How do you feel about circumcision?

[ShindoL Shill]

i really dont mind it. it doesnt make it look too different, and if you've convinced someone to come to bed with you, do you really think theyre going to say 'i will never fuck you.' because youre uncircumcised. and you dont really run around with youre dick out.

that being said, one of my friends had to be circumcised to prevent a urinary tract infection, so theres a plus (prevention of disease).

honestly? i dont give a single fuck, and if my hypothetical future spouse wants any kids we may get to be circumcised, i'll go along with it.

 

[ZiggyE]

Circumcision? More like mutilation.

NOTE: Picture contains drawings of penises and graphs of how circumcision desensitises the penis. Some people may be offended. I won't embed it to the post and instead I'll just leave the link. View at own risk.

http://i55.tinypic.com/2uoi4o1.jpg

 

[azukar]

Oh good grief, another bloody circumcision thread.

Let's summarise the whole thing in a few neat sentences:

a) people think there are arguments on both sides.

b) people have very strong opinions on the subject, based mostly on their own circumcision circumstance.

c) people get very angsty about this topic when other people disagree with their views.

d) almost nobody is in a position to compare one with the other unless they were circumcised well after becoming sexually active.

End of thread, surely?

 

[Kodachi]

what I find strange is that the only real pro-circumcision person here (Bara_no_Hime) is FEMALE

another thing i find odd is that female genital mutilation is a violation of human rights while circumcision (which is effectively the same thing.) is a-okay.

I'm pro-circumcision. And I've had one. So, yeah.

Not pro or con, just don't see the point. Just another cosmetic procedure as far as I'm concerned. The man with a circumcision will probably look sexier by the general population than say his twin brother who wasn't, much the same way a woman with a breast augmentation would be commonly seen as sexier than her twin with say an A-cup.

(I don't need to hear your personal desires in an effort to prove me wrong, I'm just saying in general)

 

[Bobbety]

As someone who had to get this done a whole year ago (for medical reasons not cosmetic) I can say that spending a year recovering at the age of 16 is an extremely awful experience. One that I would not want my son(s) to have to go through if they encountered the same problems. If you had asked me two months ago what way I preferred to be I would have said with a foreskin, but after fully recovering I'd say I prefer being circumcised.

I feel I might be able to give some extra insight into any "arguments" here being someone who can clearly remember being uncircumcised and circumcised and also remembers the trauma of such a long shitty recovery.

 

[PiggyJibbleFish]

[quote/] Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?
[/quote]

If tattoos and piereced ears were performed on innocent children without regard for their personal feelings, there would be no difference. However, as you may have noticed, they are not. Why?

Because that would be tantamount to child abuse.

Nobody has the right to decide whether or not they want a part of their child's body sliced off unless it's in the case of a life saving surgical procedure. They certainly do not reserve the right to inflict genital mutilation on an infant. Nor do they have the right to cause them tremendous ammounts of pain for the sake of aesthetics. If your kid really, really wants a mutilated penis, then he can get a circumcision when he's old enough to decide for himself.

 

[Halceon]

It's barbaric and should be done only on personal initiative

 

[Divine Miss Bee]

agreed with the OP that circumsized is prettier, and i'm jewish so of course any boys i produce will be circumsized. but i don't think it's terribly important-clearly the foreskin is not necessary for any function, so i don't much think about it unless i'm asked. (this could also be because i'm a girl.)

 

[WolfThomas]

This really needs a poll. So firstly I'm uncircumcised, because my circumcised father always kind of resented his parents making the decision without him. I'm also a fourth year medical student. So there's my bias laid right out on the table.

I don't believe people should be circumcised unless for medical reasons such as phimosis and para-phimosis. You shoudln't be circumcised at birth also because if it turns out you've got a deformity such as a hypospadias, the foreskin is important in reconstruction. Most of these are picked up early but some people go their whole life without noticing.

I feel the logic "because it looks better" is the most ridiculous argument of all, I can understand penile cancer paranoia (even though the rates are incredibly low) and cultural reasons even if I don't agree with it. But to decided to effectively mutilate your child for a fashion that changes by generation and country is absurd. Also I cannot stress this enough, the foreskin slides back when the penis is erect in the majority of people, so there's no usually aesthetic difference between the two.

