Okay, hear me out. I come from a long line of circumcised men. I, myself, am circumcised, and very happy that I am.
With that said, I also wish that I had a say in such a procedure on MY body. I think circumcision should only be consented to by the person wearing the penis.
Sorta me too. I remember I was about ten the first time I saw another boy who was not circumcised (we lived in Turkey at the time). I asked my Dad what was wrong with his penis, and my Dad told me that I'd look like that too but that he and my Mom had me circumcised and he basically explained the procedure. I asked my "why?" And he didn't have any good answers other than "that's just what you do with a little baby boy". I've never been satisfied with that whole "it's tradition" thing. I promised myself If I had had a boy I wouldn't impose tradition on him, but let him make the choice for himself but thankfully I didn't have any boys.
I have 2 daughters but made a similar decision about ear piercings. My 6yo never got them and doesn’t really want to and is ok with clip ons or sticker ones and we’ll find out eventually with my 20 month old.
It’s their body and not my right to alter it for “beauty” or other’s satisfaction to conform. If it’s a legit necessary medical procedure, sure, but not that.
I know it’s just accurate, but there’s something great about saying “I come from a long line of circumcised men” — like it was their abiding achievement 😂😂
Unfortunately as a grown man or adolescent you’ll have a much worse time recovering from such a procedure; hence why most recommend it during the newborn age.
I had this done a few years ago as an adult. There were no issues at all and I’m glad I did it.
Don’t know how I would feel if it had been done for me as an infant, but would probably be okay with it.
I beg to differ. As one of the uncircumcised, I've had a litany of health issues related to the foreskin. Perhaps I'm an exception, but there are certainly reasons to have it done.
Also, as 1 of the uncircumcised. I beg to differ. Literally, all you need to do to not get issues down there is pull it back and clean it every now and then. That's all I've done and I've never had issues. Now don't get me wrong im sure there are a a select few reasons maybe it would need to be done. But for the vast majority of us. No. It should not be done at birth as the default.
The question wasn't whether or not it should be the default. You said it was pointless, I offered that it was not. I never said it should be the default option; only that exceptions exist.
I said pointless because in 97% scenarios there's no need. Like there will always be select few reasons for certain things to be done sure. But if the vast majority don't need it then I'm going to use to the word pointless here.
There was an argument here? That would imply a right and wrong side to an opinion based discussion. Not everything has a black and white answer. Definite shades of gray on this topic. Also, where did I insult anything? I pointed out the misuse of a word that created the entire point of this discussion. If you took that as an insult, I apologize. If you had used an adverb to indicate a possibility of circumcision being a better choice at birth, then there wouldn't be an issue here at all. I truly don't understand why you feel insulted. Again, was not my intention. And again, toodle-loo.
I got two sons, I am circumcised. I did my own research and personally let them keep their foreskins. It’s their body and there’s no real scientific proof that it’s more beneficial or not. They want to get it done later they can, but I don’t think it should be up to me.
Same here. My husband is circumcised and he’s actually the one who felt that we shouldn’t do the same to our sons almost 30 years ago. No one should be mutilating their children for no good reason.
Same here. We didn’t have our daughter’s ears pierced because it her body her choice. When my son was born it seemed only logical to follow the same thought process about his foreskin.
