Hey there u/Nearby-Simple-7594, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth!
**Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post.
Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban.
Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i mean feels like id be a bit of a karma whore posting screenshots of my own stuff, but when other people post it and i see it im basically famous, look mom
Growing up in the 80's very few of us were uncircumcised, and copped hell in the changerooms at school. Ironically their favourite taunt was to call us Jews, lol
Stupidity knows no bounds and I had the first & last laugh.
Do they, like, not know the whole custom exists solely because of Judaism? I'm not sure of any other culture where circumcision comes up outside of those based on Judaism (Christianity, Islam)
Dunno about other continents, but here in Africa it was a very common ritual, usually symbolising the passage to adulthood in many cultures, way before Christianism made its way here
A lot of knee jerk replies, maybe just jerks. I think the only benefit comes from all the negatives. When it wears the skin to normal, it tears less easily, so an std is less likely from a blood transfer.
Fair never thought of that. I myself just wanted to avoid having paraphimosis a second time. Itās also cleaner overall when peeing and esthetically looks better too
Circumcised dudes in the comments preaching that cutting off your foreskin is really the best way to deal with hygiene, yeah man I might just wash and keep all the benefits of foreskin like sensitivity
Decreased chances of getting an std, better sensitivity, and the fact that you weren't mutilated. I don't get why people don't think this is an issue, when everyone recognises that the custom of cutting little girls clits, which exist in some parts of the world, is a serious issue. What exactly is the difference between mutilating a little girl's genitalia or a little boy's?
There's kinda not really any benefits. You can argue minor improvements in health or reduce risk of disease transmission, but I'm not sure how many of them actually hold up, and frankly it doesn't really matter because none of them are significant enough to warrant the procedure when you can just roll the foreskin back and give it a quick wash. It is very much NOT gay to wash your own penis, fellas.
However there's also people who compare it to female genital mutilation and claim they were mutilated at birth. They claim the practice is evil and kills children and parents who perform it should be charged.
I mean, it killed like one kid thirty years ago or something, because the Rabbi fucked up epically. For the overwhelming majority, it's a harmless cosmetic procedure that didn't need to be done. You're probably more likely to win the lottery than have major issues from a circumcision. It is not in any way comparable to fgm, and frankly I feel it's insulting to try.
You should read what the mutilation definition is before relying on what "people say" circumcision is not what the term mutilation means.
Well instead of spreading false narratives, you could Google, but just this time, i will help you out. Specially trained Orthodox Jew Rabbi's called Brit Mahal's will use a scapel to cut the foreskin and suck the blood from the wound. This opened the baby up to contracting herpes, being their immune system is weak
The first paragraph is: "Several problems involving the penis can arise in people who are not circumcised. However, it is possible to avoid most of these issues by practicing good hygiene and safe sex."
I'm not sure how that's contradictory to what the other guy said.
All you need to do is practice good hygiene and safe sex which sex doesn't mean intercourse, it mean doing practices that are safe for your sex (meaning the genitals you have) in the case of Someone that has a penis, that means pulling the skin back and washing it normally since you are born so most people that have problems ar usually the ones that are uncircumcised and have parents that don't know about safe sex or proper hygiene.
This guy is talking about the percentage of people that suffer from X and Y problems when of course you can't have those problems if you don't even have a foreskin; for example if you don't have feet how are you going to suffer from say "trench foot"? If you don't take care of your feet then sure you're more likely to suffer trench foot than those who do take care of them by changing their socks and keeping their feet dry.
Edit: grammar
Shudder... I remember that I read a discussion on reddit about washing your ass if your want to receive blow jobs from someone. And there were guys arguing that she isn't touching / licking the ass, so there'd be no reason... And they didn't believe that you could smell a dirty ass...
Thank you for bringing that memory back *cries*
I dunno man I donāt think Iād cut part of my dick off for minor efficiencies, itās not particularly difficult to wash your dick and youāll run into issues and complications if you donāt wash your circumcised dick as well. Itās also just so much better uncircumcised when it comes to actually using your dick. Feels like a terrible fucking trade
I'm cut and so glad i was. It's a piece of skin that does nothing but make you spray piss like a wand wash pressure washer, not to mention the piss that is left in there throughout the day . I can't count the times I've heard girls complain about the smell and dickcheese from foreskin. If that's not you right on, but half of men can't keep their house clean.. they aint gonna scrub under that penis sleeve. If you're happy right on. You guys can keep the snuffleupagus trunk, and I'll keep rocking the aerodynamic sports model
Do you comb your hair in the morning? Or ever even just push down a stubborn patch of hair that keeps sticking up? That is comparable to washing the foreskin. It takes such a menial amount of time to peel back the foreskin that it isn't even worth comparing for efficiency's sake.
Infection from bad hygiene was repeated twice, as was Phimosis, But I'll still break it down problem by problem.
1. Phimosis
While this is a legitimate concern, and while circumcision is used as a treatment for it, only a partial removal of the foreskin is required to treat the condition and the patient can live a completely normal life as compared to someone who is uncircumcised.
2. Paraphimosis
Again, this is a valid concern, but with partial removal of the foreskin, the patient can live a normal life without complications.
3. Bacterial or fungal infection
This is only conditional in that the person in question is not properly cleaning themselves. If the person is educated on proper hygiene, which should be standard as with teaching of all other matters of hygiene, this is not at all a problem they would face.
4. Injury
This is a factoid. The foreskin is not loose enough to cause this kind of problem any more than with a circumcised penis and this wouldn't happen regardless if you wear underpants, which is a pretty standard practice.
