- NEW!
by Sympho de Proggy
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by TSCTH
on August 31st, 2010
voted:
No
by Siyanor
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by tearb
on August 25th, 2010
voted:
No
by louis10003
on December 26th, 2009
voted:
No
by 23Skidoo
on August 31st, 2010
voted:
No
by MvL
on September 1st, 2010
voted:
No
by The Chief
on September 3rd, 2010
voted:
No
by AB is an asylum run by the inmates, ciao!
on September 3rd, 2010
voted:
No
by andersonymous
on September 3rd, 2010
voted:
No
by DA BEN DAN yanggui zi
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by Dibley
on September 3rd, 2010
voted:
No
by Possum
on September 1st, 2010
voted:
No
by welcum2earf
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Larry_M
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Gingerminx
on August 31st, 2010
voted:
No
by PocketNut is as sure as a peanut
on September 1st, 2010
voted:
No
by MrJosh
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by Isaac
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by purplecows on August 30th, 2010
by James.1.Mac
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by LePoupon is a proper gander.
on September 4th, 2010
voted:
No
by jazzer654321
on August 31st, 2010
voted:
No
by Anonymous
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by erikacrooks
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by medicgirl
on September 1st, 2010
voted:
No
by purplecows on September 1st, 2010
by Possum
on August 31st, 2010
voted:
No
by Rollie
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
No
by Sergus
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by jaimy33
on June 6th, 2010
voted:
Yes
by Pleski
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Dave_S5485
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by michele.obrien3
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by lightpeak on September 5th, 2010
by buztid.ninja
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Anonymous
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Sergus
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Bloed... on stand-by
on September 3rd, 2010
voted:
No
by Stu B needs no COAT for summer
on August 30th, 2010
voted:
Yes
by TheJoker on September 6th, 2010
by Simone_F
on September 6th, 2010
voted:
No
by guacamoley
on September 6th, 2010
voted:
No
by Lady.luxes
on September 6th, 2010
voted:
No
by carla.sue.schmidt
on September 6th, 2010
voted:
No
by Joshua_S
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by auntiepatricia on September 5th, 2010
by TLCTugger2181
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Frank_M3701
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
by Caroline_W
on September 5th, 2010
voted:
No
On what date in 1976 was Black History Month started?
by Answerbag Staff on May 13th, 2011
| 4 people like this
When was the first Black History Month celebrated?
by Answerbag Staff on May 13th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
When was Black History Month first celebrated?
by Answerbag Staff on May 11th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Are you tying up any loose ends right now?
by A 2 hours ago
| 1 person likes this
When was the last time you were in a tough situation? What happened?
by A 2 hours ago
| 1 person likes this
You're reading Should Boys Be Circumcised?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
i'll cede it "eliminates risk of phimosis"
there is NO medical justification to remove the foreskin.
This is a contradiction. There are either justifications or there are not. There are far fewer benefits from foreskin than there are from removing it. Foreskin also increases the risk of cancer for the owners, and cervical cancer for the female partners.
by trailslayer on August 30th, 2010
whatever did people do before we invented showers?
did all the men die in puberty of infected smegma?
by purplecows on August 30th, 2010
Maybe just 1/10. Relatively speaking in today's terms that about 330,000,000 males.
by Aquatic Eagle on August 30th, 2010
and 1/10 of all the men in Biblical times die of this, too?
and 1/10 of all the men in countries where they don't have running water (deserts, etc.) die of this, too?
and I suppose 1/10 of other primates (chimps, gorillas) all die of this, too?
does a number like that seem reasonable? does it pass the sniff test?
(hint: no)
by purplecows on August 30th, 2010
I'm glad you're basing your deductive reasoning of an online sniff test. I have faith in your clarity of thought and your ability to reason.
by trailslayer on August 30th, 2010
it's not a contradiction, a medical justification would have to be a universal problem suffered by all males.
.
phimosis is not a medical justification as it presents in a small percentage of ppl.
.
those ppl can be treated just as easily when the problem presents itself.
.
that's no reason to do it to EVERYONE by default.
that's stupid.
.
i thought that was clear...
by Sympho de Proggy on August 30th, 2010
There are many benefits to being circumcised Sympho, and if you ask "what are they" I will feel pity for your lack of education on the matter. Five minutes in any google result will tell you at least 9 benefits of circumcision, now pit that against the benefits of foreskin and you see where I stand on the issue.
by trailslayer on August 31st, 2010
Maybe the issue should be decided by those who undergone this "horrific, painful and traumatizing" experience. I went through it and...well...I don't remember any of it. I doubt it's more painful than when they took blood from my daughter's heel the day after birth. She won't remember that either.
by Aquatic Eagle on August 31st, 2010
if you can't discuss this without condescension then don't.
my "education" is enough to know that the legitimate reasons to remove the foreskin are relevant only to a select few.