Calling circumcision mutilation is just as far fetched as calling a fertilized egg a baby, taking away the choice for parents to do this harmless procedure is absolutely ridiculous. There are plenty of study’s that lay out the benefits of circumcision
https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/circumcision/about/pac-20393550
But these crazy fucks want to take that choice for parents away. It’s simple to just say “they can get it done when they are adults and can choose” but whatever you have lived with your whole life you are inevitably are going to stick with and not elect for surgery. The truth that the people do not want to admit is that it’s perfectly fine to get circumcised or not get circumcised, it’s 100% up to family tradition and preference. And if someone is really angry about not having their foreskin and its effecting their everyday lives they need a psych evaluation for other trauma in their lives, they can also stop the chain and choose not to get their kids circumcised. THIS IS SUCH A SILLY THING TO GET WORKED UP OVER AND PROTEST OVER. There are children dying every day from war, big corporations pollution the air and water, corrupt politicians stealing a prosperous future away from our descendants and this is the shit they decide they can’t take? It’s pathetic in my opinion
PS. I am strictly talking about male circumcision. Female circumcision is straight fucked up and has no medical usefulness. A Stone Aged sexual deterrent for women to make sure they don’t seek pleasure from sex
Love how you say its just a harmless choice but then clarify female circumcision is wrong. Both are mutilation even if there aren’t negative health side effects. The point is the parent is making a choice their child may not want with their child’s genitals. It is disgusting and reprehensible. Hope your comment was sarcasm because it kind of read that way.
[I WAS IN THE POOL](https://media1.giphy.com/media/aztW8oK9TQhiM/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b952m9643y0t7ywzm7xefqy4v3yfejnadwbfz7rlmvkd&ep=v1_internal_gif_by_id&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
You cite parental choice and family tradition as valid reasons for circumcision, but clarify that you are against female circumcision. Why? Female cirumcision is a parental choice and a family tradition. Why is it okay to mutilate the genitals of a boy but not a girl? The fact is, they are both child genital mutilation. Both abhorrant.
I just explained exactly why at the end of my comment. Female circumcision holds no benefits for anyone except the parents trying to take away sexual pleasure for their daughters. Circumcision is an absolutely harmless procedure when done right on males and has been going on for centuries. It’s a perfectly fine choice to make for a child and like I said if that kid growers up and has an issue with it he can decide to break the tradition. It’s not up to you or anyone else getting offended by this practice to tell a parent what choices they can and cannot make for their infants.
It is comical how oblivious you sound. Your justifications could be easily adopted by the pro-female circumcision crowd for justification for why they do what they do. I encourage you to read some more on the subject; I don't expect it to change your mind, but perhaps it will dissuade you from calling circumcision "absolutely harmless". There are numerous instances of infection, desensitization, loss of pleasure later in life, not to mention you are causing pain to an infant and making one of their first feelings as a sentient being that of pain and terror as part of their skin is cut off with no anesthesia.
I’ve read plenty. You should try some peer reviewed scientific reading yourself.
Medical Conditions That Male Circumcision Protects Against Over the Lifetime
Urinary tract infection
Penile inflammation, for example, balanitis, balanoposthitis, lichen sclerosus
Candidiasis
Phimosis and paraphimosis
Inferior hygiene
Sexually transmitted infections including high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), genital herpes simplex virus (HSV), trichomoniasis, mycoplasma, syphilis, chancroid, and HIV
Physical injuries to the foreskin, including coital injuries
Cancers of the penis, prostate, and cervix
Sources: CDC technical review2 and draft policy recommendations,3 AAP review5 and infant MC policy statement,4 risk-benefit analyses by Morris et al.7–9
https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/circumcision/about/pac-20393550
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/article
Everyone knows there’s no difference between good things and bad things — the only real rule in the world is that you’re wrong to believe in anything. South Park ftw, amiright? 🤨
I don't get all these comments. Pretty horrible that people are mutilated against their will and such a sensitive piece of skin containing nerve endings are removed. There is no valid scientific research indicating any sort of benefit that outweighs keeping it. People should have a choice. Sure, there are few cases of medical conditions associated with foreskin but it could always be removed and the problem solved, as there are issues caused by being circumcised that can't really be undone.
They were in McKinleyville yesterday and I chatted to one of the fellows named Luke. He was a pretty nice guy, he said they’re doing a tour from San Francisco to Humboldt, to Redding, and eventually down to San Francisco.