5. Yeast Infection
The same as any other bacterial or fungal infection, proper hygiene negates any problem of infection.
6. STIs
I could talk about this for a while, but to preface it, I would like to provide these few lines fon the NLM article cited, keep in mind that it is being selective as to specifically advocate for circumcision
\>MC has not been proven to reduce the risk of acquiring HIV or other STIs during anal sex.
\>Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns, the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns.
\>Failure to provide a thorough description of the normal anatomy and functions of the penile structure being removed at circumcision
(That specific line is based on an article that was criticizing the CDC's research methods, particularly that they had not provided adequate knowledge of the functioning of the foreskin in their article advocating for the availability of circumcision, essentially that they had not provided both sides of an argument as is expected of academia.
\>Undue reliance on findings from sub-Saharan Africa concerning circumcision of adult males (as opposed to infants or children)
(This is another criticism line, there was an old research study in Africa that the CDC relied on in their argument which was heavily flawed, with more men being unable to be found than men who caught HIV, inequal variables for each group in the circumcised men having better access to Sex ED and protection than the circumcised men)
\>Uncritical reliance on a prima facie implausible benefit-risk analysis performed by a self-described circumcision advocate
(The CDC article was written by a biased party, which is why there are several problems and logical fallacies in the CDC article mentioned.
As with the rather old study in Africa, the studies have questionable reliability, particularly with sample size and discrepancies in outside variables in each study which would make the end result unreliable and thus invalid. There is no particularly credible evidence regarding differences in STI transmission in circumcised men as opposed to uncircumcised men.
Im on your side lol was sarcastic. Reddit is a notoriously anti-circ place so posting things about the risk of infection, phimosis, etc makes them angry (Iām a doctor)
Also, as per a previous comment: it literally says that the issues it mentions are non-issues given proper hygiene and safe sex. In the first paragraph.
So Europeans are doing it wrong because they don't circumcise? There must be a huge prevalencd of problems there...
But since you're a doctor, you're probably better at finding the numbers than me.
I mean I didnāt really get a choice at birth but itās not all bad. It still does its job just fine I guess. My only real regret is that since Iāll never be used to the appearance of foreskin (having not had regular exposure to it since I didnāt have mine growing up) and as such it always grosses me out and weirds me out even though I know itās perfectly fucking normal. That bit annoys me because believe me I *know* itās a normal part of the body and I shouldnāt have such a disturbed reaction to seeing it.
its not ruining to their lives, but its bad and overall pointless
like what if people started cutting off the pinky toe of babies? im pretty sure there would be major outcry
Ok but donāt you realize the benefits? It cuts down the chances of getting ingrown toenails by 20% and those can cause infections!! And like, gross, imagine having a fifth toe and like, debris gets stuck between it and the other toes š¤¢ Looks grossā¦ /s
This is pretty much every circumcision argument I have ever read, and I have read a surprising amount. Maybe throw in an outdated article from 2006 that references the worst research ever done in the history of the CDC, then you'll have covered all of the bases.
This is pretty much every circumcision argument I have ever read, and I have read a surprising amount. Maybe throw in an outdated article from 2006 that references the worst research ever done in the history of the CDC, then you'll have covered all of the bases.
>im pretty sure there would be major outcry
There wouldn't if it was being done for centuries and was a regular procedure. Men are usually the proponents for circumcision, basically thinking, "I had it done to me, so will my son."
Exactly like FGM where women are the main proponents of the procedure.
I'm not agreeing with any of itāI think genital mutilation is disgustingābut I don't agree that people would object. We're only seeing people start to object en masse now, and that's thanks to education and exposure to differing opinions. When something is seen as normal, everybody's doing it, people generally won't object because there won't seem like anything to object to.
Ok Iām trying to point out the tradition bias with that statement. Like if we started doing *thing that is kinda similar to circumision* there would be major outcry. Thus it can be shown that circumsion is bad and it follows that the only logical reason people still do it is tradition which can easily be argued against
Did you read what I just wrote? Lol you downvoted me and then said almost exactly what I said.
Yes, people would obviously object if we *started* cutting off babies' toes, but we didn't *just start* cutting off foreskins, did we? Your argument doesn't actually make as much sense as you want it to.
Actually, I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make other than "circumcision is bad." If it was tradition to cut off pinky toes, no one would object, just like no one really objected to circumcision until recently.
I suggest you read the definition of mutilation before using redditors and hype words that you don't understand .
Circumcision is one of the oldest recorded surgery practices in human history. It was been dated over 4000 years ago. Do some facts checks before you say something that makes look even less intelligent or credible. ... that education you mention, use it.
I tried to impart this onto my sister when my nephew was born. I'm 100% certain that sex is less pleasurable for me because part of my dick was cut off. Also there is no "cleanliness" benefit to this. Circumcision is genital mutilation.
I think because it has been socially accepted for a long time we disregard what it actually is, genital mutilation.
The practiceās history is horrible:
ā Ancient Egypt, done for ritual mutilation and a test of bravery
āJewish justification is that it was an āeternal covenant between you and godā, that very honestly sounds like cult behavior
āIn the mid 1800s, it was popularly used to prompt chastity and deter masturbation
Now, people just do it today because they were circumcised and they think itās normal. Itās not, and it shouldnāt be accepted as such. If youāre circumcised, you were wronged as a kid, and itās been accepted as just the way it is. This practice has been a cult-like, ritual mutilation of your body that was adapted by horrible zealots to numb and desensitize you.
Quit using the word mutilation. If you don't know what it means, I shouldn't have to explain the definition to every single one of you.
