Thursday, March 26, 2009

Circumcision is a bad idea


By Sam Sugar

In Europe, outside certain religious communities, it’s hard to find someone who doesn’t think cutting the end off an infant’s dick is a bad idea. In America, as any Euro who’s dated there knows, opinions differ. With a good urologist making $300 a procedure, and doing up to five circumcisions a day (it’s the most commonly performed surgical procedure in America), the reasons foreskin’s slightly less hip in the US than members-only jackets are clear. Most American women who’ve never experienced a natural penis claim to prefer the cut version they’re used to. The dice are loaded.


The British Journal of Urology’s new study (commissioned by NOCIRC), “Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis” explains:

“The study shows that the foreskin is the most sensitive portion of the penis,” said study coauthor Robert Van Howe, a pediatrician at the Marquette General Health System in Marquette, Michigan. “It’s not like you’re chopping off plain old skin. The analogy would be like removing your lips, because the lips are more sensitive than the skin around them.”


And

“…the study authors say they’ve achieved something new with their study: a comparative sensory mapping of the male organ.

This new cartography of the penis proffers nineteen zones. Missing from the circumcised male are eight of these penile destinations, four on the dorsal side (the outer prepuce, the orifice rim, the muco-cutaneous junction, the ridged band) and four on the ventral (frenulum near ridged band, frenulum at muco-cutaneous junction, orifice rim, and outer prepuce). Missing from the uncircumcised anatomy are two regions on this new map, and they’re both scars.


In the areas that cut and uncut men have in common, the study showed a sensitivity deficit of between two and thirty-three percent. In those areas peculiar to the intact penis, the deficit is by definition 100 percent. And it’s in those areas, the study concludes, where most of the sensory action is. Perhaps the most salient of the report’s findings is that “the transitional region from the external to the internal prepuce is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis.”


The porn industry plays a part. Manned by lilliputian intellects, and with Jewish men making up a large portion of all male talent, uncut cocks are seldom seen. The American public’s feeling that uncut means unclean feeds a myth about disease and foreskin which people tend not to question. Even if a cut penis is fractionally easier to clean and therefore slightly less likely to carry harmful bacteria, a vagina’s easier to clean when it’s sewn shut and we don’t generally favor that.


With a generation seeing more strange cock on the web as teens than our parents did in a lifetime, the feeling that ‘US porn cock’ IS cock will spread. With the US advocating circumcision in Africa as an HIV prevention measure (ignoring the fact condoms work better) it’s a good time for people who care about free-will and sexual pleasure to point out starting every boy's life by amputating the most sensitive part of his body lies somewhere between unwise and criminal.


Change comes from the young, the young watch porn, and porn has categorized uncut cock as an exclusively gay fetish. Time for a change?

[Read the informative comment on circumcision left by Mark Lyndon of Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.)]

23 comments:

donplaypuks® said...

Jews, Arabs and Americans have perpetuated this myth of the chopped up dick being healthier than thou. And to perpetuate it, they have come up with all sorts of 'studies' claiming lower incidence of e.g cancer. These are all spurious and as cooked up as that claim by that Korean to have cloned, stem cells?

Older civilizations like the Indians and Chinese know better. God didn't create any body appendage without reason or function. The Jews tend to quickly counter this with 'What about the appendix,Moyshe?'

Well, something causes a ruptured appendix, death and controls populations to a small extent, doesn't it?

So, don't presume to second guess God! If the foreskin is there at birth you can be damn sure He put it there for a damn good reason. After it, it prevents bees from aiming a direct sting on the knob and fishes from pecking it when you go skinny dipping, don't it.

I repeat you puny humans, DON'T BE PRESUMPTIOUS & SECOND GUESS GOD!! Lol.
http://donplaypuks.blogspot.com

OrangRojak said...

Circumcision? I thought you were going on a long journey by yacht. You mean male genital mutilation? No thanks, not even if it's cheap, not even if it saves me a few seconds in the shower, and not even if (as I learned from South Park) it'll make my penis look bigger. Too much (hardcore is all gay isn't it?) porn and you'll think it's for breaking rocks with.

My Young Women's Development Worker friend relayed a joke from one of her 'clients':
Q. "What's the useless flap of skin on the end of a penis called?"
A. "A boyfriend".

Mark Lyndon said...

You might also want to check out the following:

Canadian Paediatric Society
"Recommendation: Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed."

http://www.caringforkids.cps.ca/pregnancy&babies/circumcision.htm
"Circumcision is a 'non-therapeutic' procedure, which means it is not medically necessary."
"After reviewing the scientific evidence for and against circumcision, the CPS does not recommend routine circumcision for newborn boys. Many paediatricians no longer perform circumcisions.


