised as a 56-year-old. That seemed pretty awful, but he said it wasn't that big a deal.
None of the above should be taken as an endorsement of circumcision, about which I have decidedly mixed feelings (as I'm pretty sure I've said before).
* Always comlicated, amiright?
I'm trying to think of the various ways that I'm mutilated: pierced ear, lots of dental work, some seriously weird shit with my spine, a piece of my cock cut off and discarded (one hopes), and probably a lot of other stuff I'm forgetting. I bet Donna Haraway is nodding sagely in her Santa Cruz manse right now.
At least nobody artificially reshaped your head to hide the squish marks.
The squish marks of birth/forceps/clumsy OBs.
Hey! Someone has put Circumcision Story, in which I am the protagonist, on line. My father would insist that I post a link.
http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=15347
Published in a very small literary journal in 1972, but the events occurred in Huntsville, Texas in 1963. He swore it was nonfiction.
That's really good. You must be older than I thought.
Being a father means you have to make tough choices.
I should have gone with "Being a parent: The toughest job you'll ever love."
See? We just need more good guys with BB guns!
I'm surprised this thread has gone this long without the "he should look like his father" argument. Which is a dodge that I've heard employed by two circumcision-ambivalent Jews -- one for doing it and one for not doing it.
We would have cut a boy K-sky on the argument that the medical reasons against do not rise to the level of breaking Mrs. K-sky's father's heart. But we were glad not to have to decide.
also "intactivist" is a hilariously awesome word and whoever thought of it, I salute you.
Pretty much the best part of Gaiman's Sandman world is Dream's library of unwritten books.
"he should look like his father"
Should he? I'm struggling to come up with situations in which this would arise, let alone be advantageous.
the situation is not having to have a conversation that starts with "why doesn't my penis look like yours"
With how often this concern arises you'd think we determined paternity by comparing peen.
76 is pretty awesome. Novelistic in the telling, if basically nonfiction.
I have decided to switch my main argument to "non-ZOMG-mutilated! peens look like funny woodland creatures."
Small piece of trivia. I found out that the Ontario Health Plan will no longer pay for circumcision, so it doesn't happen in a hospital. You can do it, but it's' an out-of-pocket expense a few weeks after the birth.
I have great difficulty attaining orgasm, to the point where the modest decrease in sensation due to condoms is enough that I simply won't orgasm at all. I'm also cut. I have a hard time believing that there is no connection between severing thousands of nerve endings and this unfortunate fact. Anecdata!
I now have, because olds don't know how to use a BCC, personal email addresses for several prominent judges! I don't know what I'd use them for but it was like "huh, wow."
Sign them all up for intactivist mailing lists.
are American doctors weirdly flippant about recommending circumcision for non-infants?
My father once told me that, when he was old enough to remember it, his foreskin partially grew back, and the family doctor just ripped the foreskin off.
I don't know to what extent this story is true (second-hand story about hazy childhood memories, etc.,) but the kernel of truth that it surely must contain is enough to make me shudder.
I don't know what I'd use them for
Well, I guess the first question is how many of the males are circumcised.
Was that pwned? I'm going to say that was pwned.
92: You're probably kind of an outlier.
because olds don't know how
Seems as good a place as any to ask: are "youngs" who are computer-incompetent evenly distributed through the workforce, or are they concentrated in certain professions?
Among lawyers, the number of young people who are unable to figure out anything by themselves is much larger than folklore would have suggested.
What they never warn you about: circumcised fathers don't know how to teach their intact sons how to clean that thing. Kai was having some discomfort, and we realized that it wasn't keeping/getting clean enough, and so we had to teach him to clean it, but what the hell do I know about that?
I mean, I did, and it seems to have worked, but I have my doubts.
Seemed pretty straightforward, sort of in the same category as an occasional reminder that washing properly includes the soap and rinsing extending behind the ears, between the toes and under the foreskin, from the age they start taking unaccompanied baths for a few years.
But you're supposed to pull it back, but not too far, and then the rinsing?
I'm not saying it's intractable, but it's sort of like trying to teach someone how to cook when you don't know how to do it yourself. Virtually every adult knows what's involved in frying an egg, but unless you've done it yourself, who knows whether you're communicating the key information?
"No. Put that butter back in the fridge. It was an analogy."
105 is also the wrong way to do it.
Surely there are youtube videos?
