Men, what is your view on circumcision?

I am not in favour of circumcision. I believe it to be a completely unnecessary procedure unless there is an immediate medical reason such as Phimosis (tight foreskin).

The anatomical equivalent of the male foreskin (prepuce) in females is the clitoral hood (also called prepuce) which is the fold of skin that protects the clitoral glans. Some forms of female circumcision – more often called female genital mutilation – wholly or partially removes the clitoral prepuce. I have never understood why female circumcision is considered to be ‘barbaric’ yet there is no outcry over male circumcision.

The inner surface of the foreskin has nerve endings similar to those on the glans and frenulum. This sensory tissue is thought to be involved in sexual responses in adults.

Removing the foreskin therefore affects male sexual sensitivity in two ways. It removes sensory tissue and removes the natural protective sheaf which protects the glans resulting in a further reduction in sensitivity.

During circumcision the frenulum and frenulur delta is often partially removed or damaged leaving scar tissue that is less sensitive and therefore less pleasurable.

Some people claim that circumcision is desirable for hygiene reasons. If boys are taught to clean themselves properly hygiene concerns are eliminated.

Others argue that because the child will not remember the procedure it is somehow ok. A month old baby would not remember if its arm was cut off either... does that make cutting a child’s arm off ok? Of course not.

The weakest arguments of all for circumcision are that it 'looks better' or that the child ‘should look like his Dad’. If all us guys decided that women looked better without labia would that make female circumcision ok??? Somehow I don't think so. Cutting a perfectly natural and normal part of a boy's body away for 'aesthetic' reasons is tantamount to child abuse.

Check out this question from a devastated Mom about a botched infant circumcision:

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap...

For images of botched circumcisions you can go here – WARNING ! Not for the feint hearted - http://www.circumstitions.com/Botched1.html

Here’s a question from a guy left with ‘skin bridges’ after an infant circumcision.

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap...

Americans tend to assume that the whole world is circumcised and that it is ‘weird’ not to be. In fact in most countries to be un-circumcised is the norm and being circumcised makes you the ‘odd man out’.

New-born circumcision rates have been dropping since they peaked in the 1940’s. Even in the USA - which has a very strong pro-circumcision lobby that churns out its scare campaign about disease and doom with great efficiency - circumcision rates have dropped by nearly 30%.

Australia and New Zealand have shown massive declines while circumcision was never hugely popular in the UK.

The statistics are difficult for an amateur like me to interpret but these should be close to correct. Percentage of new-borns circumcised:

Australia 1940’s (87%) 1973 (70%) 2007 (13%)

USA 1940’s (85%) 1979 (64%) 2004 (57%)

United Kingdom 1930’s (35%) 1979 (12%) 2000 (3%)

Canada 1970’s (67%) 1997 (20%) 2005 (9%)

New Zealand 1940’s (95%) 1995 (<1%)

The British Association of Paediatric Urologists states that ‘There is no current evidence to support an increased risk of penile cancer, human immunodeficiency virus infection (AIDS) or cervical cancer’ associated with the presence of a foreskin and that ‘Circumcision to prevent urinary tract infection (UTI) is unproven except in boys with abnormal renal tracts.’

http://www.baps.org.uk/documents/circumcision2007....

The Royal Australasian College of Physicians has examined recent claims that circumcision reduces the rate of urinary tract infections, reduces the risk of acquisition of HIV and reduces the risk of penile cancer and STILL concluded that... ‘Review of the literature in relation to risks and benefits shows there is no evidence of benefit outweighing harm for circumcision as a routine procedure in the neonate.’

Check out the policy statement on ‘Circumcision’ in the link below

http://racp.edu.au/page/health-policy-and-advocacy...

http://www.cirp.org/

http://www.nocirc.org/

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/10/23/11929...

http://www.circumstitions.com/

You are a foolish if you hear or agree the genital mutilation cult's lie. Circumcision totally had no benefit include health or hygiene at all. The researches of circumcision benefits always had the weakness that could only be seen by sharp thinking people. 70-80% of world's male population aren't circumcised. If you believed the God,you must think this sentence : "If the circumcision really very good & the God care its follower,why did the God give the foreskin to the newborn males?" All things that the God created are very useful to the end of the things' live. Genesis 1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." The circumcision promise between Abraham & God is fulfiled by Jesus' holy blood (for those who believed Jesus only). If you are male & was circumcised before 20 years old,you should hush your self because you don't feel real feeling of being intact.The real feeling of being intact could be felt when you are 20 years old or later because the sexual functions of foreskin are activated at the age of 20 years old or later. I don't hope you to trust me because it is your decision,I only help what I can do to open your eyes about intact male's benefit.

I think it is healthy for the baby or child boy should have this they did this in the 50 s, 60, 70, and right up til today.

