Seriously, how many of you would willingly go under the knife now, in adulthood? I'm assuming...not many. And if that's the case, how can you do it to your own baby?
Recognize game: Abraham was 99 when he went under the knife (Genesis 17:9-14 )!
As I woman, I aesthetically prefer the little man sans hood.
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
As a man, I aesthetically prefer tits with silicon. But I don't think I could really get into 'em once I know they're fake. If God/natural selection wanted silicon inside women's titties, it would already be there. If God/natural selection wanted my dick to be foreskinless, it wouldn't be there. My friend had a circumcision at 12 or 13, because he couldn't pull the hood all the way back and his parents felt they should 'step in'. He went in to hospital for a 'stomach op' and woke up with a big plaster around his nether regions. Says that sensitivity went way, way down and he just can't (or won't) use a johnny now. So while he may have decreased his tiny chances of getting some kind of hygene related infection, STDs are at the fore( ) of his worries.
Any young 'uns out there worrying about a tight foreskin prob - it can be solved with damn good wanking twice a day, and your old skin will be worked nice and loose, without needing to do away with sensitive tissue and nerve-endings.
Best foreskin party trick - I met a guy who could put a pool ball inside the end of his foreskin.
I'd rather do my fly up in a hurry and catch my foreskin than my bell-end (or jap's-eye, or purple pump or whatever).
And I agree, I wouldn't equate penile circumcision to clitoral circumcision - the latter is more extreme and traumatic but that doesn't mean that penile circumcision is all good by comparison. Seriously, how many of you would willingly go under the knife now, in adulthood? I'm assuming...not many. And if that's the case, how can you do it to your own baby?
well, I am not sure about this but I beleive that Jews do Circumcision within 8 days of birth cause the nerves have not fully developed in the child and therefore it is not supposed to hurt as much
Adult circumcision just seems cruel
PS I just wasted my 2000th post on this
The eighth day of life is the day that you start producing beta karotine in your blood, which allows your blood to clot. Before then, everyone is a hemopheliac (can't stop bleeding). I imagine the Jews learned this by trial and error. I guess modern science has found a way around that problem now.
Interesting fact - I always wondered why New Year's Day and Christmas were different days, since Christmas is Jesus's birthday, and the Year One started when he was born. Turns out New Year's is the anniversary of Jesus's circumcision (Bris), the day he officially became a Jew. ( I know none of the dates are actually correct, but this is the mythology)
As I woman, I aesthetically prefer the little man sans hood.
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
It seems like most American girls have developed that bias opinion based on conditioning. Chances are thier brother, cousins, boyfriend, etc are cut and thats what they're use to hearing/seeing . They've been told many myths about circumcision such as "hygiene"/"infection" etc. and anything different from that may seem "strange" to females.
My preference is an informed one, and I don't apologize for it...Some guys like Brazilian bikini waxes (a look that requires a woman to subject herself to painful hair removal repeatedly to achieve), while others like/don't mind a little epidermal outgrowth in the pubic area. To each his/her own.
Considering that not a single major medical organization in the entire world recommends routine infant circ., could you please tell me what type of information you've recieved has shaped your preference? Perhaps something the American Academy of Pediatrics or the American Medical Association is not aware of?
No need to apologize at all, but the Brazilian wax comparison is quite far off. Grooming of pubic hairs does not involve the permanent removal of 10,000-20,000 nerve endings nor is it done without the consent of the individual.
I hope you don't think i'm grilling you here, thats not my intent. I'm trying to get a better idea of the female persepective on this because it sure does gloom up the day when you see another human have a preference for genital mutilation (male or female) :-/
Did you read my original post? I like the way it looks, period. My opinion is informed by the fact that I've seen both and I was responding to the notion that it has something to do with me being American. I've made no comment on the medical or ethical issues; I have strong opinions on the subject that I don't need to have validated here. The comparison to pubic hair is apt, because some people have an aesthetic preference for one or the other. You and your little wounded (figuratively speaking) foreskin can target another female with your moral dilemma.