RACP Policy Statement on Circumcision
"After extensive review of the literature the Royal Australasian College of Physicians reaffirms that there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision."
(those last nine words are in bold on their website, and almost all the men responsible for this statement will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. "Routine" circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in Australia in all states except one.)

British Medical Association: The law and ethics of male circumcision - guidance for doctors
"to circumcise for therapeutic reasons where medical research has shown other techniques to be at least as effective and less invasive would be unethical and inappropriate."

National Health Service (UK)
"Many people have strong views about whether circumcision should be carried out or not. It is not routinely performed in the UK because there is no clear clinical evidence to suggest it has any medical benefit."

The College of Physicians & Surgeons of British Columbia
"Circumcision is painful, and puts the patient at risk for complications ranging from minor, as in mild local infections, to more serious such as injury to the penis, meatal stenosis, urinary retention, urinary tract infection and, rarely, even haemorrhage leading to death. The benefits of infant male circumcision that have been promoted over time include the prevention of urinary tract infections and sexually transmitted diseases, and the reduction in risk of penile and cervical cancer. Current consensus of medical opinion, including that of the Canadian and American Paediatric Societies and the American Urological Society, is that there is insufficient evidence that these benefits outweigh the potential risks. That is, routine infant male circumcision, i.e. routine removal of normal tissue in a healthy infant, is not recommended."

See also:
Canadian Children's Rights Council
"It is the position of the Canadian Children's Rights Council that "circumcision" of male or female children is genital mutilation of children.


Drops in male circumcision:
USA: from 90% to 57%
Canada: from 47% to 9.2%
UK: from 35% to about 5% (less than 1% among non-Muslims)
Australia: 90% to 12.6% ("routine" circumcision has recently been *banned* in public hospitals in all states except one, so the rate will now be a lot lower)
New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans)
South America and Europe: never above 5%

It's worth remembering that we wouldn't even be having this discussion if it weren't for the fact that 19th century doctors thought that :
a) masturbation caused various physical and mental problems (including epilepsy, convulsions, paralysis, tuberculosis etc), and
b) circumcision stopped masturbation.

Both of those sound ridiculous today I know, but if you don't believe me, then check out this link:
A Short History of Circumcision in North America In the Physicians' Own Words

Over a hundred years later, circumcised men keep looking for new ways to defend the practice.

The record payout for a botched circumcision is $22.8 million. It was said at the time that the victim "will never be able to function sexually as a normal male and will require extensive reconstructive surgery and psychological counseling as well as lifelong urological care and treatment by infectious disease specialists."
Sure, cases like that are very rare, but why should they happen at all? If you look up the galleries of botched jobs, one thing that may surprise you is just how many jobs were botched cosmetically, rather than medically. Skin tags and skin bridges and hair growing half way up the shaft are not normal, but would not be counted as medical complications.

mazen said...

Where there is substance, there is function. Take away the substance, you take away the function.
Would a circumcised man know how a penis with foreskin feels like during sex? He just misses out that part of nature for life.

Antares said...

"Forgive us our forefathers' foreskins..." (see Terminal Hierophantiasis :-)

donplaypuks® said...

Heard about Rabbi Levy who made small purses from all those discarded foreskins and sold them for only $1 each?

Well, rub it and it grows into a suitcase!! A real bargain!!

galadriel said...

Mebbe I'm a very selfish woman by ur standards, but I prefer circumcised males. They are cleaner.

Mark Lyndon said...

In some countries, the men prefer circumcised women and believe them to be cleaner. Doesn't make it right.

Anonymous said...

what about cunts ah !?

Antares said...

Galadriel - It's good that you have sampled a wide range of males, circumcised and uncircumcised. The point is, it's unethical to force unnecessary surgery - whether cosmetic or religious - upon children below the age of 18 who have no power of choice. This despicable practice originates with corrupt ancient male priesthoods who wanted to embed deep trauma & painful associations with the genitalia upon the psyches of young children, so they could forever manipulate them emotionally & psychologically through the imposition of sex taboos & sexual guilt on entire populations. Among many definitions of EVIL, I'd say the deliberate wounding & scarring of defenseless psyches ranks high on the list.

Anonymous said...

Here's one male who knows the difference between a cut and an uncut penis. Intact to 55 and been cut 5 years since. Sensitivity is gone. Difference is simply unbelievable. Penis is like a piece of wood. Circed males have no idea at all what pleasure the foreskin provides. As to those females who think circed penis looks better, get out of your small lives and see the rest of the world. Your ignorance is shocking. Aside from religious traditions (which are still questionable), America and South Korea are the only circumcising societies. Rest of world nearly all intact. Stop permanently mutilating innocent kids, boys and girls.