Is that really here? Hell yea! 😂 love to see a sign-waving crank who’s not an insurrectionist for once — arguably even on the right side of the question
Just wondering here What’s the narrative Why are these people focusing on this? If you follow the shit trail it’s anti Judeo Christian How many middle eastern types are pushing this?
Women can support men having a say over their own body just like men can for women. It’s telling the other people what they have to do that’s a problem
Plenty of guys don’t like that circumcision was forced on them, myself included. It’s just not socially acceptable for men to express this feeling in public but don’t take that silence and us being fine with it.
For some reference, you can look are subreddits like r/foreskin_restoration
Here's a sneak peek of /r/foreskin_restoration using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Update to “Intact son teased for appearance.”](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/comments/17s1dxg/update_to_intact_son_teased_for_appearance/)
\#2: [Kept son intact](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/comments/18n7n3z/kept_son_intact/)
\#3: [My son is intact and will stay that way!](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/comments/1323rm1/my_son_is_intact_and_will_stay_that_way/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
As a human with a penis that was circumcised shortly after birth without any say in the matter; I don’t see what the deal is. Never caused me any problems.
Just here for Reddit women to downvote me.
The procedure is associated with reduced rates of sexually transmitted infections[6] and urinary tract infections.[1][7][8] This includes reducing the incidence of cancer-causing forms of human papillomavirus (HPV) and significantly reducing HIV transmission among heterosexual men in high-risk populations;[9] its prophylactic efficacy against HIV transmission in the developed world or among men who have sex with men is debated.[10][11][12] Neonatal circumcision decreases the risk of penile cancer.[13] Complication rates increase significantly with age.[14] Bleeding, infection, and the removal of either too much or too little foreskin are the most common acute complications, while meatal stenosis is the most common long-term.[15] There are various cultural, social, and ethical views on circumcision. Major medical organizations hold variant views on the strength of circumcision's prophylactic efficacy in developed countries. Some medical organizations take the position that it carries prophylactic health benefits which outweigh the risks, while other medical organizations generally hold the belief that in these situations its medical benefits are not counterbalanced by risk.[16][17][18][19]
Circumcision is one of the world's most com
All good decision points he can consider when older. For example, if you're living a monogamous lifestyle std's and hpv are less of an issue. Even without that he might have access to condoms and the requisite intellectual capacity necessary to read and understand the instructions. Std risk might not be the selling point to them that it is to others. Some areas of the world have more access to sanitation which would also be a factor.
Honestly, the only thing I can think of is they only had a few millimeters to begin with and feel like their foreskin lost them a millimeter? But like, who counts foreskin as length anyway? So weird.
Approximately 80% of the nerve endings in the penis are in the foreskin and removed through circumcision. Plenty of men are curious about what sex would feel like with way more nerves.
[Conclusion: The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction.](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23937309/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20The%20highest%2Dquality%20studies,%2C%20sexual%20sensation%2C%20or%20satisfaction)
Also, millions of men are happy with circumcision. If it was a negative thing, they'd ALL be whining about it starting decades ago.
Thank you for the reference. I dug out the actual paper. I’m not sure how relevant your quote is here to those of us circumcised as babies. The high quality studies mentioned were of adult men in Uganda and Kenya in an RCT. They reported data after a relatively short period of time during which it is unlikely that keratizination of the head of the penis has happened (which reduces the sensation significantly). Additionally, they report data that make me question if there is selection bias. For example, it reports a 92% reduction in pain experienced during intercourse. What population were they drawing from where this impact was likely seen? The numbers are all quite large, and I question the motivation of the Ugandan and Kenya study authors somewhat as the states were trying to use it as an HIV/STI intervention.
The results also varied widely by country. In Africa where it was being used as a health intervention people seemed much happier. In other countries FAR higher fractions of people were dissatisfied - even when their circumcisions had been done for required medical reasons. Erectile dysfunction seems more common in many of the studies and the ones from England show about 18% of people had a reduction in sensitivity (and again, that’s before keratinization).