As I woman, I aesthetically prefer the little man sans hood.
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
It seems like most American girls have developed that bias opinion based on conditioning. Chances are thier brother, cousins, boyfriend, etc are cut and thats what they're use to hearing/seeing . They've been told many myths about circumcision such as "hygiene"/"infection" etc. and anything different from that may seem "strange" to females.
My preference is an informed one, and I don't apologize for it...Some guys like Brazilian bikini waxes (a look that requires a woman to subject herself to painful hair removal repeatedly to achieve), while others like/don't mind a little epidermal outgrowth in the pubic area. To each his/her own.
Considering that not a single major medical organization in the entire world recommends routine infant circ., could you please tell me what type of information you've recieved has shaped your preference? Perhaps something the American Academy of Pediatrics or the American Medical Association is not aware of?
No need to apologize at all, but the Brazilian wax comparison is quite far off. Grooming of pubic hairs does not involve the permanent removal of 10,000-20,000 nerve endings nor is it done without the consent of the individual.
I'm going to have to agree here. People prefer all sorts of things but generally we're talking about something that people at least have some degree of personal control about. Brazilian waxing is not mandatory or done without consent, as said above.
The one thing I think exemplifies how accepted the practice is is that Coselmed said that's she's not apologizing for her preference, and nobody got upset.
I think if a male said that he preferred female circumcision a la Africa people would be very, very pissed. And it's "normal" (I guess) there. It's a contradiction because I don't see how it's hugely different except for the rationales are different (although I feel that the end result is on a similar level, just different extremities).
Not picking on Coselmed either, just making a point.
my parents didn't do it... for me to look like my dad (we don't do comparisons when we get together for holidays)
Where does this justification even come from?
The only people I have ever heard advance it are people that are opposed to circumcision offering it as a straw man. It's bizarre..
I think it's just an uncomfortable subject for a lot of people. Talking about wee wees is just passe in a family situation.
I think that's too specific actually, I think looking like men in general society is part of the push. People are afraid their kid is going to be looked at as some sort of freak in the boys' restroom at school - somewhere where people do look.
Seriously. I have no idea where all this rage against circumcision is coming from (no pun intended) or why it's such a sensitive area (no pun intended), but it's more than a little bizarre. As long as your equipment works and isn't, ya know, turning weird colors or whatever, why get this worked up about it?
I'd be pissed at someone for cutting off any important part of my body for no reason, especially something that serves a purpose.
And I'm not trying to be a crazy activist about it.
Also, from what I've read, having a foreskin makes a difference. If nothing other than having better sex - I'm not jumping to give that away.
Americans take it for granted - being circumcised. However, most of the world (and this includes our European bretheren) don't participate in this odd little tradition. So my question is, how many people are still hooded, and how many got the axe? Do you realize that the person from across the sea (or across the state, even) could have a piece of their dick missing, or vice versa? Have you guys ever considered that as defensive as American men are of their penises, they think nothing of letting a doctor or even a drunken Rabbi snip off a large chunk of it?
Did you read my original post? I like the way it looks, period. My opinion is informed by the fact that I've seen both and I was responding to the notion that it has something to do with me being American.
So your "informed" preference is based on the way something looks?...I guess if you like scarring, dryness, and discoloration in the genitals of the opposite sex...rock on! (you're one of them suicide girls ain't cha?)
I've made no comment on the medical or ethical issues; I have strong opinions on the subject that I don't need to have validated here.
the things that make you go hmmmm...
the cmparison to pubic hair is apt, because some people have an aesthetic reference for one or the other. You and your little wounded (figuratively speaking) foreskin can target another female with your moral dilemma.
Taking this to heart are you? Not a good look when you're treading such shallow waters.
This thread is pretty weird. I'm an ardvark, as they say, and so will be any son of mine. That's as far as my thinking goes on the issue. I certainly don't feel any need to push my own agenda upon someone else's penis.
scarring, dryness, and discoloration in the genitals
Uhhh...what? Are these supposed to be results of not having a covered wagon or something?
