There is a wide variety of studies on this topic and not very surprisingly, those done in the US speak a much different language than those done in the rest of the world. Generaly it is believed that it also plays a role that money is being made with circumcision, often by the same group of people doing the research.
If you look at statistics in the rest of the civilised world, it is pretty clear that circumcision is being practiced much less than it used to be while the US still seemingly enjoy cutting away on their newborns genitals.
It's an interesting topic to research on as it shows a lot on how different people have very different relationships to sexuality, hygiene and morality.
MikeFreedomRock, if you'd be half as well educated as you think you are, you'd be able to do your research in more than one language but that might only leave you with answers that you weren't looking for.
There is a wide variety of studies on this topic and not very surprisingly, those done in the US speak a much different language than those done in the rest of the world. Generaly it is believed that it also plays a role that money is being made with circumcision, often by the same group of people doing the research.
If you look at statistics in the rest of the civilised world, it is pretty clear that circumcision is being practiced much less than it used to be while the US still seemingly enjoy cutting away on their newborns genitals.
It's an interesting topic to research on as it shows a lot on how different people have very different relationships to sexuality, hygiene and morality.
MikeFreedomRock, if you'd be half as well educated as you think you are, you'd be able to do your research in more than one language but that might only leave you with answers that you weren't looking for.
Don't Muslims (the fastest growing religion in the world) practice circumcision as well????
MikeFreedomRock, if you'd be half as well educated as you think you are, you'd be able to do your research in more than one language but that might only leave you with answers that you weren't looking for.
Kannst du mich auf einen durch-Fachleute-??berpr??ften Abschnitt richten? Ich kann Deutsch lesen.
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.
Did you realize the first sentence you highlighted contradicted your own argument? "not sufficient... to recommend..."
I think you're in denial. I can understand why, and so was I. But..
I know the internet is not the most reputable of sources, but it all makes sense. Think about it. When skin becomes uncovered, it becomes exposed to more contact and becomes somewhat calloused (i.e. less sensetive). How can you argue that? Think about if you ever wore latex gloves for more than a few minutes, then you take them off, already the hand is a little more sensetive. So, all denial aside, it looks like we got the short end of the stick, as much as we'd like not to think so.
Many of these arguements convinced me not to do it to my son (if i ever have one). Although, more than one woman have expressed their preference for the unhooded look to me, which is definitaly another consideration. I do want women to be attracted to my boy's joystick. What good is extra sensetivity if women don't want to touch it?
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.
Did you realize the first sentence you highlighted contradicted your own argument? "not sufficient... to recommend..."
I think you're in denial. I can understand why, and so was I. But..
I know the internet is not the most reputable of sources, but it all makes sense. Think about it. When skin becomes uncovered, it becomes exposed to more contact and becomes somewhat calloused (i.e. less sensetive). How can you argue that? Think about if you ever wore latex gloves for more than a few minutes, then you take them off, already the hand is a little more sensetive. So, all denial aside, it looks like we got the short end of the stick, as much as we'd like not to think so.
Many of these arguements convinced me not to do it to my son (if i ever have one). Although, more than one woman have expressed their preference for the unhooded look to me, which is definitaly another consideration. I do want women to be attracted to my boy's joystick. What good is extra sensetivity if women don't want to touch it?
But it doesn't contradict what I'm saying. The AAP (which, again, the only reason I sought them out as a source is that they were the scientific legs that the article Frank posted stood on) is not recommending one way or the other, which is exactly my position. They lay out the pros and cons of both. The first article I posted is commenting on a peer-reviewed scientific study regarding the loss of sensitivity, where they strapped up dudes' johnsons and shocked, vibrated, heated, cooled, and who knows what else. They determined that sensitivity was not an issue. And again, above, the AAP says that no medical or psychological study has proven that sensitivity is an issue. I'll take that and my own personal experience of sensitivity over the pants argument any day. My issue is with people's militancy over the issue.
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.
Did you realize the first sentence you highlighted contradicted your own argument? "not sufficient... to recommend..."
I think you're in denial. I can understand why, and so was I. But..
