Poll: Circumcision - What is your opinion?

[ninjapenguin981]

Male circumcision for religious or medical reasons? No problem with that. But I don't get why you would circumcise your baby for any reason other than that. It got put there by evolution (or God if you believe in that) for a reason after all. [small]Then again we also have appendices for some reason...[/small]

Heck, we women bleed once a month. I think you guys can manage to clean your willies now and again, yeah? (See? Equality! ;P)

The appendix once served a purpose in our history as a species. The foreskin must have once/still does serve it's own purpose. You can't just go hacking bits off of yourself unless there is a medical reason. The cleanliness business, come on it takes less than a minute, how lazy can you get?

Unless there's a serious medical condition I wouldn't let you cut off my little toe, let alone my penis so get that scalpel away from me!

 

[Embright]

Pros:
1. Allows people to not wash their penis for weeks without smegma buildup. This is good if you wander in a desert and never take baths.
2. Traditionally accepted

Cons:
1. Possibility of erectile dysfunction
2. Loss of sensitivity on glans
3. Loss of nerves by direct removal of foreskin
4. Uncut penises are naturally "ribbed" due to the foreskin, a circumcised penis doesn't provide a woman with this natural stimulation
5. Latest research indicates that the medical benefits of circumcision are negligible


The truth is that most males in the world are not circumcised. The largest population that is circumcised are Muslims followed distantly by Christians. The best indicator of circumcision is religious tradition and not scientific literacy.

 

[Cavouku]

Here in Nova Scotia, I believe I read that 8% of males were circumcised. I am in the 92% that isn't.

I answered the poll "no strong opinions", but after lurking a bit, I've gotta go with the majority in that it's acceptable if there is an issue that needs to be treated with circumcision. The religious reasons are probably actually health reasons. Was it stated in Leviticus? That book of the Bible sounded like a bunch of rules, but they were really just strictly enforced health guidelines. Back then, the risk of diseases from things was much greater, if I'm not mistaken. While today those risks are still present, they're diminished, and not threatening to you or your community unless you let it be. (This is also, I believe, the reason for the whole "not lie with another man" bit, because we all know about the thing with the Red Cross today, but that's another thread)

Personally dealing with a bit of a bound foreskin myself, but it's not to the point where it's that bad. Something that feels like it could be stretched out, I'd rather not have to remove it. I want to have kids, and if the subject of the males getting circumcised comes up, I'd probably opt to wait and see what happens.

 

[Custard_Angel]

Male circumcision has no purpose if you obey standards of hygiene. All that stuff about infection and whatnot is easy to bypass by scrubbing in the shower. Not difficult at all.

Female circumcision has only ever existed as a method of enforcing female faithfulness by removing much of the pleasure of sex and hence, removing the "want" to have an affair. Many countries have even declared it an act of barbarism.

The current system of most countries allows male circumcision and outlaws female circumcision. This is the way things should be.

As long as it remains an entirely elective procedure, it should be allowable.

As for children, I prefer the idea of it being entirely elective, but what the fuck ever. I wasn't circumcised, I have never wanted to be circumcised and I would never circumcise my child. That's fine for me, but may not be fine for someone else. It's not my place to tell anybody else that they're doing things wrong. Even about female circumcision, which I find utterly distasteful, if someone thinks it is the greatest thing ever, as far as I'm concerned, they should be free to pursue their own values in their own way.

 

[qeinar]

Well, time for another dilemma, folks! How do you feel about circumcision? Is it good? Bad? Should it be legal? No? Yes?

Personally, i think i´ll weigh the pros and cons against eachother.

PROS:

Easier to clean.
Lasts longer (during sex)
Reduces risks of some diseases.

CONS:

Loss of about 40-50% pleasure during sex.
More prone to certain diseases.

Now i don´t know about you, but i think we can call this a 50/50 descision, right? It all comes down to what matters the most for you.

But the thing is, that PARENTS can make the descision in many countries, which i think is abhorrent and simply put, wrong, since the practice is irreversible. And if you say "Oh but it can be restored" no, it can´t, not entirely. It can be HEALED, but not restored.