Yeah, the headupper shaft of the dick is actually supposed to be moist, hence part of the analogy of Frank's post. When you cut the foreskin off it dries up and destroys the way the skin is supposed to be. The scarring can be seen where the skin changes... I guess it depends on the method of how they cut off the skin, but as far as I know it leaves a distinct scar line around the circumference. Discoloration is because it's not supposed to be the color you think it is (if you're circumcised).
Only because male circumcision is very common in some parts of the world, it still is nothing else but GENITAL MUTILATION and can very well be compared (but not equalized) to female circumcision.
Depending where it's done and how deranged the person(s) who do it, female circumscision consists of "only" removing the Labia or removing the Labia and Clitoris or removing both and narrowing or almost completly closing the vagina by sewing it shut. This barbaric, crippling and in many cases deadly procedure is very common in many islamic African countries and uncircumcised women have little to no chance to get married: men prefer their women "sealed" and literaly cut them open, the night after the wedding -if the woman isn't smart and couragous enough to visit a Gynocologist for "opening her up" before the wedding night.
I guess everybody will agree that equalizing male circumcision with the above described would be insane.
However, in a case of female circumcision, where "only" the labia is removed, you definately can compare the two.
Most important thing: ALL of the above mentioned is completely unnecessary -so why do it?
It can not be denied that the nerve endings in the head of your dick lose most of their sensation when drying out and not being covered and protected by the foreskin. This simply is how it is and logicaly, there's no denying that every man who is cut has much less sensation when fucking. This is a fact and I'm sorry for everyone who doesn't like to hear this but go and cry to your parents about it cause they're the ones who did this to you.
To Coselmed: How would you react if a guy would say : "I prefer my women with their Labia cut off, that stuff is just an epidermal outgrowth and it's not aesthetically pleasing" ???
IMO permanent and harmful (religious or traditional) rituals such as non-medical circumcision should not be allowed on baby boys (and especially not girls) that cannot give their own opinions about it. Harmful and unethical traditions need to be checked, seriously. Circumcising your baby for the sole reason of wanting him to look like you is a whole nother thing and should be called what it really is: sadism and narcism.
some of this shit is getting out of hand, yeah my skins cut, my parents didn't do it cause of religion or for me to look like my dad (we don't do comparisons when we get together for holidays) my parents thought at the time it was the more sanitary, my folks are neither sadist or narcissistic, some of you dudes are straight up fuckin looney
Good for you to see things this way!
If you're cut, you have no way to imagine what was taken from you
because you never had it in the first place.
I and every single uncut man I know would never give up their foreskin because they know it's there for a reason: to protect the extremely sensitive head of our dick. Now if you're dick is all numb and dry and you never had it the way nature intended it to be, I guess it's probably better for you to be ignorant than having to realize that someone didn't only cut off a part of your dick but also a good chunk off the quality of your sex life.
Frank, explain to me how you know that circumsized men are less sensitive? Why are you so sure of this. Did Der Spiegel publish a study? Or is this internet research?
Frank, explain to me how you know that circumsized men are less sensitive? Why are you so sure of this. Did Der Spiegel publish a study? Or is this internet research?
That's very easy: Every man who still has his foreskin knows how sensitive the area is that it covers. Circumsized men couldn't even walk around without discomfort if their glans wouldn't be severly desensitized.
You also loose a good ammount of nerve endings just with the piece of skin that's removed.
Frank, explain to me how you know that circumsized men are less sensitive? Why are you so sure of this. Did Der Spiegel publish a study? Or is this internet research?
That's very easy: Every man who still has his foreskin knows how sensitive the area is that it covers. Circumsized men couldn't even walk around without discomfort if their glans wouldn't be severly desensitized.
That's your scientific evidence? Germans know best. Maybe you just get used to walking around hoody-less.
That's very easy: Every man who still has his foreskin knows how sensitive the area is that it covers. Circumsized men couldn't even walk around without discomfort if their glans wouldn't be severly desensitized.
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."
