Are more and more people understanding that male circumcision is bad?!


Question: Are more and more people understanding that male circumcision is bad.?
List why it's bad.
And for the record, I think it's bad.Health Question & Answer


Answers:
Yes, more and more people are finally beginning to use their intelligence to realize that a whole, normal and natural penis with foreskin feels and functions better than one that's been made partial, mutilated and scarred by circumcision.

I in particular am acutely aware of the damage from this brutal, archaic and barbaric mutilation. The lack of sensitivity that I have because of being mutilated as a helpless infant made it impossible for me to achieve orgasm in normal sex.

I didn't know what was wrong with me for years, but finally I found out about foreskin restoration.

This has really improved my sexual sensitivity and the intensity of orgasms is more than I ever thought possible.

The new inner foreskin is particularly sensitive, adding new dimensions in sexual feeling.

If more men who were mutilated knew what had been stolen from them along with their foreskins, this atrocity would be illegal, as it is for female minors.

It is sexist and unconstitutional to allow mutilation of males' genitals and make it illegal for females.

Doctors and hospitals make big bucks from this, charging parents for mutilating their sons, and then turning around and selling the amputated infants' foreskins for use in COSMETICS!!!!! ---and some research.

Doctors are highly biased, also, as very many of them belong to the religions that try to mutilate all males. That's one of the reasons that male genital mutilation became so widespread in the first place.

Male genital mutilation is infant sexual abuse of the worst sort, and it's time for men to reclaim the right to a whole and intact body.

About 200,000 men have become aware of what was perpetrated on them as infants by the penis butchers, and are now restoring their foreskins.

Circumcision is the worst hoax ever perpetrated on the male sex.

A foreskin is not a birth defect; it is a birthright.Health Question & Answer

I would say that this is exactly what is happening. I know when I became pregnant with my first son, I had always thought I would circ. them. UNTIL I went online and learned out how barbaric and unclean it really is. Who in their right mind wants a newborn baby to have a surgical wound IN THE DIAPER without any real reason except they want them to look like daddy and they are too lazy to teach the kid how to wash his penis when he is older!.?!

Decrease sexual nerves. It removes over 90% of the nerves from the area.

Makes the head hard and rough so that tears and bleeding happens easier opening the man up to an increase risk of infections.

Done on an unconsenting newborn boy, without reason...unnecessary cosmetic surgery should be illegal on newborns.

If it helped with HIV/AIDS...then why does the USA have so many people with this disease.? It doesn't. A condom does.

The fact that the foreskin is SOLD to cosmetic companies to produce products with it is beyond disgusting and alludes to the reason why they want this practice continued.

Baby girls are protected, so why not boys.? Isn't that hypocritical beyond belief.?

And once learning HOW and WHY it was started in the first place makes me realize how truly sick the practice is! Here are some quotes which are disturbing:

1895: 15% of the North Eastern urban American male population circumcised

In all cases of masturbation circumcision is undoubtedly the physicians' closest friend and ally...To obtain the best results one must cut away enough skin and mucous membrane to rather put it on the stretch when erections come later. There must be no play in the skin after the wound has thoroughly healed, but it must fit tightly over the penis, for should there be any play the patient will be found to readily resume his practice, not begrudging the time and extra energy required to produce the orgasm. It is true, however, that the longer it takes to have an orgasm, the less frequently it will be attempted, consequently the greater the benefit gained...The younger the patient operated upon the more pronounced the benefit, though occasionally we find patients who were circumcised before puberty that require a resection of the skin, as it has grown loose and pliant after that epoch.

[E. J. Spratling. Masturbation in the Adult. Medical Record 1895;24:442-443.]



Local indications for circumcision: Hygienic, phimosis, paraphimosis, redundancy (where the prepuce more than covers the glans). adhesions, papillomata, eczema (acute and chronic), oedema, chancre, chancroid, cicatrices, inflammatory thickening, elephantiasis, naevus, epithelioma, gangrene, tuberculosis, preputial calculi, hip-joint disease, hernia. Systemic indications: Onanism, seminal emissions, enuresis, dysuria, retention, general nervousness, impotence, convulsions, hystero-epilepsy.

[George F. Shrady. Circumscisus. Medical Record 1896;49:430]

1935: 55% of the North Eastern urban American male population circumcised

I suggest that all male children should be circumcised. This is "against nature," but that is exactly the reason why it should be done. Nature intends that the adolescent male shall copulate as often and as promiscuously as possible, and to that end covers the sensitive glans so that it shall be ever ready to receive stimuli. Civilization, on the contrary, requires chastity, and the glans of the circumcised rapidly assumes a leathery texture less sensitive than skin. Thus the adolescent has his attention drawn to his penis much less often. I am convinced that masturbation is much less common in the circumcised. With these considerations in view it does not seem apt to argue that "God knows best how to make little boys.