76 is terrific. 79 is also great, if just for this line in the photo caption:
Police charged a 312-year-old McKeesport man with the shooting.Shit just got Biblical, man.
107: presumably they meant a 3 1/2 year old man. Toddlers shoot people all the time.
In my experience, one does not have to teach a small boy to fiddle with his foreskin. And being naked in the bath just encourages that activity, so cleaning is easily accomplished.
What I always find odd about these conversations is that Americans seem to have so many stories about uncirced boys and men having terrible problems later in life and having to be cut anyway. Whereas pretty much every man I know is intact, and we don't have these stories to tell. If it were so essential, wouldn't there be loads more British boys and men having to have it done?
the situation is not having to have a conversation that starts with "why doesn't my penis look like yours"
But that seems a little crazy, tbh - we don't have a problem with "why have you got breasts?" "why don't I have hair there?" "why haven't I got a penis?" "why haven't I got pierced X?" "why isn't my hair/aren't my eyes the same colour as yours?" etc etc etc. I mean, I don't have a cock, but I don't understand why they're a special case.
"why haven't I got a penis?"
Discount Mohel.
wouldn't there be loads more British boys and men having to have it done
Well, Britain is more homogenous than the United States, for one thing, not to mention being more recently steeped in currents of virulent antisemitism. So maybe people don't talk about it openly? Or maybe they don't talk about it with you?
Asilon has uncovered my campaign of lies!
And VW mine.
I'm kind of wondering if there's a real problem with US doctors being (a) baffled and confused by minor foreskin-related problems and (b) prone to advising "Just cut it off" as the solution to every minor irritation.
If there's a culture of advocating late circumcision for minor problems that would resolve without difficulty if left alone or treated non-surgically, that'd explain all the Americans who 'had' to be circumcised late while it appears to be very uncommon where infant circumcision isn't a norm.
This doesn't explain Pres. Arthur, who seems to have a real, non-iatrogenic foreskin problem, but it might exlain some of the difference.
Maybe American underwear is different. British people talk about "y fronts" and mine never looked anything like a 'y'.
Well, Britain is more homogenous than the United States, for one thing
I'm not sure how true that actually is.
Anyway, Asilon's right. I only know of two people who had to have circumcisions in later life for medical reasons -- one a boy at school, when I was about 8, and one a friend of a friend, who was in his 20s -- and I think now there are a lot of conditions where they used to circumcise for medical reasons where now they don't. Most people seem to get on just fine.
As it happens, xelA had to have it done, when he was 1. Although it had been scheduled since birth, as he had a minor [and now fully corrected] birth defect, and the correction meant partial circumcision.
If there's a culture of advocating late circumcision for minor problems that would resolve without difficulty if left alone or treated non-surgically
I think phimosis is not treated surgically as much in other countries, and some degree of phimosis is natural in pre-pubescence.
See the NHS recommendations:
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/phimosis/Pages/Introduction.aspx
I think in the US lots of that would be treated surgically.
115
Yeah, with really severe phimosis you have to cut it off, but lots of mild cases can be treated with gradual stretching.
110
I've noticed this too. I imagine it's in large part to not having a body of knowledge around of foreskin care that is part of general culture. There is an element of "use it or lose it" to keeping it supple enough to retract, plus cleaning issues. Anecdatally, the only people with foreskin issues that I know about are N. Americans, one of whom got circumcised in his 20s. It was hard to know how much of that was strictly medically necessary, and how much was to fit in.
With foreskins, I know circumcised people in cultures where it's uncommon to actually feel a lot of resentment and trauma about being circumcised, and IME sexual dysfunction issues are much greater. So many issues surrounding sex are psychosomatic, and so much of that depends on feeling "normal," which is so contextual and culturally determined.
This is why discussions around sex go from zero to boiling point so quickly. When the personal is political, it's almost impossible to talk about these issues dispassionately. Some circumcised people mutilated, while most don't. Most rape victims feel traumatized, but many don't, etc. With a discourse framed around expertise as solely derived from personal experience, we're all experts and we're all "silenced" by people with different experiences.
112 is funny. Yes, we don't talk about being circumcised for medical reasons because we're afraid someone might think it made us Jewish. Spot on!
And anti-semitism, outside a few ageing posh arseholes, and a small number of people of Muslim immigrant backgrounds, is vanishingly rare in the UK. We've discussed that before.
Being Muslim is the world's single greatest reason for being circumcised, I think.
