Which is better or healthier? Circumcised or uncircumcised?

Answer 1

Studies (new one from last month and a few older ones) have found that circumcision reduces sensitivity and pleasure in the long run, since the head always rubs against everything. It also makes masturbation more difficult. Oddly enough, that's how circumcision was made popular in the 1800s by Dr. Kellogg.
http://forums.govteen.com/showpost.php?p=3069995&postcount=2

Circumcision is becoming a lot less popular. In some states it's as low as 14% already! The USA is the only advanced nation still doing this to newborns.
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/staterates2004/

People exaggerate with how "difficult" it is to keep clean. You just pull it back and rub the head. Simple as that, takes a few seconds and feels good. On babies/young children the foreskin is attached to the head so poo and other stuff doesn't get in there.

The surgery is painful regardless of age. Studies have concluded that.
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9712/23/circumcision.anesthetic/
http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/1f21e.htm
http://www.cirp.org/library/procedure/plastibell/

You can get all the risks (like buried/smaller penis, meatal stenosis, and so on) and answers to some circumcision benefits myths here, such as the myth that it prevents penile cancer, HIV in the developed nations, etc.:
http://forums.govteen.com/showpost.php?p=3069995&postcount=2

If you were circumcised as an adult obviously you're bound to find an "improvement" since you had it done for having problems with your foreskin beforehand, or because you wanted it done. Jackinworld found that uncircumcised guys are generally more satisfied than their circumcised partners in question 17:
http://www.jackinworld.com/library/surveys/survey5.html

More than half of circumcised guys responded that they would have rather made choose themselves. If guys could restore their foreskin guys would also be saying "Oh it's great with a foreskin after I got it......." but sadly we can't change from day to day. =P
http://www.jackinworld.com/qow/q15.html

Answer 2

That can be a hard question to answer. There are many misconceptions about the uncircumcised penis that causes many to think it's less healthy/hygienic or worse, when in fact it's not. My short opinion is that it's better to be uncircumcised. The long explanation is as follows.

Circumcision is painful and can be traumatic (link 1). Anesthesia is unpredictable in infants and may be dangerous, so effective pain-relief doesn't always work. Also, even if the actual procedure is painless, the week following and urinating will be hell as the wound heals (link 2). Furthermore, circumcision has its own risks and complications that range from excess bleeding/infection to much worse (link 3). In reality, the probability of something going wrong in circumcision almost equals the probability of something going wrong if the guy stays uncircumcised.

There's this misconception that the uncircumcised penis is more vulnerable to infections and diseases. This isn't true, though there's a statistic that says uncircumcised infants are more prone to getting a UTI in the first year of life compared to circumcised infants. While this may be true, infant girls have a higher UTI incidence than either group of male infants and a lot of circumcisions (like 200) would need to be performed to prevent one UTI (link 2).

Furthermore, the foreskin is very easy to clean and keep clean (link 4). With proper genital hygiene, most problems associated with the foreskin can be minimized/eliminated. In fact, hygiene is almost like the great equalizer when it comes to STDs. For most/all STDs there's no significant difference in STD rates between an uncircumcised and a circumcised guy.

This is even true for HIV; with proper genital hygiene, there's no real difference between the 2 groups (link 5). Also, since no one knows the cause-effect relationship between circumcision and HIV, any studies promoting circumcision to reduce HIV is still greatly debated (link 6). One thing is clear, good hygiene + safe sex (i.e. condom use) >>> circumcision.

Lastly, circumcision removes a lot of nerve endings that may contribute to sexual sensitivity (link 7). Several studies have also indicated that the foreskin may play a role in the sexual satisfaction/pleasure of not only the man, but the woman as well (links 8, 9, 10).

All in all, if the foreskin is working normally, one practices good genital hygiene, and one practices safe sex, it's probably better (and no less healthy) to be uncircumcised. About 70-80% of the world's male population is uncircumcised and ~95% of them never have any problems involving the foreskin (and of the 5% that do, very rarely are the problems severe enough to warrant circumcision). See the remaining links for more discussion on this.