It seems like the root behind all this bluster is some sort of pissing contest (har!) about "uncut means better sex" or some shit like that. It's kinda sad and ridiculous, though it is an entertaining way to kill time.
"When normal, sexually functioning tissue is removed, sexual functioning is also altered. Changes of the penis that occur with circumcision have been documented. These may vary according to the procedure used and the age at which the circumcision was performed, nevertheless penile changes will inevitably occur following circumcision.
Circumcision performed in the newborn period traumatically interrupts the natural separation of the foreskin from the glans that normally occurs somewhere between birth and age 18. The raw, exposed glans penis heals in a process that measurably thickens the surface of the glans and results in desensitization of the head of the penis.
When circumcision is performed after the normal separation of the foreskin from the glans, the damage done by forcible separation of these two parts of the penis is avoided, but the glans must still thicken in order to protect itself from constant chafing and abrasion by clothing.
The thickened, drier tissue covering the glans of the circumcised penis may necessitate the use of synthetic lubricants to facilitate nontraumatic sexual intercourse. Often, it is erroneously considered the woman's lack of lubrication that makes intercourse painful rather than the lack of natural male lubrication, which is more likely the cause. During masturbation, the circumcised male must use his hands for direct stimulation of the glans, and this may require synthetic lubrication as well.
In addition to the predictable physical changes that occur with circumcision, there are inherent risks and potential complications from the surgery. These include, but are not limited to, hemorrhage, infection, surgical damage and, while rare, death. Surgical damage and healing complications can result in extensive scarring, skin bridging, curvature of the penis, and deformities of the glans penis and urethral meatus (urinary opening). Extreme mutilations have resulted from inappropriate electrocautery use in circumcision, causing loss of the entire penis. Sex-change operations have been used as a ``remedy'' for this iatrogenic condition"
your internet science will not cut it (pardon the pun).
Oh Protector of the Skin, this is from the AAP web site (which your article cited)
Circumcision is a surgical procedure in which the skin covering the end of the penis is removed. Circumcision is usually performed by a doctor in the first few days of life. An infant must be stable and healthy to safely be circumcised. Scientific studies show some medical benefits of circumcision. However, these benefits are not sufficient for the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to recommend that all infant boys be circumcised.[/b] Parents may want their sons circumcised for religious, social and cultural reasons. Since circumcision is not essential to a child???s health, parents should choose what is best for their child by looking at the benefits and risks.
Many parents choose to have their sons circumcised because "all the other men in the family were circumcised" or because they do not want their sons to feel "different." Others feel that circumcision is unnecessary and choose not to have it done. Some groups, such as followers of the Jewish and Islamic faiths, practice circumcision for religious and cultural reasons. Since circumcision may be more risky if done later in life, parents may want to decide before or soon after their son is born if they want their son circumcised.
As noted above, research studies suggest that there may be some medical benefits to circumcision. These include the following:
A lower risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs). A circumcised infant boy has about a 1 in 1,000 chance of developing a UTI in the first year of life; an uncircumcised infant boy has about a 1 in 100 chance of developing a UTI in the first year of life.
A lower risk of getting cancer of the penis. However, this type of cancer is very rare in both circumcised and uncircumcised males.
A slightly lower risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV, the AIDS virus.
Prevention of foreskin infections.
Prevention of phimosis, a condition in uncircumcised males that makes foreskin retraction impossible.
Easier genital hygiene. Just as there are reasons parents may choose circumcision, they are reasons why parents may choose NOT to have their son circumcised:
Possible risks. As with any surgery, circumcision has some risks. Complications from circumcision are rare and usually minor. They may include bleeding, infection, cutting the foreskin too short or too long, and improper healing.
The belief that the foreskin is necessary to protect the tip of the penis. When removed, the tip of the penis may become irritated and cause the opening of the penis to become too small. Rarely, this can cause urination problems that may need to be surgically corrected.
