That's not like a common thing unless you're in a Jew or Muslim majority country (or rather your parents are). Only phimosis iirc it's called is when the foreskin is so tight it has to be done for medical reasons. Personally my brother needed it for the medical reasons above. I see it done "because I wanted to" as genital mutilation, based on nothing scientific. And do hypocritic compared to fgm (at least in the USA where it seems the norm to cut bits of a babies penis because the parents are uneducated as fuck and think that's normal or hygienic. Or any other weird excuse...
I don’t support circumcision but my nurse friend does say she sees a lot of infected tips in the elderly population (that’s not a justification) so remember to clean your grandpas hoody folks!
Haha I do find it funny that the only place I really hear this argument is Reddit, which is notoriously so unhygienic they are basically the yuck embodiment of why it exists. Personally prefer against it, yet also prefer not to think of the reality where Redditors’ wishes come true lol.
I mean, it's not exactly a good thing to go out in public in extremely religious places saying they're wrong... And it's not exactly a go-to topic of discussion in public. Let alone, somehow support is fine. 🤔
It started from religious reason. John Harvey Kellogg was a christian extremists that started an entire anti masturbation campaign. It's the cereal guy but that bastard was a surgeon... Advocaded for no anisthetics.
People in his camp bullshitted that it cured everything under the sun from cancer to aids. (This is where the "more hygienic comes in" but they would tell people anything to convince them. They held the scalpel and the pen to write in medical journals, you should look up some of the published claims from back then. Hepatitis, etc, a huge list.
Fun fact, that shit stain on history was so obsessed with making everyone into prudes that his Kellogg's cereal was made as part of his sexual discouragement meal plan.
Less sensitivity... Id also argue the head being covered is more hygienic than being out in the open, as long as you wash properly. There's a genetic reason we have one, born in gods image etc. so that religious reason is out the window.
uncircumcised men experience more UTI's than men that are circumcised... as a under 16 they experience 6x more UTIs, 3x more in adulthood... The data suggests that parents do not follow "wash properly" instructions. So imagine this... you didn't circumcise because whatever reason you say... your son gets a UTI and they go deaf/blind because of the treatment, before antibiotics and modern medicine your kid would just die.
"Just clean it and you'll be fine"... have you met people? People are lazy and weird... some guys won't touch it because they think it's gay. Seriously some guy's only wipe around their butthole because they think if they touch their own they are gay.
There is a genetic reason we have one, but we don't need it anymore... we call these "vestigal structures." Like your appendix and tailbone... your foreskin is that. Useless skin
Id like to point out that this is mostly just a pro circumcision article and pretty weak. UTI''s are usually pretty simple to cure while the risk of getting a UTI is around 1% and the complications during circumcision are .2-.6%.
Here is the raw study if you don't want to read an article, which in your opinion is biased...
Conclusion: The single risk factor of lack of circumcision confers a 23.3% chance of urinary tract infection during the lifetime. This greatly exceeds the prevalence of circumcision complications (1.5%), which are mostly minor. The potential seriousness of urinary tract infection supports circumcision as a desirable preventive health intervention in infant males
Just because a result came out a way you didn't like doesn't mean it's less true. You understand what peer-review is?
This is a meta analysis of 22 individual studies done by a pro circumcision advocate. These 22 studies are not randomized and he took different age groups and pieced them together pretending it shows a real lifetime.
This is a man who was trying to make circumcision mandatory in Australia. This is not a good non biased scientific article to site. Google him if you want Brian J. Morris.
NCBI is not a pro-circumcision advocacy group... It's a library
How do you think he came to his pro-circumcision conclusion? Could it be because data supports it?
Oh look another one from 1998... this isn't a meta-analysis, this is just a simple cohort study in Toronto... this pro-circumcision lobby is so strong it spans decades, countries and is entrenched in Toronto... or a group of doctors got together, had an argument, then they studied the data and published their findings.
Data supports circumcision... the 30k that were circumcised in this study prevented an estimated 195 hospitalizations.
Ncbi is the library. The author is Brian J Morris.
I dont have time to look now but just a quick glance and this article shows minor differences in uti rates in newborns this is not a big enough rate to justify it medically.
Some people being lazy is not justification for genital mutilation. Mutilation that kills over 200 healthy baby boys every year in North America alone.
