Male Circumcision: for or against?

[Deactivated] on 19/11/2015 - 19:49
Last edited 19/11/2015 - 20:40 by 1 other user

A family friend , who also happens to be a doctor, is urging us to consider getting our son circumcised.We've discussed it with our pediatrician and he's of the view that our son would benefit from it.My son has no health issues, other than infrequent nose-bleeds which are unlikely to be resolved by having his foreskin removed.Also both of those doctors are biased: the first one regularly performs the procedure and the second one, is muslim.

My wife is strongly opposed to circumcision for many reasons but it really comes down to the belief that only the owner of the penis has the right to decide if he would like its appearance, structure and function altered by circumcision. Even though we are his parents, we do not have the right to make that decision for him. I agree with her.

What are your thoughts? Would you/did you have your son circumcised? Do you regret having/not having had the procedure done?

Cheers,
JJB

Poll Options

  • 124
    My son is/will be circumcised because the benefits outweigh the risks.
  • 22
    My son is/will be circumcised because of religious reasons or to look like me.
  • 92
    My son is/will NOT be circumcised because the risks outweigh the benefits.
  • 2
    My son is/will NOT be circumcised because the procedure is too expensive.
  • 470
    My son is the only one who has the right to make that informed decision.
  • 16
    Other
Health & Beauty

closed Comments

    • bargainslut on 20/11/2015 - 05:52
      +1

      It depends on many variables. One must not assume that ones parents always know better than the children.

  • lordra on 20/11/2015 - 00:07
    +3

    As a young person, I never had problems with foreskin. Educate him on genital health, ensuring he keeps it clean; just how he brushes at night, save him & the family a lot of stress. LEAVE IT BE.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 00:29

    I'd seek the Dr's advice at the time - using the most up to date info.

  • superValue on 20/11/2015 - 00:37

    My son only showed discomfort for 3 hours after the procedure and even that was minimal. He gets more upset if he doesn't get fed on time. The earlier its done the less discomfort and quicker it heals.

    A friend was 25 when he was circumcised and he says no difference in sexual pleasure. He would have preferred if the procedure was done when he was a baby.

    The WHO has outlined that there are health benefits or risk reductions.

    At the end of the day, some people don't immunize their kids, i avoid antibiotics, lots of people believe this is mutilation, some people don't groom enough but each to their own. Do what you believe is best for your child.

    If you do it, just go to specialist that does this everyday and the sooner the better.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 00:47
      +2

      Not immunizing your children and having your son circumcised couldn't be more different. They aren't remotely comparable.

      I think this is a good, sceptical view: https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4471

      Personally, I would only do it if there was some pressing medical reason. If, as an adult, he decided he wanted it then he could get it done. I have personal, ideological problem with using the religion of the parent (not the child, an infant can't be called anything vis a vis religion) but that is another issue.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 02:49

      If your friend had specific indication for a circumcision, it was probably a relief for him when he had it.
      More time + contact of remnant foreskin with clothing over time, will likely change his perception of 'no difference in sexual pleasure'.

    • bargainslut on 20/11/2015 - 05:56

      The WHO? the band the WHO made more sense than these nutjobs!

      Scroll back and all will become clear.

  • Bigsta on 20/11/2015 - 01:03
    -1

    cutting off the end off your sons penis is beyond barbaric, talk to a gay friend, men with mutilated freakish penis's or circumcised penis's if you prefer are the pariahs of the gay world.

    The argument that the spaghetti monster you believe in demands that you cut the end of your sons penis or daughters clitoris off is beyond stupid, barbaric and does not belong in the 21st century.

  • Shwayne on 20/11/2015 - 01:26
    +6

    Your wife is quite right, the procedure is barbaric and pointless.

    If your son wants it done for some reason or another, it's a bit of an inconvenience later on in life but it's irreversible.

    I think a small amount of education is enough to prevent UTI's and ensure there are no issues during development/growth.

    Or you can just cut away your problems, irreversibly.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 02:50
    +3

    Like you, I have a few strings to my bow, JJB.
    Some of yours are probably a bit weirder than mine.

    I suggest that you re-read your own first paragraph.

    Biased, indeed. There are plenty of them around.

    I've typed this at unpleasant leisure even though having only partially kept up with some of the comments above. I won't alter this in relation to those, but may counter a couple, just before I click 'post' on this. Probs.

    Listen to your darling (no sarcasm) wife, Jar Jar Binks.

    Only because it is you asking, am I going to venture here.
    This is usually only offered to those who ask me for advice, directly.

    Up until the 6 week point in utero, male and female human foetuses are to all intents (and resembling certain porpoises), structurally identical. Hormone, in-sequence, triggers, see tissue that would otherwise remain and develop into ovaries, ultimately develop into, and then descend, as testes.

    Tissue that would otherwise develop into fallopian tubes, become, instead, the vasa deferentia (vas deferens).