How can circumcised look more natural than natural?It isn't healthier at all,the foreskin is there for a reason and that is to protect the Glans from becoming hard and being desensitized from continuous rubbing against clothing.It is not healthier,there is no such thing as harmful bacteria.Man has had the foreskin since they evolved,millions of years ago and lived with it perfectly well.Circumcision is relatively new and now only performed for religious reasons,extreme medical necessities and americans.Every year hundreds of children have complications due to this mutilation,some can be corrected,some are permanent,a small number need complete genital amputation and a few result in death.Circumcision is permanent,you cannot undo it if you don't like it.One more thing,it is not YOUR body to mutilate as you see fit,it belongs to an innocent who cannot protest or protect himself.

Circumcision, both male and female circumcision, is genital mutilation, and is unnatural and abnormal.

Circumcision perpetrated on infants is infant sexual abuse and a violation of the basic human right to a complete and whole body.

There are no medical benefits to circumcision, it doesn't prevent HIV, as a matter of fact there are statistics that show it can actually increase the HIV rate of transmission, because at the height of the epidemic, in the US, where 80% of males were circumcised, the rate was much higher than that of any other country in Asia, Europe, Scandinavia and South America, where they don't habitually mutilate male infants, and more than 80% of the males in these countries/continents were unmutilated.

But the medical profession tries to use scare tactics to try to keep people mutilating their sons. They are biased, as they make money from it and are very frequently members of the religions that try to impose circumcision on all males---that's how it became so widespread in the US in the first place.

Doctors NEVER disclose the adverse effects and complications from this totally unnecessary, archaic and barbaric mutilation. In fact they suppress these. Sexual sensitivity is never brought up, and prospective parents don't have disclosure of the risks.

Female circumcision of minors is illegal in the US, as all other civilized countries, but it's open season on all males. In the US, this is highly sexist and unconstitutional as such.

As a helpless infant I was tied down, assaulted, sexually molested and mutilated by the process called circumcision. This resulted in more than the usual (50-75%) loss of sexual sensitivity. I restored my foreskin, and have vastly improved sensitivity and function. Orgasms are much more intense, also. Most circumcised men aren't aware of what they've lost, as sex still feels good, but they haven't got any concept of how it is really supposed to feel.

Circumcision is the worst hoax ever perpetrated on the male sex.

A foreskin is not a birth defect; it is a birthright.

ERIC

It is not right by any means. It is male genital mutilation amd cruel and not needed. It causes tremendous pain and no pain killer is adequate. You too can choose to 'wear the t-shirt' but the fabric will be woven from your son's mutilated penis and bonded together by his blood and pain.

Read up on this as his foreskin is there for health reasons. There is no medical reason and those of use that have sons (I have four) know it does not create any problems. The medical profession pushes circumcision because they make a lot of money in a short period of time.

Let your son decide when he reaches adulthood

I opted to get circumcised at 18, so I have been there and have the t-shirt! Being circumcised is much cleaner, uncut guys need to wash at least 2-3x a day and before sex, as there is always a stink. It is healthier to be cut, uncut guys have a 60% higher chance to acquire STD's and HIV! Being cut also looks better, that's a no brainer. It also enhances the sexual experience, the foreskin just gets in the way! I had no hesitation to have my boys (2&4) circumcised as I know there is no downside, only a lifetime of benefits!

There is nothing good about being uncircumcised! Don't listen to idiots that tell you it is mutilation and you will have less pleasure during sex. The opposit is true sex rocks when you are circumcised!

Read these new studies!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081217/sc_n...

http://allcircumcision.blogspot.com/2008...

I'm not a guy, but I've talked to many guys about this issue. Please do extensive research before choosing to cut a child's genitals. Circumcision is medically unnecessary, reduces penile sensitivity, is performed without anesthetic, and can cause sexual problems later in life.

This article answers a bunch of medical questions: http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/circumc...

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/

ETA: Ivy, perhaps you'd like to have your genital oil glands removed and your clitoral hood cut off, with no anesthesia? You know... fewer places for "crap" to hide! And it would look better-- fewer folds, nice smooth scar tissue. Some women also claim they have fewer UTIs with uncut men, so it's best to stick with proven facts, not secondhand stories, when making decisions like this.

why isn't removal of the appendix, tonsils or ear piercing considered as an inhuman mutilation?

You want opinions based on experiences, not a bunch of propaganda. I'm circumcised and enjoy a happy and healthy sex life

I wouldn't like to be cleaning my foreskin all day, having my frenulum broken or experiencing phimosis

Im not a man...but I went through great dilemmas when I had my twin boys, and eventually after alot of research I had them done, having it done can prevent some disease when they reach sexual maturity, it can also help prevent them having to be done when they were older which is a much more serious and painful procedure. Now days doing new borns isn't like it was way back when my dad was a baby, its a simple procedure, they simply numb the penis, pull the foreskin back just a tiny bit, maybe 2 mm...and slide a cap over the end of the penis, releasing that 2mm of loose skin back over the cap and then surgically tying it off...within 3-5 days the excess skin and the cap simply fall away...neither of my boys had a problem with it afterwards, they needed no special treatment while it was healing before the cap came off, and when it was actually done the only reason they cried was because they had to get naked. I wouldn't hesitate to do it again if I ever had any more boys.