Why aren't all guys circumcised?

Answer 1

Oh god, here come all of the uncircumcised guys trying to proclaim that being uncircumcised is "better" than being circumcised. A guy DOESN'T need to have foreskin on his penis. Being circumcised is much more hygienic than being uncircumcised. Have you ever smelled "c0ck cheese" on a circumcised guy???

Answer 2

Ii's not just uncircumcised guys who are against circumcision. I was circumcised at bith and I hate it. Many other circumcised men feel the same but most circumcised guys have no idea what they have lost. The foreskin is sensitive erogenous tissue and covers 15 square inches in an adult (40 square centimetres), half to two thirds of the skin area of the penis. It has a unique gliding action that allows it to slide on itself and act like lube during masturbation and sex. During intercourse it acts like lube on entry and may act as a dam, preventing lubricating secretions escaping from the vagina. In one study women reported that sex with an intact partner was gentler and more satisfying since he doesn't have to thrust as hard to feel enough stimulation. Removing the foreskin turns the surface of the glans from an inner mucosal membrane to outside skin. Newly circumcised adults usually go through some weeks of intense discomfort as the glans is constantly exposed to rubbing on clothing, until it develops a thicker keratin layer and becomes less sensitive. A new study has shown real differences in fine touch sensitivity between circumcised and intact penises and that the most sensitive parts of the intact penis are those that would be removed by circumcision.

Using surgery to mutilate the genitals instead of washing in a modern western society makes no sense. Normal intact male genitals are, if anything, easier to wash than female ones and the same substance, smegma collects in the folds of both sorts.

ALL reputable medical organisations in the world now say that the risks of routine male circumcision equal or outweigh any possible benefits. Those "benefits" are marginal or much disputed. For instance even if you accepted the procircumcision case, you would have to do 100,000 circumcisions to possibly prevent one case of penile cancer. But circumcised men do get penile cancer, usually at the circumcision scar and Denmark, where the circumcision rate is less than 1%, has a lower rate of penile cancer and HIV than the USA, the last western country where circumcision is still practised on 50% of male newborns.

So a male should have a right to whole genitals, just like girls do.

Answer 3

Because except for some EXTREMELY rare medical conditions (cancer, frostbite, or gangrene on the foreskin) there is no reason to be circumcised. It is NOT more hygienic! And foreskin does not spread disease. Circumcision does not "cure" masterbation. All these things are myths. There is no more reason to whack off the foreskin of a guy's penis than to bind a girl's feet at birth. Both are mutilation. Neither has any real benefit to the victim.

Answer 4

for the same reason all girls aren't circumcised.some parents have them circumcised and some don't and some uncircumcised men and women get circumcised later and some don't.and some circumcised men have foreskin reconstruction or restoration and appear uncircumcised.unless medically necessary most men,women,and children do not need to be circumcised.

Answer 5

Because not all mothers are evil mutilators. Foreskin is the natural state of man, to mutilate infant boys is really really sick and should be outlawed. Most men are not circumcised, just in the barbaric nations that allow it for religious reasons (yeah, that makes a lot of sense!) or in nations like the US where the crazy medical community in the 20th century decided it was necessary, of course with the prodding of the dominant jewish community in the medical profession.

Answer 6

Because it isn't needed.
Why aren't all girls circumcised?

Answer 7

Basically because its the parents choice. If they want to they do, if not then they don't. :)