Circumcision is only valid for ONE reason before one hits maturity, and that is a medical condition where the foreskin is to tight around the penis and must be loosened up.

So, my opinion is: If you´re an adult and want to, then fine, good for you. If you´re an adult and you´re about to circumcise a kid, screw you.

What about you?

BONUS DISCUSSION: I find it quite amusing how many people there is that say: "Male circumcision is fine, but Female circumcision is EVUUUUUUUUUUUULLLLLLLL!" I want to ask them a question. Do you believe in equality towards both genders? If yes, shouldn´t male/Female circumcision be just as bad/good as the other?

(For the record, i am aware that female circumcision has MUCH more severe consequences, and i believe it is just as wrong as male circumcision, but this just bugs me. Why scream out for equality when you don´t want it?)

"lasts longer" have actually never been proven (look up orgasm control . that is more an individual thing, and you can hold a penis erect for a pretty good time wheter you have foreskin or not. (above 20 minuttes, and 20 minuttes of sex just gets kinda boring..)

btw for info on orgasms go read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgasm#Achieving_orgasm

Also you said you have to get a circusition if your foreskin is to tight, and well you don't have to but some people can have a painfull experience during sex. (there is also some medical oil of sorts that maks your foreskin a bit more elastic over time which can also help, which is the recomended aproach by most doctors.)

Also link to scientific proof about the diseases? why would men have foreskin in the first place if having it made you more prone to diseases? would not evolution have removed it by now?

Finaly: your view on female circusition? if any grown woman want one shure go ahead, but a female circusition do not have any pros for the woman only cons, one of which is reduced sexual pleasure.

 

[Newby_Newb]

It is child abuse. Any parents that have had their child circumcised without any valid medical reason should have their children taken away from them.


All of the reasons that I keep seeing that are in support of circumcision are all terrible reasons.

All of the people who want to circumcise their children because they themselves are circumcised, do not deserve to have children.

Circumcision is a lie and needs to be stopped.(unless it is medically nesessary, or the person is old enough to make up their own mind)

 

[incal11]

I guess it sucks then that until the they reach such an age the child's business IS their parents which is 18-21 depending on where you live. Therefore, whether I circumcise my children or not will be my business.

True, but I argue it will also be your mistake. Circumcision is pointless and damageable, the point about sexual pleasure is all but ridiculous, and it is not the only one :
http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/

As for children, I prefer the idea of it being entirely elective, but what the fuck ever. I wasn't circumcised, I have never wanted to be circumcised and I would never circumcise my child. That's fine for me, but may not be fine for someone else. It's not my place to tell anybody else that they're doing things wrong. Even about female circumcision, which I find utterly distasteful, if someone thinks it is the greatest thing ever, as far as I'm concerned, they should be free to pursue their own values in their own way.

I command your open mindedness, but apathy toward something that is objectively proven to be harmful isn't the best attitude. I say tell them, prove them they are wrong. Even if most won't listen there's always a few who will over time.

 

[qeinar]

I guess it sucks then that until the they reach such an age the child's business IS their parents which is 18-21 depending on where you live. Therefore, whether I circumcise my children or not will be my business.

True, but I argue it will also be your mistake. Circumcision is pointless and damageable, the point about sexual pleasure is all but ridiculous, and it is not the only one :
http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/

I would be preeeeetty mad at my parents if they had circumsiced me. i hate how all these myths about circumsicion are taken as facts. ._.

America is just about the only country tho, in europe it's not really that common. unless it's for religious reasons.

 

[incal11]

In terms of waiting until you are an adult. I'm glad I got snipped when I was an infant, because the pain and agony of that would be something I don't want lodged in my memory. Where as an infant will not genuinely remember that.

How about not doing it at all if it is unnecessary then ?

 

[tehroc]

Should be 100% mandatory. Uncircumcised penis looks like a dog penis.

 

[Ewyx]

Oh hey, let's keep on doing something that was designed before soap was invented and for a dry sandy area and was kept over time because it reduced teen masturbation.

What a wonderful idea.

