If i ever get a baby boy, should i circumsize him or not? I hear that its better to do so because its more dangerous not being circumsized and that there's a bigger risk of getting infections or whatsoever. My guy friend says its the opposite and that not being circumsize is better. He's a guy and he should know about this but i can't help but feel that he's wrong. Who's right?
2006-06-05 13:39:04 · 11 answers · asked by FleurDeLys 2 in Health ➔ Men's Health
well this was something that was started in the 1800s , before medicine was as advanced as it is now, and it wasn't even started in the united states, its just one of those thing that just gets carried on from family to family from lack of current education on the issue. there is absolutely no sense in getting it done its actually kinda cruel,you know they use to do the same to females when they were born cut out some of the clit thank god they finally stopped that. the reason they say it helps from getting infection is because its easier to clean under the skin ,but if you teach your son proper hygiene this will not be an issue. it also will reduce the stimulation in his orgasms as he gets older and starts having sex. think about it who made such a ignorant though of cutting a man penis, its just an old superstition made in England. and it still creates money for doctors offices but i can guarantee that any good MD will not suggest it. keep it natural unless you don't want to clean under your babies foreskin
2006-06-05 14:30:52 · answer #1 · answered by bambi 4 · 18⤊ 6⤋
Well, a couple of years back, I was working on several months on a project in US where circumcising seems to be very common while in my country it was absolutely not. There was another guy from outside US where it was also not common.
The key factor is really personal hygiene and has nothing to do with circumcision or not. Of course, a lack of personal hygiene makes it easier to attach men who are not circumcised.
Any way, I always liked his comparison. If there is some one who gets an ear infection once, does that mean that now every one has to cut off the auricles?
2006-06-06 12:13:40 · answer #2 · answered by SomeOneWhoKnowsBetter 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
circumcision is a myth, years ago people tough that removing the foreskin will prevent infections an so on, but the truth is this is not true or necessary. there is no rule to follow in personal hygiene, people circumcised have the same chances to have an infection or any other tipe of disease. So the bottom line, do not do it unless by any chance the doctor recommends it.
2006-06-05 20:49:07 · answer #3 · answered by Manny 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The truth is, god gave you every inch of your body, and having it circumsized is changing the act of god. Now going into the actual individual's perspective who the procedure is being done to, you are taking away a pleasure in which he will hate you for the following years. But it will be a hate deep inside himself everytime he goes to the toilet and looks down, in which he will know that at his parents decision are the cause of his lackness of pleasure. "Ask not what to do with the "hood" of your boy, but what the "hood" of your boy can do for you" . By the way the answer is taking away the hate from your boy towards you. And I say NOT goodbye but untilforever
Dr.R.S
2006-06-05 23:03:39 · answer #4 · answered by alrudy2005 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If a guy gets circumcised some of the nerves in his penis may be cut, and that is where most of the sexual sensation is. As long as he maintains proper hygiene by pulling back the foreskin and cleaning the area with soap & water & rinse well. This should pervent any problems.
2006-06-05 20:51:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
When my first two boys were born, circumsision was done automatically a day or two after birth. They did not do that any more when my third boy was born. The result: as well as I followed the doctor's instructions about keeping that area clean--he caught an infection there--and had to have it done at almost 3 years old. Much better to have it done as an infant.
2006-06-05 20:45:27 · answer #6 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I wonder if the first respondent abraded the area on her sons penis and unwittingly made the area more susceptible to infection. Societies and cultures have endured with the hoods intact. There is another issue to consider, and that is the loss of sensitivity with circumcision. In fact now there is a surgery to replace or manufacture a hood for the penis to prevent further loss of sensitivity- translation he may hate you for that decision later in his life.
2006-06-05 21:09:04 · answer #7 · answered by cynthie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it is better for hygienic purposes. I have seen uncircumnsized men in the ICU with testicles swollen as big as grapefruits. Sure, they had other conditions but it was not pleasant. It is a simple procudure to be done while a newborn.....not so easy later on. Plus, it just plain looks better!
2006-06-05 22:06:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It doesnt really matter whether or not a man is circumsised. Its hygenic and easier to keep clean but not necesary. It will be somewhat hard to make sure that the boy's area will be clean. It doesnt really matter but if you dont want to deal with having to make sure its clean down there then do it.
2006-06-05 20:56:20 · answer #9 · answered by Bizzy 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is really all up to hygiene, I agree with the other guys.
2006-06-05 21:09:37 · answer #10 · answered by Carlee 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i am not circunsized. It doesnt matter. i never had a infection . God made us with hood.
And i dont know if girls like it like that but i am ok with my hood.
2006-06-05 20:46:14 · answer #11 · answered by carlover 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