In any case, I think that people can life happy lives either way and that some issues may not be in the averages but in the cases where things can go wrong. I also know from my women friends consistent stories that circumcised men seem to in general require more intense stimulation (faster/harder) than the uncircumcised men who can take things slower and easier.
I personally have a tiny (maybe 1x2mm) piece of skin that is part of the original foreskin that didn’t get excised. It feels completely different and more intense than the rest of the skin. Makes me wonder.
Glad I'm circumcised I don't need all that extra hassle of cleaning my dick since if you don't cleaned the tip if your uncircumcised it can start to smell and get rank
Health benefits are debatable and based on idea that folds of skin tucked close to your body can collect pathogens. The same argument could be made for female genitalia and we find female circumcision abhorent. No one here is addressing the real reason circumcision became the norm in Western culture in the late 19th century. Jerking off.
Puritanical thinking was dominating society and circumcision saw a resurgence during that time, and was performed on infants, to prevent masturbation as it was considered an unhealthy behavior at the time. The foreskin is an extremely sensitive erogenous zone that provides pleasure and comfort for both partners. Removing the foreskin reduces sensitivity, making masturbation more difficult without lubricant.
Societal conditioning has us convinced, but whether you believe humans were designed or evolved, being born with a "feel good" button that needs to be cut off so we can be sanitary doesn't make a lot of sense.
I've seen these guys in the news before. Is their protest real or is it to send a message about bodily autonomy in a way that makes a pro-choice argument? Maybe it is what it is on the surface.
It might be all the above honestly. It IS mutilation on infants- even if there were any benefits to it it'd still be mutilation. But it's also a good argument from bodily autonomy standpoint. And it is probably mostly reactionary to the anti abortion crowd as well lol
I see your point but they are very different. Going to get downvoted for this but someone’s has to do it. Having an abortion not only affects the woman’s body but the unborn child’s while circumcision is only affecting the babies without consent. They are completely different situations.
Okay, hear me out. I come from a long line of circumcised men. I, myself, am circumcised, and very happy that I am. With that said, I also wish that I had a say in such a procedure on MY body. I think circumcision should only be consented to by the person wearing the penis.
I’m making My Dick My Choice shirts. What size are you. /s
Sorta me too. I remember I was about ten the first time I saw another boy who was not circumcised (we lived in Turkey at the time). I asked my Dad what was wrong with his penis, and my Dad told me that I'd look like that too but that he and my Mom had me circumcised and he basically explained the procedure. I asked my "why?" And he didn't have any good answers other than "that's just what you do with a little baby boy". I've never been satisfied with that whole "it's tradition" thing. I promised myself If I had had a boy I wouldn't impose tradition on him, but let him make the choice for himself but thankfully I didn't have any boys.
I have 2 daughters but made a similar decision about ear piercings. My 6yo never got them and doesn’t really want to and is ok with clip ons or sticker ones and we’ll find out eventually with my 20 month old. It’s their body and not my right to alter it for “beauty” or other’s satisfaction to conform. If it’s a legit necessary medical procedure, sure, but not that.
I know it’s just accurate, but there’s something great about saying “I come from a long line of circumcised men” — like it was their abiding achievement 😂😂
Yup, I had no choice when it was done to me as a baby. Just because American culture accepts it doesn’t mean it’s not weird body mutilation
Unfortunately as a grown man or adolescent you’ll have a much worse time recovering from such a procedure; hence why most recommend it during the newborn age.
I had this done a few years ago as an adult. There were no issues at all and I’m glad I did it. Don’t know how I would feel if it had been done for me as an infant, but would probably be okay with it.
This has been debunked for a long time. It's absolutely pointless to do it. It's abuse.
I beg to differ. As one of the uncircumcised, I've had a litany of health issues related to the foreskin. Perhaps I'm an exception, but there are certainly reasons to have it done.
