Are you for or against circumcision?
I'm personally against it, i just wanted others opinions please. I respect everyone's opinions & whatever works for you & your family is completely fine with me
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Persephone · 51-55, F
Jimmyorjames · M
@Persephone mine was medical, but I was too young to remember the reason, but I wouldn't change it now...
It keeps me smoother, it keeps everything cleaner and it looks good apparently
It keeps me smoother, it keeps everything cleaner and it looks good apparently
Ynotisay · M
@Persephone There's actually a significant decrease in urinary tract infections, penile cancer and a lower risk of STD's for circumcised males.
Persephone · 51-55, F
Interesting.
consa01 · 70-79, M
@Persephone New Zealander here. The only country where the claim that there are valid argument is support of routine circumcision, is the USA. Adult men in the USA are 80% circumcised. Yet the USA also has the highest STD rates in the first world.
The belief that circumcised is sexually more appealing, and that the foreskin on the limp penis is sexually off putting, is mostly an American fetish. Last century, many maternity wards in the USA cut all newborn boys, without first obtaining the mother's permission. American were too much in awe of doctors to object to this practice. This explains why American middle class white men today are 98%+ circumcised.
Millions of proper Americans who would never look at penis porn, do not have a clear idea of what the foreskin looks like. Most American women grew up with circumcised brothers and have never been intimate with an intact man. All this points to a psychosexual train wreck.
The belief that circumcised is sexually more appealing, and that the foreskin on the limp penis is sexually off putting, is mostly an American fetish. Last century, many maternity wards in the USA cut all newborn boys, without first obtaining the mother's permission. American were too much in awe of doctors to object to this practice. This explains why American middle class white men today are 98%+ circumcised.
Millions of proper Americans who would never look at penis porn, do not have a clear idea of what the foreskin looks like. Most American women grew up with circumcised brothers and have never been intimate with an intact man. All this points to a psychosexual train wreck.
Footballstar · 26-30, M
@Ynotisay actually the chances of an uncircumcised penis catching any of those while higher than a circumcised penis is still miniscule and it is statistically far less likely than there being complications during the procedure that can have very very unpleasant consequences
Ynotisay · M
@Footballstar Not according to the CDC. (From WebMD)
Clinical trials, many done in sub-Saharan Africa, have demonstrated that circumcision reduces HIV infection risk by 50 percent to 60 percent, the CDC guidelines note. The procedure also reduces by 30 percent the risk of contracting herpes and human papilloma virus (HPV), two pathogens believed to cause cancer of the penis.
The guidelines do point out that circumcision has only been proven to prevent HIV and sexually transmitted diseases in men during vaginal sex. The procedure has not been proven to reduce the risk of infection through oral or anal sex, or to reduce the risk of HIV transmission to female partners
Clinical trials, many done in sub-Saharan Africa, have demonstrated that circumcision reduces HIV infection risk by 50 percent to 60 percent, the CDC guidelines note. The procedure also reduces by 30 percent the risk of contracting herpes and human papilloma virus (HPV), two pathogens believed to cause cancer of the penis.
The guidelines do point out that circumcision has only been proven to prevent HIV and sexually transmitted diseases in men during vaginal sex. The procedure has not been proven to reduce the risk of infection through oral or anal sex, or to reduce the risk of HIV transmission to female partners
Footballstar · 26-30, M
@Ynotisay youve literally just proved nothing. The odds of catching aids and everything else you mentioned in a developed country are miniscule and halfing that is okay but the chances of the procedure going wrong are higher than what youre savings.
To use random numbers to illustrate this say youre uncircumcised you have a 4% chance of catching one of those. Circumcised youve a 2% chance now, brilliant but youve a 4% chance that when getting circumcised you'll have complications and could have serious consequences some of which are too grotesque to mention.
Now in reality those numbers are all a lot smaller but you get the point that youre taking more of a risk than youre saving.
To use random numbers to illustrate this say youre uncircumcised you have a 4% chance of catching one of those. Circumcised youve a 2% chance now, brilliant but youve a 4% chance that when getting circumcised you'll have complications and could have serious consequences some of which are too grotesque to mention.
Now in reality those numbers are all a lot smaller but you get the point that youre taking more of a risk than youre saving.
Ynotisay · M
@Footballstar So I'll assume you didn't take the step to actually look this up on your own, huh? That way you could have analyzed the data and seen the study specifics. Easier to say I've literally proved nothing. Gotcha'.
And just to toss this out there, developed or undeveloped countries are irrelevant. Diseases don't care.
And just to toss this out there, developed or undeveloped countries are irrelevant. Diseases don't care.
consa01 · 70-79, M
@Ynotisay
Whether a study is done in the first or the third world is extremely important for a host of reasons. HIV in village Africa is apparently heterosexually transmitted, and strongly correlated with poverty. The African clinical trials concluded that the only modality of transmission for which circumcision is effective, is female to male. This modality is rare in the first world, where HIV is spread by MSM or by nonsexual means. The CDC is not honest about what I say in this paragraph.
If circumcision "works" against HIV, South Korea would have a lower HIV rate than Japan and Taiwan. IN fact, all 3 nations have a very low HIV rate. The USA is tied with Portugal for the highest HIV+ rate in the first world. USA adult men are also 80% circumcised. So much for circumcision being a form of protection.
The first world has a fair bit of sex ed. Condoms are sold in every supermarket. There is hot running water, soap and sewers. There are free STD clinics in every city. None of this is true of village Africa.
