is circumcision necessary for males?

Question

can any provide details on this subject. as how it helps and its need

i really appreciate and thank each one for the variety and in depth analytical anwers put up by you. some of u guys are really providing knowlegable answers with source.

thank you again.

Answer 1

it is not necessary..

Answer 2

I don't really understand the need for boys to be circumcised. It's just a little extra skin that helps the penis function properly. My boyfriend is uncircumcised and his works fine. Actually really fine.

I think uncircumcised ones look kind of cute too. They don't have a dark scar all the way around.

Answer 3

It's neither necessary nor desirable.It's NOT cleaner (all guys need to wash down there), and there are no health advantages except MAYBE if you want to go to Africa and have sex with prostitutes without a condom.

Basically it's just mutilation that people have been taught to think is cosmetically superior, not that different from foot binding or the elongated necks or enormous lips one sees on "exotic" people in old copies of National Geographic.

As a woman who had sexual experience with circumcised guys before I met my intact husband, I can personally attest that a foreskin makes sex much, much better for the female partner. And the "whole" guy obviously seems to enjoy it more, too -- more pleasure and less desperation to just get off.

For adult males, circumcision can be a personal choice -- one I think is incredibly stupid, but a possible option that can be respected. But it is totally immoral to do it to infants. The process is irreversible and can prevent a male from ever having an optimal sex life. Parents do not have a moral right to make that choice for their sons.

Answer 4

Circumcision is not medically necessary. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not recommend circumcision as a routine procedure for newborn males. When making this policy, the AAP considered the possible health benefits of circumcision, such as a lower risk for urinary tract infections (UTIs) in the first year of life. The AAP also considered the risks and costs of the procedure when making this policy.

In the past, circumcision was considered necessary when a newborn's foreskin could not be retracted (phimosis). Now, however, this condition is considered normal because the foreskin of newborns is still developing. By age 5, about 90% of boys who have not been circumcised can retract the foreskin of the penis without any problems. (In rare cases the foreskin of the natural penis [uncircumcised] cannot be retracted after a boy has reached puberty, in which case circumcision may be recommended.)

Answer 5

Google would have been a better place to get details on this subject. Its a controversial topic prone to strong opinions from both sides. To answer your question bluntly, NO it is not "necessary" however if you want info about it, search the Internet.

Answer 6

No, it is NOT necessary. There is not a single medical association in the world that recommends it - not even in the US. If it were "necessary" every male would need it, but 85% of the world's males go through life just fine without being circumcised. The foreskin is not a birth defect. Also, it's not true that only intact males get penile cancer (which is really rare anyway). There are documented cases of circumcised males getting penile cancer. The American Cancer Society doesn't even recommend circumcision as a preventative measure for penile cancer.

Answer 7

Circumcision is not necessary. In fact, it has become less common over time.

Circumcision has become less common. Circumcision rates were as high as 90% back in the 1960s and 1970s (that's partly why today's adults are so... brainwashed, I supposed you could say, about thinking that circumcision is better) but they have fallen to as low as 14% in some states. Here are the statistics:
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/staterates2004/

The USA is the last developed nation doing it to a large number of newborns without religious or medical needs. (Europeans, Latin Americans, Japanese, and most Australians, Canadians, and Asians don't circumcise):
http://www.circumstitions.com/Maps.html

Circumcision does not completely stop penile cancer. The American Cancer Society has already confirmed the myth that circumcision = no cancer.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_2X_Can_penile_cancer_be_prevented_35.asp

If circumcision did stop penile cancer, then penile cancer would not be more common in the USA (most circumcised adults) than in some European nations, where circumcision is not practiced other than for medical/religious reasons.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Cancer.html

In a medical study, it was found that females are more likely to hit orgasm with an uncircumcised man:
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/60750.html

The lubricated foreskin (on the inside... like your eyelids) slides up and down during sex and masturbation to stimulate the head (which is why you don't hear of uncircumcised guys needing lube to masturbate).
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/
http://net.indra.com/~shredder/intact/anatomy/index.html

Studies have found that circumcision reduces sensitivity (this article also mentions how it has lost popularity in the USA in recent times):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285532,00.html

And despite being more sensitive, uncircumcised guys still last in the same six minute range (average) that circumcised guys do:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.00070.x

Circumcision makes masturbation more difficult:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x

Which makes sense, that's how circumcision was promoted in the USA:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/health/27-03-2006/77873-circumcision-0

Increases erectile dysfunction rates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14979200&dopt=Abstract%7C

If too much skin is removed in circumcision, it can make the penis smaller since the penis needs some skin to expand during an erection:
http://drgreene.org/body.cfm?id=21&action=detail&ref=1125
http://www.altermd.com/Penis%20and%20Scrotal%20Surgery/buried_penis.htm

Answer 8

Jorge, you wanna field this one? No, it is not necessary. Most of the rest of the world does not circumcise.

Edit: Amanda h's answer that only uncircumcised men get penile cancer is 100% wrong. The tiny rate of penile cancer is the same in circumcised men as uncircumcised men.

Answer 9

at the tip of the penis is foreskin and if you decide to get circumcision or not is totally up to you. uncircumcised males have a better erection during sexual intercourse. there is not chance of getting any type of cancer. the only thing you have to do if uncircumcised is shower daily so you wont get an infection.

Answer 10

It is definitely NOT necessary IF your higein is good. Many females think it looks better if it is circumsized but they can be circumsized, too, and if they were they'd change their minds quickly.

Answer 11

Absolutely not.
Some religions require this mutilation, but who would want to be a part of a faith that says it's OK to cut off an important part of your body?
Weird things happen when some religious quacks start preaching such painful and unnecessary attacks on the human body.