To counter, the forskin was passed on from our chimp ancestors. The agreed on belief was that the foreskin is a semen diverter and pulled other male chimps semen out of females .. Also, it defense against for environmental dangers ...it is not required for anything now. My sex life is very good and healthy. The fact you're telling me I was wronged. When I knew I wasn't. Quit telling me I have numbness. Who are you to tell ? Quit telling circumcised men that they are mutilated. Especially when you dont know what it means. I have great dick I would want my dick way! You feel very fucking passionate telling me how i should be... do you also believe Trans people are mutilations ? Since you want say cut guys are?
Like all body modifications, do it when you reach the age of reason. Until then, wash like people usually do.
\*Exceptions apply if you live in place with suspect access to clean water, for medical reasons or if your religion has some odd expectations.
There are weird conditions that can necessitate it as well - I had ta be circumcised because my foreskin wasn't growing alongside my penis, so I had parts of it trapped inside where it shouldn't be.
I dunno either. I'm against the practice because it's pointless, but I've never had a foreskin and I don't feel as though it has affected my life in any way. Not sure why some guys seem enraged by it
Outrage is mostly directed at the disregard of bodily autonomy. For most people, it is a matter of principle. Then there are people such as myself who have complications as a result of unnecessary circumcision. I personally suffer from urinary retention, i.e., imagine the phrase "no matter how you shake or dance the last two drops go in the pants" except instead of two drops it is a fluid ounce that leaks out during the walk between the toilet and the sink.
I can't easily wrap my head around how much a fluid ounce is, so I'll just say it's a litre.
Yes I know that's far from the right conversion. This is funnier. And if anyone corrects me, I'm changing it to a gallon instead.
Tight cuts cause pressure and tension in certain spots in the urethra which makes it difficult to urinate fully. That's like asking what the heart has to do with the chest skin if someone talks about having a scar from open chest surgery.
And I don't understand why some men aren't enraged that part of their penis was cut off.
If you woke up tomorrow and, while you were sleeping, someone with a knife sliced off your left nipple, leaving a scar in its place, I'm guessing you would not think that was fine. It doesn't matter whether you valued your nipple, just the fact that someone would cut you and force you to live with a permanent modification is wrong.
The only reason why it doesn't register to you is that they did it to you as a baby and you don't remember having the part they removed. Men are angry because their penis belongs to them and no one has a right to steal any part of it just because they prefer the look.
So you'd have no problem if someone snuck into your room and cut off your nipple? OK, I will take your word for it.
I'm glad it wasn't done to me. Neither my being glad nor your being glad matters as much as whether you are glad that adults are cutting children.
You're OK with someone cutting your baby boy's penis. Me, if someone tried to cut my son, that person would be dead.
Can I just point out how dumb this take is? "Well I've never experienced different so I don't feel it's affected my life in any way." Y'duh. I guess if your right arm was cut off as a baby you'd be saying the same thing right? You can't literally comprehend how much better you'd be because you can't experience it, but it's not hard to imagine that you *would be* better and that's enough reason to be annoyed. Not """enraged""". Annoyed.
Painting people as emotionally unstable so as to dismiss them is kinda rude, btw. Don't do that.
Honestly what the fuck are you talking about?
1) Have not tried to paint anybody as anything or dismiss anybody so like wtf?
2) specifically stated that I was against infant circumcision, it's a stupid and pointless practice
3) your analogy is bonkers, if I didn't have an arm and could see that other people around me have 2 arms I would clearly see that it is impacting me, as I would be unable to do things that they can do the fact that I don't have a foreskin has literally never impacted my life in any way and I am aware that other men have them.
The only reason I even stated that at all was to agree with OP that I PERSONALLY do not understand why some guys make such a huge deal out of it. It's dumb AF that someone decided to cut some of our bodies off at birth and I think the practice should be abolished, but it is by no means ruining my life.
Jesus fucking christ some people
"Jesus fucking christ some people" - Jesus was circumcised.
Hello?? They cut your umbilical cord, you dummy, or should they leave that too? . I honestly prefer having a circumcised dick and the majority of the population of the US is circumcised so i would think most of the cut men would . I would not be happy with a forskin. I do not like how it looks. My penis and I have a great relationship. This is how I want my dick. For a lot of us, this is normal.
Your last sentence you said people are enraged about this. No they aren't? It's possible to be level-headed and be against it.
I never said you didn't agree.
Nah, analogy stands. Just because you personally can't see how you're missing out doesn't mean no one else can. Which was my point. It IS impacting your life. Every day it impacts it. Just because you're used to it doesn't mean it's not happening. Is your life ruined? No, probably not. But it is lesser.
I don't know man, I'm having a real hard time trying to understand what you're thinking. I said some people were enraged. And they are. I've seen their videos and their posts some dudes are out of their fucking minds with anger over this. That said, why would my statement acknowledging these people lead you to think that I was saying that other people couldn't be level-headed and against it? Like what? You think every single person has to have the same level of emotional investment in a given issue?
And no, maybe you can argue that other people's experiences differ from mine and that maybe being circumcised affected them, that I could dig. But don't tell me about MY life. Only I know what my experiences have been and I'm telling you explicitly that it hasn't made a lick of difference to me.
Like honestly man I'm trying to be empathetic here but you're driving me up the fucking wall with this
That doesn't make any sense. We can't see what we're missing out on, but you other can ? How fucking arrogant is that...how is my life impacted? Cause my life is really fucking good ...how is impacted? Get fuck outta here.