Anonymous said...

Circumcision is practiced by the medical profession in America strictly as profiteering upon a child's birth and a parent's pocketbook -- "Oh, he'll have to be circumcised..." for whatever reason the doctor mutters with dollar signs in his/her eyes -- well, the foreskin does not retract on some children until nearly their teens -- and with all the lubricants and education available, teaching a child to retract and clean is a far better alternative to butchery.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your article. Brilliant!!! I can only hope that others will one day wise up and stop this ridiculous practice. Sadly I will never experience a foreskin, but lucky my 3 sons do!

Anonymous said...

I support this cause too.

Anonymous said...

I was born in Ukraine never got circumcised, came to America when i was 9, at the age of 15 i dis sided to get it done. It just dint feel right, i would say 90% of lady's prefer circumcised, I know because im getting laid all the time, and in regards to less feeling, Im not complainig, Im gooood

Antares said...

Anonymous @ 1:55PM - Thank you for the valuable feedback. In your case it was a conscious personal decision to be circumcised, which makes a big difference. I have no issue with the surgical removal of foreskins (in some cases it may be necessary, especially if one suffers from phimosis) - but the practice of subjecting children to this traumatic experience, whether they require it or not, just to mark them is abhorrent.

DarkPhantom said...

Although I would say 90% of the world population is uncircumcised, and theres is nothing wrong with that. If you women out there say that all uncircumcised male is dirty not clean, that is not true stop listen to fake rumor out there. Even circumcised guy arnt clean either. And either both circumcised and uncircumcised male still can recieve HIV/AIDS, if u know what you are doing then you are free from HIV/AIDS. And if I have children all my boys will be uncircumcised like me. Well people stop thinking negative stuff about our uncircumcised male =)

Anonymous said...

DAM STRAIGHT ,The fact is that every male is born with a foreskin because they are ment to have one its as simple as that people.

And the idea of mutilating the male human penis/body or female body, is out rageous to say the least, your born with a foreskin people because your meant to have it and circumcised males are poorer for not having there foreskins. And nine times out of ten in a lot of places infant males didnt get a say in it,

And parents DO NOT have a right to make that decision at all they are not the one's that must live with the emotional, physical and mental scare's of this unnessary mutilation.

Fact, the infant penis's foreskin is not retractible till the age of 7 years old some times longer, circumcision not only mutilates the penis it interupts and stops the natural development of the penis especially in infants, teenagers and even growth into adulthood.

Who ever invented routine practise of circumsion and in general need to have been shot as far as im concerned and majority of my geniration is concerned. I was born in the 1990's, the concept of if the fathers done, the son should be and its WRONG. One third of the world's male population is circumcised that is outragous and wrong, to make it worse neally all of them DID NOT get a say in it.

Its there bodies but they had no say at all and that my friends in its self is also horrifying. Now as far as AIDS/HIV is concerned the moto is "Rap your tool, don't be a fool" the male foreskin is there for a reason people its ment to be there fullstop.

Appearance dosn't play any factor in the mutilation of ones penis at all as far as cleanslyness goes don't be lazy have a shower and keep your self clean, how lazy are people to say that a foreskins diety. Your hairs diety if its not clean'd isn't people whake up. Point of fact in america the foreskins of infant males are not just disposed of from infant males that are mutilated by circumcision, there rycled and or purchased by mager pharmicuitical and reseach clinics don't believe me reseach it.

Any person that practises this barberic practise should be locked up its worse the rape and touchture concidering that this is done to an infant male with generally no pain management, or risk assessment to the infant, generally infants have died thats right DIED from this mutilation, from excessive bleeding complications afterwards and during.

To say the mortality rate is low from this is obsered all life is precious and behond a dollar figure, Circumcision is NOT nessarry at all it voids the contitution of a individual humans right any one that does practice or has practised this barberic practise needs to be mentally assesed, doctor or not and locked up. Same with the parents for condoning it or being tricked into it, watch a video of this practise its in humain!!!!.

You only have to reseach how this barberic practise started back in the king arthur days as a form of punishment and to stop mastibastion thats right. And in all honest its the quickest way to send a male gay to be honest bigest cause of insurcuity towards the oposite sex.

Most males wont talk about it or piss in a piss trof because of it WHAKE UP PEOPLE THIS IS THE 21ST CENTURREY. My Generation saids NO to this practise
PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

DAM STRAIGHT ,The fact is that every male is born with a foreskin because they are ment to have one its as simple as that people.

And the idea of mutilating the male human penis/body or female body, is out rageous to say the least, your born with a foreskin people because your meant to have it and circumcised males are poorer for not having there foreskins. And nine times out of ten in a lot of places infant males didnt get a say in it,

And parents DO NOT have a right to make that decision at all they are not the one's that must live with the emotional, physical and mental scare's of this unnessary mutilation.