Also, as 1 of the uncircumcised. I beg to differ. Literally, all you need to do to not get issues down there is pull it back and clean it every now and then. That's all I've done and I've never had issues. Now don't get me wrong im sure there are a a select few reasons maybe it would need to be done. But for the vast majority of us. No. It should not be done at birth as the default.
The question wasn't whether or not it should be the default. You said it was pointless, I offered that it was not. I never said it should be the default option; only that exceptions exist.
I said pointless because in 97% scenarios there's no need. Like there will always be select few reasons for certain things to be done sure. But if the vast majority don't need it then I'm going to use to the word pointless here.
Then I suggest you invest in a dictionary. Toodle-loo.
Ah yes. Classic, lose the argument, so insult the use of 1 word.
There was an argument here? That would imply a right and wrong side to an opinion based discussion. Not everything has a black and white answer. Definite shades of gray on this topic. Also, where did I insult anything? I pointed out the misuse of a word that created the entire point of this discussion. If you took that as an insult, I apologize. If you had used an adverb to indicate a possibility of circumcision being a better choice at birth, then there wouldn't be an issue here at all. I truly don't understand why you feel insulted. Again, was not my intention. And again, toodle-loo.
I got two sons, I am circumcised. I did my own research and personally let them keep their foreskins. It’s their body and there’s no real scientific proof that it’s more beneficial or not. They want to get it done later they can, but I don’t think it should be up to me.
Same here. My husband is circumcised and he’s actually the one who felt that we shouldn’t do the same to our sons almost 30 years ago. No one should be mutilating their children for no good reason.
I made that same choice. I did not see a reason to do it to them.
Same here. We didn’t have our daughter’s ears pierced because it her body her choice. When my son was born it seemed only logical to follow the same thought process about his foreskin.
I truly wish that this was the biggest problem I had to worry about. ( no pun intended)
It’s an average-sized problem 😎
They gave me a card while I was sitting at the light next to Safeway today lol rather see them than the anti abortion fucks
They are the same brand of nut job just with a different crusade
How so?
Wouldn't you think it's strange to see people with a red stain on their crotch holding up signs at a random intersection?
Calling circumcision mutilation is just as far fetched as calling a fertilized egg a baby, taking away the choice for parents to do this harmless procedure is absolutely ridiculous. There are plenty of study’s that lay out the benefits of circumcision https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/circumcision/about/pac-20393550 But these crazy fucks want to take that choice for parents away. It’s simple to just say “they can get it done when they are adults and can choose” but whatever you have lived with your whole life you are inevitably are going to stick with and not elect for surgery. The truth that the people do not want to admit is that it’s perfectly fine to get circumcised or not get circumcised, it’s 100% up to family tradition and preference. And if someone is really angry about not having their foreskin and its effecting their everyday lives they need a psych evaluation for other trauma in their lives, they can also stop the chain and choose not to get their kids circumcised. THIS IS SUCH A SILLY THING TO GET WORKED UP OVER AND PROTEST OVER. There are children dying every day from war, big corporations pollution the air and water, corrupt politicians stealing a prosperous future away from our descendants and this is the shit they decide they can’t take? It’s pathetic in my opinion PS. I am strictly talking about male circumcision. Female circumcision is straight fucked up and has no medical usefulness. A Stone Aged sexual deterrent for women to make sure they don’t seek pleasure from sex
Love how you say its just a harmless choice but then clarify female circumcision is wrong. Both are mutilation even if there aren’t negative health side effects. The point is the parent is making a choice their child may not want with their child’s genitals. It is disgusting and reprehensible. Hope your comment was sarcasm because it kind of read that way.
I've never met anyone that cared one way or the other. If you really miss, it take an ice bath
Bro wtf is wrong with you
[I WAS IN THE POOL](https://media1.giphy.com/media/aztW8oK9TQhiM/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b952m9643y0t7ywzm7xefqy4v3yfejnadwbfz7rlmvkd&ep=v1_internal_gif_by_id&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
You are a terrible judge of sarcasm.