My view is that both the pro and the anti circumcision sides vastly overrate the importance of this issue. A much more important issue, at least for me, is that absent tremendously compelling circumstances parenting plans between divorced parents should be binding and enforceable. If Mom didn't want circumcision, she shouldn't have given up the right to be the one who decides whether or not her kid gets circumcised. Either way, circumcision isn't a big enough deal to otherwise justify intervention from the court system to override a parenting plan that the Mom bargained for. End of story, case was decided absolutely correctly.
And this is just outrageous behavior by the Mom.
When Hironimus refused to allow the procedure to go forward, Nebus took her to court to enforce the contract she had signed. A state court sided with Nebus, noting that their parenting plan "clearly and unambiguously provides" that Chase would be circumcised. An appeals court unanimously affirmed the ruling, and a judge ordered Hironimus to turn Chase over to Nebus so he could schedule the procedure. Hironimus instead disappeared with her son. The judge then issued a warrant for her arrest for interfering with child custody. For weeks Hironimus escaped arrest by hiding with Chase in a domestic violence shelter. (Hironimus has not claimed that she was abused.) While hiding out, Hironimus filed a federal lawsuit against Nebus, asserting that, by having Chase circumcised, Nebus would violate his son's constitutional rights. Eventually, the police discovered Hironimus' whereabouts, took her into custody, and turned Chase over to Nebus.
Who of us hasn't stolen a small child?
You're not sure if Britain is less diverse than the US? I have no idea if this is accurate, but it was the first google result and it confirms my biases, so it's okay by me. As for whether Britain has a more recent history of antisemitism, I'm not sure how I'd prove that -- and I know that I don't care enough to try. Really and truly, my point was just that it's equally likely that people aren't talking about their cocks in Britain as it is that Americans are making up stories about theirs (which, unless I'm mistaken, is what asilon was suggesting).
That said, I have no peen in this fight. I've said a gazillion times that I'm ambivalent about the foreskin wars, that, in fact, I find them immensely boring. I'm sorry I insulted the queen.
Trying to be as clear I can be before I go (not in a huff), I meant that if there's some stigma around circumcision in Britain, as there appears to be, perhaps people aren't excited about sharing stories of their mutilated cocks there.
There's no stigma attached to bring circumcised, it's just less common as it's not the default option. The anti-semitism explanation really doesn't hold water and verges on a bit odd, tbh.
My son had it done, I didn't. It was the right thing for him. I have no strong feelings, other than 'countries where it's not the default get by just fine, peen-illy speaking, so clearly the medical necessity may be over-stated.'
Again, it's not an antisemitism explanation; it's a stigma explanation. And if you say there's no stigma attached to being cut in Britain -- or that antisemitism wasn't common more recently there than here -- so be it. You are the first British person to say such things to me, but I think I've only had parts of this conversation with two or three others, so my sample is neither random nor robust. Like I said above, I have zero fucks to give about any of this. It's just not my fight.
My point, just trying this one more time, was that there might be better explanations than, "Americans are making things up about problems with their cocks." But hey, this is a weird country, so maybe we should just embrace the unlikely story.
here might be better explanations
Occam's razor says that corn [maize] causes penis problems. Occam's other razor says that single-malt scotch and lamb prevent penis problems.
134: Occam's other other razor says that among competing penises, the one with the least foreskin should be most preferred. God save the peen.
||
I haven't posted this at the other place b/c I only have partial info at the moment: the MRI results have come back, but the final pathology report hasn't been released. The MRI doc talked to the pathologist, however, and so the MRI results (which I asked for but maybe should have waited on), say that I have a malignant tumor, two axiliary lymph nodes "suspicious for metastatic disease," a previously unknown but suspicious mass, and a previously unknown nodule that could be a lesion in the right breast. The left breast has a large mass that could be a fibroadenoma, but is "dominant" (whatever that means), and needs to be biopsied along with the other new spots.
I expected cancer. I did not expect it to be this serious, especially not at 33.
I still don't really have any sense of *how* serious it is, or the stage, or hormone status, or all that other crap. I'm showing up to the surgeon's office in person tomorrow morning after my genetic counseling to see if he can tell me anything else right now.
I don't know how long genetic testing will take if they use some of my biopsied tissue, or if I'll get a cheek swab tomorrow that will then take a month, but given my family history of breast and ovarian cancer, I suspect a BRCA mutation.
And these are quite nice breasts, too. I'm going to miss them.