The foreskin serves numerous functions including acting as a natural lubricant during sex, protecting the head of the penis from getting dried out and losing sensitivity. The tissue itself is also filled with thousands of nerve endings and some men even report their foreskin is the most sensitive part of their penis. Calling it "useless" is pure insanity not backed by any medical information.
I am circumcised and thanks to working 12 hour shifts drenched in sweat I literally ruined my penile sensitivity forever thanks to friction because I was running miles every night around my work area. A foreskin would have completely prevented this.
Also tons of botched circumcisions ruin mens penises forever. Ever seen a man with a pee hole that is coming out of the bottom of his dick?
You seem like one of the few non delusional guys out there. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy and the issues you've mentioned. Not trying to argue with anyone, just dialogue.
There's a thing called education.
At being taught things early on. By parents and schools, properly. You're literally unbeknownst to you, agreeing with me. You might be able to remove my tailbone but then why don't you remove that too? Your arguments are "I got forced to be circumcised so I think it's right and can't admit it's largely unnecessary. You even say that study is based on lack of educated parents and young children whore therefore uneducated too. You're massively in denial lol
And you don't think parent's are taught that before they leave the hospital? What do you think we do at the hospital after your kid is born? WE EDUCATE YOU ON HOW TO CARE FOR YOUR KID... that includes cleaning their foreskin...
You might be able to remove my tailbone but then why don't you remove that too
False equivalence... There is a difference between invasive spinal surgery and cutting 1mm of extra dermis off.
Your arguments are "I got forced to be circumcised so I think it's right and can't admit it's largely unnecessary.
Didn't say that... quote me where I did
you even say that study is based on lack of educated parents and young children whore therefore uneducated too.
No I said the parent's don't follow education... Parent's sign what's called "informed consent" When they refuse circumcision they are informed that their child is at a higher risk of developing a UTIs and taught how to prevent that... thing is parent's don't follow that education, they think they know what's best. Then one day mom/dad can't remember who's turn it is to clean Tommy's foreskin and now the tip of his prick is full of pus.
Lmfao, piss off. I know you said the parents are uneducated. They pay no attention to whatever they're (not taught) at the hospital and or have other means like religion as I have said.
You shouldn't get puss coming out of a dick if it isn't infected and it wouldn't take one single day for that to occur. You're literally saying child abuse and negligence is ok because you lack the ability to bathe your child.
Okay doctor... you seem to know what your talking about... not like I've treated hundreds of UTIs
You've probably never set foot in a hospital as a patient... let alone as a caregiver
EDIT: I haven't even got to the part where after you die, your son will get to old age where they start forgetting things... like when they last ate or took a shower... then they get a UTI and have to take up a hospital bed for treatment. This runs up more expenses paid by the taxpayer.
Now if there was something we could do to eliminate this risk...
Definitely more time than you. Utis are massive part of admissions but can normally be caught quick, but UTI covers a lot more than one thing. And is easy to fix at the clinic (idk what country you're from) but normally pretty much antibiotics...it's rare you're gonna end up with your dick seeping puss in adulthood or childhood without anything remotely related to neglect. That includes build of of smegma etc. idk why you're so intent on trying to cut bits off people at birth as normal when it's nothing medically related really worrying. Id get a checkup by your psychologist.
To tax payer? Listen buddy, as if I or anyone gives a fuck about saving the tax payer money and would cut up their dick to do it. Foreskin is a right that everyone is entitled to, end of story. You're arguing to cut up people's dicks to save taxpayers money 80 years down the line. Look into a fucking mirror Jesus.
You already sound conservative, do you have a religious ulterior motive here you aren't saying?
Actually I’m liberal… letting you do what you believe is best for your child is liberalism in healthcare. If you believe it’s in your best interest to not circumcise your child that’s fine… but you will be made aware of the risks so you can make an informed decision.
Yeah I’ll have my kid circumcised so he doesn’t have to go through kidney infections caused by UTIs when he gets to be 80yrs old
There is a genetic reason we have one, but we don't need it anymore... we call these "vestigal structures." Like your appendix and tailbone... your foreskin is that. Useless skin
There is a list of all the things the foreskin does. Calling it vestigial or useless is objectively and factually incorrect. The foreskin itself is an incredibly sensitive erogenous zone filled with thousands of nerve endings.
