But to start using facts, its proven UN-CUT penises are more pleasurable to both men and women.

And it is also proven that un-cut penises are NOT any more likely to carry STD’s or AIDS.

Oh and also a true fact when circumcised you lose 2-3 inches of penis.

And to get to the whole hygiene issue, im un-cut and have absolutely no problem with smell, but im pretty clean 2 showers a day and scrub it good, and its out of its helmet most of the day. And anyone that has a smelly penis try soap and water you nasty fucks.

The glans is designed by nature to be an internal organ. Why internal, well like the inside of your mouth and female labia, it’s supposed to remain moist membrane. When the foreskin is removed the chaffing against clothing turns the glans into dried out skin.

Yes, there is a heavy price to be paid for destroying the foreskin.

DAILY GUIDEANCE AND ENCOURAGEMENT IN PINIAL MINIPULATION WILL PROCUDE SATISFACTAORY GLANS EXPOSURE.

AN IMBARRASED PRUDE WILL SUPRESS A CHILDS SELF DISCOVERY AND DEVELOPE RHETORIC TO ABSOLVE THEN SELFS OF THERE FEELINS OF SELF GUILT AND ALLOW INFANT CIRCUMSISION .

IS IT EASER TO CHOP THAN TEACH HOW TO HELP YOUR SELF..

“In Europe, where people do not routinely circumcise their children, doctors and parents know that the proper care of a child’s intact penis is to leave it alone.”

And the outcome of this in the UK is that our NHS circumcises over 30,00 males every year because of medical problems with their foreskins. Add to these thousands more in the private sector which go unrecorded and you will see that ‘leaving alone’ doesn’t work for many people.

It has been calculated that one in three uncircumcised males will have a problem with their foreskin at some stage in their lives. For many it starts in childhood. Puberty and the beginning of sexual experience is another critical point if the foreskin hasn’t developed properly. Then later the physical stress of a relationship with very regular sex will show up a latent problem or develop one. Finally, in old age or even before, a man may lose the physical or mental capacity to care for his own personal hygiene in washing under his foreskin.

Circumcising a boy eliminates all these potential problems and I congratulate you Carol, on having the good sense to ‘cut your and your son’s losses’ (literally!) when you had the second, relatively early opportunity to do so.

I talked to a guy who was cut as an adult, and one who restored, both said with a foreskin it felt a lot better than without!

To the lady who wrote the blog, you aren’t supposed to take your young sons foreskin back when hes just born, you caused him the pain and suffering, and actually created the problem. Not to sound like an ass, but thats the truth.

PSU

Hundreds of millions of European, Japanese, and Chinese men are uncircumcised. There is no evidence that this has led to a urological disaster. As for the foreskin and AIDS, why have several hundred thousand American gay men died of AIDS since 1980, despite the prevalence of routine infant circ in the USA? This AIDS holocaust has no counterpart in advanced countries that do not circumcise routinely. Heterosexual AIDS in Africa is a different kettle of fish; African data should not be used to address the merits of routine infant circ in the USA.

If a boy experiences no discomfort during erection, no irritation under the foreskin, and can urinate freely, then his foreskin should be left completely alone until he is 15, perhaps even 18 or so. I was able to retract around 9 or 10, and very easily since about 15. If an unretractable foreskin persists into late adolescence, the boy should engage in gentle gradual stretching.

I agree that the fraction of American adult men who are cut is hard to estimate, especially if many babies are now being cut in a doctor’s office rather than in the maternity ward.

Intact doesn’t automatically mean ‘dirty’ (and funny enough the people that think that have often never seen an intact penis)

I am glad however, to see that more and more people are questioning the practice, and again, there is a HUGE difference between an adult male CHOOSING to get it done (for whatever reason) and putting a baby through it without them having a say in the matter!

I grew up when most men were cut and I had no issues. Women don’t even know you are intact if it is errect. There is no hygine issue, just water in the shower.

Care for the cut penis is actually more of a fuss for babies, until it heals. Also, cut babies are more likely to get killer staff infection. This is more of a problem in the US than HIV. Don’t touch the baies penis.

Well good on you mate, but if they hadn’t, then you COULD HAVE HAD A VOLUNTARY ADULT CIRCUMCISION…

What if the child/man DOESN’T LIKE TO BE CIRCUMCISED at all…What do you do in THAT CASE?

I know quite a few guys from different (anglo-saxon) countries that are REALLY PISSED OFF about having a part of their penis cut off without their consent: This could be avoided by simply LETTING THE INDIVIDUAL DECIDE, when he grows up, whether he wants his foreskin or not…

I really wonder what prompts people to so urgently CUT OFF A HEALTHY PEICE OF THEIR KID’S BODY, while he still does not have a say…

I’d like people to think about that for a while…

I think for most guys, who do keep themselves clean, it dose not matter that much, but is still more hygienic (and this is what women I know who’ve been with both have told me) and generally healthier if it’s done. But it is by no means essential, and I think it has to be the decision of each mother of a son, or a joint parental or even fathers decision at the mothers discretion. Whatever way is chosen is Okay.