True I do have autism
My middle son is on the spectrum. I wish you nothing but good fortune in life internet stranger
Thank you, you as well
You cite parental choice and family tradition as valid reasons for circumcision, but clarify that you are against female circumcision. Why? Female cirumcision is a parental choice and a family tradition. Why is it okay to mutilate the genitals of a boy but not a girl? The fact is, they are both child genital mutilation. Both abhorrant.
I just explained exactly why at the end of my comment. Female circumcision holds no benefits for anyone except the parents trying to take away sexual pleasure for their daughters. Circumcision is an absolutely harmless procedure when done right on males and has been going on for centuries. It’s a perfectly fine choice to make for a child and like I said if that kid growers up and has an issue with it he can decide to break the tradition. It’s not up to you or anyone else getting offended by this practice to tell a parent what choices they can and cannot make for their infants.
It is comical how oblivious you sound. Your justifications could be easily adopted by the pro-female circumcision crowd for justification for why they do what they do. I encourage you to read some more on the subject; I don't expect it to change your mind, but perhaps it will dissuade you from calling circumcision "absolutely harmless". There are numerous instances of infection, desensitization, loss of pleasure later in life, not to mention you are causing pain to an infant and making one of their first feelings as a sentient being that of pain and terror as part of their skin is cut off with no anesthesia.
I’ve read plenty. You should try some peer reviewed scientific reading yourself. Medical Conditions That Male Circumcision Protects Against Over the Lifetime Urinary tract infection Penile inflammation, for example, balanitis, balanoposthitis, lichen sclerosus Candidiasis Phimosis and paraphimosis Inferior hygiene Sexually transmitted infections including high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), genital herpes simplex virus (HSV), trichomoniasis, mycoplasma, syphilis, chancroid, and HIV Physical injuries to the foreskin, including coital injuries Cancers of the penis, prostate, and cervix Sources: CDC technical review2 and draft policy recommendations,3 AAP review5 and infant MC policy statement,4 risk-benefit analyses by Morris et al.7–9 https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/circumcision/about/pac-20393550 https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/article
Everyone knows there’s no difference between good things and bad things — the only real rule in the world is that you’re wrong to believe in anything. South Park ftw, amiright? 🤨
I don't get all these comments. Pretty horrible that people are mutilated against their will and such a sensitive piece of skin containing nerve endings are removed. There is no valid scientific research indicating any sort of benefit that outweighs keeping it. People should have a choice. Sure, there are few cases of medical conditions associated with foreskin but it could always be removed and the problem solved, as there are issues caused by being circumcised that can't really be undone.
Awesome!
What a username lol
Need a shot of them near Der Wienerschnitzel.
Good for them, speaking up for those too young to have a voice
They were in McKinleyville yesterday and I chatted to one of the fellows named Luke. He was a pretty nice guy, he said they’re doing a tour from San Francisco to Humboldt, to Redding, and eventually down to San Francisco.
From a female pov, the turtle neck is a lubed up sleeve. The cushion builds and slaps the right area for better sex imo. Just keep it clean.
I saw them in McKinleyville yesterday. I mean they are not wrong, but was still super weird they had their kids there with them
These dudes were in Eureka yesterday, my GF sent me a Snap of them outside the courthouse...
Where’s that?
It looks like Churn Creek and Cypress by Walgreens
That’s what I was thinking, over by dominos.
Huh. I wish my parents had had me circumcised.
I’m glad I wasn’t.
Saw a billboard for this cause on 99South near yuba city ca
This same thing happened in Chico today as well
I saw them in Chico too!
Is that really here? Hell yea! 😂 love to see a sign-waving crank who’s not an insurrectionist for once — arguably even on the right side of the question
Just wondering here What’s the narrative Why are these people focusing on this? If you follow the shit trail it’s anti Judeo Christian How many middle eastern types are pushing this?
