Circumcision removes the most sensitive parts of the penis
The foreskin keeps the glans soft and moist and protects it from trauma and injury
Specialized nerve endings in the foreskin enhance sexual pleasure
No medical institution in the world actually recommends the practice
Performing circumcision on a child can and does result in the deaths of children due to blood loss and/or failure of the immune system
Circumcised males have a much higher rate of sexual dysfunction and premature ejaculation.
The medical literature is full of protective claims for various diseases, such as sexually transmitted disease , male and female cancers, and urinary tract infection. All such claims have been disproved."
The United States has one of the highest rates of male circumcision and also one of the highest rates of HIV infection in the developed world, suggesting that circumcision is having exactly the opposite effect
The vast majority of the world(83%) is not circumcised Don't decide on how a circumcision may look better. don't know where your getting your facts from. the glans of the penis contain the most 'nerve endings' and sensitive tissue. circumcision does not remove this. why would anyone envy someone with a foreskin. they are gross. got rid of mine at 23. by choice. wish it was done at birth as it should be you are fully correct that foreskin preserves the senation of glans penis. Just to say ak don`t know what he / she is talking about for instance "semen lubricating the female vagina". lol, thanks for using spell check ak. Unfortunately its circumcised not circumscribed. Lol it isn't geometry Yes I deeply resent being circumcised. It's a mutilation I will never forgive my parents or the medical profession for.
a k's assertions are completely witout foundation, or in some cases reason. "Not enough oxygen to the glans" is laughable! Circumcised males are believed to suffer from more sexual problems than intact ones.
Using surgery to mutilate the genitals instead of washing in a modern western society makes no sense. Normal intact male genitals are, if anything, easier to wash than female ones and the same substance, smegma collects in the folds of both sorts.
Cutting away 15 square inches (40 square centimetres) or sensitive erogenous tissue, over half the skin of the penis is just plain evil. To suggest that exposing the glans protects it is muddled logic. The glans has to thicken it's keratin layer just to cope with the constant rubbing against clothes. Females are much more prone to infections than intact men but nobody would dream of cutting them except in a few African countries, where many of the same arguments are used to justify FGM as a k is using here.
Since its introduction into the west as an anti-masturbation measure in the 19th century, circumcision proponents have trotted out endlessly changing justifications for the procedure, as earlier ones are disproved. Most of these proposed reasons have later been proved to be based on flawed studies but the myths continue. Even if the claims for benefit were accepted the level of any protection from disease is so low as to be easily outweighed by the risks involved in the surgery. A few babies even die each year from circumcision complications and some lose their penis from necrotic infection. More common complications of infant circumcision, like skin bridges or too much skin removed, do not show up until much later in life. So the statistics do not include them in the complication rate. (A penis with a skin bridge is much harder to clean and causes major sexual difficulties.) However even on these artificially lowered statistics all the major medical authorities in the world now say that these risks outweigh the dubious benefits of routine infant circumcision.
The foreskin is packed with nerve endings, special anatomical features like the ridged band and has a unique elastic gliding action, allowing it to slide on itself and act like lube. This action is what most males use to masturbate with except those who are cut so tightly that they have to use lube or just rub it dry. Of course the intact male has the option to use lube too if he wants to. During intercourse it acts like lube on entry and may act as a dam, preventing lubricating secretions escaping from the vagina. In one study women reported that sex with an intact partner was gentler and more satisfying since he doesn't have to thrust as hard to feel enough stimulation. Removing the foreskin turns the surface of the glans from an inner mucosal membrane to outside skin. Newly circumcised adults usually go through some weeks of intense discomfort as the glans is constantly exposed to rubbing on clothing, until it develops a thicker keratin layer and becomes less sensitive. A new study has shown real differences in fine touch sensitivity between circumcised and intact penises and that the most sensitive parts of the intact penis are those that would be removed by circumcision.
A few intact males have problems with tight foreskin but this is only a tiny proportion of intact males, 1% or less. The condition can now be almost always treated with simple stretching exercises, sometimes in combination with a steroid cream that speeds up the process.
Many men resent being circumcised, some so much that they stretch to try and regain some of their lost foreskin's function. They can never recover all the complex anatomy and lost nerve endings though. Infant circumcision is a violation of a man's right to intact genitals. circumcision is medically necessary for some complications like phimosis and paraphimosis etc
in such cases it is helpful in preventing infections
but it is not compulsory
there are some disadvantages
but during complications it is better than the worst condition
it doesnt prevent hiv
it only reduces the rate of risk to which a man who is safe may be exposed to
eg:if u get circumcised and hav sex with hiv positive persont definitely u will get infected.
if u keep away from all such ways of spreading of hiv also u may have risks of 20 % of contracting hiv and other infections
that 20% is reduced to 10% from circumcision LMAO, that looks familiar.