    In developmental terms, female anatomy is profoundly the underpinning of human and other mammalian physiology. Not sure about Binksian.

    'Girl Genes' (men tend to mainly add the genetic wildcard) make for the dominant percentage of conferred, key, structural, blood, guts & bone genetic traits expressed in human OzBargainers, but that's as an aside for no other OzBargain thread, hopefully.

    In original tissue type, the penis begins effectively in its early development as a vagina, then 'turned inside-out' as the foetus develops further.

    The glans penis / the head of the penis, is comparable - in relation to the paucity of nerve-endings - to the clitoral hood and partial bits of the underlying structure.

    As much as ninety percent of nerve morphology in a given penis is under the skin on the INSIDE of the foreskin. It is only THAT particular nerve morphology in THAT tissue, that is in any way comparable in density and type to that present in the clitoris.

    Jar Jar Binks. In circumcised - yes, including me, men, the frenulum (remnant of foreskin) below the head of the penis, remains the most sensitive piece of skin on their /your /my (yet still, in /my case - at least - majestic) schlong.

    Still, a shed… um, load, of nerve-endings. Gone.

    I do alright, Jar Jar Binks, as have you, and I'm sure that there will probably always be some women (not Wiki, which is admirable) who express a gleeful (if generally screwy) preference for circumcised penises.

    Female sexual experience is so, incredibly, contrastingly, intense, that I still wonder what I may have missed - with my Guardians (not of the galaxy), like so many at the time (and apparently more recently, in your case, yours), deciding - and above all else - most likely keen that I look like Daddy, 'down there'.

    I wish that I had been given the choice.

    If this thread gets a real go-on, it will undoubtedly (signs already) turn into a veritable shitstorm of religious, cultural, and uncircumcised HIV-rate etc., statistics.

    As for my opinion on female circumcision - this written as part of another comment, in another thread, that I also wished I hadn't seen:

    Not counting the countries of migration where it continues 'underground', in the thirty-odd countries in Africa and the Middle East where the Muslim 'cultural' practice of female genital mutilation is still perpetrated - on more than 3 Million girls every year (and no, I didn't need to search to recall the horror of that figure), men haven't needed to involve themselves, explicitly, in the process, for generations. Beyond the understanding that girls will be 'done', the women do the rest.
    From cutting, to removing the clitoris altogether, to further excision, to the last two plus sewing the vagina up altogether, mothers conspire with aunties and grandmothers to ensure that the horror that was visited upon them, is in turn visited upon their daughters, their nieces, their granddaughters.

    I've by and large said my peace.
    I am really going to try and leave it at that.

    Also, again - listen to your wife.

    (A gold star and a koala stamp, wicket1120.)

    • harkoliar on 20/11/2015 - 11:06

      I don't know to plus you with your comment or neg you because you have jar jar binks in it!

    • bargainsville on 21/11/2015 - 04:34
      -1

      Regarding FGM, and the last part of your post, where you quoted something you wished you hadn't seen, it would've actually been better if you hadn't seen it, and instead quoted something more factual that doesn't re-affirm some thoughts you may already believe in.

      Apart from the actual link in the quote you pasted, when this FGM thing was big in the news, I actually came across a video hosted by several atheists, and they where talking about FGM. They pointed out, with reference to certain research, that FGM is actually a cultural practice, and nothing to do specifically with "Muslims". It is practiced in both Africa and Asia, and was even recommended by Doctors in America, largely christian.

      It's a cultural practice, tradition passed on, nothing more.

      • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2015 - 07:58
        -1

        Neg happily offered in return for yours.

        Regarding FGM, and the last part of your post, where you quoted something you wished you hadn't seen,

        Words were mine - particular OzBargain thread was the 'wished not seen'.

        Most already-well-attended by the time I click on them, threads, I just leave to others. Most people get the advice, information and views that they are looking for, or likely will do, as those threads pan out. Even more likely as OzBargain grows larger.

        It's a cultural practice, tradition passed on, nothing more.

        Female Genital Mutilation, overwhelmingly - in its origin, and now even moreso - in the ongoing horror as perpetrated in North Africa, the Middle East, parts of Asia, and sought out, underground, in Western countries, is a 'cultural practice' that is profoundly, usually, intrinsically, linked to Islam and various worst-end-of-the-spectrum /completely effed-up notions relating to 'modesty', that are in reality just used as a means to subjugate women.

        I am terribly sorry if I have offended you in saying that. Every single occurence of FGM in some way linked historically, presently, 'culturally' to Islam? No. Just, overwhelmingly, most.

        Have a nice weekend. Pray for my soul, or my death as an infidel.
        Either is fine.

