Why are boys circumsized in certain cultures?
115107
I just watched a movie about circumsizing in one of my college classes. There is NO purpose for it, and after watching the movie, I will NEVER do that to my child, nor will i recommend it. According to the movie, most cultures circumsize boys to "prevent them playing with themselves" which obviously does not work. I listed the movie below if you want to try to find it.
730014
To shaglemongirl - Circumcision has never been part of Christianity. \n\nFemale circumcision is illegal in the US. Circumcision of the general male population in the US was not common until after World War 2. This was medically-based not religiously-based. A popular myth spread that male circumcision results in fewer infections and the wife of a circumcised male was less likely to get any of the reproductive cancers. This theory has since been proved baseless. Male circumcision rates have fallen drastically in the last couple of decades. Only a minority of males in the US are circumcised as part of their religion.
928857
If he wants to be cut he can have it done on his own.  He owns the penis it is his decision. It has been his penis all his life, parents should respect their sons bodies just like they do their daughters.\n\npopibz you twit, if uncircumcised penises are "very difficult to clean" then girls are impossible to clean. The rest of your re-posted answer is all the same kind of half baked crap. The best circumcising could do for STDs or HIV AIDs is to only reduce the chance of contact, if even that. You still need condoms and safe sex to stop disease, so why cut? \n\nDo you realize you are exposing boys needlessly to antibiotic resistant staph infections (MRSA). http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/DOC/mrsa.html \n\nA boy is more likely to die from circumcision complications than to contract cancer of the penis.\n\nJust take the whole baby home and teach him to use soap and water.
848481
Male circumcision is equally mutilation.  Just because it has religious roots it doesn't make it right.  Perhaps it made sense then to have male circumcision but today science has given us the knowledge of personal hygiene so it is completely uncalled for and an abuse of basic human right.\n\nBy the way not all female genital mutilation involves cutting the clitoris.
893023
Being uncircumcised, and having dealt with the "to snip or not to snip" issue in my youth.....I can give you some firsthand information on whether or not there is an advantage or a disadvantage to being uncircumcised.  Having had to deal with someone's reaction at first glance, and having to explain why it looks different to a couple of girlfriends, I realized that the only real difference between being circumcised and uncircumcised depends on your geographical location.  Yes there is an obvious physical difference with regards to the presence of the foreskin, and also the fact that the glans (head) is alot more sensitive to the touch than that of a circumcised one.....but that's as far as it goes.  If you travel to Europe.....most men in European countries are uncircumcised....same goes for countries in South America, and in Asia.....I guess they'd be asking the same question you just asked, but it would be regarding the advantage or disadvantage of a circumcised penis.  In the U.S., it's a well known fact that circumcision is widely practiced, and it has become the accepted standard.  It's so accepted that seeing an uncircumcised penis is almost like seeing someone from another planet.  Regardless though.....there is no real advantage or disadvantage to being uncircumcised.\nPersonally, the hygiene issue is really a non-issue, because I was taught from an early age to always clean up after using the bathroom.....and even now when I'm out of the house, I always walk around with a little pack of Wet-Naps.....so I can say that I'm relatively more hygenic than most circumcised guys who just shake put it away.  In the end it's about soap & water.\nIn my case, I was blessed with a shorter foreskin than normal which retracts completely on it's own when I become erect.....and although some guys are cursed with a tight foreskin (Phimosis), mine has always been flexible and easy to retract.\nAs far as an advantage, I can clearly state that having a glans that is very sensitive to the touch and loaded with sensations is something I would never want to lose.  In my case I've never had to deal with premature ejaculation......at one time I had to deal with the complete opposite....taking too long to ejaculate.\nAs far as medical problems are concerned, I've never had any issues, or situations that required medicine or medical intervention.  As far as it affecting sex.....I couldn't see how it would affect me in particular, because the glans is completely exposed when I'm erect.  In men with longer foreskin, all they have to do is retract it when they are erect, and it is the same as a circumcised one......in the end, it's a penis.\nBest of Luck!
573855
To be clear, most men are uncircumcised.  It's just here in the U.S. and much of the Middle East where they circumcise regularly...