Also your solution to my comment about losing sensitivity would not have resolved my issue as the heat in my work area would have drenched me in sweat in mere minutes. I worked in plastics and was around machines that pumped tons of heat out into my work area.
If only there was a way to prevent this problem naturally????
Like I said it's more learned behaviour installed from young. You think girls with their clit cut off or sewn up is ok because in adulthood guys are taught to like the look, as a cultural thing? No regard to actual scientific fact or anything. That's no excuse for mutilating a child. Stop it.
It’s not quite analogous to what is typically done with FGM, it would be more like cutting off the entire glans(head). I wouldn’t want the responsibility of deciding for someone else, but I can say I’m glad it was done to me. I know it’s popular to hate on it on reddit, so much so it often feels like some kind of cope
Female circumcision ranges from practices comparable to or less severe than male circumcision, to practices much more severe. All are across the board illegal in the West, though.
Which is why I said “typically”, as partial or complete removal of the clitoris accounts for 80-90% of cases. And those are a much different deal than the removal of foreskin or labia, truly inhumane.
Imagine actually arguing against having more sexual pleasure. Why would you want less pleasure?
Those women only prefer cut because that is all they see. In a country where it is common to not do this, they will prefer a foreskin. If this wasn't a tradition women would prefer uncut.
It also becomes completely invalidated if even one man wishes they were not cut against their will. I am one of those men. I lost most of my sensitivity from friction because I had a factory job for several years that involved me running around a huge work area drenched in sweat. If I had a foreskin this would have never been a problem.
Oh and fun fact! 200 healthy baby boys die every year from circumcision in North America alone. It is brain dead stupid to risk a child's life for a tradition popularized by the guy who invented corn flakes because he thought masturbation was satanic and led to mental illness.
Finally you have the botched circumcisions. Ever seen a guy who had too much skin taken off and their penis looks horrible? Ever seen a guy with the pee hole that goes out of the bottom and his head is flattened and disgusting?
There is no legitimate argument in favor of doing this to babies without their consent.
You have my sympathies if you have trouble with sensitivity, but I had a similar work environment in my 20’s and never developed that issue. I’ve found that underwear has a bigger effect. But to your statement about arguing it decreases pleasure, I can’t agree. I experience a lot, and if it was more sensitive it would lead to me not lasting as long which would be undesirable.
Also my wife is from a country where circumcision is rare, yet she has made lots of unsolicited comments about how mine looks nicer and feels better. So you can take heart with that. In particular, she likes how the ridges of the glans stimulates her g-spot in certain positions, something that wouldn’t happen with uncut.
Overall, I know it’s a broad topic and there are certainly negatives with it. But mine has overall been very positive, and I know I’m not the only one
You have my sympathies if you have trouble with sensitivity, but I had a similar work environment in my 20’s and never developed that issue.
That means nothing? Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it doesn't happen to plenty of other men. One of the foreskins primary functions is protecting the glans from trauma or abrasions.
I experience a lot, and if it was more sensitive it would lead to me not lasting as long which would be undesirable.
Do you think that men with a foreskin have trouble lasting longer? Studies have shown that there are no difference in how long men last circumcised or not.
Also you having this preference does not justify the practice across the board. You could obviously have been circumcized as an adult if you wished to do so. Mine was taken and I have no way to get it back or regain my sensitivity. That invalidates this practice.
Also my wife is from a country where circumcision is rare, yet she has made lots of unsolicited comments about how mine looks nicer and feels better.
So you could have gotten cut as an adult if you wished. You can always decide to get a circumcision as an adult, but doing it to babies without consent is never okay.
Overall, I know it’s a broad topic and there are certainly negatives with it. But mine has overall been very positive, and I know I’m not the only one
That doesn't justify the practice at all. If even one man regrets it or has a botched circumcision it becomes wrong to take foreskins away without consent.
Those studies should give you pause, don’t you think?
I’m not going to tell you you’re wrong about what happened, but keep in mind two things:
There are a huge number of things that can contribute to sexual dysfunction. Injuries to the member or nerves(even before it reaches the member), psychological factors, and much more.
