do you think circumcision should be the persons choice?

Do you think circumcision should be the persons choice in united states? Right now its the parents choice for the baby to get circumcised. I think it should be the persons choice when they turn 18. To me its mutilation because they do it against your will. How is in the other countries on circumcision? To me its like a woman getting a circumcision. Theres really no need for it.

yes, it makes sex less enjoyable for the man.

I think it should be a choice and anyone who chooses to mutilate their own penis should be institutionalized.

Don't agree with female circumsicion.

but male circumsicion is largely a cosmetic change. You could argue cleanliness, sexual pleasure whatever. At the end of the day if you can still get a rise, do your thing your getting pleasure out of it.

Better, less painful and no memory of having it done if it's a baby.

I myself am circumsiced but i don't go "Oh noes moms and dads mutliated me!" and i don't have a huge grudge against them either. Plus uncircumscide penis looks freaky as hell. but *shrugs* whatever i guess.

I think it should be a choice and anyone who chooses to mutilate their own penis should be institutionalized.

mattisgod01

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

communistcat

[QUOTE="communistcat"]

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

NiKva

Babies tend to be more hypersensitive to pain, so it's likely it was very painful, you just couldn't express it in words at the time and can not remember the process. It likely hurts alot.

[QUOTE="NiKva"][QUOTE="communistcat"]

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

mattisgod01

Babies tend to be more hypersensitive to pain, so it's likely it was very painful, you just couldn't express it in words at the time and can not remember the process. It likely hurts alot.

[QUOTE="communistcat"]

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

NiKva

It is the person's choice, once you become 18. You can't make a choice as a baby.

Of course... since no one would make that choice. >.>SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="communistcat"]

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

NiKva

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]Of course... since no one would make that choice. >.>NukaNuked

[QUOTE="NukaNuked"][QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]Of course... since no one would make that choice. >.>SolidSnake35

uuuh id rather get circumcised when im a baby then when im 18.....mems_1224

Yes.

There are a few individual circumstances where circumcision is necessary. Apart from those isolated cases, there's no excise for mass circumcision, and it should be outlawed until the person receiving it is old enough to decide for himself.

No. Parents should be autonomous over their children, period. If you want to choose not to circumcise your child, that's wonderful. You can make that choice.

[QUOTE="communistcat"]

Uncircumcized penises are ugly.

NiKva

There are over 10 000 nerve endings in the foreskin, and they're all there from the time of birth.

Circumcision hurts about as much as cutting your finger tips off. Be it to a baby or full grown man.

[QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

[QUOTE="NiKva"] This, and it doesn't hurt when you're a baby.lightleggy

Babies tend to be more hypersensitive to pain, so it's likely it was very painful, you just couldn't express it in words at the time and can not remember the process. It likely hurts alot.

As a basic survival instinct pain sensitivity is required for most species to survive and becuase babies are still developing and are so vulnerable they need to be hypersensitive to pain as to alert their parents to a possible danger they are in (Babies do that through crying as is always the case during circumcision). The penis contains massive amounts of nerves that have developed by the time they are born so they most definitely do feel pain.

No. Parents should be autonomous over their children, period. If you want to choose not to circumcise your child, that's wonderful. You can make that choice.

Communistik

Certainly not. Your foreskin is the property of the United States government and so it should remain that way.

Do you think circumcision should be the persons choice in united states? Right now its the parents choice for the baby to get circumcised. I think it should be the persons choice when they turn 18. To me its mutilation because they do it against your will. How is in the other countries on circumcision? To me its like a woman getting a circumcision. Theres really no need for it.

slipknot0129

[QUOTE="slipknot0129"]

Do you think circumcision should be the persons choice in united states? Right now its the parents choice for the baby to get circumcised. I think it should be the persons choice when they turn 18. To me its mutilation because they do it against your will. How is in the other countries on circumcision? To me its like a woman getting a circumcision. Theres really no need for it.

HoolaHoopMan

And there's a huge difference between circumcision and vaccination. Vaccines are well established to prevent serious diseases. There's still no proven benefit to circumcision.

It's not a choice parents should be allowed to make.

When you're that young, you have to trust in your parents to make the right call for you.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="slipknot0129"]

Do you think circumcision should be the persons choice in united states? Right now its the parents choice for the baby to get circumcised. I think it should be the persons choice when they turn 18. To me its mutilation because they do it against your will. How is in the other countries on circumcision? To me its like a woman getting a circumcision. Theres really no need for it.

BuryMe

And there's a huge difference between circumcision and vaccination. Vaccines are well established to prevent serious diseases. There's still no proven benefit to circumcision.

It's not a choice parents should be allowed to make.

Not really. In a lot of female circumcision cases they actually remove the **** which is anatomically homologous to the penis The two procedures aren't the same.

Both vaccines and circumcision can be viewed as a preventative measure against infection or disease for children (cultural implications aside), albeit one is grossly more important than the other. It cuts down on UT infections, STD transmission rates, and almost eliminates the chances of contracting penile cancer.