I'm so sorry J. Many sympathies your way.
Oh, J, I'm so sorry. They're magnificent breasts but do are all your other parts and I'm sure the doctors can eventually cyborg up something awesome. Not what anyone wanted to hear, I know, and I hope there's clarity and an action plan soon. And the blog would probably be into breast shots if you want them preserved for posterity, you know.
Jesus, J. All the best, and thanks for keeping us in the loop. I was just wondering how you were doing.
I have some beautiful professional portraits, believe it or not, and they will go in the pool once I get to my laptop. Someone should enjoy them.
Way to make some of us feel like amateurs, but FINE!!
Oh gosh, J. Best of luck with what comes next.
J, take care. I'm so sorry. I hope it's +/+/+. Good luck.
Very sorry to hear that, J...we'll be thinking about you.
Well that's pretty goddamn lousy. Good luck.
Oh no, J. That's a very scary situation to be in.
Ooof! J, thank you for the update. I was thinking about you. I will keep wishing you all good things.
Jesus fuck, that sucks. I've been thinking about you and will be thinking about you. Reach out if I can be useful.
Agh, fuck. That is scary and you are great and I'm sorry you're going through this. Thank you for the update.
Oh, shit. I'm sorry. Will be thinking of you.
I have a similar issue to Chester A. Arthur but I think it can be fixed without a full circumcision. I think if my health education hadn't assumed all men were circumcised or had absolutely no problems with their foreskin, I'd have caught the issue earlier. It's embarrassing, but I didn't learn that I wasn't able to retract fully until I was an adult because I didn't know how far back my skin was supposed to go. FWIW, I learned a lot about foreskin complications from British websites, which, also FWIW, seemed to approach circumcision as a last resort treatment.
Oh I'm so sorry. Wishing you the best of luck.
Oh, shit, President J. Best wishes for a decent outcome.
So, sorry, J. That is scary. Thinking of you.
Ugh, shit. Bodies are scary. I'll be thinking about you and hoping the next bit of news is better.
J., we are thinking of you over here. I am so sorry you got that news. Good thoughts.
Ugh, sending sympathetic vibes in your direction, J. That sounds really overwhelming.
J., so sorry, and sending positive thoughts.
Oh J, so bloody sorry, that's really not what any of us had been hoping for. Sending you all the best for the next bit xxx
And no, VW, I was not fucking suggesting that American men made stuff up, I was thinking along the lines of 115.1, so you and Chester can fuck off.
Oh, J. I've been wondering. Sympathy and best wishes.
Thanks, all. I process these things by doing research and complaining loudly and widely--it really helps to have a community that lets me just bitch. i should probably restart my personal pseudonymous blog.
J- very, very sorry. In my thoughts. Take care of yourself.
Just read 137 this morning. Thinking of you, J.
J, hoping for not-too-awful when the final picture emerges. Horrible to be in that not knowing limbo.
I am so sorry, J. If it looks as though there's chemo in your future, email me your hat size and I will knit you a Grovery headwarmer. (And maybe a non-foolish headwarmer as well -- hats are fast.)
What is Grovery and why can't I even google it?
re: 180
I'm guessing something like:
http://www.berkeleyhat.com/grover-hat-wool-knit.html
or
http://store.sesamestreet.org/Dept.aspx?cp=21415_21456_21461_21491
That was my first thought, but I don't see how "non-foolish" could be a contrast to that.
Ugh, J, I had been hoping for better news than that. All good mojo your way.
172: sorry for having misunderstood you.
So sorry, J. May some good news start coming your way.
Good luck, J. I hope you punch fucking cancer in the fucking face.
I crocheted my own Grover helmet last year--that might come in handy! (FYI, not be presumptuous but should note that I am allergic to all animal fibers with the possible exception of alpaca.) I'm hoping I won't need the kind of chemo that causes hair to fall out, but if I do--I'm dying it all shocking blue first!
Meanwhile, sitting in the waiting room of the genetic counselor. Someone (a volunteer/professional musician?) is playing the piano in far too loud and jaunty a manner. If I were in a worse frame of mind, I'd smack him.
I process these things by doing research and complaining loudly and widely
Hear hear! Loud, wide complaining is the way to go, and I pledge to do my part to provide a receptive and sympathetic audience for it.
Loud, jaunty piano, dear god.
I am ready to inflict grievous bodily harm to this motherfucking piano player. We are not in a silent film! No one is tap dancing! PEOPLE ARE RECEIVING FATAL DIAGNOSES, ASSHOLE!