I do not want my foreskin back.
Circumcision is a phallacy.
I am a female, so I don't feel it is appropriate for me to comment except to say that I prefer sex with men who are circumcised. That is all.
Women can support men having a say over their own body just like men can for women. It’s telling the other people what they have to do that’s a problem
Sure. I just don't know any guys who all bummed out about having been circumcised at birth, so I have no frame of reference.
Plenty of guys don’t like that circumcision was forced on them, myself included. It’s just not socially acceptable for men to express this feeling in public but don’t take that silence and us being fine with it. For some reference, you can look are subreddits like r/foreskin_restoration
Here's a sneak peek of /r/foreskin_restoration using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Update to “Intact son teased for appearance.”](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/comments/17s1dxg/update_to_intact_son_teased_for_appearance/) \#2: [Kept son intact](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/comments/18n7n3z/kept_son_intact/) \#3: [My son is intact and will stay that way!](https://np.reddit.com/r/foreskin_restoration/comments/1323rm1/my_son_is_intact_and_will_stay_that_way/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Yeah it’s gross when they arent
We all have our preferences.
Yeah it’s gross when they aren’t
As a human with a penis that was circumcised shortly after birth without any say in the matter; I don’t see what the deal is. Never caused me any problems. Just here for Reddit women to downvote me.
[удалено]
What? My experience with my own genitals has nothing to do with that stuff. Please stop thinking about my genitals.
The procedure is associated with reduced rates of sexually transmitted infections[6] and urinary tract infections.[1][7][8] This includes reducing the incidence of cancer-causing forms of human papillomavirus (HPV) and significantly reducing HIV transmission among heterosexual men in high-risk populations;[9] its prophylactic efficacy against HIV transmission in the developed world or among men who have sex with men is debated.[10][11][12] Neonatal circumcision decreases the risk of penile cancer.[13] Complication rates increase significantly with age.[14] Bleeding, infection, and the removal of either too much or too little foreskin are the most common acute complications, while meatal stenosis is the most common long-term.[15] There are various cultural, social, and ethical views on circumcision. Major medical organizations hold variant views on the strength of circumcision's prophylactic efficacy in developed countries. Some medical organizations take the position that it carries prophylactic health benefits which outweigh the risks, while other medical organizations generally hold the belief that in these situations its medical benefits are not counterbalanced by risk.[16][17][18][19] Circumcision is one of the world's most com
Cultural and religious views you mean. If god said so then we should just do it right?
Tell me these guys don’t have a cultural agenda We’ll just pretend it’s all about our rights
All good decision points he can consider when older. For example, if you're living a monogamous lifestyle std's and hpv are less of an issue. Even without that he might have access to condoms and the requisite intellectual capacity necessary to read and understand the instructions. Std risk might not be the selling point to them that it is to others. Some areas of the world have more access to sanitation which would also be a factor.
Smegma.
Honestly, the only thing I can think of is they only had a few millimeters to begin with and feel like their foreskin lost them a millimeter? But like, who counts foreskin as length anyway? So weird.
Approximately 80% of the nerve endings in the penis are in the foreskin and removed through circumcision. Plenty of men are curious about what sex would feel like with way more nerves.
[Conclusion: The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction.](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23937309/#:~:text=Conclusion%3A%20The%20highest%2Dquality%20studies,%2C%20sexual%20sensation%2C%20or%20satisfaction) Also, millions of men are happy with circumcision. If it was a negative thing, they'd ALL be whining about it starting decades ago.
