circumsized or not?

Question

ok im not going to say if im cut or not that way no personal attack of me being "gross" or "mutilated" heres the question there has been no concrete evidence that circumsision is better then uncut and there has not been any concrete evidence that uncut is better so my question is why do people feel the need to say uncut people are disgusting and that cut people are mutilated is it really a big deal? i think both are fine but it gets ridiculous when people ask any question about it all people say is omg your disgusting or omg your mutilated does it matter? which do you prefer without attacks and does it really make a difference for the woman or man? Thanks

Answer 1

You're right. I'm only against it on newborns, as I believe all guys should have the choice to choose. That, and there are many unnecessary risks on doing it on newborns.

Circumcision = loss of sensitivity according to new study
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285532,00.html
http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality.html#sorrells

Higher erectile dysfunction rates after circumcision:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14979200&dopt=Abstract%7C

When women didn't know what penis they were dealing with (circumcised or uncircumcised) 9 out of 10 preferred uncircumcised (study).
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/60750.html

Foreskin anatomy and function (keeps the glans soft and protects it, etc).
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/

Circumcision is extremely painful.
http://www.cirp.org/library/procedure/plastibell/

The USA is the last advanced nation doing it, but rates have fallen down from over 90% in the 1960s to as low as 21% here in California currently. From CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/18/circumcision.decline.ap/index.html
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/staterates2004/

Circumcision was actually promoted in the USA at first to stop masturbation (in hopes of it being tight enough to require lubes and not have skin to slide since the foreskin is already moist)
http://english.pravda.ru/science/health/27-03-2006/77873-circumcision-0

USA = highest HIV rates in advanced nations (and highest circumcision rates). CIA statistics:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2155rank.html

And one study already trashed the claims of the study that said that circumcision reduces HIV.
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0000543

Worldwide circumcision rates:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Maps.html

And discussion of common circumcision benefit myths and discussion of all the risks that can develop over time and negative side effects (buried penis, meatal stenosis, etc):
http://forums.govteen.com/showpost.php?p=3069995&postcount=2

Answer 2

People tend to prefer what they're used to and defend it in any way the can justify. In the US, the foreskin was "absent" from mainstream culture for so many decades that people forgot what it was and how to deal with it, so it was maligned, even though science has shown almost every myth surrounding the foreskin is false (i.e. myths such as it's hard to clean, more prone to infections/STDs, etc).

On the other hand, some people feel that cut is "mutilated" because it's too often done on infants without their consent, and was not done out of medical necessity or religious mandate. It's kind of like removing the tonsils after birth - the tonsils have no real benefits and it doesn't cause any problems in the vast majority of the population, but it can cause problems; yet we don't routinely remove the tonsils. So many infants are stripped of the choice to keep/remove one of the most sensitive parts of their bodies, which when left alone would almost never cause any major problems.

Does it make a difference? Not to most people probably. About 70-80% of the world's male population is uncircumcised and the circumcision rate in the US has fallen from nearly 90% to just under 60% nationally today (with higher/lower rates depending on the state).

As for how it feels to the man or woman, some relatively recent research seems to support that the foreskin (when working normally) can be beneficial to both the man and woman (see links). But again, this differs from person to person, and how one uses his penis is probably more important than what it has or lacks.

Answer 3

I am a woman though I have been married 24 years I had 2 boyfriends who were not circumcised and to me the sexual feeling is not as good as a circumcised man. I have never thought of it as gross or the other being mutilated however. I have heard that uncircumcised must clean very well under the skin. I know some Religions don't do this procedure until a boy is 13, to me that is horrible due to pain. It is normally done right after birth so babies scream for a minute. So I guess it is each persons choice. My husband is cut as is my son, and both of my daughters sons.

Answer 4

Okay,
I am a woman, and would never be with an uncircumcised man, and would make sure that any sons I ever may have are circumcised soon after birth. The reason being is yes there is evidence that men who are not circumcised are more likely to get and spread infections. They have higher rates of STD's, possibly because the foreskin holds in the mucus secretions of their partners. Any how I would never say anything bad towards those who are not. But for my own health and that of any of my off spring I am for the procedure. But I agree people should not make others feel bad about this subject, it is after all the choice of thier parents.

Answer 5

I was cut at 18 and happy with being cut! I must say having been on both sides I feel being circumcised is way superior to being with foreskin! Without a doubt I had both my boys 1&3 circ'd at birth.....
Sex is extremely better circumcised as well! The orgasms are explosive! When you are uncut its to sensative to really enjoy sex! All the BS of extra nerve endings is BS! The foreskin does nothing but hinder good sex! BTW-most American girls won't even think over going down on an uncut guy!

Answer 6

Well I prefer circumsised. I just think they look nicer. My son is and I went threw hell to have him circumsised closed after birth.
I can tell you a horror story. My sister inlaw has 7 kids and thats a job in itself. Her youngest got a build up of fluid underneith the skin, even though she changed him and kept him clean, while they were waiting for a specialist to see the 9 mth old he got a very bad infection there and almost died. Even though she was there all the time with him and had medical staff around.
He was finally curcumsized and the infection cleared up. Even the doctor told her that infections and things like this happen because babies cant tell you if there is something wrong with their bodies and it could have been the slightest of poo or anything in the diaper that got in there and caused it.
So I am pro!!!

Answer 7

It is a matter of personal preference. I could care less if a man is cut or uncut. I had opted for not having our son circumsized but hubby didn't like that idea thinking he would feel different and embarassed as he got older so we had him circumsized.

Answer 8

The first uncircumcised child I diapered, was startling to me,
I called another adult to confirm this male child's "deformity".
That was my honest reaction, not knowing the issue would be
presented to me at this time.

I am a woman
my attitude comes by way of ancient religious teachings
circumcision was commanded by God inorder for the man
to be considered both clean and socially acceptable, as an
accepted member of society and "prepared" for marriage.
That was the BC teaching and thought. Once the AD years
came there was a new teaching (In the letter to the Romans, Bible) saying that it no longer was of importance that Christians be identified as either circumcised or uncircumcised.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance is neat and clean when circumcised.
Odor is less likely when circumcised, as body oils and fluids
can hide and be trapped in the foreskin. ( we women have enough folds of our own, it can be a constant battle for us.) Circumcision is the only way I could feel comfortable
enough with my husband to make love with him.

Answer 9

Uncut is better by far, and keeping it clean is easy. Many guys lose the sensitive feeling of their gland from having it rub against clothing all their lives. An added plus is with the extra skin, it will make the penis look bigger and create an impressive bulge for all to see. And about appearance, who cares what others think, at least you can orgasm without the use of lube. I truly believe men who are cut, envy those that aren't, because the foreskin has extra nerves for an extreme orgasm.

Answer 10

Personally, I much prefer circumcised men.. I find circumcision is much easier for personal hygiene, and considerably lessens the risk of transmission of the human papilloma virus which can cause cervical cancer in women.