 

[Vitor Goncalves]

Two words: Penile cancer.

The risk is about double if you're uncircumcised. Uncircumcised men are also much more prone to urinary tract infections and multiple STD's.

I also have to disagree with the 'cons' list above. Loss of 50% of sexual pleasure? Where does that come from? I'm unaware of any reliable source that claims male circumcision makes sex less pleasurable. I'm also unaware of any studies showing an increased risk of ANY disease after circumcision. This is why the comparison between male and female circumcision makes no sense to me. There are real, serious, provable costs to female circumcision. There are none that I know of for men. Circumcision has real advantages (how important they are may be debatable, but they're there) and I don't see any costs.

Bottom line, a foreskin doesn't do you any good, a clitoris does.

Thats actually not related with being circumcised or not, but to the fact a big portion of uncircumcised man not keeping proper hygiene of the penis. Can easily be solved if you train your forskin to be more retractable. Many men cant pull it back, and all sort of dirtiness and bugs stay there to the point it gets carcinogenic.

 

[Shycte]

Should be 100% mandatory. Uncircumcised penis looks like a dog penis.

So, because you think that it looks better, it should me mandatory? That's outha be the most stupid thing I read since I read the last guy in this thread saying it.

This discussion is kinda pointless. While yes, perhaps parents shouldn't do that to their kids, it's a kind of trival thing. Also, if you ban it. People are still going to do it but with unclean tools and then the pure boys might actully get harmed for real. Kinda like abortion.

I won't be doing it to my kids if they don't need it though. Yet to see a valid reason.

 

[Vitor Goncalves]

Should be 100% mandatory. Uncircumcised penis looks like a dog penis.

I could prove you wrong but I would be banned if I posted pictures here.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Easier to clean is a bit of bollox really. Just pull the damn fore skin back and clean under it. That is hardly a herculean task for any man. Also neither is wierd looking get over yourself people. They are the same bloody thing just pull the damn skin back and they look the exact same.

Also here is a fun quote from Yahoo answers.

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
A circumcised penis is one that has had the foreskin cut off. So one with foreskin (how all boys are born) is uncircumcised, while one without it is circumcised. Here's an illustration:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/?

When erect they can appear very alike, since the foreskin pulls back.

Circumcision has become less common, though. Circumcision rates were as high as 90% back in the 1960s and 1970s (that's partly why today's adults are so... brainwashed, I supposed you could say, about thinking that circumcision is better) but they have fallen to as low as 14% in some states. Here are the statistics:
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/U?

The USA is the last developed nation doing it to a large number of newborns without religious or medical needs. (Europeans, Latin Americans, Japanese, and most Australians, Canadians, and Asians don't circumcise):
http://www.circumstitions.com/Maps.html

Why?

In a medical study, it was found that females are more likely to hit orgasm with an uncircumcised man:
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/?

The lubricated foreskin (on the inside... like your eyelids) slides up and down during sex and masturbation to stimulate the head (which is why you don't hear of uncircumcised guys needing lube to masturbate).
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/

Studies have found that circumcision reduces sensitivity (this article also mentions how it has lost popularity in the USA in recent times):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2855?

And despite being more sensitive, uncircumcised guys still last in the same six minute range (average) that circumcised guys do:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs?

Circumcision makes masturbation more difficult:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs?

Which makes sense, that's how circumcision was promoted in the USA:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/health/?

Increases erectile dysfunction rates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?

If too much skin is removed in circumcision, it can make the penis smaller since the penis needs some skin to expand during an erection:
http://drgreene.org/body.cfm?id=21&actio?
http://www.altermd.com/Penis%20and%20Scr?

Circumcision does not completely stop penile cancer. The American Cancer Society has already confirmed the myth that circumcision = no cancer.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/conten?

If circumcision did stop penile cancer, then penile cancer would not be more common in the USA (most circumcised adults) than in some European nations, where circumcision is not practiced other than for medical/religious reasons.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Cancer.htm?

And a new study found that circumcision does not reduce your chances to get HIV/AIDS. Unlike other studies, this one was done in a developed nation; the USA.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22096758/

Two words: Penile cancer.

