Why is circumcision so widely practiced in the United States of America?

Question

I feel circumcision is mutalation. I know it is praticed in the christian religion but why do the non christian parents perform this barbaric pratice on their children? Please stop this and wait until your child is old enough to make the decision themselves. Doctors say if you do not have it done that it can cause urinary tract infections. I do not think it is the foreskin that causes the infection, but the parent not cleaning the child well enough. It also can cause many problems worse than a minor infection and isn't even recomended by doctors. As a circumcised man I wish this had not been done to me. I also wish to hear other men's opinion on this subject. Do you wish this had/had not been done to you and why. I also wish to hear from women. Do you prefer a man circumcised or not and why.

Answer 1

Circumcision is most certianly wrong. It is an injury to mind, body and soul that permenantly scars and difigures men for life and deprives them of a wonderful and most sensitive part of their body., It is the removal of normal and healthy body parts from an unconsenting child who has no say in the matter. I suppose it is mainly due to ignorance that it is still done in the US. There is no ethically sound reason to do it as it amputates a totally normal and healthy body part.

The intact penis is very easy to keep clean and does not take much time to clean. Compared to the much more complex female genitalia, the intact male genitalia is much easier to care for. Women, in fact, have a much higher rate of yeast infections than men do, and furthermore, the rate of UTI for women is 5 to 50 times higher for women than it is for men. Just as these conditions do not require circumcision of women, neither is circumcision of men needed either, as they are both far less common in males and when they do occur can be treated in the same non-invasive (non surgical, non cutting, non circumcision) manner that they are treated by on females.

The foreskin is also an important and vital part of male anatomy. It is the location of 20,000 highly specialised nerve receptors of various types not found in this concentration anywhere else on the human body. The sensory loss and loss of sensation and pleasure from circumcision is quite obvious. Nerve endings are responsible for the pleasure sensations that we feel on our bodies. The more nerve endings that are present, the more pleasure and sensation there will be, since each nerve ending adds additional sensory input. Nerve endings are found in the skin, especially the skin of the foreskin which is the most heavily innervated part of the human body. Therefore, when you remove skin, you are removing nerve endings, reducing the number of nerve endings. This therefore does result in the loss of pleasure since fewer nerve endings means less pleasure. Most of the highly sensitive specialised pleasure nerve endings of the penis are located on the inner fold surface of the foreskin. Comparitively, the glans and the external penile shaft skin have few specialised nerve endings and are relatively dull in comparison. This is why the removal of the foreskin can resuilt in a significant and massive loss of sensitivity of the penis. Many men who have been subjected to circumcision as adults have reported these significant losses of pleasure and sensitivity.

The loss of the foreskin has been aptly described as amputating ones taste buds. Like the taste buds, the type of pleasure which can be produced by the foreskin for instance during masturbation can be found nowhere else on the human body. The foreskin is an important and healthy part of male anatomy and there are non invasive, non circumcision ways to treat things such as non rectractability. The foreskin is also there to protect the glans which is sensitive itself. The loss of the foreskin has been said by some to lead to further loss of sensitivity on the glans as well which further dulls pleasure, due to keratinisaion of the foreskin whereby the glans, if it is not protected by the foreskin, due to constant abrasion and exposure, of the glans which is mean to tbe an internal, protected organ, collects a layer of dead skin cells over it which buries nerve endings deeper and becomes dulled and desensitised.

Regarding the HIV issue, by the way, to prevent HIV is through the use of condoms or not having sexual intercourse at all. Both of these can provide far greater protection from HIV than circumcision ever will. Condoms can provide you with 80% or greater protection from HIV, while not having sexual intercourse provides 100% protection. One of the best aspects of this, is not only greater protection from HIV than circumcision, but also it does not require the amputation of the most nerve loaded and pleasure sensitive part of your body, the foreskin. When a person is going to have sexual intercourse it is best to do so only in the case of a stable and trusting relationship. Before one has sex with a partner, both partners can get tested for HIV as well. This reduces the chance of one partner passing HIV to the other quite considerably. It is also wise to wait until later, until say after one is over 18, before having sexual intercourse. One tool we have to our use as an alternative to sex is masturbation. The foreskin particularly increases the pleasure from masturbation quite significantly as many of the most heavily innervated parts of the penis are located in the foreskin, especially the frenulum, which is a string like and webbed structure which connects to the underside of the glans, and runs down the inner surface of the foreskin, and the ridged bands, which are highly sensitive elastic bands which are located at or just inside the tip of the foreskin and form a continuous structure with the foreskin.
Overall females have more yeast infections, etc, then men, and we find ways of avoiding cutting off parts of their genitals.

. Even without the prepuce, the chance is still significant that you will get HIV, and it would be foolish to engage in sex with strange women still, a good chance you will be circumcised, and have HIV. The US has a twice higher rate of HIV than europe, despite the US having much higher circumcision rates than Europe. We have a lot of circumcised and HIV infected men in the US. Why is it only men who are being asked to give up sexually sensitive tissue? Women have plenty of HIV receptors on their genital mucousal tissue that we could excise. Many types of FGM are very much the same As MGM, such as removing part of the labia and the clitoral hood, would be very similar in scope of damage to MGM.

When one reaches the age of sexual maturity and decides they want circumcision, they can always have it done then. Its their body and they can make the choice for themselves. But what if a person is going to practice safe sex all of their life? Being mutilated will have done absolutely no good and they would have lost all of that wonderful sensitivity in the foreskin, ironically destroying much of the pleasure of their masturbation experience as well.