I do not personally think there is anything wrong with infant male circumcision, though local anesthetic should be used to reduce pain. Most studies show it as having overall health benefits, but there is some conflicting evidence in that regard. As long as a male Has scrupulous hygiene, circumcision is unnecessary, but a large % of males do not. And unlike with the inner female genitals, a mans penis is not naturally self cleaning, so it is definitely more hygienic if a male is circumcised at birth. Of coarse, good hygiene is important for everyone of both genders. By contrast to male circumcision, so called female “circumcision”-female genital mutilation- (which is actually not practised in most Muslim cultures, though male circumcision is) makes infection more likely, by interfering with the natural cleaning properties of the area. My aunt is a nurse who has personally assisted with numerous circs, and while it is painful for the infant, they do not remember it latter. Based on her expereance dealing with men who have poor hygiene at work who she has had to care for, she is pro circumcision, and had her own circumcised as well.

Finely, as far as sexual sensation goes, it has now indeed been shown that circumcision DOSE significantly reduce sensitivity for a male, but sexual functioning is not impaired at all, and among older men, studies actually show, all else being equal, circumcised men actually have LOWER rates of sexual dysfunction than those who are not. Reduced sensitivity in a male is not necessarily a bad thing at all.
My mom had me circumcised at birth for hygienic reasons, and I am glad she did. (and no pain relief was ever used back then) I do not remember it, yes I have Sean a video of it being done without anesthetic, and it is horrible, even with pain relief it still hurts, as a truly effective dose is not safe for routine use in newborns. But I think it is well worth it in the long run. I have plenty of sensitively as well.

I believe circumcision is a decision that PARENTS have the right to make for their son, and if the parents do not agree, I believe the mother should have the sole right to decider what is best for her son. I believe in gender equality in general, but not on this issue, I just think there is a very strong gender distinction here, that is biologically based. Parents make permanent decisions for their kids all the time, and I do not feel that being circumcised at birth is any violation of a males rights at all. I do see it as being a violation of the rights of a WOMEN who just gave birth to a son, for her to be either pressured not to, or worse to be told she cannot have her son circumcised, or that she must have it done or given no choice and it’s just done, if that is not what she wants. I think it is ultimately HER decision, and nobody else has the right interfere with that. I do not believe circumcision is wrong or harmful at all, as long as it is performed properly, and is actually beneficial in general for both the boy and especially any future female partners of his.

Filipinos and south Koreans also both practise practice circumcision, (the latter do to U.S. influence) and it is actually common (though not the norm) among those who afford to pay for it in the larger cities in some parts of Latin America. I know this from sever all friends of mine who are from Mexico and central America who have told me so.

Some of the kids are gaining toilet independence at that age and do use the potty, plus there are diaper changes in the classroom, but there’s not a lot of exposure at that time.

The thing I have not experienced is any kind of “making fun” by children that age, especially about bodies. There has been no comment about “differences,” period. The kids are pretty matter-of-fact, mostly just trying to deal with how much of their bodies they are willing to put under the shower stream (keeping faces dry is a concern for some of them) and I find it hard to imagine that a preschooler at age 3 could experience mocking peer pressure. I know my child (who is three now) doesn’t operate that way, and neither do any 3-year-old peers that I know. At all.

Girls have 4 times higher incidents of UTIs and ((nothing)) gets cut off from them. The idea that boys should look like their fathers is ridiculous as girls don’t compare the looks of their vaginas with their mothers. You’re a case of clear American brainwashing done succesfully. I feel sorry for your son.

But, it’s not surprising that many U.S. doctors, back when your son was born and currently, know little about proper care of the intact penis. It’s nature’s default condition, but the “default” for many years in the U.S. has been surgical alteration. The forcible retraction “for cleaning” that you did is common (but bad) advice. Until a boy’s foreskin is retractable, the foreskin should be left alone, completely. If it has poop on it, wiping it down during a diaper change as you would a wipe off a finger is sufficient. During a bath, it’s enough to swish it around in the water. Later, the boy can learn to retract himself and wash up just as a circumcised man does (or should) in the shower.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out that your son’s problems with the foreskin sticking and bleeding sound directly related to the foreskin being retracted when still fully or partly fused, probably a result of someone’s misunderstanding of what proper hygiene required. But the experience you describe is not the norm or the inevitable result of leaving a child’s penis intact.

I am a middle-class white American living in central Ohio. My son is intact, as are the sons of several of my white middle-class friends, and none of our children have ever had any sort of infection. Since we know that we can avoid problems simply by leaving our children’s private parts alone, we do not feel any obligation to perpetuate the custom of routine infant male circumcision. Some cultural traditions are worth preserving; for non-Jewish/non-Muslim Americans, this is just not one of them.

And kids at preschool were making fun of your son’s penis? He was naked at preschool??? and 3 year olds were making fun of his penis??? I’m sorry, but that is a bit much to believe. And, if it was true, empowering your son about his body was the way to go, not cutting off pieces. Please visit the AAP or AMA site and read up on the correct care of an uncircumcised penis so that any future sons do not have to go through what your son did.