Answer 3

There's a lot of debate over health/hygiene benefits of circumcision. Of all that I've read, it seems that there is no measurable benefit for the procedure. So I'm just gonna stick to subjective ratings....... Looks-wise, circumcised is better (except if the scar is really big & jagged). Most foreskins are kind of ugly or silly-looking. But I would go with Uncut over a crappy circumcision. Penises aren't very pretty in general, so the way it looks is not that important. More important is how it functions: Foreskin is better for sex & handjobs (easier & more fun to play with). Sex with some cut penises can chaff, especially if u are a little dry! OUCH! The extra skin also acts like a ribbed condom, more ridges to feel. Some chicks say they can't tell the difference btwn cut & uncut for sex, but I can. Some guys may have a thin foreskin, so that may explain it. My BF has a thick one, so it definitely FEELS nicer than other cut guys I've had. With a condom, it's less noticeable. Now, for oral, circumcised is the winner. Foreskins feel kinda weird & mushy in the mouth & they have a stronger smell. Unless the guy has JUST stepped out of the shower, I can always detect that "smegma-ish" scent. Not too say that it's horrible or anything, 'coz women's privates smell even stronger. But I HAVE been with both varieties who had less than perfect hygiene & I can tell u........I almost got turned-off foreskin for LIFE. The cut guy still smelled bad, but nowhere NEAR the uncut one! So, fellas, pls keep those turtle-necks clean!!

Answer 4

Forced circumcision is wrong.
Circumcision is a form of male genital mutilation. It is generally the forced removal of the foreskin from a child without the ability of the child to consent.
The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis and therefore very significant during sexual intercourse. Circumcision removes as much as 75% of sensation [ http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/bju_6685.pdf ].
The foreskin reduces the force required by the penis to enter the vagina. It also increases the sexual enjoyment of the female partner. Here is a study to back this up: http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/
The foreskin keeps the glans soft and moist and protects it from trauma and injury. Without this protection, the glans becomes dry, calloused, and desensitized from exposure and chafing.
Specialized nerve endings in the foreskin enhance sexual pleasure.
The foreskin may have functions not yet recognized or understood.

Performing circumcision on a child can and does result in the deaths of children due to blood loss and/or failure of the immune system.
It can and does result in very significant scaring.
It can and does result in sexual problems later in life.
The idea that it provides better hygeine is flawed and is simply a matter of performing good genital hygeine. The study that you are less succeptible to aids if you are circumcised is flawed(see link: http://www.cirp.org/news/sydneymorningherald11-06-03/ ). A condom is still required to prevent transmission of STI's.
Studies about the rate of transmission of aids with respect to both male and female circumcision have been conflicting.
A collection of said studies can be found linked from here:
http://www.mgmbill.org/aids.htm
Furthermore:
"The United States has one of the highest rates of male circumcision and also one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the developed world, suggesting that circumcision is having exactly the opposite effect. Conversely, Finland and Japan have some of the lowest rates of circumcision and also some of the lowest rates of HIV/AIDS."
Do not do it for hygeine issues. It is a trivial task to ensure good genital hygeine.
The vast majority of the world(83%) is not circumcised.
There is no good reason to perform male genital mutilation.
Leave your child decide what he wants when he is old enough to decide himself.

See this site:
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/

Here is a tracking of circumcision news articles which is kept very up to date:
http://www.cirp.org/news/

Have a look at some of these websites:
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/
http://www.noharmm.org/
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9712/23/circumcision.anesthetic/


Would you like to see this babaric and heartless surgery in progress?
Would you like to hear the child screaming?
I wonder if you could watch this video:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=352478&fr=ybr_sbc
It is not just a little snip here and there. Watch the above video of a circumcision in progress.

Have a look at these videos:
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=137650&fr=ybr_sbc
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1736954830543671382&sourceid=searchfeed

Answer 5

Uncircumcised, it is how nature intended men to be. Like all things on the body the penis must be washed.