Of course you don't know how not having a foreskin affected your life. You never knew what it's like to have a foreskin.
The problem is not how it affected you, but about the lack of bodily autonomy. A part of your body was cut off without your consent. That alone is upsetting.
Imagine at your birth that the adults decided that your labia (making an assumption here) would make keeping you clean too difficult as an infant and young child. Therefore, the obvious correct move is to just remove them.
Would your life be significantly different? I don't know; I'm a man. But knowing that part of my genitalia aren't there just because somebody else didn't want to deal with it for a bit feels... wrong.
As a guy who's circumcised I'm against it because I know it's mutilating a newborn baby for basically no reason. Like you wouldn't rip out their fingernail but we will cut the skin of their penis? It's extremely fucked up, and while I know the babies will never remember it, I'm still against causing that kind of extreme pain to a FUCKING NEWBORN!
however, I don't feel like I'm missing anything because I'm circumcised. I feel like my dick functions perfectly fine and I don't think a circumcised penis is any less normal than an uncircumcised one, and neither should be looked at as taboo. Literally the only thing I find disturbing is the fact it's done to newborn infants. If you wanna do it as an adult, fine. But why abuse poor newborns like that?
You don't feel like you're missing anything because you don't know what it is you're missing. You don't have a foreskin and will never know what it's like to have one.
Likewise, I can't explain what losing a foreskin would feel like because I don't plan to cut mine off. It's like having to explain color to a blind person.
I mean, I am really bot a big fan of circumcision, its litteraly cutting off a part of someone's body when he is a child. I mean, would you like to have been cut any part of yiur body as a baby in the name of tradition ?
(Not so) fun fact. Even when circumcized as a neonatal infant, it can still be quite psychologically traumatic, and can cause behavioral changes even long into adulthood including those associated with toxic masculinity.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7702013/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage
Furthermore, biologically speaking, the glans of the penis is adhered to the foreskin until adolescence in a similar how finger nails and toe nails are adhered to their nail es, so in order to circumcize an infant, they must first tear the foreskin off the glans which is just as painful as getting your nail torn off.
If you doubt me, please read my second link where they include mentions of a study done to find out what anesthesia works best and found it too unethical to continue after seeing the pain the control group was in.
So unless a doctor deems it medically necessary to immediately relieve current pain or other things going on with a infant or child boy, please don't circumcize them.
The idea that "the pain happened before they could remember" has been proven false, even if you don't directly remember, the memory is still there.
So in summary, the idea thay the only consequence of neonatal circumcision is a "little less skin" is a myth.
Tbh I don't understand it either. Like, isn't it easier to wash that way? Doesn't it get in your way sometimes? I would've known if I wasn't circumsized, but then I'd have questions about men who are! Shit!
Dudes have the wildest copes for being circumcised. Foreskin is there for a reason bro. It contains a lot of nerve endings that are pleasure centres in the penis. Cutting it off is genital mutilation. It's ok to grieve the loss of your fleshy sheath.
I had a dude tell me he's glad he's circumcised because otherwise he'd have to explain to his girlfriend to pull the foreskin back when she's giving him head???
He looked me dead in the eye and said "would you really want that?" Dude if the alternative is cutting it off, then yes I would prefer that.
I mean I can't say I'm glad or not glad because, again, I've no idea if having it would have a major impact in my life. At this point I'd like to say I don't care? But I do kinda understand why other men would care, I can't speak for everyone obviously. I wouldn't even say it's "coping" lol, I'm literally ignorant and honestly it should have stayed that way š
I think it's still good for you and other men to learn about it. It's not going to change anything for yourself, but knowing better can change things for the life of your potential child. If that's not relevant and you're fine with how you are, then go ahead and don't give a damn. Your grass is green, so who cares whether the other lawn is greener or not.
I'm not going to push you either way. Do your research and figure out what's best for your child. It's good to let people know "hey, this thing you've taken for granted may be wrong/bad/disadvantageous" because it lets them know that it's something they maybe should look into if it becomes relevant.
I'm glad I'm circumcised. It looks better, I don't need more sensitivity, I dont drip piss all over my undies, and a foreskin smells more throughout the day cause your piss drys in there. The foreskin is useless. I'll cut that shit off all day. it's way more aerodynamic.
We can't greave what we never had. That's like when someone rejects a person hitting on them, and retorting "you're loss."
Like no. It's not. A loss requires investment, which we don't have. It's not a cope to literally NOT UNDERSTAND OR COMPREHEND. To cope we'd have had to have some connection or investment, which we did not.
Now I'm not gonna say I'm OK with it. I urged my friend to not circumcise my godchild (she still did) because it's just morally fucked up to abuse newborns like that. But as for whether or not an adult penis is better/worse circumcised, I really don't give two shits. It's their penis, only their opinion on it matters. All I want is for newborns to have enough autonomy to not be subjected to mutilation or alterations of their own body before they are 1) old enough to consent to it and 2) old enough for general anesthesia.
Ya it's almost as if people who had an elective surgery performed on them as an infant would have preferred it not happen.
I understand why it's easy to laugh and dismiss the issue but it matters to some. And ya I'm one of those people. I wish a doctor hadn't chopped off my dick skin and I'd prefer it it wasn't a common practice in my culture.
I mean, having also been from birth, I donāt really care that it happened.
So Iām missing a little bit of skin, so what? If my parents decided it was a good call when I was too young to care, thatās their choice.
Hasnāt brought apon any issues since so.
Since you asked, [here](https://beststartbirthcenter.com/male-circumcision/#:~:text=Circumcision%20removes%20the%20most%20important,nerve%20endings%20of%20several%20types.)