Also the foreskin is added sensation, whether this is important is debatable, but it's a decision an adult should make for themselves.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

1. The only possible medical benefit of a circumcision is a mild drop in UTI's. Possibly. And this is UTI's which can be prevented by effective cleanliness and stopped by antibiotics.

2. Mutilating someone for aesthetics is disgusting. It's a mutilation because it's permanent and has negative consequences (see 3). It has been stated that the thought of lopping a child's ear off because it looks nicer is psychotic and fucking depraved. It's no less so to lop off part of their penis.

3. Desensitisation DOES OCCUR. This isn't hokey and since most people are circumcised at birth they'll never know (so the whole oh but they don't seem to care is ridiculous and pathetic). It's not hard to point out the quantity of nerve endings in a penile foreskin or the fact that it lubricates and protects the head underneath. Remove the foreskin and the head is left to dry out and become numb, further dulling sexual pleasure.
Maybe a better comparison would be chopping an inch off face of the forefinger.

4. It's a choice. Let the person in question make it. When they hit 18 let them decide if they want to chop their body up the way you let an adult decide if they want to permanently put ink into it. YOU do NOT have to live with a circumcised penis, nor does it affect you in any real way. Let them decide once they're old enough to do so. The process is irreversible and dangerous, not to mention pointless.

 

[joshuaayt]

I had the procedure, and, obviously, I can't really say if it has had a measurable effect on my sexual satisfaction.

But you do have to ask yourself why on earth a parent would want to, when it's probably less creepy and much simpler to just teach the child proper hygienic practices.

There is enough discussion, nowadays, about the possibility of it reducing sexual satisfaction- something I assure you, were it to be proven conclusively (with science), the kid would resent their parents for- that said parents really should consider more carefully the permanent decision they are making for their child.

 

[NoeL]

As someone who had to get this done a whole year ago (for medical reasons not cosmetic) I can say that spending a year recovering at the age of 16 is an extremely awful experience. One that I would not want my son(s) to have to go through if they encountered the same problems. If you had asked me two months ago what way I preferred to be I would have said with a foreskin, but after fully recovering I'd say I prefer being circumcised.

That's like saying "I never want to go through having an ingrown toenail again, so I wish I had my feet chopped off instead". Obviously that's a more extreme example, but the principle holds.

The "medical benefits" of circumcision can be realised with good hygiene. Essentially, you have the option of washing it or undergoing unnecessary, non-consensual, not-unrisky surgery to remove it. In slums and third world countries where soapy water is hard to come by the latter may be your better option, but in any developed country it's sickening that someone would put such an important organ at risk for absolutely no good reason.

The foreskin also plays a substantial role in intercourse. Not only does it house a great deal of sensitive nerves, it makes penetration much easier. The girl I'm seeing is medium-small down there so without lube it becomes a bit of an ordeal. Some guys are cut so tight they can't even jack off without lube.

There's also the risk factor, including but not limited to one side being tighter than the other, causing the penis to bend. My tip bends down a bit, though I can't say whether or not that's due to the circumcision.

 

[Gory Assassin]

Circumcising babies SHOULD BE ILLEGAL because it violates their human rights and can further along in their life cause quite a lot of distress because it is like losing a limb. Adult circumcision i really don't care about because the only way it can happen is if the adult agrees to it.

Foreskin is useless. It serves no practical purpose - it has no effect on sexual stimulation or pleasure.

The foreskin is not useless it does have a massive effect on sexual stimulation. The foreskin contains about 20,000 finely tuned nerves and most of the erogenous zones on the penis. It also covers the head of the penis keeping it most and protecting it from friction from objects such as clothes which reduces sensitivity of the head of the penis. If a penis is circumcised it looses all those nerves and erogenous zones, the head of the penis has kertization which is the formation of the same stuff your nails are made out of over the head of the penis and it reduces sensitivity also circumcision has been known to cause vaginal dryness during intercourse. Overall there are no upsides to circumcision and should only ever be done if needed to.

 

[Harlief]

Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?