.
most do it for aesthetic reasons, or because of some non-reason like the already discussed hygiene issue.
.
you say there is a good reason ?
enlighten me.
what reason is there for the en-masse mutilation of all humans by default ?
.
keep in mind that the foreskin does have important qualities, which obviously outweigh it's negative ones, as it's a trait that survived natural selection in all mammals.
.
what benefit is there that is relevant to every single person and outweighs the benefits of having a foreskin in the first place ?
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
Eagle, i don't think it's a traumatizing experience, nor do i think it's that painful.
i'm pretty sure the person who suffered most during my circumcision ritual (my family is jewish so naturally they heeded the barbaric norm of that faith), is my mother.
.
i do ,however, think it's a complete violation of one's basic rights to personal safety and health.
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
Penile cancer and the cervical cancer of your partner are pretty good reasons. The foreskin has no important qualities, I am at peak health without mine and my sexual life has been excellent. I am thrilled I never had to grow up embarrassed of myself for how my penis looked. I am horrified when I see an uncircumcised penis, I am thankful my father told the doctors to circumcise me at birth. If I had a boy, I would not hesitate to do the same for him and I now that he too would thank me.
by trailslayer on August 31st, 2010
I'm with you trailslayer. I am glad it was done to me.
by Aquatic Eagle on August 31st, 2010
you can be glad it was done to you, that's your right.
you don't have the right to chop it off other ppl just cos you're used to it.
.
The simple presence of the foreskin is not a risk factor for penile cancer.
.
http://knol.google.com/k/the-foreskin-causes-cancer-myth#Current_Medical_Opinion
.
here.
sources and all.
.
unlike in most organs, penile cancer on the foreskin can be completely removed by removing the foreskin.
.
circumcision does not decrease the chances for cancer on the glans or any other part of the penis, so there is no reason to remove the foreskin before the problem presents itself.
.
your personal phobia is irrelevant, slayer.
if you really are "horrified" when u see an uncircumcised penis maybe you should see someone about that.
.
any other old wive's tales regarding the evil foreskin ?
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
oh and as for "no benefits":
http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
It's not something I got used to. It's something that's never bothered me, pained me or caused me any harm. I would never have noticed it was even an issue if I'd never seen an uncircumcised one before. It's not something that lasted any length of time and if it hurt it obviously had no negative effect on me.
by Aquatic Eagle on August 31st, 2010
how can you say it had no negative effect on you when it was removed at birth ?
.
i posted a link with an entire list of negative effects of circumcision.
.
some are rare or are considered surgery complications.
let's put those aside, not cos they're not important (it is, after all, death by unnecessary surgery), but it isn't relevant to all who were circumcised.
.
this is a no-brainer, people.
there are universal drawbacks to circumcision.
there are no universal benefits to circumcision.
.
those benefits that aren't universal but still relevant, like phimosis, can be easily treated by circumcision ONLY ON THOSE WHO NEED IT.
.
it never bothered you ?
well of course, that's how you imagine yourself.
circumcised.
if parents were to chop off their kid's pinky at birth you'd say the same thing.
.
and when you'll see an unmutilated hand the first time and go "what's wrong with him ? what does he need that for ?".
.
your feelings on the subject are anecdotal and irrelevant.
it still doesn't doesn't justify en-masse circumcision.
it's still a gross violation of one's right to personal health, safety, and control over his body.
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
"how can you say it had no negative effect on you when it was removed at birth?"
Because it's my penis and I still have it today with no negative effects.
"if parents were to chop off their kid's pinky at birth you'd say the same thing."
Actually no I wouldn't say the same thing. A pinky finger has some function to it that I would not have. Foreskin is unnecessary and is not missed at all.
"it still doesn't doesn't justify en-masse circumcision."
You say that as if it's a mandatory thing and babies are being marched (well...carried) in lines into the circumcision chamber. Nobody is saying it should be mandatory.
by Aquatic Eagle on August 31st, 2010
Circumcision is hygenic above all else and for the great majority it was chosen for that reason alone. The benefits of foreskin as labled from your link are laughable "The foreskin creates a visibly longer penis, especially when the foreskin extends beyond the head of the penis." This is literally saying that "it makes you look like you have a bigger penis" because flabby skin is hanging over the front of it.