It is unethical to remove body parts that having nothing presently wrong with them, or where a clinically verifiable medical condition can be treated with non-invasive method, where the condition is minor, is not severely life threatening.

The bottom line is it comes down to personal choice, that is, pesonal choice of the person whose body it is. We do not have any right to steal body parts which are normal and that everyone is born with from unconsenting persons. They should be allowed to make the choice for themselves when they are old enough.
Source(s):

Answer 2

It is what Americans are used to. The uncircumcised penis is foreign to many women, they think it looks funny, that it's dirty, they don't understand how it works, etc.

Actually too much cleaning can cause urinary tract infections. We know women should avoid bubble baths, douching or harsh soaps in the vagina. No need to pull the labia apart and scrub, any woman who's had soap in there will tell you it doesn't feel good. The foreskin does not need scrubbing anymore than a woman's labia does.

I prefer uncircumcised but that's because I've had several of both types and learned to appreciate them. I thought they looked funny at first too and didn't understand how everything worked.

Answer 3

My advice: ignore the radicals and fundamentalists who fanatically oppose the procedure; these people are against simply because they are not happy with *their* circumcision, they certainly need help.

I have four sons, all of them circumcised, none had ANY problem. I was there when the doctor did the procedure, and they were perfectly fine. Just a little normal crying at the beginning and then they relaxed as the doctor worked. They were peacefully sleeping by the time he finished. A week after the procedure their penises were completely healed and they were happy and joyful.

CIRCUMCISION IS PAINLESS, EASY AND VIRTUALLY NO-RISK.

Circumcision is NOT mutilation, don't try to mislead other with lies.

I never had any doubt that I would have all my sons circumcised too, even after some people *tried* to convince my of their catastrophist and surrealistic theories against it.

It’s just SO MUCH BETTER TO BE CIRCUMCISED.

Answer 4

I personally am happy my parents had me circumcised. I like the look, but then again I have had it for my whole life. Plus at least in America uncircumcised men seem to be less popular, so a child could grow up being scared to show or tell women about it. Also, it seems like evolution made it so you had foreskin so your penis would not freeze off and lose functionality, and now that this is not longer a problem, at least here in the US, I see no more use for this skin and it doesn't bother me that my parents did it to me.

Answer 5

Women have a lot to do with perpetuating circumcision in America.

Though most have never even seen a natural penis, and very few have had sex with a natural man, in the hospital it's the woman that usually signs the consent form. And since the only kind of penis they know is the circumcised, they sign away their son's sexuality not realizing

WOMEN, TOO, ARE HARMED BY MALE CIRCUMCISION

http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/10F/1hook_scrapes.html

----------

Answer 6

I wish it had not been done to me either.... The only reason that it is practiced here is for a cleaning issue parents obviously don't like the fact they would have to clean and dry it for the child and then teach them to do it. Narrow minds... there are parts on a women that could also be circumszed for cleansing issue and they Don't do that I say leave the boys stuff where it is. I feel like it has been robbed from me!!!!

Answer 7

You are correct. It's a mutilation. It should have been stopped years ago when we started having indoor plumbing. I'm cut and have no religion. I feel sorry for those that are cut so tightly that they can't even jerk off without using a lube. I will say one thing though, a circumsized penis is beautiful. having that long foreskin covering the head looks awful. But that's just me. Another benefit is that having the head exposed cuts down the sensitivity so we can go longer.

Answer 8

I agree that circumcision is wrong. I think Americans still have it done because they're uninformed or too concerned about what other people are going to think about their sons penis (stupid, yes).

Few people realize that it actually was started because the church thought it would prevent men from mastrubating... but told everyone it was "cleaner". So here we are many, many years later with stupid people still saying "it's cleaner" and they don't understand what they're really saying.

Answer 9

Because CIRCUMCISION IS VERY BENEFICIAL, its cleaner and several research bodies have concluded that circumcised men have less risk of contracting STD's such as AIDS-HIV or herpes.

Uncircumcised penises are difficult to keep clean, and more prone to infections and penile cancer, studies have shown.
A circumcised penis is naturally clean and virtually free from urinary infection. You will not have to worry again with careful washing of your penis.

Is it NOT true that the AAP (American Academy of Paediatrics) does not recommend circumcision. They simply say they leave the decision to parents. But recently, and specially after the New Zealand study, the AAP has been discussing if it may be necessary to change their policy and recommend circumcision to all newborns as they used to do, so in the future we may see that the AAP advocates again circumcision.
Have a look at: http://www.baby-health.net/articles/381.html

About STD's:

As I said, 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

About sensitivity of a circumcised 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

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.

Finally, this site has a lot of useful and *unbiased* information. Make sure you have a good look: http://www.circinfo.net

Answer 10

Doctors with strong religious bias sold it as necessary for hygienic purposes and to prevent masturbation (true), but you are correct it is mutilation.

It reduces the man's pleasure for no good reason, similar to the practice of removing the clitoris in some backward cultures.

Answer 11

everything you say is true.circumcision takes place because of medical politics.Christians do not circumcise girls or boys.it is considered mutilation in the bible.i am circumcised and wish i wasn't.you have to fight to stop circumcision.the brain damage caused to people by it is horrible and the sexual disadvantage for women make circumcision obsolete.female circumcision harms women's sexual pleasure and male circumcision causes female arousal disorder.circumcision of males and females harms women the most.