The USA has a high rate of cervical cancer, despite being circumcised. Cancer of the penis is quite rare throughout the first world, which is mostly uncircumcised.
No foreign nation has endorsed the CDC's conclusions. I live in a country that used to circumcise most boys, and gradually gave up the practice, 1960-85. No evident problems thus far. The CDC also behaves as if botched circumcisions were rare; in fact, no one counts botched and lethal outcomes. There is ample anecdotal evidence of a fair number of botched outcomes. The CDC is silent about possible adverse effects of circumcision on adult sexual function and satisfaction. In fact, these have never been researched in the USA and Canada, an unconscionable situation.
Whether a study is done in the first or the third world is extremely important for a host of reasons. HIV in village Africa is apparently heterosexually transmitted, and strongly correlated with poverty. The African clinical trials concluded that the only modality of transmission for which circumcision is effective, is female to male. This modality is rare in the first world, where HIV is spread by MSM or by nonsexual means. The CDC is not honest about what I say in this paragraph.
If circumcision "works" against HIV, South Korea would have a lower HIV rate than Japan and Taiwan. IN fact, all 3 nations have a very low HIV rate. The USA is tied with Portugal for the highest HIV+ rate in the first world. USA adult men are also 80% circumcised. So much for circumcision being a form of protection.
The first world has a fair bit of sex ed. Condoms are sold in every supermarket. There is hot running water, soap and sewers. There are free STD clinics in every city. None of this is true of village Africa.
The USA has a high rate of cervical cancer, despite being circumcised. Cancer of the penis is quite rare throughout the first world, which is mostly uncircumcised.
No foreign nation has endorsed the CDC's conclusions. I live in a country that used to circumcise most boys, and gradually gave up the practice, 1960-85. No evident problems thus far. The CDC also behaves as if botched circumcisions were rare; in fact, no one counts botched and lethal outcomes. There is ample anecdotal evidence of a fair number of botched outcomes. The CDC is silent about possible adverse effects of circumcision on adult sexual function and satisfaction. In fact, these have never been researched in the USA and Canada, an unconscionable situation.
Footballstar · 26-30, M
Ynotisay · M
@consa01 AIDS doesn't care. And, as I mentioned to the other poster I encourage you to ALSO check out the FACTUAL study referenced by the CDC. And what other countries do or support is irrelevant. Particularly as I didn't mention anything but the CDC. I should have mentioned the World Health Organization which also supports circumcision for medical reasons.
Personally, I don't give two shakes one way or the other. But what I DO know, for a FACT, is that this is not a black and white issue as so many seem to want to make it. So when I see comments that imply that it is I'm inclined to show the other side of the coin.
Personally, I don't give two shakes one way or the other. But what I DO know, for a FACT, is that this is not a black and white issue as so many seem to want to make it. So when I see comments that imply that it is I'm inclined to show the other side of the coin.
Ynotisay · M
@Footballstar Did I share an opinion with you that I'm "not gonna' change?" Don't think I did.
consa01 · 70-79, M
@Ynotisay It is emphatically not the case that all demographics are equally susceptible to HIV. HIV+ is vastly more common in some parts of Afica than it is anywhere in the first world.
When it comes to routine circumcision, the CDC's views are a problem. In no other first world country have the public health authorities concluded is advisable or cost effective. The WHO and the CDC are not independent of each other. Each echoes the views of the other. Those views are the result of work by a small group of principal investigators.
A major problem with American work re circumcision is that it silently assumes that the foreskin has no sexual value. I know from personal experience that that is emphatically untrue.
If this is not a black and white issue, then the penis should be left alone.
When it comes to routine circumcision, the CDC's views are a problem. In no other first world country have the public health authorities concluded is advisable or cost effective. The WHO and the CDC are not independent of each other. Each echoes the views of the other. Those views are the result of work by a small group of principal investigators.
A major problem with American work re circumcision is that it silently assumes that the foreskin has no sexual value. I know from personal experience that that is emphatically untrue.
If this is not a black and white issue, then the penis should be left alone.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
consa01 · 70-79, M
@charley Thank you for your kind words. I am a baby boomer who was typically the only intact dude in the locker room. I was so ashamed of my untrimmed johnson that I remained a virgin until I was 37 years old. I was 34 when I finally understood that my body was right, and American medicine was wrong. A lot of my understanding of this topic comes from the internet and social media. American women learn easily from a varied sex life many things that I had to struggle to learn. As for my previous comment, I almost chose medicine as my profession, which is why I understand the medical literature re circumcision fairly easily.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@Ynotisay [quote]AIDS doesn't care.[/quote]
You know it's sort of funny - once there were a few months where I just kept getting sick, over and over. Well, in this sole hypochondriac incident of my life I went to my doc and asked for an HIV test. He asked - and after finding out that I fuck women, he spent five minutes laughing at me - before ordering it up.
Seems AIDS does care.
If your son is straight, risk of HIV is very very low. And if he's gay circumcision does nothing. Leave the poor guy's pecker alone. And teach him to wrap it up.
You know it's sort of funny - once there were a few months where I just kept getting sick, over and over. Well, in this sole hypochondriac incident of my life I went to my doc and asked for an HIV test. He asked - and after finding out that I fuck women, he spent five minutes laughing at me - before ordering it up.
Seems AIDS does care.
If your son is straight, risk of HIV is very very low. And if he's gay circumcision does nothing. Leave the poor guy's pecker alone. And teach him to wrap it up.