        P.S. Did I mention that I have some Muslim friends? Only a few, but they are very nice. Would recommend. FGM likely very distant for them, but a couple are close enough as friends to have gained their sense of the undercurrent of fear that exists within their community, within Islam, in relation to being seen to 'step out of line', in relation to just about everything. Palpable and disconcerting. Far more for them, than for me.

  • Thaal Sinestro on 20/11/2015 - 03:17
    +1

    To the people you voted "My son is the only one who has the right to make that informed decision", all I can say is that is much better to be circumcised as a baby than wait until you are an adult.

  • Talonparty on 20/11/2015 - 04:21
    +5

    The whole idea is absolutely barbaric. There's no reason at all to cut your son's genitals unless there's a specific condition that requires an operation. Those that argue it is more hygienic ignore modern hygiene practices.

    Those who suggest it for preventative measures regarding HIV etc need to consider their reasoning. The systematic removal of breasts would eliminate risk of death through breast cancer but that's obviously too extreme. At what point do you decide that surgery with non-negligible risk outweighs any statistical benefits?

    Those who suggest it's a function-less flap of expendable senseless skin are cruel in their ignorance. It is thought to contain a higher concentration of nerves than the clitoris, to cut off which is considered the most hideous form of barbarism by society.

    Honestly, what the hell are you thinking taking a knife to your son's penis with no good reasons other than cosmetic or discredited 'old world' thinking? Leave it alone, he'll thank you for it when he's old enough to understand what you were going to do. My mum considered it because she thought it was more hygienic and the (British) doctors told her they wouldn't do it unless it was for religious reasons because there was no real good reason. I'm extremely thankful she wasn't able to go through with it.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 08:30

      My mum considered it because she thought it was more hygienic..

      Also give humorous soap references in earlier comments, worth taking the opportunity to say…

      'Smegma' (it is a horrible word) on uncircumcised penises is very high in oil content. When the balance of that - relative to moisture, remains relatively undisturbed, pathogens are very likely kept at bay. Same applies to women, who also produce smegma around the clitoris and the labia.
      Don't use soap, which strips residual surface-layer of oil. Just use water.

  • netizen on 20/11/2015 - 05:27
    +7

    I did it and regretting. Please don't do it to your son.

  • bargainslut on 20/11/2015 - 06:00

    Hey JJB, could you please do a thread about world economics, past present and future?

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 06:43
      -2

      or get a real life, or at least post a bargain that's useful for everyone.

  • infinite on 20/11/2015 - 07:06
    +17

    My uncle is a GP and his medical advice was that OP's friend (whether he is a real doctor or someone who just has a doctorate in some academic field) is insane giving that advice. As in, could get struck from the register as a doctor type of crazy, for offering that advice.

    He advised specifically that since 1971 it's been the opinion of the the Royal Australasian College of physicians (and specifically the Paediatrics and Child Health Division of the organisation) that there has never been a single legitimate reason for circumcision other than a few very extreme medical conditions, for which all have treatments steps available to go through first before circumcision is even considered. They consider the removal of foreskin both damaging to the penis, the sexual health of the male and even psychologically damaging - in the short and long term. He said the professional and insurance issues aside, the practice is considered barbaric and there's no difference between male and female circumcision considering the loss of genital areas and the sensations & nerve endings they contained. Other than ancient religious beliefs, there's no reason to do it & like most doctors, he doesn't believe that's an appropriate reason either. He said he's never once in his life worked in a practice or hospital that allowed the procedure & referred any client who asked for the process to be done to first read up on the academic findings that show there's literally not a medical reason for it, then when they ultimately ignored him, referred them to the hospital administration who would refer them elsewhere.

    He even e-mailed me a link to the most up to date academic fact-based publishing http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpc.12825/full GP's refer to, noting that like with every other single actually reputable paper published on the issue, it deconstructs every single last social, opinon-based and pseudo-medical reasoning put forward for circumcision and finds not one of them to have any fact or scientific base to conclude circumcision should ever happen, other than in a few rare medical conditions after no other treatments have worked.

    • UFO on 20/11/2015 - 13:55
      +4

      There we go… REAL FACTS.

      I have two sons under the age of 5. Advice given to me was that there is no logical reason to remove the foreskin unless on medical grounds.

      In Canberra, 8 out of 10 boys born do not have their foreskin removed.
      This is directly from two respected doctors. One a fertility expert who delivers babies nearly every single day, and the other a GP who specialises in paediatrics. I can PM names if you live in area and would like to contact them.

      It's just not done anymore. Religious beliefs is the main reason, but you really need to ask yourself why on Earth a Church would care one bit about the look of your son's penis. I can understand why from a hygiene point of view one hundred years ago when parents never discussed such things with their children…. but in modern times??? Give me a break.

      It's genital mutilation for no valid reason. Religeon is NOT a valid reason anymore. No way.