929864
They prefer a bigger one. They prefer a tight one. Not only they like the look of it, but they also like the thought that the foreskin was mutilated. I already investigated all of that, that is why I know.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe “medical” reasons for circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!!\nCircumcision is “nothing” compared to other much more terrible things that people do for MONEY, when MONEY is involved EVERYRHING is possible, MONEY is the priority not moral values, not ethics, not health, not wrong or right, not even human life, etc. People are selfish by nature. And that is soooo sad. $$$CASH$$$\n\nSimply does not matter if circumcision has advantages or not; he has the right to his body to be intact, and that overrides everything else. And btw it only has disadvantages, see below.\n\nMOTHERS, the feelings of mothers who observed the circumcision of their babies. Go here if you have the courage:\nhttp://www.circumcision.org/mothers.htm\nThey do not remember the pain when they grow up, but I wonder what kind of neurological/emotional damage it does to inflict such severe pain to such a young one!\n\nIn the US circumcision started to stop boys from masturbating; they will take much longer to reach the orgasm, and the orgasm will not be as intense, but that will not stop them.\nNowadays the “medical” reasons to circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!!\n\nRELIGION--If God intended boys to not have "skin" He would have made them so.\nAlso, if you examine the bible, lest just say that is full of terrible things that are considered very illegal nowadays, and many of those terrible things are AGAINST WOMEN. Women, how would you like it if those things get legalized?\nhttp://www.nocirc.org/religion/\n\nHYGIENE--Use a new invention, soap and water!!! Women produce much more “smegma”, all kinds of discharges, wetness, and smells; because of physiologic and anatomical reasons, and how would you feel if they cut your vulva lips??? Women, why don’t you answer my question, are you afraid? Women are more likely to get urinary tract infections and no one suggests we surgically alter them at birth to reduce the risks! Just one of many double standards and laws that always treat men worse.\n\nMEDICAL REASONS--No medical reasons. It is not a birth defect! A extremely small chance of a complication do not justify the removal of the foreskin, if so, why don't we remove the tonsils and the appendix when a child is born, and the chance of complications of the tonsils and the appendix is much greater. And what is even greater is the chance of breast cancer so the best thing to do is to remove the breast glands of young girls or at least remove them at the first sign of trouble without trying any alternative treatments first in order to preserve the breast(women, how do you like it now?). And for infections of all the organs, including female organs, use a new invention called antibiotics. Talking about complications, in fact many baby boys die each year from circumcision and related complications.\nEVEN if “TRUE phimosis” occurs, instead of chopping it off like barbarians!, use Conservative Treatments like:   \n-Topical Medication(non-traumatic and non-destructive)\n-Dilation and Stretching(non-traumatic and non-destructive)\n-Combination treatment(non-traumatic and non-destructive)\n-Preputioplasty is the medical term for plastic surgery of the prepuce or foreskin(many methods).\nIf you want more detail on Conservative Treatments, go here:\nhttp://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/\nhttp://www.circinfo.org/alternatives.html\nThe foreskin can still be tight even after puberty, and it is natural, not TRUE phimosis.\nAnd now they invented a new reason to make money, the risk of STD in uncircumcised men. Well actually uncircumcised men have more protection, but in practical terms that protection means nothing, because circumcised or not, if you have sex without protection and your partner have an STD
378182
like that one girl said its usually choice of the parents more or less. Some religions dont allow it being removed like jehovas witness and some others. \n\nSome people find it repulsive others just thinks its cool. either way It usually removed for cosmetic appearances or health issues. \n\nNowadays Its less common to circumcise, but there is a majority of those that still are intact
129328
What the above poster had said is false.  Hygiene depends strictly on the individual and circumsized people are just as prone to infection or bacteria as uncut people depending on how clean that individual is. Other than that is basically started off as a religious ritual but has no effect on the organ itself.
458297
To be circumcised means to undergo circumcision, which, in males, involves the excision (or the removal) of the prepuce (or the foreskin) of the penis. For more details on female circumcision, you could refer to the following link\n\nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/medical_notes/241221.stm\n\nCircumcision is either done due to medical reasons or as a cultural pratice.
1102069
It's a religious custom; a "good Jew" like Jesus would be circ'd.  It's a health issue in countries where there are tons of other health issues; circucisionis the least of their worries.  It's not commonly done in western Europe, and in the US recently the rate is only about 50% of newborn boys.\n\nInsurance won't cover it any more.  It's unnecessary.
1029635
Circumcision is mutilation.  We abhor it being done to girls in Africa, but we practice ritual mutilation on our men every day.  What the hell?
403190
Well dude the circumcision practise started in the US due to religious and moral beliefs of people in the 40s and beyond. They said that one of the main benefits of circumcision was that it prevented or to reduce the chance of masturbation in boys (because its a sin). Circumcision has increased in the US to where doctors automatically circumcise babies with out parental consent...and most doctors just do it because it was done to them and its a common thing to do to newborns. Its a practise that should not be continued due to the damage and pain it causes to the baby. Plus intact penises are more sensitive to stimulation, and not everyone gets the "cheese" i've seen a few girls ive been with, that had more "cheese" than I have ever had in my life!
1045934
It's cutting the foreskin which exposes the penis. Teaching children good hygiene renders circumcision just preference of the parents. It is unnecessary and accidents though rare still occur. IE cutting the penis tip off.
527892
These days there are NO hygenic reasons for circumcision if you bathe at least once a day. There will therefore be no smell. Accusations otherwise are just born out of ignorance. If you consider most of European men, for instance, are uncircumcised, don't you think they would have moved to circumcision en masse long ago if circumcision was the most hygenic and correct thing to do?\n\nAlmost all other reasons for circumcision are now medically treatable and therefore, circumcision is unneccessary.\n\nFor women, an intact penis is DESIGNED to work better that a circumcised one because the foreskin allows for greater movement during sexual intercourse and less lubrication is required.\n\nIt is also better for the man because his glans is soft and sensitive - the glans on circumcised penises gets thick and hard over the years and decreases sensitivity and can even lead to erection problems.\n\nI am writing this as someone who IS circumcised and I am appalled that a fully functional part of me was trimmed off for no real reason and which has, subsequently, given me a less satisfactory sex life than my uncut counterparts.
11312
Directly Quoted:\nCircumcision substantially reduces an infant´s chances of getting a urinary tract infection (UTI) during the first year of his life. Although the rate of urinary tract infections for infants is not very high (around xxx %), UTI´s are becoming increasingly difficult to treat (see here for a discussion). \nCancer of the penis - that effects xxx men in a thousand - is essentially eliminated in circumcised males. \nResearch shows that males who are circumcised have a lower risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). In addition, partners of circumcised males are less likely to contract vaginal infections (e.g. yeast infections). \nCircumcision eliminates foreskin infections that occur throughout childhood. \nCircumcision prevents phimosis, a narrow opening that makes it impossible to retract the foreskin at a later age. \nGenital hygiene is easier after circumcision. \nCircumcision virtually eliminates the accumulation of smegma.
231466
drs say to never put soap inside. BTW jews are not the only ones that circumsise. It is a very common practice