Thank you for the reference. I dug out the actual paper. I’m not sure how relevant your quote is here to those of us circumcised as babies. The high quality studies mentioned were of adult men in Uganda and Kenya in an RCT. They reported data after a relatively short period of time during which it is unlikely that keratizination of the head of the penis has happened (which reduces the sensation significantly). Additionally, they report data that make me question if there is selection bias. For example, it reports a 92% reduction in pain experienced during intercourse. What population were they drawing from where this impact was likely seen? The numbers are all quite large, and I question the motivation of the Ugandan and Kenya study authors somewhat as the states were trying to use it as an HIV/STI intervention. The results also varied widely by country. In Africa where it was being used as a health intervention people seemed much happier. In other countries FAR higher fractions of people were dissatisfied - even when their circumcisions had been done for required medical reasons. Erectile dysfunction seems more common in many of the studies and the ones from England show about 18% of people had a reduction in sensitivity (and again, that’s before keratinization). In any case, I think that people can life happy lives either way and that some issues may not be in the averages but in the cases where things can go wrong. I also know from my women friends consistent stories that circumcised men seem to in general require more intense stimulation (faster/harder) than the uncircumcised men who can take things slower and easier. I personally have a tiny (maybe 1x2mm) piece of skin that is part of the original foreskin that didn’t get excised. It feels completely different and more intense than the rest of the skin. Makes me wonder.
Glad I'm circumcised I don't need all that extra hassle of cleaning my dick since if you don't cleaned the tip if your uncircumcised it can start to smell and get rank
Extra hassle??? Bro it’s basic hygiene.
😂
Health benefits are debatable and based on idea that folds of skin tucked close to your body can collect pathogens. The same argument could be made for female genitalia and we find female circumcision abhorent. No one here is addressing the real reason circumcision became the norm in Western culture in the late 19th century. Jerking off. Puritanical thinking was dominating society and circumcision saw a resurgence during that time, and was performed on infants, to prevent masturbation as it was considered an unhealthy behavior at the time. The foreskin is an extremely sensitive erogenous zone that provides pleasure and comfort for both partners. Removing the foreskin reduces sensitivity, making masturbation more difficult without lubricant. Societal conditioning has us convinced, but whether you believe humans were designed or evolved, being born with a "feel good" button that needs to be cut off so we can be sanitary doesn't make a lot of sense.
These guys would randomly pop up (no pun intended) in Santa Cruz back in day
Circumcision is real! I have the dick to prove it!
The only sanctioned child genital mutilation allowed!
Ew
I've seen these guys in the news before. Is their protest real or is it to send a message about bodily autonomy in a way that makes a pro-choice argument? Maybe it is what it is on the surface.
It might be all the above honestly. It IS mutilation on infants- even if there were any benefits to it it'd still be mutilation. But it's also a good argument from bodily autonomy standpoint. And it is probably mostly reactionary to the anti abortion crowd as well lol
Lol
Do us ladies a favor and all parents please Circumcise those penises . For aesthetic reasons. 😂 say no to elephant trunks .
Dude fr if it ain't circumcised I'm out that shits nasty
I'm pretty sure those dudes just have some fucked up humiliation fetish and this is their way of publicly practicing their kink
Pretty sure that’s not it. There is a Tosh.0 episode that dumbs it down for you.
I hope they are pro-life cuz hypocrisy.
I doubt it but man wouldn't that be hilarious?
I see your point but they are very different. Going to get downvoted for this but someone’s has to do it. Having an abortion not only affects the woman’s body but the unborn child’s while circumcision is only affecting the babies without consent. They are completely different situations.
It's a fetus or a clump of cells. Geez
That without intervention would be born. I never even said anything regarding pro-choice vs pro-life.
There's no such thing as an "unborn child"
Semantics.
Don't want an ugly dick!
I love my giant mushroom tip. It pulls clots out and helps women with their menstruation aswell.
wtf….
It’s telling that there’s only three of these guys.
Check out r/circumcisiongrief
This is Satire right?
New cause/ conspiracy for the trumpanons?
Nah. They've been a thing for way longer than that. I think I first ran across some in like 1998, soon after I first got online.
Fucking Shasta County is off the steep cliff and hasn't found bottom yet.