What is the big deal about circumcision?

Question

why do people think circumcision is bad (please don't put religious reasons)im circumcised and dont have a problem with it my family is not religous or anything like that

im 13

Answer 1

I don't think that circumcision is bad or good. If you are it's supposed to be more hygienic. If you are not it's said that it gives you greater sexual pleasure. It's not true however that sexual pleasure is greatly reduced if you are circumcised...

Answer 2

well you said not to put in religious reasons but that's the only reason. Most religions frown upon circumcision. Others don't simple as that.

I'm circumcised...glad i am. Its been scientifically proven that its much more healthy and hygienic to be circumcised

Answer 3

Here is a mothers perspective on circumcision.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Puz7dA7qo...

Answer 4

It is wrong to cut part of someone's genitals off without their consent. That's all there is to it. On top of that, there is no benefit to circumcision so the fact that it is legal to perform on an infant is absolutely disgusting.

I am a circumcised man and it was not botched but I feel that I was mutilated against my will.

I am actually in the process of restoring my f******n non-surgically as I am extremely angry and disappointed that a healthy, functioning part of my body was removed for no good reason other than societal customs.

The risks are very small, but many boys have lost their penises due to botched circumcisions and some have even died due to bleeding or infection.

The risk is very small but it is a risk that I would never even consider when the alternative is to leave my son the way that he is intended to be and carries no risk of death or disfigurement.

http://www.icgi.org/

http://www.noharmm.org

http://www.nocirc.org

I think that it is important for everyone to read what's behind the following link.

http://knol.google.com/k/george-hill/cir...

Answer 5

My little fella works well without his headscarf.

Answer 6

This is only a big deal in America where people would rather cut parts of themselves off than take soap, water, and 30 seconds to clean them.  No other country has this debate.  They either do it for religious purposes or see no point in it.

Answer 7

Well, you will never know it, but it removes at least 50% of the pleasure of sexual intercourse.

The f******n is there for a reason, to keep the glans (head) moist. Without the f******n, the glans gets keratinized, Which means the once moit skin dries and hardens.

There is no good reason to remove the f******n, unless you suffer severely from phimosis. Its practice was popularised by Mr Kellogg, who didnt like the idea of young men masturbating, as he considered it sinful. So its a very common practice, often done without anasthaesia, for no good reason at all.

Answer 8

It removes sexual pleasure for the male and some people view as cruel to remove the f******n. It is a choice.

Answer 9

its not a big deal theres no difference whether ur circumcised or not

there just idiots

Answer 10

i do not no

Answer 11

the purpose of having a guy to be circumcised is for hygienic reason....thats what doctors always say......but if you're not circumcised,well, you can clean your p***s all the time to prevent it from accumulating germs and being infected for some reason.....for my personal opinion, circumcised is much better that uncircumcised.....i just heard a news last week that a china man was hospitalized because his p***s got infected....their reason is that the guy is uncircumcised and they have to cut the p***s of the guy....the p***s of the guy gives foul smell, swollen and disfigured....doctors said its cancerous....

when it comes to s*x.....i don't think circumcised or uncircumcised has something to be it....it depends how you handle yourself when it comes to carnal contact.....

just be yourself and keep yourself clean to prevent from sickness and any germs or virus that could infect us......

Answer 12

I'm a girl , and I think its nasty if a guy isn't circumcised .

Answer 13

I think part of the problem that the opposition to circumcision has is that in America most of the men are circumcised (around 75%) so telling them hat it is bad  - they are going to take it personally.  Anger is a normal reaction too.  

But people opposed to circumcision don't like the myths that go around about how there are certain advantages to being circumcised.  If you were as informed as I am on the subject you would have read some of the studies that these assertions were based on and found them to be highly flawed which means they are not valid.  The major doctors association even says themselves that there "may" be certain advantages to circumcision but these are to enough to recommend it.

There really are no advantages:  http://www.cirp.org/library/disease

America started circumcising to prevent young boys masturbating:

Why Americans started circumcising: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X09jPPeog...

The f******n is the most sensitive part of the p***s.

http://www.enotalone.com/776-1.html

On its underside are thousands of nerves that are stimulated as you move the skin up and down like so:

http://geocities.com/painfulquestioning/...

a circumcised can't do  this easily  because he has lost the skin - so he has a hard time masturbating.

Also, after circumcision the glans(head) is exposed.  It rubs on clothes so a tough layer of skin forms on top of the head of the p***s to protect it.  This further reduces sensation.

Because the shape and functionality of the p***s has changed, it no longer works as it should during s*x:

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

Also what about the complications of circumcision - some people have lost there p***s - a lot more have painful erections - difficulty urinating - the list goes on: http://www.catholicsagainstcircumcision....