Some people believe that circumcision makes the tip of the penis less sensitive, causing a decrease in sexual pleasure later in life. This has not been proven by any medical or psychological study.[/b] Almost all uncircumcised boys can be taught proper hygiene that can lower their chances of getting infections, cancer of the penis, and sexually transmitted diseases.
So you can spout whatever you want, but please educate yourself.
Comments
Recognize game: Abraham was 99 when he went under the knife (Genesis 17:9-14 )!
As a man, I aesthetically prefer tits with silicon. But I don't think I could really get into 'em once I know they're fake. If God/natural selection wanted silicon inside women's titties, it would already be there. If God/natural selection wanted my dick to be foreskinless, it wouldn't be there. My friend had a circumcision at 12 or 13, because he couldn't pull the hood all the way back and his parents felt they should 'step in'. He went in to hospital for a 'stomach op' and woke up with a big plaster around his nether regions. Says that sensitivity went way, way down and he just can't (or won't) use a johnny now. So while he may have decreased his tiny chances of getting some kind of hygene related infection, STDs are at the fore(
Any young 'uns out there worrying about a tight foreskin prob - it can be solved with damn good wanking twice a day, and your old skin will be worked nice and loose, without needing to do away with sensitive tissue and nerve-endings.
Best foreskin party trick - I met a guy who could put a pool ball inside the end of his foreskin.
I'd rather do my fly up in a hurry and catch my foreskin than my bell-end (or jap's-eye, or purple pump or whatever).
The eighth day of life is the day that you start producing beta karotine in your blood, which allows your blood to clot. Before then, everyone is a hemopheliac (can't stop bleeding). I imagine the Jews learned this by trial and error.
I guess modern science has found a way around that problem now.
Interesting fact - I always wondered why New Year's Day and Christmas were different days, since Christmas is Jesus's birthday, and the Year One started when he was born. Turns out New Year's is the anniversary of Jesus's circumcision (Bris), the day he officially became a Jew.
( I know none of the dates are actually correct, but this is the mythology)
Did you read my original post? I like the way it looks, period. My opinion is informed by the fact that I've seen both and I was responding to the notion that it has something to do with me being American. I've made no comment on the medical or ethical issues; I have strong opinions on the subject that I don't need to have validated here. The comparison to pubic hair is apt, because some people have an aesthetic preference for one or the other. You and your little wounded (figuratively speaking) foreskin can target another female with your moral dilemma.
I'm going to have to agree here. People prefer all sorts of things but generally we're talking about something that people at least have some degree of personal control about. Brazilian waxing is not mandatory or done without consent, as said above.
The one thing I think exemplifies how accepted the practice is is that Coselmed said that's she's not apologizing for her preference, and nobody got upset.
I think if a male said that he preferred female circumcision a la Africa people would be very, very pissed. And it's "normal" (I guess) there. It's a contradiction because I don't see how it's hugely different except for the rationales are different (although I feel that the end result is on a similar level, just different extremities).
Not picking on Coselmed either, just making a point.
I think it's just an uncomfortable subject for a lot of people. Talking about wee wees is just passe in a family situation.
I think that's too specific actually, I think looking like men in general society is part of the push. People are afraid their kid is going to be looked at as some sort of freak in the boys' restroom at school - somewhere where people do look.
I'd be pissed at someone for cutting off any important part of my body for no reason, especially something that serves a purpose.
And I'm not trying to be a crazy activist about it.
Also, from what I've read, having a foreskin makes a difference. If nothing other than having better sex - I'm not jumping to give that away.
