Poll: What do you think about circumcision?

[cgaWolf]

what exactly are the medical reasons for cutting the skin?

Technically, slightly lower risk of infections, STDs and cancer from smegma.
All this can be done BETTER by washing your dick (aka. adequate personal hygiene) & practicing safer sex.

There are valid reasons, such as narrowing of the preputial orifice, but that's uncommon.

 

[Rutnier Nodarse]

any chance someone could tell me what is bad about being circumcised? maybe it's just an american thing to be annoyed about it...(not meaning to cause trouble just there doesn't seem to be any debate about it here in europe)

Not just in America, I'm from Cuba and it's kind of a must.


OT: I don't see what's so wrong with the parents choosing whether or not to choose for their child, after all. WHO'S ARSE DID YOU COME OUT OF ANYWAY??

 

[MysticToast]

I'm not entirely sure what my position is, actually. I do have a question though.

Is the circumcision requirement anywhere in the New Testament? Because if it's not, parents don't have any religious reason to do it.

It's in the Jewish Tanakh and in some versions of the Old Testament. I can't speak as to the Christian reasons for it.

I don't want my penis looking like a bagel dog so I say yes.

Seriously?

The Christians use the Old Testament too. The reason I asked was because of the old/new covenant and everything in the Bible.

 

[jawakiller]

It's not a big deal sooooo... Why would anyone have a problem with it?

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

It's perfectly fine, and has positive medical benefits to it. People complaining about male circumcision being abuse are just whining for the sake of being whiney. Why does it matter to you? If you don't want to circumcise your boys, that's fine. But telling lies such as saying it lowers sensitivity (something you can't really measure), is just going too far.

Em aside from making hygiene slightly easier so you don't have to pull back the skin it has no benefits and causes problems like harder penetration and higher proportions of erectile dysfunction.

In fact here we go I wasn't going to look these up but 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/imagepages/19093.htm

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/USA/staterates2004/

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/408/60750.html

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/0,2933,285532,00.html

And despite being more sensitive, uncircumcised guys still last in the same six minute range (average) that circumcised guys do:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.00070.x/abstract;jsessionid=544637F61F0B04BEB5E5038BB769B984.d03t04

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.00070.x/abstract;jsessionid=544637F61F0B04BEB5E5038BB769B984.d03t04

Which makes sense, that's how circumcision was promoted in the USA:
http://english.pravda.ru/health/27-03-2006/77873-circumcision-0/

Increases erectile dysfunction rates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14979200&dopt=Abstract%7C

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://www.drgreene.com/azguide/inconspicuous-penis
http://www.altermd.com/Penis%20and%20Scrotal%20Surgery/buried_penis.htm

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/content/CRI_2_4_2X_Can_penile_cancer_be_prevented_35.asp

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.html

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/

http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circumcision-causes-100-deaths-each-year-in-us/

 

[CopperBoom]

Well, I seem to have turned out fine (I hope). I can't say I remember, but there's no lasting harm at least.

But is that really enough reason for it?

Yes.
Hell with smegma.

 

[retyopy]

Heh, there are 69 comments. Well, there were.

I got circumcisized, and it hasn't really effect me, so...

 

[WolfThomas]

what exactly are the medical reasons for cutting the skin?

Usually if the patient has suffered from either a phimosis or a paraphimosis, an event where the foreskin gets stuck and there's restriction to the penis, they usually involve some sort of congenital tightness to the foreskin in the first place. They get a circumcision after the event has resolved to prevent it happening again. I first hand had to drive my housemate to hospital after he had a paraphimosis after drunken sex, it wasn't pretty. But they're so rare you really only do a circumcision reactively.

 

[JaredXE]

Actually its true because your cutting of lots of nerves. Say doctors remove nerves in your rm, its going to be less sensitive. You cant measure that, but there is difference becuase the nerves are absent.

Ask any circumcised male that is sexually active if sex is pleasurable to him....he's going to say yes. What exactly is "more pleasurable"? Increased sensitivity would also mean earlier ejaculation, which means sex is quicker. Few men would want this.

What I am trying to get at though is that the only conceivable way to measure a reduction in sensitivity and pleasure is to take an uncircumcised male who is sexually active, then snip his foreskin off and let him have sex. Until that happens, declaring that there is a decrease in pleasure is a fallacy that has never been backed up. I.E. pulled out of people's asses.

Whining for the sake of being whiney? Seriously? It matters to me because my body was mutilated and I had no say in the matter. It matters to me because one of the most personal parts of my body was irreversibly changed without any concern for my opinion on the matter.

