United States and Circumcision

garric

Emperor
Joined
Mar 28, 2003
Messages
1,395
Location
Yay Area
It's a sad but true fact that nearly every white male born in the United States is circumsized at birth. That means that before the child is allowed to leave the hospital most of the time, he must have his foreskin removed by a doctor. This can have several consequences down the road, most notably a reduction in size, loss of sensativity, and other serious side effects.

The question is WHY? Why is it that the United States, a Christian (or mostly Christian) nation, condones this done to every white male born? Most minorities do not get this done (unless by request), and there are many cases where the parents don't discover this fact until after it's been performed. Most have simply accepted it as the status quo, and since it was done to them and their fathers before them, they accept it. I don't know if this is the truth and if anyone has any hard evidence to support or deny this claim please present it.

Infact, when speaking to many women about the issue, they said that to have it uncircumsized is nasty, horrible and disgusting, and they would refuse them based upon that fact. The only group in the entire world that requires this horrific practice done to every male are the Jewish. But why does it happen in the United States? The Jewish community makes up only a small portion of the total population, and the only other nation that regularly does it with the same frequency as the US is Isreal.

There have been numerous studies done about the subject, but most of the time since it has already been practiced for so long, it remains an issue that gets swept under the rug most of the time, and the practice continues unabbated. I know this sounds more of a rant against this practice but I think that it needs to get out there. This is the primary reason why millions are bombarded daily by advertisements offering increased size, performance, and other things, when the issue could be averted at birth and avoided altogether.

So please, tell me your thoughts, and be civil about it. If I've made any mistakes with what I've said above, I appologize, but if not, then I think that it should be put out there for the people to know and to think about, because this happens to your children and can affect them for the rest of their lives. So before you allow them to become another, please look at the facts and think, what is best for my child?
 
Source, please? One of these "numerous studies" you mention?

Oh, and I begin to seriously doubt your agrument when you bring out the spam emails relating to penis size.

BTW, it may be done for health reasons.
Wikipedia said:
HPV

Several studies have shown that non-circumcised men are at greater risk of human papilloma virus (HPV) infection.[35] [36] [37] While most genital HPV strains are considered harmless, some can, but not necessarily do, cause genital warts or even cancer. One study found no statistically significant difference between men with foreskins for HPV infection than those who are circumcised, but did note a significantly higher incidence of HPV lesions and urethritis [38].
[edit]

Hygiene

Circumcision reduces the amount of smegma produced by the body. Smegma, a transliteration of the Greek word σμήγμα for soap, is a combination of exfoliated (shed) , epithelial cells, transudated skin oils and moisture that can accumulate under the foreskin of males and within the female vulva area, with a characteristic strong odor and taste. Smegma is common to all mammals, male and female. While smegma is generally not believed to be harmful to health, the strong odour may be considered to be a nuisance giving the impression of lacking hygiene. In rare cases, accumulating smegma may play into causing balanitis.

The Royal Australasian College of Physicians and the Canadian Pediatric Society emphasize that an non-circumcised infants penis should be left alone and requires no special care. Attempts to forcibly retract the foreskin, e.g. to clean it, are painful, often injure the foreskin, and can lead to scarring, infections and pathologic phimosis. It is recommended that, while there is no special age where the foreskin should be retractible, once the foreskin becomes retractible, the child should gently wash it with soap and water. It has been suggested, however, that excessive washing of the foreskin and the glans will make infections such as balanitis more likely.
[edit]

Infectious and chronic conditions

Non-circumcised children and men tend to have higher rates of various infections and inflammations of the penis, and of the foreskin, than circumcised men.[39] The reasons are unclear, but several hypothesises have emerged:
 
That is what I was told, but I thought I happened to every male baby regardless of race.

And when they told it to me, I had the same thoughts as you are having now.

EDIT: Sorry, I was talking to Garric. Your post (Erik's Post) wasn't posted when I started writting mine.
 
Are you talking to me or garric, Urederra? It's unclear.
 
Well I'm a minority in the US but I got circumsiced. As has been meantioned before hygenic reasons. It does'nt really matter.
 
silver 2039 said:
Well I'm a minority in the US but I got circumsiced. As has been meantioned before hygenic reasons. It does'nt really matter.
Evil Tyrant said:
I never have understood why people get worked up over this. It is such a trivial matter.

Doesn't really matter? You're performing a cosmetic sexual surgery on an infant for some unknown reason (Because everyone else is doing it?). Most of the time, getting cut is a default thing, doctors just do it all the time. The whole "circumcision prevents cancer and aids!" is a myth, don't believe it.
 
I was circumcised for two big reasons

1) It makes hygine when one is an infant, or very young and unable to clean themselves well, much easier. I suppose that area is prone to infection

2) everybody else in America does it. My parents didnt want me to be the guy in the locker room with "the funny penis". Plus, girls in america like it better.

I certainly havent suffered
 
1) It makes hygine when one is an infant, or very young and unable to clean themselves well, much easier. I suppose that area is prone to infection - That is just a myth, there may have been some sort of health issues associated with having a foreskin, but in modern first world society they are unexistant.

2) everybody else in America does it. My parents didnt want me to be the guy in the locker room with "the funny penis". Plus, girls in america like it better.
This is what really makes me angry about this whole thing. Just because everyone else is doing it isn't a good excuse. My girlfriend actually dumped me after half a year of dating when she found out I was uncircumsized.
 
garric said:
Doesn't really matter? You're performing a cosmetic sexual surgery on an infant for some unknown reason (Because everyone else is doing it?). Most of the time, getting cut is a default thing, doctors just do it all the time. The whole "circumcision prevents cancer and aids!" is a myth, don't believe it.
It is a practice that has been performed on infants since the dawn of civilization, and if the doctors to it by default, they probably have a good reason, they are after all, doctors. I just have never understood why people think it is such a big deal, it's not like they are castrating the kids or anything.
 
garric said:
The whole <hygiene thing> is a myth, don't believe it.
Source, please. You failed to provide one in the opening post and you failed again to provide one in response to my posting a source.
 
Evil Tyrant said:
It is a practice that has been performed on infants since the dawn of civilization, and if the doctors to it by default, they probably have a good reason, they are after all, doctors. I just have never understood why people think it is such a big deal, it's not like they are castrating the kids or anything.


Well, I believe that at least in Europe is not so common. And there are not penis infection epidemies in countries where they don't perform circumcision.

And arab countries they perform ablations to every woman, and the reason they give doesn't look good to me.
 
It is a heinous and cruel thing to deface the penis, man's most beautiful and redeeming organ. Women who prfer it circumcised are sadomasochists who likes body modification.
 
This thread is about male circumcision, not female genital cutting.
 
So "smegma" is actual medical jargon? I learn something new every day, everything else in garric's post was old news to me.
 
Circumcision is important. Thats how god knows we're keeping our end of the bargain. Many thousands of years ago, the creator of the universe promised to look out for us as long as we cut the foreskin of our male children. Hmm, makes god sound even weirder than your average priest.
 
It's a sign of the covenant, not a requirement. Is that a little less wierd?
 
Back
Top Bottom