I know the internet is not the most reputable of sources, but it all makes sense. Think about it. When skin becomes uncovered, it becomes exposed to more contact and becomes somewhat calloused (i.e. less sensetive). How can you argue that? Think about if you ever wore latex gloves for more than a few minutes, then you take them off, already the hand is a little more sensetive. So, all denial aside, it looks like we got the short end of the stick, as much as we'd like not to think so.
Many of these arguements convinced me not to do it to my son (if i ever have one). Although, more than one woman have expressed their preference for the unhooded look to me, which is definitaly another consideration. I do want women to be attracted to my boy's joystick. What good is extra sensetivity if women don't want to touch it?
But it doesn't contradict what I'm saying. The AAP (which, again, the only reason I sought them out as a source is that they were the scientific legs that the article Frank posted stood on) is not recommending one way or the other, which is exactly my position. They lay out the pros and cons of both. The first article I posted is commenting on a peer-reviewed scientific study regarding the loss of sensitivity, where they strapped up dudes' johnsons and shocked, vibrated, heated, cooled, and who knows what else.[/b]ey determined that sensitivity was not an issue. And again, above, the AAP says that no medical or psychological study has proven that sensitivity is an issue. I'll take that and my own personal experience of sensitivity over the pants argument any day. My issue is with people's militancy over the issue.
I want to know who volunteered for that kind of shenanigans....
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.
According to most studies i've read, the rates are 98%/99%...meaning circumcision lowers chances of a UTI by one percent. I'd still take the 98% chance that a UTI won't happen.
A lower risk of getting cancer of the penis. However, this type of cancer is very rare in both circumcised and uncircumcised males.
A cancer so rare, there are actually more known cases of male breast cancer than there is penile cancer anually.
While we're on the topic of cancer, if you had a daughter, would you have one of her breasts chopped off to lower her chances of breast cancer(the most common cancer in females) by a whopping 50%? I doubt it.
A slightly lower risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV, the AIDS virus.
Take note that America(circumcises the highest amount of males routinely) and sub-saharan Africa(the region that circumcises the highest amount of males ritually) are #2 and #1 in the leading AIDS rate worldwide.
Prevention of foreskin infections.
Unless you're stuck in a cave, soap and water should not be a problem.
Prevention of phimosis, a condition in uncircumcised males that makes foreskin retraction impossible.
Phimosis is generally solved these days with a mild topical steroid cream that just about any doctor can prescribe. We don't go chopping up girls genitals because one of them may be "too tight", do we?
Easier genital hygiene.
Having to spend 30 seconds less to clean yourself properly in the shower is not a valid reason to surgically remove any part of someones body. Would you have some teeth pulled to make brushing them easier? or howbout the tips of your fingers be removed so that you won't have to clip your fingernails anymore?
So you can spout whatever you want, but please educate yourself.
As an anatomy major I'm well read on the issue and can tell you from years of research that circumcision is an excuse to a problem that does not exist.
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.
According to most studies i've read, the rates are 98%/99%...meaning circumcision lowers chances of a UTI by one percent. I'd still take the 98% chance that a UTI won't happen.
A lower risk of getting cancer of the penis. However, this type of cancer is very rare in both circumcised and uncircumcised males.
A cancer so rare, there are actually more known cases of male breast cancer than there is penile cancer anually.
While we're on the topic of cancer, if you had a daughter, would you have one of her breasts chopped off to lower her chances of breast cancer(the most common cancer in females) by a whopping 50%? I doubt it.
A slightly lower risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including HIV, the AIDS virus.
Take note that America(circumcises the highest amount of males routinely) and sub-saharan Africa(the region that circumcises the highest amount of males ritually) are #2 and #1 in the leading AIDS rate worldwide.
Prevention of foreskin infections.
Unless you're stuck in a cave, soap and water should not be a problem.
Prevention of phimosis, a condition in uncircumcised males that makes foreskin retraction impossible.
Phimosis is generally solved these days with a mild topical steroid cream that just about any doctor can prescribe. We don't go chopping up girls genitals because one of them may be "too tight", do we?
Easier genital hygiene.
Having to spend 30 seconds less to clean yourself properly in the shower is not a valid reason to surgically remove any part of someones body. Would you have some teeth pulled to make brushing them easier? or howbout the tips of your fingers be removed so that you won't have to clip your fingernails anymore?