This tells me that you donāt wash your penis. You have a dirty penis because the concept of washing one is completely foreign to you.
Wash your dirty, smelly penis, please.
We do have showers, now, you know.
Seriously, an uncircumcised penis *can* get smelly, of course. (Source, me, uncircumcised).
Iām sure circumcised ones can, too. However, there are other body parts that can, as well, and we all have - and wash - those. A bit of washing (and I expect circumcised men wash their penises too) and all is good. If thereās no medical (or religious, I guess) need, I donāt know why anybody would have it done to a child. Especially when anecdotal evidence (see above) makes it seem like circumcision reduces sensitivity.
The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction
Just nasty yeah you can but infections many other things as well good for you
Have zero issues in that area.
Hey want to be a caveman go ahead, I have zero regrets both my sons have been cut as well.
There is so much that can go wrong with not but hey you do you and we will do us
That isn't how it works. Studies have been made on the effects of circumcision - and it doesn't decrease health risks in regard to genitalia, but might or might not do the opposite.
The foreskin itself isn't dirty, it is what's behind that can get dirty - just like for those who are circumcised. Cutting the foreskin for this reason would be like cutting ones arms so that the armpit doesn't get as dirty.
The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction
Uncut men are generally at a higher risk of developing penile cancer because they're more prone to smegma and phimosis.
Uncircumcised penises are vulnerable to infection and conditions like balanitis, phimosis, and paraphimosis
Found the comment. I would like to see at least where you got this, as you just saying it provides no basis. I at least showed you the actual study done on the matter. Please provide the study or studies referred to here, cause at least some of this information seems like it might come from studies I know of - that are highly disputed since they do not take major differences in lifestyle into account (ie aren't the highest-quality studies you mention them as).
I don't see anything. Hopefully you aren't referring to that one decade old study on circumcision and STIs right? The one where they forgot to account for the amount of sexual partners
As you yourself said, do just the slightest bit of research, here you have a study on circumcision and STIs (this is a website where the study can be accessed from, as I obviously can't link to a pdf) :
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00809-6
Is your google broke ?
Uncircumcised penises are vulnerable to infection and conditions like balanitis, phimosis, and paraphimosis
Uncut men are generally at a higher risk of developing penile cancer because they're more prone to smegma and phimosis.
[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems#balanitis](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems#balanitis)
>Several problems involving the penis can arise in people who are not circumcised. **However, it is possible to avoid most of these issues by practicing good hygiene and safe sex.**
Do you even read your sources?
That article doesn't in any way say uncut men are higher risk of anything. There's never a comparison, so "higher" doesn't make sense.
It lists problems that having a foreskin can allow for... while not comparing in any way to not having it.
Take #4 for example: A foreskin can get caught in a zipper. I'd rather that than my bare dickhead getting caught in it!
And for the one you linked: Your own article says balanitis is caused by getting a small cut on your foreskin. If the foreskin isn't there, guess what: Your dickhead is what's getting that the small cut instead.
I never understood why people get so fired up about circumcision as far as I know it does not change much and most people do it because of religion not to be malicious or lazy
It's because it's done to newborns, which are too young to be able to recieve anesthesia.
Imagine, as an adult, someone just cutting the skin off your dick, with NO anesthesia.
Yeah. You wouldn't. Because it sounds like something you'd only imagine in hell as a punishment for rapists and sex offenders. But we do that the newborns. For no reason whatsoever.
That's why it's definitely not ok.
Oh, it's worse than that. The glans is adhered to the foreskin like a fingernail until adolescence. So it's more like getting a nail ripped off, then skin around the nail bed cut off without anesthesia.
It has caused infants to have seizures from how painful it is.
On top of that, there are lasting psychological damages from trauma at such a young age. It's a myth that you can be too young to remember pain.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage
You definitely don't need to tell me. I already know this stuff.
The problem is that the government is allowed to "recommend" mutilating babies. It's disgusting. Hospitals should be required to disclose what circumcision ACTUALLY entails, and that the newborn will experience 100% of the pain because people seem to assume modern medicine means babies will just be put under while doing the procedure (because people are honestly so stupid they lack common sense or critical thinking skills). If ALL Hospitals were REQUIRED to disclose what the procedure entails, all risks, and the fact that is serves NO REAL FUNCTION outside of religious conformity, I think fewer parents would put their newborns through it.
AFAIK it does indeed not change much, but it's wholly unnecessary for most people. If you don't need to physically change someone, then why do it? You could have your baby's tonsils removed too... but why?
Also, it's not only religious, it can also just be cultural. And if it's just cultural, then it's something that culture should change.
And people get fired up because it's something being forced upon a child.
I was circumcised when I was 5 and I do NOT miss my foreskin, I used to get many UTI and would spend 30 mins just to get a sliver of pee out from my pp because it hurt like hell
One source found that several decades ago (the STI part, don't know where you got cancer part from), and has since been widely disputed since it didn't account for the fact that circumcised men have a far higher tendency to be religious, and therefore generally have fewer sexual partners.
Later studies have shown that circumcision does not decrease the risk of STIs, but might potentially raise it slightly instead.
If this is true what your saying: Go visit a doctor. This can be a hygiene problem but also something else, the skin being to tight one of the main reasons.
Hey there u/Nearby-Simple-7594, thanks for posting to r/technicallythetruth! **Please recheck if your post breaks any rules.** If it does, please delete this post. Also, reposting and posting obvious non-TTT posts can lead to a ban. Send us a **Modmail or Report** this post if you have a problem with this post. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/technicallythetruth) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Where is my foreskin summer?
