Men only please: What is your stand on circumcision?

Question

Hi, I am having a boy in a few months, and have a big decision to face. My husband wants to circumcise our son, but I'm not so sure. If you could please share your experiences with me, circumcised and uncircumcised, and whether you agree with your parent's decision or not and why. Thank you very much for your help!

Answer 1

I am circumcised at birth and have no regrets about it. I guess it is easier to be cut at birth rather than wait when he is pre-teen. Believe me, I never remember any pain. Plus with the doctors now, they can probably do these things right.

It is easier to clean a cut penis. There are no folds to worry about. No cases of phimosis. There are no cases of smegma (accumulated dirt/semen) that can cause infection to careless guys -- boys/guys do tend to be careless (though many of them probably clean that area).

They say that uncut guys are more sensitive. If that is the case, maybe that is the cause for premature ejaculation of many. ha ha. I dunno... In any case, cut guys still have excellent sensation there. Plus I say its more aesthetic....

If I will have a son, I will probably do that too (with the wife's assent). Anyway you are not desisting. .... as for "who's going to labor" guy, this is not about going to labor. The boy is also his father's son. Who is going to pay for his schooling anyway? d:




PS: Being here in the Philippines, it will be very difficult for a young man to be known that he is still uncut. Serious humiliation here, source of butt jokes and ridicule. But only here...( I know that US is more accepting of uncut penises.)

Answer 2

I'm an educated health care professional and am married to an uncircumcised man. We both made the decision to not have our two sons circumcised at birth. There is absolutely no good medical reason to have it done and is not recommended by the APA. We also felt we didn't have the right to subject our sons to a painful, disfiguring procedure without a valid reason. I once had to assist in a circumcision and I was horrified by it. The poor baby was strapped to a board and cut on without any anesthesia. Believe me, that baby hurt! My two sons are grown now and I have asked them if they regret not being circumcised. They both have told me they like the way they are and would never want to be circumcised. I don't think being in a natural state ever hurt their love lives.

The foreskin protects the penis. The glans is more sensitive in uncircumcised men, which gives them greater pleasure during sex. If you teach your son to pull back the foreskin during bathing and wash the head of the penis well, he will have no increased risk of STD over that of a circumcised man. Of course, he should be taught to use a condom so that the issue of circumcision as relates to STD's is not one.

Answer 3

Hi, I'm uncircumcised and I've never had any problems whatsoever with my foreskin, and I rather like it this way. I'm glad my parents kept me the way I am (though, I don't think they knew what circumcision was since it's really uncommon outside the US) and I believe that the circumcision decision should be decided by the guy himself (unless religiously mandated or medically necessary).

As you make your own decisions with your husband, you should know that circumcision is painful on the infant (link 1) though most doctors will use a local anesthetic. But since painkillers can be dangerous for infants, the baby will probably feel the full pain of recovery and urinating will be painful (link 2). Also be aware that there are some potentially serious risks/complications because it is a surgical procedure (link 3), and - while very rare - can cause deaths (link 4).

One of the most common arguments for circumcision is cleanliness and hygiene. Honestly I've never understood where this came from because the foreskin is so easy to clean and keep clean (much easier than brushing one's teeth) if you know what to do (links 5, 6). The hygiene/cleanliness issue doesn't make sense at all to me.

And another argument is that the circumcised penis is less prone to STDs/infections. Most studies actually find no significant difference between circumcised and uncircumcised men, and good genital hygiene basically eliminates any potential advantage circumcision has in this respect (links 7, 8). In any case, good genital hygiene + safe sex (i.e. condom use) >>> circumcision.

And lastly, circumcision removes a lot of nerve endings in the foreskin that'd probably otherwise contribute to sexual sensitivity (link 9). Also several studies indicate that the foreskin may be beneficial to the sexual satisfaction/pleasure of both the man and woman (links 10, 11, 12).

So as long as there's nothing physically/medically wrong with the foreskin (which is fairly rare), the guy maintains good genital hygiene (which is easy), and he practices safe sex (which he should anyway), then there's really no good reason to circumcise and in fact, the foreskin might be a good thing.