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] For one, it's not really analogous to female circumcision. Most female circumcision would be comparable to partial penis amputation. Secondly, I still believe that parents have the right to consent to get it done just as they have the right to get their child vaccinated or have other procedures done. HoolaHoopMan

And there's a huge difference between circumcision and vaccination. Vaccines are well established to prevent serious diseases. There's still no proven benefit to circumcision.

It's not a choice parents should be allowed to make.

Not really. In a lot of female circumcision cases they actually remove the **** which is anatomically homologous to the penis The two procedures aren't the same.

Both vaccines and circumcision can be viewed as a preventative measure against infection or disease for children (cultural implications aside), albeit one is grossly more important than the other. It cuts down on UT infections, STD transmission rates, and almost eliminates the chances of contracting penile cancer.

Last I'd checked, that was still totally inconclusive.

But also, the foreskin does have a use. It prevents the gland at the end of the penis is meant to be kept sterile, and the foreskin prevents it from getting soiled (fecal matter, for example)

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="slipknot0129"]

Do you think circumcision should be the persons choice in united states? Right now its the parents choice for the baby to get circumcised. I think it should be the persons choice when they turn 18. To me its mutilation because they do it against your will. How is in the other countries on circumcision? To me its like a woman getting a circumcision. Theres really no need for it.

And there's a huge difference between circumcision and vaccination. Vaccines are well established to prevent serious diseases. There's still no proven benefit to circumcision.

It's not a choice parents should be allowed to make.

Uncircumcized penises are disgusting. I'm glad I'm circumcized.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]Circumcision is partial penis amuptation. They cut the end off of the penis.

And there's a huge difference between circumcision and vaccination. Vaccines are well established to prevent serious diseases. There's still no proven benefit to circumcision.

It's not a choice parents should be allowed to make.

Not really. In a lot of female circumcision cases they actually remove the **** which is anatomically homologous to the penis The two procedures aren't the same.

Both vaccines and circumcision can be viewed as a preventative measure against infection or disease for children (cultural implications aside), albeit one is grossly more important than the other. It cuts down on UT infections, STD transmission rates, and almost eliminates the chances of contracting penile cancer.

Last I'd checked, that was still totally inconclusive.

But also, the foreskin does have a use. It prevents the gland at the end of the penis is meant to be kept sterile, and the foreskin prevents it from getting soiled (fecal matter, for example)

Uncircumcized penises are disgusting. I'm glad I'm circumcized.

ROFLCOPTER603

This. Plus circumsicision helps reduce the chances of getting certain STDs. Not to mention that you can do your business anywhere without lotion.

What gland is this?sonicare

The Glans. Quite literally the thing that the foreskin covers up.

There is some debate about whether or not STDs are more common with circumcised vs. uncircumcised. Given the nature of the male urethra, UTI's are extremely rare in males and usually have to do with other issues such as catheters or poor immune systems. At least in the 90's and early 2000's, penile cancer was more common in uncircumcised males.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]What gland is this?BuryMe

The Glans. Quite literally the thing that the foreskin covers up.

[QUOTE="ROFLCOPTER603"]

Uncircumcized penises are disgusting. I'm glad I'm circumcized.

Tokugawa77

This. Plus circumsicision helps reduce the chances of getting certain STDs. Not to mention that you can do your business anywhere without lotion.

I hear on the grapevine that popular thinking these days has reverted to the idea of 'hood is good'

Circumcism is just so passe.

Better, less painful and no memory of having it done if it's a baby.

I myself am circumsiced but i don't go "Oh noes moms and dads mutliated me!" and i don't have a huge grudge against them either. Plus uncircumscide penis looks freaky as hell. but *shrugs* whatever i guess.

SaudiFury

I have the same exact feeling. I don't see why this is even a topic. unless a baby tells the doctor to put the knife away, then this shouldn't be an issue. most circumcisions are performed usually within a couple of days of birth. thank god i don't have to even worry about getting one or not. the adverse psychological and medical effects as well as supposed benefits are still deeply debated and there is no clear answer as to who's right or wrong. that's my opinion, no beneficial or adverse affects but i don't consider myself "mutilated" or "deformed".

Link?

Last I'd checked, that was still totally inconclusive.

But also, the foreskin does have a use. It prevents the gland at the end of the penis is meant to be kept sterile, and the foreskin prevents it from getting soiled (fecal matter, for example)

BuryMe

Well for one the foreskin usually keeps the glans penis from getting keratinized from outside sources and rubbing, however the draw back is that in the early years it actually makes it far harder to keep it clean.

For STDs in general its fairly evident that neonatal circumcision cuts transmission rates down tremendously. As for things like UT infections and penile cancer it becomes less of an issue. Both of these conditions are much rarer so the AMA doesn't usually recommend the procedure unless infants are at risk of a UT or repeat UTIs.

The health risks and benefits are usually negated on each side that I think it's really a non-issue, reason being that the AMA and other associations don't recommend it as a necessity. The one glaringly obvious advantage would that of STD transmission however, that cannot be overlooked.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]What gland is this?BuryMe

The Glans. Quite literally the thing that the foreskin covers up.

The one glaringly obvious advantage would that of STD transmission however, that cannot be overlooked.HoolaHoopMan