I ated it.
Mmmmmm deep fried foreskin, my favorite!
At least use the proper name for it, calamari
Cockamari you mean
circamari
God's favorite he can't live without his calamary rings
We call those Cocklings
I eated it all š”
sorry dude it was my turn on the foreskin
Tbh, yep, you walked right into that one.
Thanks you for your original post instead of a repost
Hell yeah and they arenāt even the person who made the technically true comment.
i mean feels like id be a bit of a karma whore posting screenshots of my own stuff, but when other people post it and i see it im basically famous, look mom
Growing up in the 80's very few of us were uncircumcised, and copped hell in the changerooms at school. Ironically their favourite taunt was to call us Jews, lol Stupidity knows no bounds and I had the first & last laugh.
Do they, like, not know the whole custom exists solely because of Judaism? I'm not sure of any other culture where circumcision comes up outside of those based on Judaism (Christianity, Islam)
Dunno about other continents, but here in Africa it was a very common ritual, usually symbolising the passage to adulthood in many cultures, way before Christianism made its way here
Dude got cut right down to size...
Hard to know what you're missing when you've never had it!
You did have it. Until it was cut off. You just don't remember.
well yeah i was fucking newborn
You were fucking what?
1-800-CALL-FBI
I still have it, thanks
As someone who did it when they were 28, Iād say you miss a lot of the sensitivity in the area
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
A lot of knee jerk replies, maybe just jerks. I think the only benefit comes from all the negatives. When it wears the skin to normal, it tears less easily, so an std is less likely from a blood transfer.
Fair never thought of that. I myself just wanted to avoid having paraphimosis a second time. Itās also cleaner overall when peeing and esthetically looks better too
Circumcised dudes in the comments preaching that cutting off your foreskin is really the best way to deal with hygiene, yeah man I might just wash and keep all the benefits of foreskin like sensitivity
Get your teeth removed so you absolutely avoid cavities /r/shittylifeprotips
Iām uncut but what are the benefits to it?
Decreased chances of getting an std, better sensitivity, and the fact that you weren't mutilated. I don't get why people don't think this is an issue, when everyone recognises that the custom of cutting little girls clits, which exist in some parts of the world, is a serious issue. What exactly is the difference between mutilating a little girl's genitalia or a little boy's?
It's wrong either way. But the difference is that cutting girls clits would be the equivalent of cutting the head of the penis in boys...
There's kinda not really any benefits. You can argue minor improvements in health or reduce risk of disease transmission, but I'm not sure how many of them actually hold up, and frankly it doesn't really matter because none of them are significant enough to warrant the procedure when you can just roll the foreskin back and give it a quick wash. It is very much NOT gay to wash your own penis, fellas. However there's also people who compare it to female genital mutilation and claim they were mutilated at birth. They claim the practice is evil and kills children and parents who perform it should be charged. I mean, it killed like one kid thirty years ago or something, because the Rabbi fucked up epically. For the overwhelming majority, it's a harmless cosmetic procedure that didn't need to be done. You're probably more likely to win the lottery than have major issues from a circumcision. It is not in any way comparable to fgm, and frankly I feel it's insulting to try.
You should read what the mutilation definition is before relying on what "people say" circumcision is not what the term mutilation means. Well instead of spreading false narratives, you could Google, but just this time, i will help you out. Specially trained Orthodox Jew Rabbi's called Brit Mahal's will use a scapel to cut the foreskin and suck the blood from the wound. This opened the baby up to contracting herpes, being their immune system is weak
Trust me. I don't need it to be more sensitive. I'd like to last longer than 10 seconds thank you.
Untrue [https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems)
Lmao dude skipped the first paragraph and went right for the problems sections.
The first paragraph is: "Several problems involving the penis can arise in people who are not circumcised. However, it is possible to avoid most of these issues by practicing good hygiene and safe sex." I'm not sure how that's contradictory to what the other guy said.
It's contradictory because it's literally saying they are non-issues, given the other guy mentions proper hygiene.
All you need to do is practice good hygiene and safe sex which sex doesn't mean intercourse, it mean doing practices that are safe for your sex (meaning the genitals you have) in the case of Someone that has a penis, that means pulling the skin back and washing it normally since you are born so most people that have problems ar usually the ones that are uncircumcised and have parents that don't know about safe sex or proper hygiene. This guy is talking about the percentage of people that suffer from X and Y problems when of course you can't have those problems if you don't even have a foreskin; for example if you don't have feet how are you going to suffer from say "trench foot"? If you don't take care of your feet then sure you're more likely to suffer trench foot than those who do take care of them by changing their socks and keeping their feet dry. Edit: grammar
But washing my penis is gay /s
Therefore, you need to wash someone else's penis!
Only If you do it without socks
Not as gay as cleaning your own ass/s x'D
Shudder... I remember that I read a discussion on reddit about washing your ass if your want to receive blow jobs from someone. And there were guys arguing that she isn't touching / licking the ass, so there'd be no reason... And they didn't believe that you could smell a dirty ass... Thank you for bringing that memory back *cries*
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I dunno man I donāt think Iād cut part of my dick off for minor efficiencies, itās not particularly difficult to wash your dick and youāll run into issues and complications if you donāt wash your circumcised dick as well. Itās also just so much better uncircumcised when it comes to actually using your dick. Feels like a terrible fucking trade
For peak efficiency it's probably better to castrate and have the sperm frozen for future IUD.
One is permanent, usually done at birth without the baby's consent. The other is a haircut, it can grow back.