So you can spout whatever you want, but please educate yourself.
As an anatomy major I'm well read on the issue and can tell you from years of research that circumcision is an excuse to a problem that does not exist.
wow, so the only reason left is that some women prefer it?
I cant believe I just read all this bullshit. yall need to go get laid...
Said by someone who just read through all three pages
I just wanted to say that it's fucking weird that Coselmed is catching heat for her comment. Most American women I know wouldn't pause a second to say they prefer circumcised dick and frankly, most people I know wouldn't bat an eye at the comment.
OK brace yourself because i am about to go off for the first time in awhile.
It is so typical soulstrut to harp on Coselmed for saying she likes a circumsized man. I mean whatever you fucking buttholes with your goddamn pictures of fake titty ho's up in this shit all day long.
You all can devote entire threads to Women's appearances but if one of the 3 ladies around here makes a comment about a dick you actually have the nerve to question her?
You actually have a problem and will contest what this Woman feels after destroying my Auricon thread with a bunch of pictures of Ice-T's wife's fake tits and your fucking retarded comments about her physical appearance.
I can't even post a thoughtful thread without your fucking perverted disruptions and then you scold this Woman because she likes a clipped cock?
For the record... Ramona and I came to the desicion that we would NEVER circumsize our child and that circumcision is the most Midevil bullshit of all time. Nothing personal but that is just our INFORMED opinion.
And that bit about the child having no nerve endings in his cock for eight days is the most retarded bullshit ever. A friend of ours REGRETS doing it to his son and said that he wailed like a fucking banchee when they sliced his dick open.
And yes... I'm cut too.
I just don't get it.
Oh and just if I have not made myself clear... The sexism of this site is the most embarassing thing about it.
You all need to read some Lucy Lippard and shit.
Now with that being said I still love Soulstrut and think it is the best music forum out there by a million years and I am down with this shit till the end. I rep this shit.
Plus all y'all are fany too and you make me laugh.
Comments
Sure, but is any[/b] chance acceptable?????
On a related note, are all of our departed foreskin's in foreskin heaven??
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/H/Ho/Holy_Prepuce.htm
HOLLA!
Part and parcel of the Soulstrut strangeness continuum. Crink is making a study of the phenomenon.
If you look at statistics in the rest of the civilised world, it is pretty clear that circumcision is being practiced much less than it used to be while the US still seemingly enjoy cutting away on their newborns genitals.
It's an interesting topic to research on as it shows a lot on how different people have very different relationships to sexuality, hygiene and morality.
MikeFreedomRock, if you'd be half as well educated as you think you are, you'd be able to do your research in more than one language but that might only leave you with answers that you weren't looking for.
i'm just glad all this ended with me not getting penis cancer and walking regular.
Don't Muslims (the fastest growing religion in the world) practice circumcision as well????
yes but according to grafwritah they are an "odd" people.
Sure are a lot of them. I'd keep that POV under wraps...
I'm hep to the jive...
Unfortunately no. I ganked it from another message board, but it sure is a winner, isn't it?
Kannst du mich auf einen durch-Fachleute-??berpr??ften Abschnitt richten? Ich kann Deutsch lesen.
Did you realize the first sentence you highlighted contradicted your own argument? "not sufficient... to recommend..."
I think you're in denial. I can understand why, and so was I. But..
I know the internet is not the most reputable of sources, but it all makes sense. Think about it. When skin becomes uncovered, it becomes exposed to more contact and becomes somewhat calloused (i.e. less sensetive). How can you argue that? Think about if you ever wore latex gloves for more than a few minutes, then you take them off, already the hand is a little more sensetive.
So, all denial aside, it looks like we got the short end of the stick, as much as we'd like not to think so.
Many of these arguements convinced me not to do it to my son (if i ever have one).
Although, more than one woman have expressed their preference for the unhooded look to me, which is definitaly another consideration. I do want women to be attracted to my boy's joystick. What good is extra sensetivity if women don't want to touch it?