I bet the piano player is there to be smacked. He's like a therapy animal.
"Poor prognosis, Arnie. Minor key."
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/561331541028368453/
At least now we know why the clinic that treats limping doesn't get visited by the people who bring in the puppies anymore.
J, just catching up. Argh, I'm so, so sorry.
Oh, duh -- that's why Grover hat came to mind, because I saw you in one. How's silk allergenically? It's 'animal' in some sense but not really, and I'd love to try working with it but don't want to commit to a sweater.
Just caught up too, J. Thinking of you.
That piano player sounds very irritating. It took the player only ten minutes for J to go from ugh to smash. I hope that you aren't stuck still in the waiting room.
I'm sorry, J, really very sorry. You haven't strayed far from my thoughts since your first announcement.
(FYI, not be presumptuous . . .)
In the traditions of the blog, we should probably be taking up a collection to buy you dinner at the French Laundry or something equivalent . . .
So sorry about the news, and thank you for sharing.
You are in my thoughts, J. Maybe you can get some rocking tattoos like Heebie plans to get. I hope the crap you are going through goes as smoothly as possible.
Oh man. I'm sorry to hear it. A close friend just did this in the last couple year. It was pretty bad, but now that it is over, she is herself. Once you've gone through it, there is a return to normal.
Very sorry, and thinking of you. That's a horrible thing to go through at any age, but to be blindsided so young. .. You're owed a piano-player strangling.
Right. Canonically you Don't Shoot the Piano Player, you strangle the piano player. More satisfying that way.
Home now. The piano player is a volunteer who comes in Monday and Wednesday mornings. The receptionist said that he is hard of hearing. I....am going to avoid scheduling appointments when he is there.
Silk is fine, as are cotton and most synthetics. I'm cursed with crazily Princess-and-the-Pea-level sensitive skin that reacts badly to metals (other than >10k gold, platinum, and titanium), fur spun from wooly animals (e.g. cashmere makes me want to rip my skin off), the saliva of some but not all calico cats (insta-hives), etc.
I have to say--I am so relieved that I cut off contact with my mom already. I don't think I could handle having her in my life with all of this going on.
That is good -- if you couldn't take having her involved now, it would have been really hard to manage the stress of cutting her off while you were also dealing with this.
I am glad you know yourself that well, and have taken pre-emptive measures. Also I hope you're vegging out and have something mindless to distract yourself with.
J, Robot, I hope you won't need it, but in case you test positive for a BRCA mutation, FORCE is a really good organization dedicated to supporting people who are BRCA+, both those who have cancer and those who don't. They have a helpline and a message board, and lots of informative webpages. www.facingourrisk.org
J, I have only just seen this -- saw it on the other place first. You will be much in my thoughts.
208: Huh, I'd never seen that.
210: Heebie and J, Robot: let me know if you need any more information and I can post more. For example, Heebie, there is a local FORC/E support group in Au/stin that meets in July: http://www.facingourrisk.org/get-support/local-groups/texas-austin.php
Their webinars (archived) and videos are also really useful if you are trying to make decisions about specific issues regarding prevention or treatment. http://www.facingourrisk.org/understanding-brca-and-hboc/publications/brca-and-hboc-videos.php
Finally, they also sponsor a conference in Philadelphia every year, which I have attended once and found really useful. Some of the conference videos are archived online at the above link.
http://www.facingourrisk.org/get-involved/events/annual-conference/index.php
FOR/CE was started by a BRCA2+ veterinarian who got breast cancer in her early 30's. She stopped practicing as a vet to become a full-time advocate for the BRCA+ community and has turned FORC/E into a real powerhouse over the last 15 years or so. For example, FO/RCE was very active in the Myriad gene patenting case before the Supreme Court.
(A little about me; I'm BRCA2 positive, in my early 40's, and getting ready to do the prophylactic surgeries in the next year. So I feel for both of you and would like to be of use if I can.)
Interesting, thanks! My situation is a little odd because it's so ridiculously undramatic. I found out I was BRCA+ in 2001, and no one in my family was sick - my grandmother died back in 1960 or so, and my dad had himself tested on a hunch. So I've have had the past 15 years to think about all this, without any grief of loved ones or witnessing any actual breast cancer treatment in my family.
Nevertheless, the surgeries are finally coming due, for better or for worse.