would you/have you asked a man to be circumcised? if yes why?

Question

WOMENS QUESTION
not males whinging about being cut/uncut or trying to influence othe people on an issue that is obviously a personal choice of parents, espesh mothers.

why do people waste time answering a question when they don't read it first.

Answer 1

YES Why? Keep reading...

Most women prefer a man with a circumcised penis because it may move inside them in a less friction-based manner. Once he is inside the vagina, the unhooded penis may easily slide up and down to create pleasure for both partners.

There are several advantages for circumcised men when it comes to sexuality. First is that circumcised male have no need to worry about daily cleansing of his foreskin. Meanwhile, men with an intact foreskin must take special care to move it up and down and clean it inside its covered areas to avoid odors or serious infection because of material buildup. Consequently, there might be some bacteria and germs that could surface thus affect their sexual health.

Safe sex is an added concern for uncircumcised men and their partners. Men with foreskins occasionally have difficulty finding the right condom or keeping one on during penetrative sexual activity. That spells trouble in bed as well as generates unneeded anxiety.

As for the sensitivity of the penis, no medical or physiological study has proved that circumcision reduces sensitivity, opposed to common belief. It is completely FALSE that circumcision reduces penis sensitivity. The American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP) confirms this on their web site; have a look at: http://www.aap.org/pubed/zzzjzmemh4c.htm

Several studies carried out by prestigious research bodies have concluded that uncircumcised penises are more prone to infections and contraction of STD's, including AIDS-HIV. Circumcised men have been proved to be up to seven times less likely to be infected than those who are uncircumcised. Have a look at this site:
http://icuxbridge.icnetwork.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=14095142&method=full&siteid=53340&headline=-circumcision-protects-against-aids--name_page.html

As for women, studies also show that circumcision also protects female partners from AIDS-HIV and other STD's. Browse this article: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2006/02_08_06.html

Circumcision is an easy and nowadays painless procedure, which has many benefits, and virtually no risks.

Circumcision is NOT an amputation. Circumcision is NOT comparable at all to female circumcision, which is something completely different.

Circumcision rates are INCREASING nowadays, both in the United States and overseas. Many African and South American countries with little circumcision tradition are starting to promote the procedure to help to reduce the AIDS-HIV infection rates.

Answer 2

I'm assuming this question is directed towards women, but I'd hate to let that ignorant first comment go unchallenged.

Yes, SOME medical research has suggested there are benefits to circumcision, but OTHER medical research suggests there are negatives to it. As it stands, neither side can agree, so why the hell would the default position be to circumcise? If it's naturally how the penis is, it seems to be the more logical choice to leave it that way unless there's a problem. Plus people get all up in arms about "female circumcision" in foreign countries (different than FGM), but they seem to have no problem with the same being done to men here.

Hypocrites.

Edit: Speaking of hypocrites, just noticed the OP changed his question. It's a parents' decision to mutilate their kids now! Wow, well, we can just tell all those people campaigning in Africa to shut the hell up about FGM now. It's been the parents' decision all along!

My point was that there is no convincing evidence either way. If you don't like it, I don't care. Just don't try to fob off your own ignorance with pathetic excuses like that.

Answer 3

I'm undecided. Not sure it was an original law inspired or given by God or if it was a fetish of women long ago, who insisted their captured slaves have this done to themselves, or if it was a law started by men who wanted to have lots of mates and/or rapes without it being as detectable because there is an aftereffect if the man is not circumcized that can last for a day or so; when people were more sensitive/psychic it would be easier to tell who had raped them-and then, since Jewish persecution has gone on so long, it was attributed as being Jewish law by the gov. in power rather than the actual reason(s) made known

Answer 4

As a man, I wouldn't give in to pressure from a partner to be circumcised, unless it was for a medical reason.

Answer 5

How ridiculous. Why mutilate your child unnecessarily? And as far as asking a grown man to do it, you've got to be kidding. If I WERE to ask a grown man to do it, and he DID, I'd dump him so fast, his head would spin. No self-respecting man would do that for a woman.

Your name wouldn't be Hugo by any chance, would it?

Oh, and p.s. women don't care.

Answer 6

No way. For those men who have been left unmutilated, it is entirely their choice if they want it done. I'd never pressure a man to have bits of him cut off.

Answer 7

I couldnt see myself asking a man to do it, but I would prefer if he did.

Answer 8

yes. some medical research have shown high prevarency of viral infections to uncircumcised.