Are more guys "cut" or "uncut"? i thought more guys were cucumcised at birth, instead of left alone.
2006-12-16 23:54:09 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health ➔ Men's Health
It depends where in the world you're talking about. In the US right now about 60% of guys are circumcised. In the 70s and 80s that number was as high as 80-90%. But clearly it's fallen out of favor somewhat, and today's number has been fairly stable for the last few years. Circumcision is very rare in Europe, except amongst Jews and Muslims. Most of Central and South America and Asia are also uncircumcised. On the whole, about 80% of the world's male population is uncircumcised.
2006-12-17 02:05:11 · answer #1 · answered by trebla_5 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
It's a matter of geography and religion. Jews and Muslims have it done as a ritual. In Sweden infant circumcision is considered so barbaric and harmful that it's illegal except for religious or medical exemptions. It used to be popular in the US because people thought it cut down on masturbation, but now it has largely fallen out of favor. In Africa, only Muslims circumcise. It is rare in non-Muslim, non-Jewish Asia, Europe, and South America.
It should be illegal everywhere. Female genital mutilation is considered a crime, so why do we let baby boys have this done to them? Keeping clean is not rocket science, and that's all that is needed.
2006-12-17 16:52:47 · answer #2 · answered by Maple 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Most guys in the United States or Canada are happily circumcised. Most men in Africa and Asia are circumcised too, as well as many men in Australia and New Zealand.
Globally, about 40% of the world population is circumcised, but this amount is expected to increase thanks to recent research that proves circumcision reduces the risk of contracting STD's such as AIDS-HIV. Some countries in Africa and South America with little circumcision tradition are promoting the procedure to reduce the AIDS-HIV infection rates.
Is a circumcises penis less sensitive than an uncircumcised one?
Not really. A circumcised penis is exactly, or even more sensitive than an uncircumcised one. There is NO *scientific* evidence that says the opposite. The foreskin has not really any function, as many will WRONGLY think. I totally agree with Andy in this. Have a read at the site he's suggesting above.
Are uncircumcised penises more prone to infections?
Yes, uncircumcised penises are more difficult to keep clean, thus being more prone to infections, plus they are more likely to get STD's like AIDS or herpes. Many studies and research have been showing this fact for many many years. Circumcision also reduces the risk of penile cancer.
Don't let those radicals who oppose circumcision foul you. Circumcision is NOT any kind of mutilation. That comparison is wrong, misleading and used only to manipulate people. It is NOT at all comparable with female circumcision, which is something completely different.
Circumcision is an easy and nowadays painless procedure that has many many benefits, both for men and women, and has virtually no risks.
Only believe serious and scientific evidence, reject obscure and nonsense theories and explanations. And so far, serious and scientific evidence is SUPPORTING circumcision.
This site has excellent information on circumcision. Please have a good look: http://www.circinfo.net
2006-12-17 14:08:40 · answer #3 · answered by Scuba 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Whether or not circumcision should be performed is a controversial question, especially as religious issues may be involved. One of the aims of the Circumcision Information Pages is to provide parents with information to assist them, if and when they are confronted with this question. Parents are especially referred to the FAQ, or Frequently Asked Questions file.
This site has links to information on the rights of the child, religious issues, and related issues.
Circumcision cuts some or all of the foreskin (prepuce) from the penis. The frenulum may also be cut away at the same time, in a procedure called frenectomy. The word "circumcision" comes from Latin circum (meaning "around") and caedere (meaning "to cut").
2006-12-17 07:58:21 · answer #4 · answered by Master Of Chaos 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
In the United States circumcision is more common by 23%.
2006-12-17 07:56:16 · answer #5 · answered by Isis 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Circumcision is more common in the US than in Europe. Also, depending on what your religious belief is, you might be circumcized (Jewish boys are cut).
From a health perspective, lots has been written about whether to cut or not to cut. Being cut is easier to clean. There are also studies saying that being cut doesn't decrease sensitivity.
2006-12-17 08:19:42 · answer #6 · answered by barrych209 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
MOST ARE BUT SOME DUE TO PREFERENCE OR RELIGION MY SON IS NOT BECAUSE THEY DIDNT DO IT AT BIRT THEY WAITED ONE WEEK LATER MADE HIM AN APPT AT LIKE 2 IN THE AFTER NOON AND TOLD ME NOT TO FEED HIM NOW COME ON YOU TRY NOT FEEDING A ONE WEEK OLD ALL DAY NOT CUTE SO I JUST NEVER WENT BACK HIS DADDY IS NOT EITHER I FIGURED HE COULD TEACH HIM HOW TO CARE FOR IT AND IT IS OK AS LONG AS ITS KEPT CLEAN AND DRY IT DOES WORK THE SAME TOO BELIEVE ME LOL
2006-12-17 07:58:57 · answer #7 · answered by aengel69 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
In my day, uncut was the oddity; now it seems to be evening out
2006-12-17 08:10:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Some barbaric tribes still carried out this mutilation of young boys around the world...They say it's some form of cleansed ritual...I know in the catholic church when your baptized....your cleansed... no need to be circumcised,.... we need all our bits...!!!!!
2006-12-17 08:13:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I`m uncut. WHY ALTER SOMETHING THAT IS NATURAL? I like it this way.
2006-12-17 09:33:06 · answer #10 · answered by kaszika 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