Should circumcision be the person's OWN choice?

[ManyHamsters]

Implying that either of those things are of great significance in a person's life is pretty silly.

Neither sexual pleasure nor some minor potential health benefits are of great significance? Are you sure you're human?

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Neither sexual pleasure nor some minor potential health benefits are of great significance? Are you sure you're human?

Neither the difference in sexual pleasure (which is indicated to be insignificant) nor minor potential health benefits are of great significance.

[LilSaihah]

Neither the difference in sexual pleasure (which is indicated to be insignificant) nor minor potential health benefits are of great significance.

I'm kind of wondering how you'd analyse the difference in sexual pleasure between someone who was circumcised at birth and someone who wasn't circumcised.

But yeah the health benefits are minor. If you need to clean it you can just pull it back, it's not rocket science. Maybe if you live in the 1400s or some other time or place where being clean isn't a concept then circumcising your boys would be a good idea.

[Spectral]

Neither sexual pleasure nor some minor potential health benefits are of great significance? Are you sure you're human?

I absolutely assure you that circumcised men experience plenty of sexual pleasure. Some potential increase thereof compared to a barely relevant potential health benefit is pretty insignificant.

[Banawani]

That's a logical fallacy. (Ironic, considering your signature)

Just because the majority of people get along fine without it, doesn't mean they wouldn't be better off with it. And no, them saying that they don't think they would be doesn't mean a thing, since they have lived their entire lives that way and do not know what they are missing.



And I never said it did. Though increased rates of erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation are a couple of the proven side-effects.

PE isn't a defect, it's an evolutionary trait, we didn't always have the luxury of boning under roofs.

[Deleted]

To many pages to read, I only read about 8 of them.

To those people saying the foreskin has little to no use. It protects the most sensitive part of the penis form harm, pretty damn importand if you ask me.
And better hygiene? wtf? I shower everyday and when i go into the shower i pull my foreskin back and wash it. So hygiene is perfectle fine with a foreskin.

Save from a few medical reasons, like painfull erections with a to small foreskin i see no reason to remove it before a person is of legal age to deside it for himself (18 in most countrys)

[Mifuyne]

Might aswell chop off someones head to avoid stupidity.

[Kasierith]

See the information cited in various places throughout this thread about the drawbacks of circumcision.

Or use common sense. Gee, I wonder if that sheath over that extremely sensitive body part has a use. Well, it couldn't possibly be to prevent the sensitive part from rubbing up against everything and becoming desensitized, so lets chop it off!

Its hard to take the views of quite a few countries seriously when they don't even support their official policies with case studies. Going by the common sense rule is a pretty facetious point to hold if you're a professional organization.

[pateuvasiliu]

The studies they make are on Kenyans. Like... seriously.

[Symphonic]

But yeah the health benefits are minor. If you need to clean it you can just pull it back, it's not rocket science. Maybe if you live in the 1400s or some other time or place where being clean isn't a concept then circumcising your boys would be a good idea.

I have a family member. He is not circumcised. He is one of the cleanest people you will ever meet. Germophobe, super clean and tidy. He has had more than one Urinary Tract Infection and they have been so, SO painful. If he can get one in his later years being as clean as he is, I think the benefit of not having to worry as much about a UTI is a great health benefit. It's not like you don't clean it just because you're circumcised.

[pateuvasiliu]

And I ask again, how does a flap of skin prevent or cause urinary infections?

[Symphonic]

And I ask again, how does a flap of skin prevent or cause urinary infections?

The urinary tract can be infected from above (by bacteria entering the kidneys from the bloodstream and travelling downward) or from below (by bacteria entering the urethra and travelling upward).

Infections from above are often seen in newborns seen with generalized infection or sepsis. If there are many bacteria in the bloodstream, some are likely to get through the filters of the kidney to the urine. This is especially likely if the filters are immature, or if there are a lot of bacteria.

In older children and adults infection most often starts from below. In small children still using diapers, stool (which is largely bacteria) can sit for some time right at the meatus; the longer it sits there, the more likely it is that bacteria may enter the urethra. Baby boys are less likely to have this happen because the head of the penis isn't as likely to sit in stool. (Note, though, that bacteria can hang out in any moist, warm area, and that UTI's in boys under 1 year old seem to happens more often in uncircumcised boys than in circumcised boys since bacteria can accumulate beneath the foreskin.) Sexually active teenage boys and adult men are prone to UTI's because of friction at the meatus, which tends to push bacteria into the urethra (urinating after intercourse helps avoid UTI's)

[Deleted]

How does the health argument even enter into it, for those living in first world nations?

Are people in this day and age incapable of cleaning under their foreskin? Or unwilling to, out of sheer laziness? The health argument is borderline absurd. The foreskin protects the glands from harm [and provides significant sexual stimulus at that], just as the nails protect the fingers and hair keeps the head warm. You don't see religious arguments being made for the removal of nails/hails on medical grounds.

Circumcision is mutilation and I detest the idea of a child having a part of their penis removed because of religious observances that have no part in the modern world. Remarkable to think that people still persist in defending male circumcicion, but fall awfully quiet when the topic of female circumcision is raised. It's totally unnecessary in this day and age, particularly when you live in a modern society and you've access to soap, showers and information pertaining to personal hygiene.

[Symphonic]

How does the health argument even enter into it, for those living in first world nations?

Are people in this day and age incapable of cleaning under their foreskin? Or unwilling to, out of sheer laziness? The health argument is borderline absurd. The foreskin protects the glands from harm [and provides significant sexual stimulus at that], just as the nails protect the fingers and hair keeps the head warm. You don't see religious arguments being made for the removal of nails/hails on medical grounds.