Fact, the infant penis's foreskin is not retractible till the age of 7 years old some times longer, circumcision not only mutilates the penis it interupts and stops the natural development of the penis especially in infants, teenagers and even growth into adulthood.

Who ever invented routine practise of circumsion and in general need to have been shot as far as im concerned and majority of my geniration is concerned. I was born in the 1990's, the concept of if the fathers done, the son should be and its WRONG. One third of the world's male population is circumcised that is outragous and wrong, to make it worse neally all of them DID NOT get a say in it.

Its there bodies but they had no say at all and that my friends in its self is also horrifying. Now as far as AIDS/HIV is concerned the moto is "Rap your tool, don't be a fool" the male foreskin is there for a reason people its ment to be there fullstop.

Appearance dosn't play any factor in the mutilation of ones penis at all as far as cleanslyness goes don't be lazy have a shower and keep your self clean, how lazy are people to say that a foreskins diety. Your hairs diety if its not clean'd isn't people whake up. Point of fact in america the foreskins of infant males are not just disposed of from infant males that are mutilated by circumcision, there rycled and or purchased by mager pharmicuitical and reseach clinics don't believe me reseach it.

Any person that practises this barberic practise should be locked up its worse the rape and touchture concidering that this is done to an infant male with generally no pain management, or risk assessment to the infant, generally infants have died thats right DIED from this mutilation, from excessive bleeding complications afterwards and during.

To say the mortality rate is low from this is obsered all life is precious and behond a dollar figure, Circumcision is NOT nessarry at all it voids the contitution of a individual humans right any one that does practice or has practised this barberic practise needs to be mentally assesed, doctor or not and locked up. Same with the parents for condoning it or being tricked into it, watch a video of this practise its in humain!!!!.

You only have to reseach how this barberic practise started back in the king arthur days as a form of punishment and to stop mastibastion thats right. And in all honest its the quickest way to send a male gay to be honest bigest cause of insurcuity towards the oposite sex.

Most males wont talk about it or piss in a piss trof because of it WHAKE UP PEOPLE THIS IS THE 21ST CENTURREY. My Generation saids NO to this practise
PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Automatically, I feel like a Freak of Nature. After hearing: "Circisism is wrong! Its mutilation! Let your baby decide whether he should have a perfectly natural dick or one that was medically done"
Your fucking baby just can't say: "Can I have it done my good sir? or Please sir, I do not want it done. I'll think about it later on"
People spewed hatred at my mom for putting me into circisism. I am happy with her choice, AND there are different methods. You can use EMLA cream 2 hours before the procedure, have the doctor retract the foreskin, then put on the ring to keep it there, freeze the ring, and then let it on for a week. I only cried for I was hungry. No trauma. Of course you'll still have skin, and the foreskin looks like a pink little tab. My mom has met people that were circumcised, her first mate who help gave birth to my sister, and me who would've nearly died from a low sperm count. Her second mate had cost her plently of infections and much much more. The second was uncut, first was cut. If your gonna hate on cut dicks, atleast see what it is, and it true most kids and old people cannot clean properly with being uncut you must notice that, the other 79% of uncut dicks may not or may know how to clean their dicks like yours. My mom had to work in one of those working homes, the nurse and doctors did not clean these men uncut dicks right. She had to do it. One mans unct dick dirt and shit was able to fill a big medicine bottle. Now I sound Biased. But I do know what was it is to have an Uncut dick, of course it might be better, or it might not! Yes I'm missing an organ, but that organ isn't going to end my life.

Antares said...

Anonymous @ 7:45AM - It appears that in your case losing your foreskin resulted in a distinct loss of sensitivity to nuances. The essay is titled "Circumcision is a bad idea." It doesn't say that circumcision is "wrong." Big difference there. You can be doing something your belief system considers "right" - but it could still be a damn stupid idea, like blowing yourself up just to get laid in the afterlife.

Personally I view all compulsory religious rituals as pretty bad ideas - because they are compulsory. Good ideas don't require compulsion of any sort. Good ideas liberate. Bad ideas enslave. Simple as that.

Anonymous said...

No , You're wrong . circumcision will protect you from genital diseases. It's totally recommended.

Archibald Ponsonsky-Smythe said...

I was mutilated in my teens. Circumcision destroys sexual pleasure because all erogenous nerves are in the foreskin. The common misconception is the glans penis and glans clitoris are the primary erogenous zones, but there is no histological evidence to back this up. They are both primarily protopathic, covered in free nerves which detect pain and pressure. All the important erogenous nerves are in the prepuce of the male and female.