___________8888888888____________
________8888888888888888_________
______88888888888888888888_______
____888888888______888888888_____
____88888888________888888888____
____88888888________888888888____
____88888888________888888888____
____88888888________888888888____
____888888888______888888888_____
______88888888888888888888_______
________8888888888888888_________
___________8888888888____________
_______88888888________8888888___
_______88888888________8888888___
________88888888______8888888____
_________88888888____8888888_____
__________88888888__8888888______
___________888888888888888_______
____________8888888888888________
_____________88888888888_________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
_888888______________________888888
__888888____________________888888
___888888__________________888888
____888888________________888888_
_____888888______________888888__
______888888____________888888___
_______888888__________888888____
________888888________888888_____
_________888888______888888______
__________888888____888888_______
___________88888888888888________
___________ 8888888888888________
_____________8888888888__________
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888____________________
_____88888888____________________
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888____________________
_____88888888____________________
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_____88888888888888888888888_____
_______88888888________8888888___
_______88888888________8888888___
________88888888______8888888____
_________88888888____8888888_____
__________88888888__8888888______
___________888888888888888_______
____________8888888888888________
_____________88888888888_________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
______________888888888__________
Peace,
h
PS: Ladies, I'm clipped fo' yo pleasure.
So your "informed" preference is based on the way something looks?...I guess if you like scarring, dryness, and discoloration in the genitals of the opposite sex...rock on! (you're one of them suicide girls ain't cha?)
the things that make you go hmmmm...
Taking this to heart are you? Not a good look when you're treading such shallow waters.
Uhhh...what? Are these supposed to be results of not having a covered wagon or something?
Yeah, the headupper shaft of the dick is actually supposed to be moist, hence part of the analogy of Frank's post. When you cut the foreskin off it dries up and destroys the way the skin is supposed to be. The scarring can be seen where the skin changes... I guess it depends on the method of how they cut off the skin, but as far as I know it leaves a distinct scar line around the circumference. Discoloration is because it's not supposed to be the color you think it is (if you're circumcised).
And for the rest of you, no arguing[/b].
For sure. The main point is a lot of people's penises get the decision made for them.
Depending where it's done and how deranged the person(s) who do it, female circumscision consists of "only" removing the Labia or removing the Labia and Clitoris or removing both and narrowing or almost completly closing the vagina by sewing it shut. This barbaric, crippling and in many cases deadly procedure is very common in many islamic African countries and uncircumcised women have little to no chance to get married: men prefer their women "sealed" and literaly cut them open, the night after the wedding -if the woman isn't smart and couragous enough to visit a Gynocologist for "opening her up" before the wedding night.
I guess everybody will agree that equalizing male circumcision with the above described would be insane.
However, in a case of female circumcision, where "only" the labia is removed, you definately can compare the two.
Most important thing: ALL of the above mentioned is completely unnecessary -so why do it?
It can not be denied that the nerve endings in the head of your dick lose most of their sensation when drying out and not being covered and protected by the foreskin. This simply is how it is and logicaly, there's no denying that every man who is cut has much less sensation when fucking. This is a fact and I'm sorry for everyone who doesn't like to hear this but go and cry to your parents about it cause they're the ones who did this to you.
To Coselmed: How would you react if a guy would say : "I prefer my women with their Labia cut off, that stuff is just an epidermal outgrowth and it's not aesthetically pleasing" ???
Good for you to see things this way!
If you're cut, you have no way to imagine what was taken from you
because you never had it in the first place.
I and every single uncut man I know would never give up their foreskin because they know it's there for a reason: to protect the extremely sensitive head of our dick. Now if you're dick is all numb and dry and you never had it the way nature intended it to be, I guess it's probably better for you to be ignorant than having to realize that someone didn't only cut off a part of your dick but also a good chunk off the quality of your sex life.
Frank, explain to me how you know that circumsized men are less sensitive? Why are you so sure of this. Did Der Spiegel publish a study? Or is this internet research?
That's very easy: Every man who still has his foreskin knows how sensitive the area is that it covers. Circumsized men couldn't even walk around without discomfort if their glans wouldn't be severly desensitized.
You also loose a good ammount of nerve endings just with the piece of skin that's removed.
Don't do this to your kids!
That's your scientific evidence? Germans know best. Maybe you just get used to walking around hoody-less.
dropping science:
http://aolsvc.health.webmd.aol.com/content/article/64/72304.htm
And why is this thread here in the first place? Grafwritah, you had a burning circumcision question and decided, "hmmm. Better ask soulstrut." MORON
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."