Amazing bonus of foreskin, bravo
by trailslayer on August 31st, 2010
XD slayer, you obviously only read the first one.
.
how bout how it protects your glans from trauma and cuts ?
allows accumulation of lubricant ?
"cushions" the penis making it less necessary for the vagina to be lubricated in the first place ?
most cases of vaginal dryness wouldn't be an issue if the male wasn't circumcised.
also i don't know about you but i don't consider decreased sexual pleasure a minor thing (the foreskin is mostly nerves).
.
the list includes benefits to immunological defense (#8 #9 #10),
hormonal development (#12 #11),
regulation of proper blood-flow (#7 #14),
and other miscellaneous benefits.
.
.
all that and more.
and all you have to do is wash it twice a week.
.
.
slayer, you just read the first one and decided this isn't worth your time.
if that's how you make such decisions i'm not surprised you came to the conclusion you did.
.
i hope when you actually have a child and this stops being a purely hypothetical issue you'll put more effort into your decision.
....
@Eagle
it is mandatory in the way that society doesn't question it and encourages parents to do it.
.
it's true, no law forces it.
en-masse circumcision is still, de facto, the case.
if only in that parents are fed myths like "foreskins cause cancer"
.
parents aren't informed in the pros and cons of this operation (the true ones, i mean).
as a result they often resort to public opinion (which is almost always bullshit on any subject) to make the decision for them.
.
you must agree there's something wrong with this picture.
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
I would circumcise my child for looks sake alone. The defenses the foreskin gives are also infections it causes. Urinary tract infections, a myriad of foreskin only issues as well. Trauma and cuts? It's a penis for christsake, it suffers no trauma and I ride bmx for a living so my lifestyle is clearly one that could be deemed "extreme".
An unlubricated vagina is certainly a problem and I will say so from experience, but a lubricated one is bliss and more common than the unlubricated one. I cannot speak on decreased sexual pleasure as I had not had sex while my foreskin was still intact, but I can say I do not notice a lack of pleasure in the sense that I cannot enjoy or achieve orgasm.
You also forget the point that it doesn't really matter if your foreskin increases your pleasure from sex if it's unattractiveness causes no one to desire it in the first place. The majority of my sexual partners were all thrilled with my circumcised penis, almost always telling me "Thank God you're cut, those other ones are NASTY".
by trailslayer on August 31st, 2010
we already went over this, infections are caused by lack of basic hygiene.
getting circumcised for that reason is like pulling out your teeth so you won't have to brush them.
.
all universal immunological effects of the foreskin are positive ones (i'm assuming you shower at least 3 times a week, making all infections, fungi, and other unpleasant diseases null for this discussion)
.
in addition, you haven't addressed even a 1/4th of all the points brought up by the article.
.
hormonal issues ?
bloodflow ?
temperature regulation ?
.
what about all these ?
.
now, you may not care that you're working with a numbed-down tool, but are you comfortable deciding that for your kid ?
.
also, women who prefer circumcised penises are merely a product of their environment.
.
if we weren't in a society that accepted genital mutilation as the norm, the intact penis would look perfectly normal to them, and they'd look at your (and my) circumcised penis like you would look at an amputated foot.
.
i'm assuming you're American, yes ?
in most countries the percentage of circumcised men is MUCH lower (among those who aren't religiously bound to it, i mean).
in European countries you'll find that most women find your circumcised penis weird.
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
Sympho: I'm not sure if you have children or not or how old they might be but I just had a little girl and even then the subject of circumcision came up. The doctor and my doula mentioned it as something to think about if we have a boy in the future. Both stated that it's a decision we have to make but to make sure we read all of the information. That doesn't sound to me like we were uninformed. Also, if you want to go talk to the parents who just take the public opinion's word for it then fine but I tend to make medical decisions based on something other than public opinion.
by Aquatic Eagle on August 31st, 2010
i'm happy to hear that, Eagle.
it's a good start.
still not the ideal, but a good start :)
by Sympho de Proggy on August 31st, 2010
I live in Denmark, where circumcision is only legal (on people under 16), if the parents are part of a religion that demands it (and can prove they are part of it), if it is necessary for the child health (and if all other treatments have been exhausted) and it can only be done by a plastic surgeon (we have free health care, so it won't cost a thing).
Here circumcision is extremely rare, and women here do prefer a uncircumcised penis, since it's both the cultural norm, the penis looks intact and because foreskin contributes to improved stimulation of the vagina (i have personally talked to women, who said circumcised penises feel weirdly smooth, and dull). And we experience no ill effects of having our foreskin, neither having smegma/hygiene problems, nor STD's (both America and Denmark having the the percentile amount of STD cases).