    • pxrnm on 20/11/2015 - 14:33

      Hmmm there are other views out there and many of those are doctors who would disagree with your uncle, here are a number of them:

      International consensus statement on infant male circumcision by 56 Australian and International academic and clinical experts:
      http://www.circumcisionaustralia.org/pdf/InternationalStatem…

      I found many commenters here are just giving out comments based on their personal believes without evidence. Surprisingly it was directed to those who agrees with circumcision.

      • xsacha on 21/11/2015 - 01:20
        +2

        There's a handful of doctors that support circumcision solely because they make a lot of money from the referrals when no other doctor will take them. They take on a lot of risk though.

    • roadsign on 20/11/2015 - 15:11
      +1

      Great summary!

  • boccos on 20/11/2015 - 07:52
    +3

    What a wonderful discussion. Originally circumcision was introduced to the Jews as part of God's Law way back BC as a sign that they were a race apart and God's own, amongst other things. Upon the Coming of Jesus, circumcision was abolished along with other changes and the door opened to all to become Christians not just Jews. There was a similar debate in the New Testament over circumcision as you are having today.
    There is no reason to circumcise, unless the male foreskin causes problems during an erection. This can be dealt with if and when a problem is discovered. Any other argument is invalid. So, any parent who decides to circumcise their boy, does so because of their own prejudices or ignorance, not the child's welfare.

  • DarkOz on 20/11/2015 - 08:07

    Almost 2 decades ago I read an article that stated the death rate from early circumcision is higher than not. The only benefit from circumcision is keeping it hygienic and prevents infections but the procedure is not 100% guaranteed risk free. Also there are other minor issues as a direct result from the circumcision.

    • infinite on 20/11/2015 - 15:20
      +2

      "Keeping it hygienic" is solely about washing. Nothing to do with chopping off body parts.

      • DarkOz on 21/11/2015 - 11:51

        Exactly that. Circumcision is suppose to make it easier to wash, especially for kids.

  • visca on 20/11/2015 - 08:30
    +1

    You have two medical practitioners, one which you state is your own, giving you their professional opinion and you choose to come to ob for another. I mean this is concerning your son, and if you are not clear on the issue should you not be seeking an independent medical opinion. Not wanting to devalue the views of Ozbargeners, but I see this community very much inappropriate to seek advice/view on something as important as your sons health.

    • RocketSwitch on 20/11/2015 - 09:04
      +1

      OP was asking for views, thoughts and opinions, it's an open forum which is entirely appropriate. It would be inappropriate if he was seeking medical advice from OzBargain.

    • airzone on 20/11/2015 - 11:12
      +1

      Bringing these types of topics to OZB is part of JJB's MO.

  • brownhux on 20/11/2015 - 08:39
    +8

    Strongly against. Circumcision should only be performed for specific medical indications such as a phimosis, which are fortunately very rare.

    We will look back on male circumcision with horror in the future.

    Edit: I also don't believe religious or cultural reasons are good enough. The child is not born of any religion he is a blank slate and should be given autonomy over mutilation of his body.

  • sajidmib on 20/11/2015 - 08:52
    +1

    depends on a doctors advice that is what they are approved for by the Govt and a bias is another thing

    adding the word "muslim" to it wont give you the right advice from public as it becomes political and you will not get what you want

    had you mentioned "Jew" as they do circumcision as well for religious beliefs then this would have been different story just try it one day and see different comments

    SO is totally your right to do or no to do … your child is not in a position to make a decision or understand his rights, don't be fooling ourselves with rights and this thing thats going around, if you find the doctor biased go to another collect a few advices and based on that make your decision

    IF doctor tells you we need perform heart surgery on you, wont you say its good I ll live longer …. or you would say no its my right to die and i should die this is 2015 not 1800"s

    thanks…

  • RocketSwitch on 20/11/2015 - 08:56
    +5

    Another strongly against. I think it's barbaric in my opinion. Why would anyone let their child go through such a pain inducing and mangling procedure?

    You're literally cutting off skin. This is cruel.

    It's their body, it's their choice, I believe you can't take that away from them. This is not like they have heart condition where they NEED this operation to save their life.

    It's risky with no benefits in my point of view.

    I don't understand why anyone would risk a procedure like this.

    When I was looking at the stats, it has dramatically decreased. It will continue like this when everyone looks back and sees what malpractice it was, but one must ask, how much revenue does circumcision bring in, for example, to a country like US?

    Food for thought, don't subject this horror to a newborn.

    • BestofOZB on 22/11/2015 - 09:36
      -1

      If you have not had the procedure done or not have seen it done please stop using words like "such a pain", "cruel", "risky" and "malpractice". It is none of the above, it is possibly the simplist medical procedure to do. OP was asking for your opinion so I suggest you only do that without over-stating things to keep a healthy discussion.

      • infinite on 22/11/2015 - 19:39

        It's clearly all of those things though. It's also a medical risk to perform & recommended against by every last doctors body and representative group in Australasia. None of this is even debatable. It's all clear fact.