And it might be worth noting that 70-80% of the world's male population is uncircumcised and since you don't hear a huge proportion of them complaining of medical problems, it's safe to assume that the vast majority have no problems whatsoever. Also, the circumcision rate in the US has fallen from almost 90% a few decades ago to just under 60% nationally today (with rates being higher/lower depending on the state).

Okay, I apologize that this post is so long, but basically, my stand is that the circumcision decision should be one that the individual should make for himself and shouldn't be made for a non-consenting infant. See the remaining links for further discussions.

Answer 4

I'm uncircumcised, and have never had an infection in my life. The foreskin is a very enjoyable part of the penis to have, and I am VERY thankful my parents didn't have me circumcised.

My girlfriend also tells me that she loves my foreskin, and is very glad I wasn't circumcised.

Also, circumcision rates are declining, so your son would not be teased for being uncut... if anything circumcised boys will be the ones getting teased (although I've never been teased because of it).

Answer 5

Go with circumcision. It's healthier and much more sanitary for your boy. Ignore all those who say the head becomes desensitized, It's a myth. The truth is that circumsised penis is also the better looking when compared to an uncut one.

Answer 6

Totally against. There is no rationale reason to do it, unless you do it for religious reasons. There is no validity in the claim it is more sanitary; over 2 billion men in the world are not circumcised, and there is no great epidemic of men losing their penises due to infection! I was circumcised as an infant, and my wife even talked me into circumcising our son years ago, would not do it if I had known more about the process and how cruel and unnecessary it is.

The rationale that everyone else is circumcised is no longer valid either- the rate in the US is now lower than 55%, it was once over 90%. So in 15 years, over half of the teen boys will be uncircumcised, so there will be less incentive to use that as a basis.

Answer 7

There are nerves, arteries, and veins within the foreskin that maintain all of the means down via the shaft of the penis. When those arteries and veins are severed it is viable that blood float to the discipline is reduced quite. Also, if after his circumcision if the rest dermis is stretched quite tight that would additionally avert the highest quantity of blood going "quite simply" into the penis. Then once more, might be his penis simply without difficulty reacts otherwise after the operation. So, is circumcision the intent? Probably, but it surely would no longer be.

Answer 8

I say don't have your son circumcised now, let it be his decision when he's old enough, remember he can decide to be circumcised later in life, but he can't decide to be uncircumcised.

I'm uncut and would never change that. I've never had any health problems with it in 38 years. As for most woman finding cut penises more attractive I would have to disagree with that also, because all the women I've been with have made positive comments about it because I was the first uncut man they'd been with.

Answer 9

I am extremely grateful that my parents had the good sense to leave me intact! It is NOT "extra" skin -- it is very important to sexual pleasure for both men and their partners. The locker room thing is no longer a problem, if it ever was (was not for me) because probably a majority of the other boys will be intact -- circumcision is falling way out of favor in most parts of the country.

It is really not your right to irrevocably alter your son's body when he is too young to consent unless there is a medical reason. (Which there almost never is.) He can always choose to have it done as an adult (which very, very few men do) if he really wants to be cut for some reason. But he can't get it back if you have it chopped off.

Watch a video of the procedure http://www.cirp.org/library/procedure/plastibell/ -- is this the way you want to welcome your perfect new son into the world? Remember, that is a real child having his body mutilated.

The cleanliness argument is a crock. My wife says she has never seen, smelled, felt, or tasted smegma on me. Washing an intact penis is actually easier than cleaning behind your ears -- would you chop his ears off because he might not wash behind them?

All surgery has some complications. A lot of boys have post-circumcision infections and other healing problems. A few boys each year have to have their entire penis amputated because of botched circumcisions. And a few die. For what? Because somebody thought it looked cuter cut?

Let him have an intact body as his birthright!

Answer 10

If it's that much trouble to make a decision then I would say just leave it uncircumcised. It can always be done later.

Answer 11

I think circumcising is a must for men. it makes the it look petter even when not erected,
jesus chriest was cercumcised as well
Ibraham the prophit also
, also circumcising makes it easy to clean.
wish u good luck