And i personally think it's child abuse, even when doing it because of arbitrary rules of a religion, and would love to see the law changed, so you have to be over 16 (unless of course it's medically needed).
Just though you guys should know...
by TSCTH on September 1st, 2010
^ this.
.
good for you guys :)
i live in israel, so you can imagine how blind ppl are to the barbarianism of circumcision here.
.
good to know some countries know better
by Sympho de Proggy on September 2nd, 2010
trail. penile cancer occuring in hte forskin would be a reason for those who get penile cancer in the foreskin to get the forskin removed. and the belief that the foreskin can give the girl cervical cancer is bubkis. HPV does not come from foreskin. it is a virus and comes from exposure to someone else with the virus.
"I would circumsize my child for looks alone" WOW. if your child wanted the LOOK of circumcision he can ask for it when he has developed his opinion. if you make that choice for him he can't what are you going to propose next? cutting infant girls hymens so when they do not experience it tearing when they eventualy lose their virginity? chopping off foreskin is far more drastic than slicing hymen. that is like having your infant daughters labia trimmed because you think they are too big.
I asked a poll on here and not one girl who had experienced both prefered cut. the lubricating action of the foreskin does not fail durring sex because it is immune to evaporation. uncut does not require any cort of lotion or lube even for a handjob. if your child wants to or needs to be cut it can be done later. if they do not want it they can not undo your mutilation
by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on September 3rd, 2010
I am a woman who has been with both cut and uncut. My husband is cut- but I GREATLY prefer uncircumcised. I have tried to encourage him to restore his foreskin. I would also like to post that as far as "hygiene" for the baby goes- the foreskin is still attached to the penis- sometimes until puberty. I would think it would be more difficult to take care of a wound. If my son comes to me one day and tells me he wants to be circumcised then we will sit down and discuss it- because having plastic surgery is HIS choice- not mine.
by Michelle_R on September 5th, 2010
reattach!!!! I think I would be even less likely to do that than I am to get cut. can they restore it? I know they can not restore the nerve endings. thank you michelle R. there is no witness more credible in court than a hostile witness (someone who testifies against their own agenda) and I think being married to cut but prefering uncut would deffinately qualify you for that additional credibility.
by TAPriceCTR s son is wearing his COAT on September 5th, 2010
I may be late by almost a year, but I would like to add my 2 cents.
The worst part about circumcision in my opinion would be the human rights violations.
I know this was pointed out already, but trailslayer if you like the way your penis is mutilated (and yes it's mutilated) then fine.
But how could you make that decision on your own child based purely on cosmetics?
There is no medical justification for circumcision, and if you want to make the best decisions for your child, let HIM decide what he wants his body to look like when he is of the age of consent.
the penile cancer bit... yes if you chop off a part of the body it can't become cancerous. So does that mean we should surgically remove the breasts to prevent male breast cancer?
Penile cancer is less common than male breast cancer.
http://web.archive.org/web/20071030194444/http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_1X_What_are_the_key_statistics_for_penile_cancer_35.asp?sitearea=
http://www.medicinenet.com/male_breast_cancer/article.htm
In other words, penile cancer is rare. Hardly a medical justification.
And I can't remember if this was brought up in this thread, but the claim that the foreskin causes HIV/AIDS is bollocks.
First, the studies that were done in Africa had an unacceptable amount of flaws.
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/
Second, if circumcision did prevent HIV then you would expect a correlation between circumcision and HIV in countries that have a high circumcision rate, such as the United States. When compared with Europe (which has a lower circumcision rate) you don't find this correlation.
I'm basically pulling a lot of this from this YouTube video, complete with references in the vid and all:
http://www.youtube.com/user/freedom0speech#p/u/0/e-Lm396q8KA
by Coexist on April 3rd, 2011
i'll cede it "eliminates risk of phimosis", but that's like saying chopping everyone's arm off eliminates risk of wrist sprains.
it's true, but completely moronic.
Bravo, Sympho - very well said.
by Unicorn Man on July 2nd, 2011
I would cut off my child's nose for looks alone. But also, it eliminates the risk of nose cancer, and my child will never pick his nose. I've never missed anything from not having a nose. I'm horrified whenever I see a nose.
(hint: this is satire -- in other words, I'm making fun of you)
by purplecows on July 3rd, 2011
lol :D
by Unicorn Man on July 3rd, 2011