        The only people campaigning for it to even stay legal are the uninformed, the barbaric religious mongs & the conspiracy nutters.

  • Pootie Tang on 20/11/2015 - 09:05
    +2

    I got it done at the age of 23 - Very happy to have had it done. Less sensitive would be the main disadvantage but there are other advantages. PM if you would like to discuss in detail (not in a creepy way).

    • brainactive on 20/11/2015 - 12:29

      I want to PM you but you've got PM turned off. Can you turn it back on?

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 09:13
    +2

    My brother was circumcised a few years ago at the ripe old age of 26 (major procedure at that age).

    He says its great because he doesn't have to drip dry as much when pissing, and there is no cheese smell anymore (his lack of hygiene is what probably required it to be done in the first place though). Other than that, nothing is different (including sex wise apparently).

    • Hirolol on 20/11/2015 - 11:23

      How could he handle that level of sensitivity without the foreskin?
      Surely it is less sensitive once it is removed.
      If the top were exposed 24/7 pre circumcision personally i would have trouble functioning in day to day activities.

    • xsacha on 21/11/2015 - 01:24
      -1

      Drip dry? What the? You just peel it back to pee, there's no drip drying.
      If you pee with the skin on, some will get stuck in there and cause the cheesey smell (and actual cheese-looking substance) that requires washing off. Also, you only need to start doing it once it starts happening (that is, around puberty).
      Common sense is all that is needed. This stuff doesn't even need to be taught.

  • spurf on 20/11/2015 - 09:21
    +10

    I'm an Anaesthetist and I wouldn't subject my kids to an anaesthetic unless the procedure was absolutely necessary and couldn't be deferred until they are older as there is growing evidence that anaesthetic drugs may be harmful to the developing brain.

    http://smarttots.org/resources/faq/

    Even without this to worry about, the procedure itself has too many inherent risks to justify the mostly minor benefits which other posters have already said can already be achieved by less drastic measures i.e. normal hygiene and standard safe sex practices. If this was a procedure developed in the modern era it would never pass ethics approval to be performed routinely on otherwise well infants.

    If you do decide to get it done please see an experienced Paediatric Surgeon or ideally a Paediatric Urologist to examine your son. There has been cases of circumcision being performed on children with abnormal urological anatomy. The foreskin is used by Urologists for urethroplasty (repair / refashining of the urethra) for children with this abnormality. No foreskin means this repair is much more difficult to perform.

  • ijd on 20/11/2015 - 09:39

    What do women prefer their partners to be? That would be more important than a minor health benefit.

    • anonymous01 on 20/11/2015 - 10:03
      +4

      The one with more money.

      • rakerr on 20/11/2015 - 11:09
        +3

        How much does a second hand foreskin fetch these days?

      • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2015 - 19:50

        That's only in regards to the men who want their women to be significantly more attractive than themselves.

    • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2015 - 19:49
      +1

      Circumcised.

  • SupeNintendoChalmers on 20/11/2015 - 10:08
    +3

    Unless your son has difficulty retracting his foreskin (phimosis) there is zero good reason to do this.

    Curiously…… how the freckle did a group of people 1. Figure out and 2. Decide you can cut off foreskins?

    • Hirolol on 20/11/2015 - 11:20
      +1

      Probably a prank gone wrong.
      Then they just use the excuse oh yeh we did it for religious reasons

    • noskich on 20/11/2015 - 12:28
      +1

      It is quite interesting that men with phimosis are not given any other option than circumcision even though it is possible to only make a cut in the foreskin and in that way loosen it up (preputioplasty). However preputioplasty is not available in any public hospital in Australia, only circumcision. For preputioplasty you need to go private. Even though preputioplasty is much more easier to do and much less invasive as the foreskin tissue is left and only a slit is made.

      Shows how traditional approach in medicine still prevails even in Australia in the 21st century.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 10:26
    +1

    I have never found a convincing argument why parents decide to deaden the nerve endings of genital of their children. It is a decision that must be made by the children when they grow up. It poses no risk whatsoever and it is very common to have foreskins in different parts of the world. It is a religious and cultural thing, and has very little scientific basis.

  • carlitos on 20/11/2015 - 10:59

    Wow, its actually not about whether you clean or don't clean. It's not that simple at all. Some people clean and yet it isn't good enough, they have such tight foreskin that the moisture and bacteria build up is so common it can happen within the period of the last clean. These types of people can have recurring skin infections under the foreskin within months and they are being recommended by doctors to circumcise as the best course of action.

  • faisalemran on 20/11/2015 - 11:17
    -3

    Medical reasons for circumcision - (Source: https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au)

    Recent research suggests that circumcision may bring medical benefits such as:

    10 times lower risk of a baby getting a urinary tract infection (UTI).