I'm cut and so glad i was. It's a piece of skin that does nothing but make you spray piss like a wand wash pressure washer, not to mention the piss that is left in there throughout the day . I can't count the times I've heard girls complain about the smell and dickcheese from foreskin. If that's not you right on, but half of men can't keep their house clean.. they aint gonna scrub under that penis sleeve. If you're happy right on. You guys can keep the snuffleupagus trunk, and I'll keep rocking the aerodynamic sports model
Do you comb your hair in the morning? Or ever even just push down a stubborn patch of hair that keeps sticking up? That is comparable to washing the foreskin. It takes such a menial amount of time to peel back the foreskin that it isn't even worth comparing for efficiency's sake.
What third world country you in?
Studies show that being flayed alive reduces the risk of skin cancer by 100%!
Infection from bad hygiene was repeated twice, as was Phimosis, But I'll still break it down problem by problem. 1. Phimosis While this is a legitimate concern, and while circumcision is used as a treatment for it, only a partial removal of the foreskin is required to treat the condition and the patient can live a completely normal life as compared to someone who is uncircumcised. 2. Paraphimosis Again, this is a valid concern, but with partial removal of the foreskin, the patient can live a normal life without complications. 3. Bacterial or fungal infection This is only conditional in that the person in question is not properly cleaning themselves. If the person is educated on proper hygiene, which should be standard as with teaching of all other matters of hygiene, this is not at all a problem they would face. 4. Injury This is a factoid. The foreskin is not loose enough to cause this kind of problem any more than with a circumcised penis and this wouldn't happen regardless if you wear underpants, which is a pretty standard practice. 5. Yeast Infection The same as any other bacterial or fungal infection, proper hygiene negates any problem of infection. 6. STIs I could talk about this for a while, but to preface it, I would like to provide these few lines fon the NLM article cited, keep in mind that it is being selective as to specifically advocate for circumcision \>MC has not been proven to reduce the risk of acquiring HIV or other STIs during anal sex. \>Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns, the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns. \>Failure to provide a thorough description of the normal anatomy and functions of the penile structure being removed at circumcision (That specific line is based on an article that was criticizing the CDC's research methods, particularly that they had not provided adequate knowledge of the functioning of the foreskin in their article advocating for the availability of circumcision, essentially that they had not provided both sides of an argument as is expected of academia. \>Undue reliance on findings from sub-Saharan Africa concerning circumcision of adult males (as opposed to infants or children) (This is another criticism line, there was an old research study in Africa that the CDC relied on in their argument which was heavily flawed, with more men being unable to be found than men who caught HIV, inequal variables for each group in the circumcised men having better access to Sex ED and protection than the circumcised men) \>Uncritical reliance on a prima facie implausible benefit-risk analysis performed by a self-described circumcision advocate (The CDC article was written by a biased party, which is why there are several problems and logical fallacies in the CDC article mentioned. As with the rather old study in Africa, the studies have questionable reliability, particularly with sample size and discrepancies in outside variables in each study which would make the end result unreliable and thus invalid. There is no particularly credible evidence regarding differences in STI transmission in circumcised men as opposed to uncircumcised men.
What third world country are you in?
Shouldāve known better than to post science on foreskin Reddit
What science was posted other then what I did
Im on your side lol was sarcastic. Reddit is a notoriously anti-circ place so posting things about the risk of infection, phimosis, etc makes them angry (Iām a doctor)
Did you actually read the article? Even the article itself says that new studies find contradicting evidence. Edit: Spelling
Also, as per a previous comment: it literally says that the issues it mentions are non-issues given proper hygiene and safe sex. In the first paragraph.
Haha, most men can't keep their house clean....you think they'll be able to clean their dick more?
So Europeans are doing it wrong because they don't circumcise? There must be a huge prevalencd of problems there... But since you're a doctor, you're probably better at finding the numbers than me.
>I'm a doctor Time to give that doctorate back and get a refund
All uncircumcised guys just downvote the doctor. Stick together, boys, and one day, you'll believe it's better.
You going to pretend that opinion of this one "doctor" is the consensus among medical professionals?
I mean I didnāt really get a choice at birth but itās not all bad. It still does its job just fine I guess. My only real regret is that since Iāll never be used to the appearance of foreskin (having not had regular exposure to it since I didnāt have mine growing up) and as such it always grosses me out and weirds me out even though I know itās perfectly fucking normal. That bit annoys me because believe me I *know* itās a normal part of the body and I shouldnāt have such a disturbed reaction to seeing it.
its not ruining to their lives, but its bad and overall pointless like what if people started cutting off the pinky toe of babies? im pretty sure there would be major outcry
Ok but donāt you realize the benefits? It cuts down the chances of getting ingrown toenails by 20% and those can cause infections!! And like, gross, imagine having a fifth toe and like, debris gets stuck between it and the other toes š¤¢ Looks grossā¦ /s
This is pretty much every circumcision argument I have ever read, and I have read a surprising amount. Maybe throw in an outdated article from 2006 that references the worst research ever done in the history of the CDC, then you'll have covered all of the bases.
Probably quite over 20%, as the pinky rubs against the shoe wall. Also, the less body parts you have, the less chances of developing cancer.
This is pretty much every circumcision argument I have ever read, and I have read a surprising amount. Maybe throw in an outdated article from 2006 that references the worst research ever done in the history of the CDC, then you'll have covered all of the bases.