Mutilated? Really? Are you suffering a handicap or are deformed in any way? Is your daily life a wreck and a constant trial? No, I doubt it is. Was it done against your will? yes, but then so was your parent's cutting your hair and clipping your nails and getting your immunized and taking you to the dentist, all of which can cause trauma to young children. You can't miss what you never had, and can never get back. So if all you do is complain and don't/can't do anything about it, then you are whining.

[quote/]Again, yes, it has medical benefits, but those benefits are not unique to circumcision: they can be attained in other manners than genital mutilation. You seem to be coming from the viewpoint of, "Yeah, let's mutilate some babies, give me a reason why not." While I am coming from the viewpoint of, "No, let's not mutilate some babies, give me very convincing reasons as to why it should be done."[/quote]
Lets see....I do believe that giving someone a additional protection against catching and transmitting diseases is a good reason. Yeah, condoms do the same thing, but you can't wear two condoms, but you can have a hardened penis that works in conjunction with a condom. Then there are the less tangible benefits. For one, IT'S NORMAL. Yeah yeah, you may argue about how it shouldn't be and an uncut penis is more natural, but please try and remember being in the school gym locker room at shower time. Uncut boys were considered weird. Same goes with most American women. I know many women who consider an uncut dick to be odd and would rather not let one in her. Appearance plays a large part, whether you want it to or not.

I have yet to hear any. And you disrespecting and disregarding people who disagree with you does nothing to validate your opinion, or make me respect it.

Again, if all you are is complaining about something you have no control over and aren't doing anything to fix it, you are a whiner. You have control over your own child, but don't you dare stick your nose into other people's business and tell them what to do with their children. That shows far more disrespect than anything I have written.

 

[annoyinglizardvoice]

I think it's rather silly and most of the so called benefits are completely made up and/or based on out-of-date bigotries.
I do also believe that if an individual has his heart set on having a bi of skin removed from his dick, then there's no more reason to stop him than there would be for any other body modification. This however means that it must be the choice of an informed adult, and should never be done to children.

 

[lRookiel]

Nope, I think it's horrible. Legal child abuse, and whether or not people have religious reasons to do it shouldn't even come into it.

If someone wants to have it done to themselves when they're old enough to decide, fine. If someone wants to forcibly and irreparably mutilate their child, that is not fine, and I don't care what their reasons are.

You sir, need a /thread

here you go!

OT: LOOK ABOVE, that says it for me.

 

[Seives-Sliver]

The parents should decide, because when one is circumcised, it is usually while the child is a baby, or toddler, and they wouldn't remember it. There are also medical reasons, mostly because it's a hygiene issue. Really, it's not like a circumcision will kill a child, and it really doesn't have any negative effects, since when the child grows up, they won't see any benefit to having a foreskin in the first place.

 

[ProZack]

It's perfectly fine, and has positive medical benefits to it. People complaining about male circumcision being abuse are just whining for the sake of being whiney. Why does it matter to you? If you don't want to circumcise your boys, that's fine. But telling lies such as saying it lowers sensitivity (something you can't really measure), is just going too far.

Snip (Get it?)

A lot of your links were broken there, buddy.

OT: In my opinion, I'm neutral for it. I am circumcised, and I'm not yelling at my parents for cutting my penis. It makes no difference to me. Will I do it to my child? I don't know, I guess I'll leave it for my future wife to decide.

 

[Denamic]

I voted the parent's choice, but what I really mean, is religious reasons. I really think you shouldn't circumcise, barring medical reasons, unless it's a religious reason. I just don't see a point to cutting off part of the dick for any non-religious reasons. Seems kinda weird.

"(10 points says poll gets eaten)" You, my friend, are out 10 points. I think I will use the points to buy a vineyard, out in the countryside.

What if the religion says you have to cut off the ears, would you be alright with that too?
What about the nostrils?
Or how about simple ritual scarring?

Keep knives away from infants if there's no medical reason to cut them.

 

[Pipotchi]

The parents should decide, because when one is circumcised, it is usually while the child is a baby, or toddler, and they wouldn't remember it. There are also medical reasons, mostly because it's a hygiene issue. Really, it's not like a circumcision will kill a child, and it really doesn't have any negative effects, since when the child grows up, they won't see any benefit to having a foreskin in the first place.

But the fact is that some men do regret having a circumscision done to them when they were children, indeed some men use various tools and procedure to 'regrow' their foreskins.

Sure its not the majority but how many people have to regret it for people to stop doing it, 1 in 10? 1 in 5?

Just seems like the percieved benefits are not worth the potential risks.

 

[Fiery Killer]

I am SO FUCKING GLAD that I am circumcised... seriously, women like it better, I like it better, less shit to clean, less risk of infection... it's overall pretty amazing.