    No risk of infants and children getting infections under the foreskin
    Easier genital hygiene.

    Much lower risk of getting cancer of the penis (Penile cancer).

    A possibly lower risk of men getting sexually transmissible infections (STIs) than men who are not circumcised.

    Also, please go through the following article -

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2860727/Benefits-c…

    I have got two sons and both are circumcised. Not because we are coming from Muslim background but because I know the health benefits pretty well.

    Consult with few other doctors if you are still hesitant with the "biased" views of the first two doctors.

    • eggnbacon on 20/11/2015 - 13:45
      +9

      The same webpage you point to states this in their summary

      • Circumcision may offer health benefits, although these may be too small to justify surgery.

      Also your selective editing of the medical reasons leaves much to be desired.

      • A 10 times lower risk of a baby getting a urinary tract infection (UTI) in his first year of life (remembering that only one per cent of babies are at risk of a UTI, so 1,000 circumcisions are needed to prevent one UTI)

      • Much lower risk of getting cancer of the penis (although this is a very rare condition and good genital hygiene also seems to reduce the risk. More than 10,000 circumcisions are needed to prevent one case of penile cancer)

      • A possibly lower risk of men getting sexually transmissible infections (STIs) than men who are not circumcised (although these studies have not been scientifically confirmed and safe sex practices are far more effective in preventing these infections).

  • Hirolol on 20/11/2015 - 11:26
    +4

    Anyone that has a 'cheese' smell or gets their junk infected for lack of hygiene should have the whole thing removed.
    Seriously disgusting.
    Who lets it get to that level? Do you wipe ur butt after you take a dump?

  • nekro on 20/11/2015 - 11:33
    +3

    I've saved a small fortune in water and soap over the years… #winning

  • rodinthink on 20/11/2015 - 11:35
    +5

    Fun Fact/ Myth :
    The tip of your junk contain a thousands of nerves that make you sensitive during a pillow-fight. This way you know when the yoghurt almost finish to produced in which mean you know when to take-your-time and slow down.

    In the other hand Circumcision desensitize your pleasure-meter. You know when the tip of your dingo always touch the undies, it slowly desensitize your sense . You only given information about the final-stage of yoghurt production in very last minute so suddenly you get panic and the result are un-expectation & disappointment as you don't have enough time to put extra-flavour in the yoghurt which make a really big difference.

    ============================================================================================================

    "And for what it's worth, the best sex I ever had was with an uncircumcised guy! I think they feel more and can also last longer.
    "

    "Most of the American women i have been with (this was the 80s had never seen an uncut dick before and I was a novelty)"

    The uncircumsised male has better sensitivity during intercourse, masturbation or a blow job. Women enjoy uncircumsised penises more. During gay sex uncircumsised is also preferred. Based on the testimony of female friends, uncircumsised men are better in bed and consequently are better at pleasuring women. The same applies to anal sex, the better performing males (uncircumsised) give a more enjoyable performance

    ============================================================================================================

    Anyway society (mostly parent) encourage us to do circumcision by giving false advantage like you can be much more taller & any other dodgy tricky false advantage

    TLDR;
    Gr8-Depression-the-2nd incoming after reading this forum

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 15:06
      +2

      Mate, even as one of the unnecessarily circumcised, I don't think about it very often.
      I do agree that this thread on OzBargain isn't helping with the 'not thinking about it' part. Bloody Jar Jar Binks.

      Don't let that 'Gr8-Depression-the-2nd' thing take hold. As long as actually orgasms remain good, we really don't have too much to complain about.

      Also, if you find yourself musing (can happen) on the sexual bonus that women receive, just think about it as just compensation for periods, childbirth, sit-down peeing (unless you're Whoopi Goldberg - don't ask..), and the assorted circumcised or uncircumcised (profanity) wandering around that all women encounter, sometimes daily.

      I guarantee you that you will feel better about your particular lot in life, cut or uncut, after thinking about that.

      What the hey. Here's a smiley.
      :)

  • djones145 on 20/11/2015 - 11:40

    rofl

    love ur topics, nothing is boring in ur life!

    please create a halal post next, then region
    maybe one on who to vote for etc

  • edgar28 on 20/11/2015 - 11:49
    +1

    The 1st option (or another option) should be
    — is/will be circumcised because being identified with high risk of health issue.

  • girlshaped on 20/11/2015 - 11:50
    +1

    I don't have kids, but if I had one I wouldn't want it done. I don't think it's necessary as long as the kid is aware of the necessity to keep clean etc.

    Being a big fan of penises in general, I think they look better with their hat on anyway.

  • SpaceNinja on 20/11/2015 - 11:50
    +7

    What did the guy say to the doctor after his circumcision procedure ?
    .
    .
    .
    Keep the tip.

    • airzone on 20/11/2015 - 19:32
      +1

      What do you call a Russian circumciser?

