It became popular because people thought it cured masturbation, which in turn caused many ailments like blindness, STDs, etc. That has since proven to be false but the practice continues because by then it had become ingrained into the culture. Foreskins hadn't really been seen for a few generations, so few knew how to deal with it and it became foreign and maligned.
Even now there are people trying to promote circumcision for various reasons, like hygiene: seriously, the foreskin is one the easiest parts of the body to clean and keep clean (easier than brushing teeth). Infection: while circumcision might decrease the chances of a UTI, it poses enough risks and complications to essentially negate that benefit. STDs and HIV: research has been conflicting, it might even depend on the kind of STD. Recent studies say it reduces HIV but apparently proper hygiene of the foreskin negates that as well (see links).
There are legitimate reasons for circumcision (medical, not religious) but that's only a small fraction of the like 5% of uncut men who develop any real problems with their foreskins. Americans don't have to be circumcised (though sometimes the pressure to get cut is great), and in fact the rate has decreased from like nearly 90% to between 50% and 60% today, and it keeps falling.
2006-09-26 09:38:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by trebla_5 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is a dramatic shift in attitudes toward circumcision in Swaziland, which has one of the world's lowest rates of the practice and one of the highest HIV prevalence rates.
Circumcision, once widely viewed as unmanly, it is making a sudden comeback in the country since the publication of a South African study that finds the practice could reduce the risk of contracting HIV.
According to the study published in the November 2005 issue of PLoS Medicine, male circumcision might reduce the risk of men contracting HIV through sexual intercourse with women by about 60%, in Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS Report in November 2005, Hundreds of Swazi men have been circumcised in recent months, and hospitals that were rarely approached for circumcision earlier are now circumcising 10 to 15 patients weekly, with a two-month waiting list.
However, some circumcision advocates say that newly circumcised men might believe that they are "totally protected" from HIV and take to high-risk sexual behavior, while in fact they are highly vulnerable to HIV in the weeks after circumcision until the wound heals, when the virus can enter the body through
this is one of the reason
2006-09-26 03:53:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
it's goes back to victorian times and the anti masturbation and sex is dirty league it was about 90% of boys had this done to them this has reduced to about 60% in the us today.in the rest of the world
about 16% (1 in 6) a majority of that figure mainly jewish or muslim countrys.Studys showing prevention of hiv have been shown to be flawed,not taking into account cultural practices.
ie. where circumcision is highest in certain tribes hiv is lower,having more than one sexual partner is frowned upon.(which is the most likely cause)
a simple example in west. 90% circ rate in usa would show lower
hiv than say uk (currently 6% circ rate) but hiv rate in us is actually a lot higher.times are fortunately changing and personal choice will be the decider for future genrations.
2006-09-26 11:46:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm American and live in Europe now. Those people who are for circumsision 'claim' that it is cleaner to not have foreskin. I suppose those same people don't know how to wash properly.
It's a parent's choice for their baby whether or not they want their son to be circumisized. Not all do it, but most.
I think it's a cruel thing to do. Thereis no anthesetic for the baby. Those idiot say that the baby doesn't know pain or is just in shock. They really are dilluted in thinking that.
2006-09-26 03:42:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Just me. 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
HZE
2014-05-30 03:47:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
American male children do not have to be. One can tell the doctor not to.
Male children do get picked on here in the states if they are not though. At least this is what one of my three boys told me.
2006-09-26 03:44:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I really don't think its a religous thing anymore because I'm catholic and was circumsized at birth. I don't know what it is with american families who are typically christian and still want their sons circumsized. There are no health benefits to it.
2006-09-26 03:42:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by tribe2437 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm guessing it's more acceptable in the Western world for a while now? And for sanity, it's cleaner.
2006-09-26 03:42:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Tank D 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I am circumcised and despite I don't live in America... they claim it is cleaner and you don't have to be jewish
2006-09-26 20:28:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
OMG
2006-09-26 03:41:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by ghbnhgjhnbhg7171 2
·
0⤊
0⤋