The risk is about double if you're uncircumcised. Uncircumcised men are also much more prone to urinary tract infections and multiple STD's.

I also have to disagree with the 'cons' list above. Loss of 50% of sexual pleasure? Where does that come from? I'm unaware of any reliable source that claims male circumcision makes sex less pleasurable. I'm also unaware of any studies showing an increased risk of ANY disease after circumcision. This is why the comparison between male and female circumcision makes no sense to me. There are real, serious, provable costs to female circumcision. There are none that I know of for men. Circumcision has real advantages (how important they are may be debatable, but they're there) and I don't see any costs.

Bottom line, a foreskin doesn't do you any good, a clitoris does.

There are some links from a post on Yahoo answers. Personally I haven't looked at them but they seem to discredit a lot of the pros of circumcision.

 

[Labcoat Samurai]

My point was that with this being such a personal (and charged) issue, lots of responses will end up being emotional rather than factual.

You're right, of course. It's a tough issue... particularly so for circumcised men. I mean, the clear consensus now is that there's no medically compelling reason to perform the operation, but that can be kind of hard to accept if you had it performed on you. Presumably, you really want to think it happened for good reason.

oh sure, but to be honest, i don't care, i would be worried bout my kid possibly having to do it when he's older. hears my position, you will have no memory if it ever. it may hurt but you'll never be able to remember that far back, but if you have to wait til your six because of a UTI or just chose to do it when your 20? that would be almost insane amounts of pain. but growing up with it done doesn't really do anything to you, your not missing anything. so it's either then or never from a parents point of view. mutilation? maybe, but you'll never miss it if you never had it.

I confess a bit of ignorance here, but presumably they use anesthetic, right? Writing this in a hurry or I'd go look it up first... Men get vasectomies all the time. Would this worse?

 

[thom_cat_]

I'm fine with my penis uncircumcised thanks... just as I don't like parents pushing religion on children I'm against cutting off skin just for the heck of it without any consent, possible or not.

 

[Kroxile]

This thread belongs on 4chan.

Just another attempt (apparently successful) to start cut vs uncut on a more respectable website.

 

[ham and red bull]

Honestly, this thread is disturbing on soooo many levels.
I was circumcised at the age of 6 because of medical reasons I won't go into.
The way you guys are reacting to male circumcision is disgusting. There are no pros or cons, it's mostly done because of religious or in my case medical reasons, nothing weird about it at all.

Now if we're talking forced circumcision, that shit is sick, especially for women.

I'm reporting this thread, it has become downright offensive.

 

[qeinar]

My point was that with this being such a personal (and charged) issue, lots of responses will end up being emotional rather than factual.

You're right, of course. It's a tough issue... particularly so for circumcised men. I mean, the clear consensus now is that there's no medically compelling reason to perform the operation, but that can be kind of hard to accept if you had it performed on you. Presumably, you really want to think it happened for good reason.

oh sure, but to be honest, i don't care, i would be worried bout my kid possibly having to do it when he's older. hears my position, you will have no memory if it ever. it may hurt but you'll never be able to remember that far back, but if you have to wait til your six because of a UTI or just chose to do it when your 20? that would be almost insane amounts of pain. but growing up with it done doesn't really do anything to you, your not missing anything. so it's either then or never from a parents point of view. mutilation? maybe, but you'll never miss it if you never had it.

I confess a bit of ignorance here, but presumably they use anesthetic, right? Writing this in a hurry or I'd go look it up first... Men get vasectomies all the time. Would this worse?

actually some men that have taken a circusicion later in ,life have reported a loss in pleasure from orgasm. ^^ and the argument used that your not missing anything by having it cut, can be flipped since having it cut does not improve your penis in any way. Also yes they do use anesthetic so having your foreskin chopped of is not really painfull. it's a bit of an anoyance for a week or so though, but it is far from "insane amounts of pain" more of an inconvenience really. so "your not missing out on anything really" well your missing out on your foreskin. ^^ it's not like you can put it back on, so i'dd leave that choice to my kid.