      Asnip Yurdikov

  • thord on 20/11/2015 - 11:57
    +10

    It should be illegal. Nobody should be performing unnecessary medical procedures on their children.

    The 'benefits' of cleanliness and reduced risk of STIs HIV are agenda driven misrepresentations. Do you know how to use a condom? No? You're an idiot? Okay, well, do you also live in sub-saharan africa? No? Then there's no (profanity) reason to bring up HIV protection as a benefit to circumcision. You're not going to be exposed to it. Cleanliness? Do we really need to go through this? (profanity) have a shower. You want to have your son look like you? Apart from the insane narcissism of this, I think we should call the police. You and your son should not be comparing your dicks.

    There are no real-world benefits and only drawbacks to circumcision (unless medically necessary in maybe 0.01% of people). Circumcision was revived in the US by John Harvey Kellogg. Yeah, the guy who invented the cereal (fun fact, he invented corn flakes to be so bland and uninteresting that they would curb sexual desire and prevent masturbation - that's the kind of (profanity) he was).

    In fact, he was so opposed to masturbation that he extremely strongly campaigned for circumcision to become regular and normal (and is a big part of why it's still practiced in the US today). Why? Because he wanted to stop boys from masturbating! He specifically wanted that the initial association with your penis be linked to pain to discourage masturbation, and he specifically encouraged circumcision to reduce sexual sensitivity and feeling to reduce masturbation. He also used to promote the application of pure carbolic acid (phenol) to the clitoris for girls.

    That's the history of circumcision and a big part of why it's still being practiced in the US and Australia. Because of a rich anti-sex (profanity) who made cereal.

    Couple more facts, the foreskin holds tens of thousands of nerve endings. All of that is lost in circumcision.

    The foreskin provides necessary protection for the sensitive parts, otherwise, over a long period of time, you develop a toughening of the skin and de-sensitivity. The fact that it takes a while is why you won't here recent adults who have had circumcision complain about lost sensitivity. It takes a decade or so of having your exposed penis rubbing against your clothes to toughen the skin.

    The foreskin also is important in maintaining one of the best ways to have sex. It allows for slow rocking motions and less motion being required. What you'll often see or even notice in yourself if you're circumcised is that the "pumping" motion or hard (profanity) in-out in-out is often necessary to achieve orgasm. This isn't the case for uncircumcised people. This hard pumping oftens leads to problems as you can hit the woman's cervix causing pretty bad pain, and it's also less pleasurable for the woman (in general ).

    You can go on and on listing reasons why circumcision is a terrible idea. Honestly, I think anyone who's informed and allows it to happen is a monster. You don't cut up your child's genitals. Doctors who support it especially I completely lose respect for. They should know better.

    • Bunnyburger on 20/11/2015 - 22:39
      +1

      Fun fact: Kellogg loved giving yoghurt enemas as well. For all his emphasis on purity he was quite the closet deviant!

  • lollyball on 20/11/2015 - 12:40
    +4

    Haha just read the title. For a 35 yr old and gone through 6 surgeries over my lifetime, and still okish (dam wisdom teeth surgery!!) I say NOOOO circumsicion. If there's nothing wrong/ broken don't touch it. Let the person decide if they're over 18.
    If it's to wear a hat or whatever go for it, but surgery?!? Im not cut down below and have had no problems there. Leave it!! Don't do it!! And if u get kicked out of somewhere then Ur better off, Ur kids health is more important. Well that's my 2c anyway :) all the best.

  • winterseed on 20/11/2015 - 12:48
    +4

    I like my foreskin.

  • abovethelimit on 20/11/2015 - 13:02
    +2

    Against circumcision. Their body their rules. If he want's to remove it when he is older then go for it. If I get it removed now and he wants it back bcoz having a foreskin becomes a new fad in 15 years time then it will haunt me for life. So yeah, power to you my son, cut a bit or cut the whole lot of it…..whatever floats your boat ;-)

  • juwakin11 on 20/11/2015 - 13:07
    +1

    argumentative topic.. this will not go anywhere..

  • fozzie on 20/11/2015 - 13:39
    +1

    No way, I wouldn't do it to my son (if I had one) unless medical. In my family none of my relatives has done, I'm Italian and we are not obsessed with circumcision. They are all fine as far as I know. My husband was circumcised as a baby as that was the use when he was born, here in Australia

  • Lockieasy on 20/11/2015 - 13:43

    I have been told by female lovers that I could be a porn star due to my circumcision & size so I'm totally happy with it being cut (which was done as a baby).

    The decreased sensitivity is great in that it let's you last much longer in bed (women appreciate this one alot) and the hygiene thing is just an added bonus.

    That said, if I weren't circumcised today I probably wouldn't get it done unless it was for medical reasons because there's no way I'm having anyone near my penis with a knife.

