Can someone please revise this?

Good. I love it. I hope it goes well

"there are almost no deaths from routine circumcision"

Tell that to the parents of the boys that have died from circumcision. Do you think its okay that 100+ baby boys die every year from this unnessesary surgery? There are no deaths from being intact, yet there are deaths from being circumcised.

"Comparing this to complications coming from infections and disease that are birthed from uncircumcised males"

If uncircumcised males are reeling with infections and diseases, why is it that the 97% of males from the UK who are not circumcised arn't suffering from infections and diseases????

Why is the STD rate higher in the USA where the majority of males are circumcised, compared to lower rates of STD's in the UK where it is extremely rare to be circumcised?

"many are thankful that their parents chose to have it done"

But many more are very unhappy that their parents had this done to them and it cannot be reversed. An intact male who wants to be circumcised and have the procedure done with aqequate pain relief, whereas males who were forced to be circumcised at birth have to live with it for the rest of their life.

Lastly, I would like to ask you this question regarding babies not being able to remember the pain so its acceptable to put them in pain.

Would it be acceptable to circumcise a male adult in the same way a baby is circumcised and then erase their memory 15 minutes later? Is it really ethical to do this?

Circumcision rates are dropping whether you like it or not because people are becoming more educated about the function of the foreskin.

I see that you've completed your school essay on male circumcision,

a subject you admitted to knowing little about:

As a newcomer to the topic, you've obviously been bowled over by the

medical establishment's pro-circumcision propaganda, which can all

sound very convincing except that it's predicated on one major false

premise "removal of excess skin that serves no true purpose."

Time to bring up The Many Functions & Benefits of the Foreskin:

1. The penis foreskin is highly erogenous tissue. It contains 20,000 – 40,000 touch-sensitive nerves that produce exquisite feelings of pleasure. Circumcision removes most, or all, of these highly erogenous touch-sensitive nerves. Cut off. Stripped away. Gone forever. And although a circumcised man can still derive pleasure, sex with a circumcised penis can be deficient in many ways. Certainly, circumcised sex is not the sensual experience nature intended.

http://xrl.us/ForeskinSexualFunctions

2. On an intact penis, the foreskin supplies sufficient shaft skin for a comfortable erection. Scientific studies have shown that when the penis becomes erect, the length of the penis shaft can double. Where does the skin come from to cover that longer shaft? From the foreskin. The foreskin--after it moves to the shaft upon erection--has been scientifically shown to provide a doubling of shaft skin.

In contrast, circumcision may cause a man to have only half the shaft skin nature intended. On a baby, the skin removed during circumcision may seem small, but on a fully grown man, it can amount to a loss of one-third to one-half of the man’s penis shaft skin system. This loss is equivalent in size to a 3” by 5” index card--about 15 square inches. Insufficient shaft skin can cause abnormal bowing of the penis when erect. An overly tight shaft skin can often compress the penis’s inner tissue, which can create a discomforting erection for the circumcised man. And insufficient shaft skin, due to circumcision, is the cause.

http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/10F/5broomsti...

If you are so for circumcision, please go for it. Cut off your prepuce (clitoral hood). Look at all the alleged benefits you get. Removal of the female and male prepuce involves similar tissue with similar function. So if it is that good, cut your clit hood already. Think about that as people in other parts of the world are pushing that as cleaner and looking better.

I find it amusing that you mention "Appearance is one of the two major reasons that modern American mothers decide to circumcise their baby boys (Morris)" -- because they like to look at their child's exposed glans, the natural look of a sexually excited male. YIKES that is sick. It is interesting that the "MORIS" you mention is a member of a circumcision sexual fetish group. One of the leaders of their group, Vernon Quaintance was arrested for having child pornography. Google the name and you’ll get more than a page of results. What a bunch of sick F**ks that get off on inflicting pain to the penis of baby boys.

BTW, WEB MD has been hijacked by a bunch of circumcision pushers. These include doctors that are cut and have no clue about the function and PLEASURE of a natural penis. They want everyone to have a FRANKENpenis like they do. They never mention much about how 65% of American men hit age 40 and GET NUMB DICK and need VIAGRA.

MALE Circumcision is nerve damage cutting off about 20000 fine touch and stretch sensing nerve endings and removing a source of pleasure from the male FOR LIFE. This is 2/3 of the total pleasure source amputated! This is nerves, blood vessels, protective covering and pleasure zones taken away from a human before the human can experience this. The dynamics and function and pleasure from sex and masturbation of the penis is harmed for good.

Only about 0.5% of males who are left intact at birth end up getting circumcised later in life. That tells you the foreskin parts are not as much of a problem as people make it out to be, and Men LIKE their foreskin parts.

There is no data that shows HIV, HPV or any STD change or any real benefit to cutting off parts of a baby boys penis in the US, EU JP.... Even in Africa (with water issues) about the same number of cut men and natural penis men have HIV. Real world studies how that a man with a natural penis is at no higher risk of HIV and HPV. The American Cancer Institute has repeatedly said that male circumcision is of no use to lower the risk ANY cancer of any type. What a bunch of crap.

The idea that natural penis boys have more infections is part myth and part BAD medical advice. It is now known that boys that are natural should not have their foreskin touched by others. The US medical advice was to pull it back and scrub with soap. That causes problems including infections.

You should know that infant boys are EASIER to care for when they are natural (intact). The foreskin does not retract until late childhood or even puberty, so you do nothing special, just wipe the outside of his penis clean and leave it alone. Furthermore, to prevent painful and bleeding erections later in life, doctors are now commonly leaving more skin behind- in a cut boy this means you may have to push the left over skin back at every diaper change and clean beneath it to prevent it from adhering or infecting. The very thing that mother's think they avoid by circumcising! In short- Intact = wipe like a finger, NEVER retract Cut= vaseline, clean thoroughly, push back remaining skin to prevent adhesions etc (the last step perhaps for several months or years).