But it doesn't contradict what I'm saying. The AAP (which, again, the only reason I sought them out as a source is that they were the scientific legs that the article Frank posted stood on) is not recommending one way or the other, which is exactly my position. They lay out the pros and cons of both. The first article I posted is commenting on a peer-reviewed scientific study regarding the loss of sensitivity, where they strapped up dudes' johnsons and shocked, vibrated, heated, cooled, and who knows what else. They determined that sensitivity was not an issue. And again, above, the AAP says that no medical or psychological study has proven that sensitivity is an issue. I'll take that and my own personal experience of sensitivity over the pants argument any day. My issue is with people's militancy over the issue.
I want to know who volunteered for that kind of shenanigans....
According to most studies i've read, the rates are 98%/99%...meaning circumcision lowers chances of a UTI by one percent. I'd still take the 98% chance that a UTI won't happen.
A cancer so rare, there are actually more known cases of male breast cancer than there is penile cancer anually.
While we're on the topic of cancer, if you had a daughter, would you have one of her breasts chopped off to lower her chances of breast cancer(the most common cancer in females) by a whopping 50%? I doubt it.
Take note that America(circumcises the highest amount of males routinely) and sub-saharan Africa(the region that circumcises the highest amount of males ritually) are #2 and #1 in the leading AIDS rate worldwide.
Unless you're stuck in a cave, soap and water should not be a problem.
Phimosis is generally solved these days with a mild topical steroid cream that just about any doctor can prescribe. We don't go chopping up girls genitals because one of them may be "too tight", do we?
Having to spend 30 seconds less to clean yourself properly in the shower is not a valid reason to surgically remove any part of someones body. Would you have some teeth pulled to make brushing them easier? or howbout the tips of your fingers be removed so that you won't have to clip your fingernails anymore?
As an anatomy major I'm well read on the issue and can tell you from years of research that circumcision is an excuse to a problem that does not exist.
wow, so the only reason left is that some women prefer it?
Or that it makes you last longer in bed?
Damnit! What am I doing back here!? AYOOO!!!
I figured eventually the typical Soulstrut response would arise.
Citation? I'd like to see a reference post in APA style, please.
If ever there was a thread guaranteed to result in high levels of ass-hurtedness...
Said by someone who just read through all three pages
I just wanted to say that it's fucking weird that Coselmed is catching heat for her comment. Most American women I know wouldn't pause a second to say they prefer circumcised dick and frankly, most people I know wouldn't bat an eye at the comment.
It is so typical soulstrut to harp on Coselmed for saying she likes a circumsized man. I mean whatever you fucking buttholes with your goddamn pictures of fake titty ho's up in this shit all day long.
You all can devote entire threads to Women's appearances but if one of the 3 ladies around here makes a comment about a dick you actually have the nerve to question her?
You actually have a problem and will contest what this Woman feels after destroying my Auricon thread with a bunch of pictures of Ice-T's wife's fake tits and your fucking retarded comments about her physical appearance.
I can't even post a thoughtful thread without your fucking perverted disruptions and then you scold this Woman because she likes a clipped cock?
For the record... Ramona and I came to the desicion that we would NEVER circumsize our child and that circumcision is the most Midevil bullshit of all time. Nothing personal but that is just our INFORMED opinion.
And that bit about the child having no nerve endings in his cock for eight days is the most retarded bullshit ever. A friend of ours REGRETS doing it to his son and said that he wailed like a fucking banchee when they sliced his dick open.
And yes... I'm cut too.
I just don't get it.
Oh and just if I have not made myself clear... The sexism of this site is the most embarassing thing about it.
You all need to read some Lucy Lippard and shit.
Now with that being said I still love Soulstrut and think it is the best music forum out there by a million years and I am down with this shit till the end. I rep this shit.
Plus all y'all are fany too and you make me laugh.
I just need to call that shit out... that's all.
I love you,
ap
Trill.
Its a little ironic, given the context of this post, that a lot of the Feminist theory I've read is based on Freud's Castration fantasy.
I won't chime in on the rest of it.
I have to apologize, my information was based on hearsay and your source is the only documentd one.
Sorry to everyone who read my rambelings... I was out of line and relying on unproven and subjective material.
Sorry also to Johnny Paycheck. Please still come to my little gig at Happy Ending on the 18th, you too, MikeFreedomrock.
Sorry, sometimes, I'm an idiot...
damn,....I kinda do need to get laid. good call.