  • outofdateyesterday on 20/11/2015 - 13:45

    It feels much better for sex

  • c64 on 20/11/2015 - 14:06
    +4

    gee, i don't know how i've managed to get through life without catching some gangrenous infection which requires my dick to be chopped off…

    leave things as nature intended

  • Kaz0551 on 20/11/2015 - 14:46
    +1

    The real reason you're circumcised…. thanks Kellogg! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCSWbTv3hng

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 14:54

    But what do women think about the attractiveness of one or the other. Hood vs hoodless.
    Most people have commented on the medical side, I'd like to know if flapless is preferred by ladies as I expect it is. For both attractiveness and instinctive health reasons, or any other.

    Any thoughts. Including for gay guys?

    • infinite on 20/11/2015 - 15:31

      There is no argument to be made. If her preference is for hoodless, then just pull it back. It's just that easy. The only difference is "would you like less penis or more".

    • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2015 - 13:12

      There is a post on this thread mentioning this. I would say that whether they realise or not, most women would prefer hats for ease of HJ/etc. I expect most women simply, would not care. The only reason I have ever heard a female say she preferred the snip is re: aesthetics - which is highly subjective anyway.

  • jewsavings on 20/11/2015 - 15:14
    +2

    My cut friends wish they weren't (even in cases it was done for medical reasons).

    Don't do it if there's no health issues and let the kid decide if there is a need for it.

  • Praeto on 20/11/2015 - 15:19
    +3

    There seems to be a lot of circumsized people in this thread, that have gone their entire life without washing their genitals. :P

    Don't circumsize unless there is a medical issue that requires it..

  • VehemenceThePhoenix on 20/11/2015 - 15:23
    +3

    I think the poll would be better simplified as 2 or 3 simple options (without justifications embedded). Currently, there are several options with highly detailed justifications that might not even suit someone's reasoning.

    • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2015 - 17:54

      Which is why there is an option for "other".

  • Ivan Krazy on 20/11/2015 - 15:29
    +3

    I'm not circumcised. Glad my parents made that decision because now I can make an informed decision. Prefer it uncircumcised as its more pleasing to fondle with the extra skin. Hehe

  • mrshorty on 20/11/2015 - 15:33
    +5

    Im not circumcised either and I wouldn't circumcise unless there was a deal on the front page of ozbargain with at least 100+ votes.

  • fr33loader on 20/11/2015 - 15:34
    +4

    In the country were I grew up (Philippines), it is compulsory and a rite of passage.

    Usually boys will be cut between year 3 and year 4. By year 5, most will be cut. We will hear stories of boys going to high school uncut, but it's rare.

    In Manila at least, being uncut will earn you the butt of jokes.

    But now that I'm living in Australia, it's up to my son to decide if he wants one.

    • thord on 20/11/2015 - 15:44
      +3

      In Manila at least, being uncut will earn you the butt of jokes.

      It's funny how that happens. In Somalia young girls will tease others from around age 8-10 if they haven't had FGM. They call them names, ostricise them, and consider them unclean and impure.

  • wannagrababargain on 20/11/2015 - 16:37
    +2

    Listen to your wife.

  • evol on 20/11/2015 - 17:21
    +1

    Where is the poll option for bikies?

  • GameChanger on 20/11/2015 - 18:00

    Has anyone died from an 'unhygienic' foreskin?

    • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2015 - 07:54

      Dude, just wash it.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 18:24

    Metzitzah b’peh (blood sucking circumcision)

    WT..?! O.O

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 21:50

      That sounds like it might be a snake nightmare, of a different sort…

      I'm not clicking on that link, unless you click on the link in this.

      Don't.

      P.S. Further up… One Ms.117531 seems to have removed her wt-meme avatar. Maybe a would-be OzBargainer, who also aspires to be a waterlogged one, will take it on in the future.
      Probably time to think otherwise philosophically, JJB:
      Earlier on, she dodged a soup, then ended up in a stew. She was turnip. It happens. :(

      If you're reading this, wt:
      Do come back, li'l turnip.

      You are missed.

      • GameChanger on 20/11/2015 - 22:11
        -1

        Maybe if people stopped stalking turnip, they would have remained on here.

        • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 22:26
          +3

          Neither JJB, nor anyone else, 'stalked' turnip.

          Given some of your recent behaviour - harassing JJB in both the hidden and regular forum threads - you are the only OzBargainer I can think of that fits your 'stalker' description.

          Grow up.

        • GameChanger on 20/11/2015 - 22:43

          @Tas: How about you grow up. I used to speak with him via messages and I have a strong reason to believe it was due to stalking from your 'best mates'.

        • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 22:51

          @GameChanger:

          Interesting that we can see edits made to posts but we can't see how a member has edited their own comments.

        • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2015 - 22:52

          @GameChanger: Her, not 'him'. Turnip is a she…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join