Pierced ears and tattoos require consent from the person getting them. A newborn baby can hardly be expected to provide consent.

 

[Sentox6]

The appeal to the entirely subjective assertion that it makes for a "better-looking penis" is laughable. That's the sort of thinking that led to practices like foot binding in the past. Thankfully circumcision doesn't lead to any major issues in the long run... with the exception of reduced sensitivity.

Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?

If you don't care for it, that's fine, but why so... passionate about this topic?

I know the word "trolling" is terribly abused and overused these days, but I really can't imagine how any sane human being could make this comparison.

Unless you live in a very, very dysfunctional community where tattooing or piercing one's infant is a common practice. If so, I hope I never happen upon it.

Foreskin is useless. It serves no practical purpose - it has no effect on sexual stimulation or pleasure.

Ok, trolling.

 

[Dimitriov]

I approve of it. I am circumcised and I like it that way, and I am glad it was done when I was an infant and could heal quickly and without scarring or any memory of the pain.

To all those idiots who talk about it as chopping off part of your manhood: it's frikkin' skin, that's all. When a plastic surgeon does a face lift they don't chop a persons head off.



If you don't want to do it to your kids that's fine, but leave the rest of us alone.

 

[Dasrufken]

2. I don't remember the pain.
rebuttal: If someone was raped using a roofie, does it matter? Even if they don't remember?

Your logic is equally flawed.

rebuttal: An infant lacks the ability to convert short-term memory into long-term memory. They also heal faster (because they are still growing rapidly) than an adult would. That means that their pain passes more quickly, and is forgotten without becoming a part of their personality.

Whereas rape, even while unconscious, is a terrible and scarring experience due to the feeling of violation. Just knowing you have been raped is terrible, even if an individual can't remember it. Also, even while asleep, an adult brain still records data - it still transfers that data to long-term memory. So even if you're raped in your sleep, part of that experience is retained.

So an infant will truly forget, whereas an adult cannot truly forget. Hence your point is not valid.

See? It still matters. You seem to lack many facts about circumcision by your post above.


Watch that video, it even has sources to back it up.

There is absolutely no reason to.

I'm going to have to disagree with you. There are plenty of medical reasons to have a male circumcised:

http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/infopack_en_3.pdf

http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/infopack_en_4.pdf

These are info packets from the World Health Organization, which I think we can agree upon is a reliable source for this kind of information. I'll tell you to read the links if you want a list of all the health benefits of male circumcision but some of the highlights are:

-Decreases the chance of urinary tract infections of babies/children
-Decreased instances of cervical cancer in female sexual partners
-Ease of penile hygiene leading to fewer infections
-Lower rate of sexually transmitted infections
-Lower rate of penile cancer
-Helps prevent the spread of HIV

Now, I will agree that it is a choice, but I don't think that it should be either illegal or mandatory. I personally am very happy my parents had me circumcised.

Look up. If you actually look into it, there are studies that disprove your assumptions and some of those benefits are not actually benefits at all.

Ultra, you just took all the words i wanted to say, and said it for me.

Thank you for sparing me the time it would've took to write a reply like that.

 

[NoeL]

i'm jewish so of course any boys i produce will be circumsized.

No offense, but what you said there is pretty fucking disgusting, and I would urge you to put some more thought into things like this. There's nothing "of course" about it - babies born to Jewish parents aren't genetically circumcised - you're making a personal choice to mutilate your child for religious/cultural reasons. What if your child decides not to be Jewish when he grows up? Don't you think he deserves that choice, as an individual? What you're saying is like "I'm a white supremacist, so of course any boys I produce will be bigoted racists too". No. They'll only turn out like that if you choose to force your own beliefs (and in this case, cultural mutilation) upon them. The least you can do is wait til their 18 and let THEM decide what to do with their own penis.

 

[PaladinMJ]

There is absolutely no reason to.
And fucking aesthetics is NOT a valid reason to chop part of their dick off. Why don't you let them grow up a little and then decide if they want a "better-looking penis".

Though really, I think it should be illegal.

this...
BTW my wife is an RN and hell yes it IS traumatic to the little guys.


have you ever seen a real circumcision? No frickin way you can say it's anything but TRAUMA!