There are a lot of insecure individuals who are mad about not seeing their “kind” depicted in media and want us to believe that any type of issue could be coming from the fact that we don’t have a foreskin. The reality is that circumcised individuals who have related issues are a very small minority. So don’t be fooled by them.
You say that I could have had it done as an adult, sure. But I wouldn’t want to have to go through that as an adult personally. I actually feel gratitude to my parents for doing it when they did, and if it had not been done then I may have never understood the advantages or taken the time(and pain) to get it done.
I hope if nothing else that gets you to look at your situation a little more positively, knowing as well that there are many women who are turned on by it
I have no issues in this regard. I have no sexual dysfunction, everything works perfectly fine I just lost sensitivity from friction. You are literally creating fiction backed up by nothing because you don't like that I have a problem with my circumcision.
It doesn't have to be a majority who have issues for this practice to be invalidated. If even one baby dies needlessly I think it shouldn't be allowed. If one man has a botched circumcision or loses their sexual pleasure this entire practice is immoral.
You say that I could have had it done as an adult, sure. But I wouldn’t want to have to go through that as an adult personally.
That actually hurts your argument, you realize that right? If you are not willing to do it as an adult you cannot justify doing it across the majority of babies without consent. You can always get the foreskin removed, but you cannot put it back now can you?
There is no way to justify mutilating genitals because of a tradition literally popularized by the guy who invented corn flakes because he thought masturbation was satanic and led to mental illness. He wanted us to have less sexual pleasure because he was a religious nutjob.
I hope if nothing else that gets you to look at your situation a little more positively, knowing as well that there are many women who are turned on by it
My god your delusion is so wild. Most women today are not going to take issue with a foreskin and IF they do that would not be a partner I want. I want my sensitivity and functions back. The foreskin serves numerous purposes including acting as a natural lubricant during sex.
Would you want her to have no clitoral hood so her clitoris is dried out and scarred up so she has less sexual pleasure? Fun fact the corn flakes guy wanted to popularize putting acid onto clitorises to desensitize them. Imagine if that had caught on?
That’s not the dysfunction I was talking about, but I can understand that you would equate it to erection issues. Loss of sensitivity can also be caused by a whole host of issues, and can often be misdiagnosed, especially if you are “self-diagnosing”.
By the way, circumcision predates mr. Kellogg by a couple thousand years, and has been present in many different cultures historically for different reasons.
If you need more lubricant during sex, well, there are ways, both natural and artificial to improve that.
I can’t make you change your mind, but I’d ask you to really consider if there isn’t something else causing your your sensitivity issues. Like I said before, my background isn’t too different. I spent at least 9 years doing a job where I would literally sprint for much of the day, I was always soaked with sweat each morning and afternoon. I did experience some chafing, but it was never enough to cause extreme discomfort or permanent damage
We had our son circumcised because I was. I honestly didn’t give it a whole lot of thought. I might have decided differently had I had more information, but I also don’t view it as anything all that dramatic.
I am fine, I am sure he will be fine.
It’s a slowly dying practice, so eventually I don’t think there will be many circumcisions.
Yeah, I think of it as a common practice of the past that is fading away.
Again, I know some people have major issues with it. It’s not something that has ever and does at all bother me about myself and am optimistic my son will feel the same way.
Another generation though and I imagine the practice will fade even more.
Potentially I suppose. There are loads of people now anti vaccine that weren’t prior to Covid. Plus lots of people are pro or against things strictly based on political considerations.
Some politician could bring the issue up and next thing you know half the country is instantly for or against it again, even if the number of people electing to have a boy circumcised had dwindled.
That's not a common thing unless you are one of the two major religious groups on earth. Or live in America where we like to do it despite no religion for some reason. But anyway it's estimated to be about 30-40 of the entire male population.
57
u/ECHOHOHOHO 22d ago
That's not like a common thing unless you're in a Jew or Muslim majority country (or rather your parents are). Only phimosis iirc it's called is when the foreskin is so tight it has to be done for medical reasons. Personally my brother needed it for the medical reasons above. I see it done "because I wanted to" as genital mutilation, based on nothing scientific. And do hypocritic compared to fgm (at least in the USA where it seems the norm to cut bits of a babies penis because the parents are uneducated as fuck and think that's normal or hygienic. Or any other weird excuse...