It seems like the root behind all this bluster is some sort of pissing contest (har!) about "uncut means better sex" or some shit like that. It's kinda sad and ridiculous, though it is an entertaining way to kill time.
Did you just coin that phrase? I like that (seriously).
Circumcision performed in the newborn period traumatically interrupts the natural separation of the foreskin from the glans that normally occurs somewhere between birth and age 18. The raw, exposed glans penis heals in a process that measurably thickens the surface of the glans and results in desensitization of the head of the penis.
When circumcision is performed after the normal separation of the foreskin from the glans, the damage done by forcible separation of these two parts of the penis is avoided, but the glans must still thicken in order to protect itself from constant chafing and abrasion by clothing.
The thickened, drier tissue covering the glans of the circumcised penis may necessitate the use of synthetic lubricants to facilitate nontraumatic sexual intercourse. Often, it is erroneously considered the woman's lack of lubrication that makes intercourse painful rather than the lack of natural male lubrication, which is more likely the cause. During masturbation, the circumcised male must use his hands for direct stimulation of the glans, and this may require synthetic lubrication as well.
In addition to the predictable physical changes that occur with circumcision, there are inherent risks and potential complications from the surgery. These include, but are not limited to, hemorrhage, infection, surgical damage and, while rare, death. Surgical damage and healing complications can result in extensive scarring, skin bridging, curvature of the penis, and deformities of the glans penis and urethral meatus (urinary opening). Extreme mutilations have resulted from inappropriate electrocautery use in circumcision, causing loss of the entire penis. Sex-change operations have been used as a ``remedy'' for this iatrogenic condition"
http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/milos-macris2/
Oh Protector of the Skin, this is from the AAP web site (which your article cited)
Circumcision is a surgical procedure in which the skin covering the end of the penis is removed. Circumcision is usually performed by a doctor in the first few days of life. An infant must be stable and healthy to safely be circumcised.
Scientific studies show some medical benefits of circumcision. However, these benefits are not sufficient for the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to recommend that all infant boys be circumcised.[/b] Parents may want their sons circumcised for religious, social and cultural reasons. Since circumcision is not essential to a child???s health, parents should choose what is best for their child by looking at the benefits and risks.
Many parents choose to have their sons circumcised because "all the other men in the family were circumcised" or because they do not want their sons to feel "different." Others feel that circumcision is unnecessary and choose not to have it done. Some groups, such as followers of the Jewish and Islamic faiths, practice circumcision for religious and cultural reasons. Since circumcision may be more risky if done later in life, parents may want to decide before or soon after their son is born if they want their son circumcised.
As noted above, research studies suggest that there may be some medical benefits to circumcision. These include the following:
A lower risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs). A circumcised infant boy has about a 1 in 1,000 chance of developing a UTI in the first year of life; an uncircumcised infant boy has about a 1 in 100 chance of developing a UTI in the first year of life.
A lower risk of getting cancer of the penis. However, this type of cancer is very rare in both circumcised and uncircumcised males.
A slightly lower risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV, the AIDS virus.
Prevention of foreskin infections.
Prevention of phimosis, a condition in uncircumcised males that makes foreskin retraction impossible.
Easier genital hygiene.
Just as there are reasons parents may choose circumcision, they are reasons why parents may choose NOT to have their son circumcised:
Possible risks. As with any surgery, circumcision has some risks. Complications from circumcision are rare and usually minor. They may include bleeding, infection, cutting the foreskin too short or too long, and improper healing.
The belief that the foreskin is necessary to protect the tip of the penis. When removed, the tip of the penis may become irritated and cause the opening of the penis to become too small. Rarely, this can cause urination problems that may need to be surgically corrected.
Some people believe that circumcision makes the tip of the penis less sensitive, causing a decrease in sexual pleasure later in life. This has not been proven by any medical or psychological study.[/b]
Almost all uncircumcised boys can be taught proper hygiene that can lower their chances of getting infections, cancer of the penis, and sexually transmitted diseases.
So you can spout whatever you want, but please educate yourself.
There's your selling point right there....