Con
It hurts
Children have no choice in the matter
Can cause issues

I'm circumcised and would like to reply with this
1. Nobody can remember being circumcised, I couldn't ever tell you how much it hurts to be circumcised, and I didn't even know I was until my teenage years.
2. In the long run, I can't really imagine anybody really caring. Someone who's uncircumcised is most certainly not going to be interested in cutting their own genitals, and actually vice versa as someone who is circumcised I wouldn't want to suddenly have an uncircumcised penis. You're going to be comfortable growing up with whatever you have.
3. "Can cause issues"? That's the most vague con I've seen in a while, what issues are you talking about?

Honestly, I don't see the problem. Taking away the right to circumcise would anger religious people, so I say just let the parents do it if they want and it will die down. I'm willing to bet that 50 years from now (at least in the US, EU, and other developed nations) that circumcision will be extremely scarce.

So yeah, it really doesn't matter, so just let it happen.

 

[thom_cat_]

http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/guide/circumcision

The medical reasons are listed in this article.

But again, all of the advantages gained by circumcision can be gained by other means.

Oh but see, this is pretty much bullshit too.
"There is some evidence that circumcision has health benefits, including:"
I'm sorry, but there's also "some evidence" against the fact that circumcision has health benefits. I researched this a while back and the amount of conflicting evidence given was just staggering.

It's just not worth it, if there are any health benefits then they're not even applicable to children anyway so let them decide once they're older.
It's not like we cut out appendixes at birth, or people are allowed to cut off any other body part citing "religious reasons". What does God want the tip of someone's dick for?
I'm not circumcised and I never will be.

Spoiler

It's perfectly fine, and has positive medical benefits to it. People complaining about male circumcision being abuse are just whining for the sake of being whiney. Why does it matter to you? If you don't want to circumcise your boys, that's fine. But telling lies such as saying it lowers sensitivity (something you can't really measure), is just going too far.

Em aside from making hygiene slightly easier so you don't have to pull back the skin it has no benefits and causes problems like harder penetration and higher proportions of erectile dysfunction.

In fact here we go I wasn't going to look these up but 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/imagepages/19093.htm

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/USA/staterates2004/

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/408/60750.html

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/0,2933,285532,00.html

And despite being more sensitive, uncircumcised guys still last in the same six minute range (average) that circumcised guys do:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.00070.x/abstract;jsessionid=544637F61F0B04BEB5E5038BB769B984.d03t04

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.00070.x/abstract;jsessionid=544637F61F0B04BEB5E5038BB769B984.d03t04

Which makes sense, that's how circumcision was promoted in the USA:
http://english.pravda.ru/health/27-03-2006/77873-circumcision-0/

Increases erectile dysfunction rates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14979200&dopt=Abstract%7C

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://www.drgreene.com/azguide/inconspicuous-penis
http://www.altermd.com/Penis%20and%20Scrotal%20Surgery/buried_penis.htm

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/content/CRI_2_4_2X_Can_penile_cancer_be_prevented_35.asp

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.html

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/

http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circumcision-causes-100-deaths-each-year-in-us/

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

It's perfectly fine, and has positive medical benefits to it. People complaining about male circumcision being abuse are just whining for the sake of being whiney. Why does it matter to you? If you don't want to circumcise your boys, that's fine. But telling lies such as saying it lowers sensitivity (something you can't really measure), is just going too far.

Snip (Get it?)

A lot of your links were broken there, buddy.

OT: In my opinion, I'm neutral for it. I am circumcised, and I'm not yelling at my parents for cutting my penis. It makes no difference to me. Will I do it to my child? I don't know, I guess I'll leave it for my future wife to decide.

That was a copy paste from an old post it didn't work right most are fine now but one of the links was gone from source.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

My folks had me circumcised when I was an infant and frankly I'm glad they did. The hygienic reasons aside, it's a redundant body part, like the appendix, an evolutionary vestige. I've never had 'erectile dysfunction' or problems masturbating, though I have heard plenty of hilarious stories about women turned off by creepy dog dorks, and none of them involve an appreciation for smegma buildup.

So, have fun cleaning it with a Q-tip, turtlenecks.

 

[Scabadus]

If I grabbed a knife and walked down the street cutting up people's penises I'd be locked away, why should the reaction be any different if the victim is a small, defenceless person who's not able to even think for themselves and on top of that is UNDER YOUR FUCKING CARE?!

What an adult does to their own body is their business, but parents who do this should have their kids taken away. If they do the circumsition for religious reasons they should never get the kids back: in 2011 do we really want to still be living in a society where belief in a magical sky-man still automatically overrides medical evidence of possible infection (not to mention the possible effects on sex life) and basic human rights to a person's own body because nobody is "allowed" to question religion since it's belief and opinion? Circumcision is surgery, all surgery carries an inheriant risk.