- why should these people have their lives ruined due to ignorance?  everyone should have the right not to have an important part of their body taken away without their consent.  80% of the world is uncircumcised - only a very small proportion of people would choose this procedure.  They would have to be brainwashed into doing it - which is what happens in America.

Interesting blog on circumcision:

http://wreckingboy.livejournal.com/31854...

Answer 14

I don't think it should be done to infants because it is cruel and unnececssary. The f******n is a normal part of the p***s and it provides a lot of sexual sensation. Sorry you are missing that. f******n problems are rare, and it's easy to clean.

Harriet

Answer 15

Circumcision is healthy and it reduces the chances of you getting any STDs.

Answer 16

The 10 Reasons why I think infant circumcision is wrong.

1. Circumcision is considered non-therapeutic and medically unnecessary in the vast majority of cases. Only when it becomes medically necessary should it be considered.

2. The procedure itself is very painful especially for babies because they have to rip the f******n from the glans and anesthesia is rarely used. Causing pain without a necessity is medically unethical.

3. When done at birth, routine circumcision is a violation of the infants right to choose and therefore unethical.

4. Circumcision cuts off all the nerve endings in the f******n (which include the most sensitive parts of the p***s in the ridged band) reducing sensitivity.

5. Circumcision exposes the head of the p***s to friction of clothing which causes keratinization further reducing sensitivity, particularly as the man ages.

6. Lack of f******n makes masturbation more difficult since the f******n doesn't slide up and down anymore. Prevention of masturbation was the reason it became popular in the first place. Circumcised masturbation usually requires lube.

7. Lack of f******n makes s*x less pleasurable for the female because it adds friction in the v****a since there is no f******n gliding motion anymore.

8. Circumcision leaves a scar on the p***s. Some people believe that circumcision is more asthetic than natural. This opinion is of course biased by the fact that Americans are used to seeing circumcised penises. Anywhere else, circumcision is usually considered mutilation.

9. Infant circumcision if common in the US because doctors get paid to do it. There is no universal health care system in the US. Doctors intentionally won't educate parents before presenting them with the decision. Circumcision is the most common surgury done in the US and it's the only one that routinely violates a doctors code of ethics to "first do no harm".

10. Some guys who were circumcised at birth regret that the decision was made for them and are not glad about it but there's nothing they can do now since it's permenant. Any uncircumcised guy who wants to be circumcised later in life can just go have it done (although most are happy the way they are).  

Answer 17

how do you know? you have never experienced the full pleasure, you think you aren't missing anything because you can't experience it

I wish my parents hadn't chosen it for me, when I found out about it I read everything I could, I know tons of information about and have read both pro and anti circumcision websites, I really wanted to believe it was good, but the truth just isn't there, you see and hear all these claims but if you ask for the actual study nobody has them or they are so old and used invalid techniques and would not even be considered for publishing, I wanted to believe it was good but if you look at both sides, circumcising without an immediate medical need makes no sense at all.

I did f******n restoration restoring what was left (they do leave some f******n) but it's not all restorable, but what I was able to get back was great. but this came at a price, I can no longer see circumcision as cosmetic or as if it does not really matter, things that I thought were normal I only realized were problems after I restored and no longer had them, sexual enjoyment is way up. I can't imagine how much better the real thing is.

people have said in relation to sexual pleasure

intact=10

cut=3

restored=7

and from my experience I agree with the cut/restored numbers

http://knol.google.com/k/george-hill/cir...

www.nocirc.org

Answer 18

Because you should not surgically alter a child's sexual equipment when they are below the age of consent. It is morally WRONG.

If they want to do it as an adult, it is their business.

Most Americans seem to accept routine infant circumcision, but I can't tell you how morally twisted it looks to people here in the UK where we don't do it.

The equivalent procedure on a girl would be removal of the inner labia and clitoral hood. Sure, that might be 'cleaner' and look 'neater', but a girl would lose something from her sexual experience. Would you consider it acceptable if that started being done routinely to all baby girls, or would you consider it shocking?

If someone told you they were getting their little baby girls labia and hood 'cut' so that she was 'cleaner' and 'wasn't teased in the locker room' by the other girls as a teenager, and so men would like her more as an adult, would you think that was ok too?

Answer 19

The f******n is there for a reason.

The only reasons men want it removed is lazyness, they are too lazy to clean it properly or because they have problems with it, which is understandable.

As to women who like it circumcised, well what right does a being with a hole full of mucus and germs no matter how hygenic they are, no matter how often they clean, what right do they have to say that a p***s with a f******n is dirty?

Answer 20

Whilst you are glad to be circumcised, I assume you had it done at birth, so you don't know any different. I on the other hand am glad I'm uncircumcised, but the difference is that I still have the choice, and could change it if I wanted to.