Anyway, someone mentioned cervical cancer.
Walboomers reported that HPV DNA is found in more than 99.7 percent of cervical cancer cells in 1999. HPV infection is a necessary condition for cervical cancer.
See the NOCIRC position statement for more information on cervical cancer and circumcision. http://www.nocirc.org/statements/cervica...
In February 1996, representatives of the American Cancer Society stated in a letter to the American Academy of Pediatrics:
"The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such [genital] cancers. Research suggesting a pattern in the circumcision status of partners of women with cervical cancer is methodologically flawed, outdated and has not been taken seriously in the medical community for decades."
Hygiene and prevention of disease are among the commonest reasons cited for performing male circumcision. This directory contains references that examine the validity of these claims in detail: http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/
About circumcision bias: http://www.circumcision.org/bias.htm
Ethical questions: http://circumcision.org/bioethics.htm
Ethics: http://circumcision.org/ethics.htm
Circumcision Information: http://www.circumcision.org/information....
I feel one should not be allowed to cut parts off of someone's body without their informed consent, be it the mother or the father irrelevant of their intentions. It is an irreversible process. How will the child view your decision when he grows up? See this video: http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=13...
It's perpetuated by culture, just as FGM in other areas and the majority of people who force it on their children do not know the true facts.
It should be the choice of the victim as to whether or not they want to undergo the procedure. There are many men who try to undo the damage done to them every year: http://www.norm.org/
It is wrong to force an irreversible process onto them that they may not undergo as a adult if they still had the choice.
No medical institution in the world actually recommends the practice.
Let's have a look at medical associations in the developed world. The British Medical Association, Royal Australasian College of Physicians, Canadian Paediatric Society, American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, Australian College of Paediatrics and Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons. Every one of them recommends AGAINST performing the procedure. Their positions on the procedure can be found here: http://www.circumcision.org/position.htm
Performing circumcision on a child can and does result in the deaths of children due to blood loss and/or failure of the immune system.
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=51...
Approximately 230 American males die every year because of circumcision. [ http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/de... , http://www.cirp.org/library/death/ ] This is a meaningless and very sad loss of life. What you said is true. Next time just add sources to back it up. Here, I'll do it for you. =P
Circumcision = loss of sensitivity study
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2855...
http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality....
Higher erectile dysfunction rates after circumcision:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query...
When women didn't know what penis they were dealing with (circumcised or uncircumcised) 9 out of 10 preferred uncircumcised (study).
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/...
Foreskin anatomy and function (keeps the glans soft and protects it, etc).
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/
Circumcision is extremely painful.
http://www.cirp.org/library/procedure/pl...
The USA is the last advanced nation doing it, but rates have fallen down from over 90% in the 1960s to as low as 21% here in California currently. From CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/18/cir...
USA = highest HIV rates in advanced nations (and highest circumcision rates). CIA statistics:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/fac...
Worldwide circumcision rates:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Maps.html
And discussion of common circumcision benefit myths and discussion of all the risks that can develop over time and negative side effects (buried penis, meatal stenosis, etc):
http://forums.govteen.com/showpost.php?p...
---
Some guys try to restore their foreskin by stretching remaining skin. That takes over a year, though, and doesn't restore the nerve endings and such.
Restoration forum:
http://www.foreskin-restoration.net/foru...
What's lost and restorable with circumcision:
http://www.norm.org/lost.html What you haven't mentioned is that a circumcised penis carries much less risk of cervical cancer in women and also that it looks very much nicer ;-) i am very sorry dear......but u are totally wrong. circumcision is a protective practice, it saves the glans.....y...becoz
1. its protects the glans and urethra from every oppertunistic infections like fungi, bacteria, and different sources, and all the doctors and anybody well aware about biology will understand that skin is a protective measure and the flap over the glans serves as a carrier of all the microbes and germs, and the urine which is a very impure liquid also not fully excreted in an uncircumscribed male and and its remnants remain there and harbours the microbes.
2. STD are more common in uncircumscribed
3. bad erection is also a problem.
4. semen can't lubricate the vagina properly during intercourse.
5.not enough oxygen for the glans,
6. bad hygeine, so more prone to UTI's (urinary tract infections)
7. bad nasty smell.
8. women more satisfied from circumscribed.
so my friend u are totally wrong........these points make sense, do think about it, |