Circumcision is mutilation and I detest the idea of a child having a part of their penis removed because of religious observances that have no part in the modern world. Remarkable to think that people still persist in defending male circumcicion, but fall awfully quiet when the topic of female circumcision is raised. It's totally unnecessary in this day and age, particularly when you live in a modern society and you've access to soap, showers and information pertaining to personal hygiene.

I said this earlier about hygiene. Doesn't matter how clean you are.

I have a family member. He is not circumcised. He is one of the cleanest people you will ever meet. Germophobe, super clean and tidy. He has had more than one Urinary Tract Infection and they have been so, SO painful. If he can get one in his later years being as clean as he is, I think the benefit of not having to worry as much about a UTI is a great health benefit. It's not like you don't clean it just because you're circumcised.

And I am not going to be quiet about what you are calling "female circumcision". There's no such thing. It's called Female Genital Mutilation, and that is absolutely and completely different. Women don't have foreskin. Cutting off external genitalia, makes intercourse hurt painfully, and is mainly done to stop women from having sex. Cutting off foreskin does not affect sexual performance or pleasure. Even moreso when done as a baby.

[RüneRS]

I had a circumcision when I was 4, I had no say in it. It wasn't out of religion, more out of necessity (if they wouldn't have done it I might have lost my willy :S ) I'd rather have a bald(= also more hygiënic) one then none at all

[chocobo606]

I said this earlier about hygiene. Doesn't matter how clean you are.


And I am not going to be quiet about what you are calling "female circumcision". There's no such thing. It's called Female Genital Mutilation, and that is absolutely and completely different. Women don't have foreskin. Cutting off external genitalia, makes intercourse hurt painfully, and is mainly done to stop women from having sex. Cutting off foreskin does not affect sexual performance or pleasure. Even moreso when done as a baby.

Any idea what the odds are or what percent of a risked increase someone is of getting a UTI because they're uncircumcised? No offense, but just because you know someone who had that problem, doesn't mean it's unrare. Just because x is more likely to get y disease, doesn't mean it's not a 0.5 chance or something. I just wouldn't want to have an argument over something like that without knowing how big of a difference it makes. And no, the fact that there's even a small chance doesn't make it a good argument either, since there are ways of preventing UTI's as a male.

From what I've seen, UTI's because you're uncircumcised are pretty non-existant, unless you're dirty. Honestly saying the health benefits of being circumcised make it be worth it, I really just don't believe it.

[Deleted]

I had a circumcision when I was 4, I had no say in it. It wasn't out of religion, more out of necessity (if they wouldn't have done it I might have lost my willy :S ) I'd rather have a bald(= also more hygiënic) one then none at all

I don't think anybody would argue against being circumcised due to medical complications, such as the potential loss of the penis because the foreskin is cutting off circulation. What people do hold issue with is people advocating male mutiliation on religious or hygienic grounds. There's plenty of bodily parts that require attentions: hair, nails, or even limbs. You don't see people advocating the amputation or removal of these parts because some desert dwelling tribe [without proper education or access to medicine or hygiene] said you should thousands of years ago. There's plenty of religious practices that have fallen by the wayside over the centuries, mainly as a result of scientific advances -- it's just a shame that circumcision isn't held up and mocked as an absurd and out dated concept.


"Last laugh's on you guys, I had the snip when I was a kid. That means I don't need to wash my cock because I'm not going to get germs! Think of me when you spend 2 minutes washing your penis in the shower, I'll be out doing more productive thngs."

The germs argument is just absurd. Pure laziness on the part of the parent to not educate the child [you can teach them to brush their teeth, but not clean their foreskin, what?] or if the circumcised is an adult, pure laziness on their own part if advocating the germ "argument".

In many ways, I've got the best of both worlds. I've got a fully stimulated penis that is more receiptive to touch than those who have been mutilated, which improves my sex life considerably. It's protected by the glands from harm, and what's more is I don't have the issue of vegetable gardens or fungus growing under my skin. Why? Because I know how to wash the damn thing.

[pvtpyro]

From a female perspective I wish every guy was circumcised. What guy in their right mind would willingly get it done as an adult?

As for uncircumcised... I admittedly only have one experience and it was a major turn off. Disgusting. ALL of my girlfriends agree with me. Sure you can teach a guy to be clean, and I'm sure some are. But I've seen the way a lot of guys live, and looking at their cleaning habits in public, I doubt it's any different downstairs. For some, not all.

I say keep doing it the way their doing it.

[Deleted]

From a female perspective I wish every guy was circumcised. What guy in their right mind would willingly get it done as an adult?

As for uncircumcised... I admittedly only have one experience and it was a major turn off. Disgusting. ALL of my girlfriends agree with me. Sure you can teach a guy to be clean, and I'm sure some are. But I've seen the way a lot of guys live, and looking at their cleaning habits in public, I doubt it's any different downstairs. For some, not all.

I say keep doing it the way their doing it.

Congratlations on coming across as a complete and utter retard for justifying the mutilation of the male gender because of one bad experience.

It says more about your choice in men, than anything about the link between cleanliness and circumcision. Congratulations, you go for dirty guys.


Imagine the furore if we were wishing every woman suffered female mutilation. Fuck it.

[zorkuus]

From a female perspective I wish every guy was circumcised. What guy in their right mind would willingly get it done as an adult?

As for uncircumcised... I admittedly only have one experience and it was a major turn off. Disgusting. ALL of my girlfriends agree with me. Sure you can teach a guy to be clean, and I'm sure some are. But I've seen the way a lot of guys live, and looking at their cleaning habits in public, I doubt it's any different downstairs. For some, not all.

I say keep doing it the way their doing it.

Well I don't give a crap what other people think about my appereances, and I'm certainly not going to modify it (or anything else in my body) just to suit other people's taste. What if I told you I don't like tits ala natural? Pardon me but you come off as a very shallow person.