[R.W. Cockshut. Circumcision. British Medical Journal. 1935;2:764.]



[Routine Circumcision] does not necessitate handling of the penis by the child himself and therefore does not focus the male's attention on his own genitals. Masturbation is considered less likely.

[Alan F. Guttmacher. Should The Baby Circumcised.? Parents' Magazine 1941;16:26, 76-78.]

http://www.noharmm.org/docswords.htm

Need I say more than these quotes.?Health Question & Answer

Circumcision is a religious thing, if you did not need a foreskin you would not have one, look at the sickoz that circumcise baby girls, they are driven by religion.
Religion has started most wars and is responsible for most of all conflicts and crap going on in the world at present.
With males the risk is that when de-foreskined, that the end of the penis is also cut off and baby will bleed to death. With baby girls the same applies, if they don't they will never orgasm. Is that sick or what .?. Never mind all the physco **** that goes with that.Health Question & Answer

Sure, the rate in the US has dropped from almost 95% to just slightly over 50%. Of course, about 85% of the US men are cut, but as more are not cut at birth, the overall rate as a percentage of the population will drop in a few years.

No medical reason for circumcism for almost all guys. Only rarely is it required to open up the foreskin due to pain. Bad because not natural, and the kid has no choice in getting mutilated. Enough said.Health Question & Answer

Most guys (80%) worldwide are intact (with foreskin). 20% are circumcised - 2/3 of this 20% are Muslims. Christians do not circumcise, Jesus is the new covenant whereas Abraham who was circumcised is the old Covenant.

Circumcision for non-religious reasons only became popular to prevent masturbation. Only English -speaking countries took this strange practice up - the USA, England, Canada, and Australia. It was never that popular in England and was stopped completely more than 50 years ago there. Today nobody is circumcised in England. In Canada and Australia , it has been declining since the 1970's, today less than 10% are circumcised in those 2 countries. In the USA, it has declines though not by much from a high of 90% in the 1970's to about 60% today.
.?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=5&id=70&Itemid=48" rel="nofollow">http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/ind...


If most guys new how valuable the foreskin is, they would be pissed that it was taken away without there consent.

The foreskin contains nerves found nowhere else on the penis. The underside has a mucosal surface. As the skin is moved up and down (which is something circumcised guys cannot do) these nerves are stimulated. You can watch this here:
http://geocities.com/painfulquestioning/...
There is also a 20 minute video on that site called the functions of the foreskin.

also, because the glans (the head of the penis) is exposed without the protection of the foreskin, it dries out. It also rubs on clothes and so the skin becomes tougher. Both these things further reduce sensitivity. You can see more info about this on this site:
http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm

This site shows why sex is less enjoyable for men and women when the guy has been circumcised(there are 10 points to go through):
http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/

There has also been research that suggests that circumcised men are about an inch shorter than intact men and also the penis is a lot thinner in girth.

Intact guys are no more dirtier than circumcised guys. Most guys clean under the foreskin in the shower - there isn't much to clean anyway - everything produced is natural - just like in the vagina. The foreskin equivalent in the woman is the clitoral hood - how would women like to be circumcised.?Health Question & Answer

This article tells why it's bad:

.?page=2" rel="nofollow">http://www.chronogram.com/issue/2008/12/...

And it's bad because it's WRONG to cut off parts of peoples bodies without their given informed consent. I don't care if they are the parent's or not. It's wrong to make that choice for them.

-ConnorHealth Question & Answer

Mr Mother Russia, do you think all guys who are not circumcised have an infected penis.?

Unfortunately I think at lot of people are still very pro-circumcision. This is not gonna change much for several decades to come.Health Question & Answer

It is happening. The US is just the slowest of the bunch. Other English speaking countries are way ahead of us on getting rid of this terrible practice. Health Question & Answer

*facepalm*
edit: Mother Russia, that was pure pwnage.Health Question & Answer

Because it's cruel and unnecessary.

HarrietHealth Question & Answer

why do you think its bad.?Health Question & Answer

im sorry, do you like an infected penis.? Health Question & Answer



The consumer health information on youqa.cn is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for any medical conditions.
The answer content post by the user, if contains the copyright content please contact us, we will immediately remove it.
Copyright © 2007-2012 YouQA.cn -   Terms of Use -   Contact us

Health Q&A Resources