"Frankly, all the "benefits" of circumcision (such as being able to stop masturbation, stopping penile cancer, stopping wet dreams, etc) were all later proven false. In addition, in response to the HIV crap, the US is the only rich country that does this surgery, yet we have the highest HIV rate. Suspicious, no? Europe and Japan (which don't cut) and even parts of Latin America have lower HIV rates."

"Unlike many Americans think, a foreskin is not necessarily dirty, and it does have benefits (like keeping the head moist (don't need lubricant most times) and keeping the head sensitive). In addition, cleaning shouldn't be a problem; you slide it back, rub the head (feels good by the way) and you're done in 5 or 10 seconds when you shower. That's how easy it is. In fact, on young children it doesn't even slide back because it's attached to the head so nothing will go into it; you don't have to worry about it. Many Americans think that having a foreskin is so demanding and tough!"

"In addition, circumcision isn't done as common as before. The national average is now about 50/50, and some states its as low as 14% (Nevada). A few decades ago it was almost universal to be cut. The same was true in Canada; their rate of circ is now 9% average nationwide."

Answer 6

Uncircumcised is better, because that is how we were all born. Circumcision is completely unnecessary unless your religion requires it. Cleaning under the foreskin is the easiest thing in the world to do. Hmmm...using pro-circ logic I could therefore say that all baby boys should have their fingernails surgicaly removed, because some of them may not be able to clean under them properly (i.e. easier). No thanks. Here in Canada, the practice is less common than in the U.S. The Europeans are way ahead of the western world when it comes to this.

Answer 7

If you've paid any attention to the news, you'd see that more and more evidence is emerging where circumcision is definitely the healthier option. But alas, to each their own. I already had to hear so much debate on this topic being a med staff secretary at a hospital during a JCAHO review. Given all that information I had to take in, and more recent news reports, if I were to ever have a child and if my child were I boy, I'd definitely have it done...and without delay.

Answer 8

neither is healthier, but only a girl could answer which one is better because guys only get one view, I was circed as an infant so I never experienced what an uncirced penis was, but guys that have uncirced penises don't know what its like to have a circed penis. So it doesnt really matter which is better and healthier cause its just the way it looks

Answer 9

Circumcised. I found a website: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/circumcision/PR00040 which weighs the pros & cons of circumcision. Among the benefits, they list:
The benefits
Circumcision may have health benefits, including:

Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it easy to wash the penis — although it's simple to clean an uncircumcised penis, too.
Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The risk of urinary tract infections in the first year is low, but these infections may be up to 10 times as common in uncircumcised baby boys. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on.
Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis may narrow so much that it's difficult or impossible to retract. This can also lead to inflammation of the head of the penis.
Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is very rare, it's less common in circumcised men.
Decreased risk of sexually transmitted diseases. Safe sexual practices remain essential, but circumcised men may have a slightly lower risk of certain sexually transmitted diseases — including HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, and human papillomavirus (HPV), which causes genital warts. Some strains of HPV also cause cervical cancer.

And for the drawbacks:
The drawbacks
Circumcision also has drawbacks, including:

Surgical risks. Excessive bleeding and infection are uncommon, but possible. The foreskin may be cut too short or too long or fail to heal properly. If the remaining foreskin reattaches to the end of the penis, minor surgery may be needed to correct it.
Pain. Circumcision hurts. Local anesthesia can block nerve sensations during the procedure.
Permanence. After the procedure, it may be impossible to re-create the appearance of an uncircumcised penis.
Expense. Some insurance companies don't cover the cost of circumcision.

There's more information on that website also such as description of the procedure, etc.

I, personally, had both of my sons done & didn't regret it.

Answer 10

I circumcised my son, to prevent infections.
Having provided child care for alot of children, I noticed boys uncircumcised were at higher risk of infection. If parents are careful to pull back skin every night at bath though it should not be a problem. My son has complained a lot of pain in that area, the doctor said it was normal.