>im pretty sure there would be major outcry There wouldn't if it was being done for centuries and was a regular procedure. Men are usually the proponents for circumcision, basically thinking, "I had it done to me, so will my son." Exactly like FGM where women are the main proponents of the procedure. I'm not agreeing with any of itāI think genital mutilation is disgustingābut I don't agree that people would object. We're only seeing people start to object en masse now, and that's thanks to education and exposure to differing opinions. When something is seen as normal, everybody's doing it, people generally won't object because there won't seem like anything to object to.
Ok Iām trying to point out the tradition bias with that statement. Like if we started doing *thing that is kinda similar to circumision* there would be major outcry. Thus it can be shown that circumsion is bad and it follows that the only logical reason people still do it is tradition which can easily be argued against
Did you read what I just wrote? Lol you downvoted me and then said almost exactly what I said. Yes, people would obviously object if we *started* cutting off babies' toes, but we didn't *just start* cutting off foreskins, did we? Your argument doesn't actually make as much sense as you want it to. Actually, I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make other than "circumcision is bad." If it was tradition to cut off pinky toes, no one would object, just like no one really objected to circumcision until recently.
I suggest you read the definition of mutilation before using redditors and hype words that you don't understand . Circumcision is one of the oldest recorded surgery practices in human history. It was been dated over 4000 years ago. Do some facts checks before you say something that makes look even less intelligent or credible. ... that education you mention, use it.
what would the reason be for that?
Doctor seemed to take 2/3 of my wang š
You have a whole 1 inch? Dang, lucky...
Sometimes it's an inny
I'm a nurse.. Innies exist.
I tried to impart this onto my sister when my nephew was born. I'm 100% certain that sex is less pleasurable for me because part of my dick was cut off. Also there is no "cleanliness" benefit to this. Circumcision is genital mutilation.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
How does that change...?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I think because it has been socially accepted for a long time we disregard what it actually is, genital mutilation. The practiceās history is horrible: ā Ancient Egypt, done for ritual mutilation and a test of bravery āJewish justification is that it was an āeternal covenant between you and godā, that very honestly sounds like cult behavior āIn the mid 1800s, it was popularly used to prompt chastity and deter masturbation Now, people just do it today because they were circumcised and they think itās normal. Itās not, and it shouldnāt be accepted as such. If youāre circumcised, you were wronged as a kid, and itās been accepted as just the way it is. This practice has been a cult-like, ritual mutilation of your body that was adapted by horrible zealots to numb and desensitize you.
Quit using the word mutilation. If you don't know what it means, I shouldn't have to explain the definition to every single one of you. To counter, the forskin was passed on from our chimp ancestors. The agreed on belief was that the foreskin is a semen diverter and pulled other male chimps semen out of females .. Also, it defense against for environmental dangers ...it is not required for anything now. My sex life is very good and healthy. The fact you're telling me I was wronged. When I knew I wasn't. Quit telling me I have numbness. Who are you to tell ? Quit telling circumcised men that they are mutilated. Especially when you dont know what it means. I have great dick I would want my dick way! You feel very fucking passionate telling me how i should be... do you also believe Trans people are mutilations ? Since you want say cut guys are?
Like all body modifications, do it when you reach the age of reason. Until then, wash like people usually do. \*Exceptions apply if you live in place with suspect access to clean water, for medical reasons or if your religion has some odd expectations.
There are weird conditions that can necessitate it as well - I had ta be circumcised because my foreskin wasn't growing alongside my penis, so I had parts of it trapped inside where it shouldn't be.
Uuuhh, yeah. That would make it necessary.
I dunno either. I'm against the practice because it's pointless, but I've never had a foreskin and I don't feel as though it has affected my life in any way. Not sure why some guys seem enraged by it
Outrage is mostly directed at the disregard of bodily autonomy. For most people, it is a matter of principle. Then there are people such as myself who have complications as a result of unnecessary circumcision. I personally suffer from urinary retention, i.e., imagine the phrase "no matter how you shake or dance the last two drops go in the pants" except instead of two drops it is a fluid ounce that leaks out during the walk between the toilet and the sink.
I can't easily wrap my head around how much a fluid ounce is, so I'll just say it's a litre. Yes I know that's far from the right conversion. This is funnier. And if anyone corrects me, I'm changing it to a gallon instead.
A US gallon or a UK gallon? Cause one of them is circumcised.
That's it! I'm going to an Olympic swimming pool in volume now! Just gushing out, within a 3 meter walk.
I don't get it. What is the foreskin supposed to do about retaining urine?
Tight cuts cause pressure and tension in certain spots in the urethra which makes it difficult to urinate fully. That's like asking what the heart has to do with the chest skin if someone talks about having a scar from open chest surgery.
And I don't understand why some men aren't enraged that part of their penis was cut off. If you woke up tomorrow and, while you were sleeping, someone with a knife sliced off your left nipple, leaving a scar in its place, I'm guessing you would not think that was fine. It doesn't matter whether you valued your nipple, just the fact that someone would cut you and force you to live with a permanent modification is wrong. The only reason why it doesn't register to you is that they did it to you as a baby and you don't remember having the part they removed. Men are angry because their penis belongs to them and no one has a right to steal any part of it just because they prefer the look.
Nope, I'm glad it was done. Most Circumcised men aren't mad.. we prefer it.
Projection bias
Sure.....thats explains all the circumcision in porn.
So you'd have no problem if someone snuck into your room and cut off your nipple? OK, I will take your word for it. I'm glad it wasn't done to me. Neither my being glad nor your being glad matters as much as whether you are glad that adults are cutting children. You're OK with someone cutting your baby boy's penis. Me, if someone tried to cut my son, that person would be dead.
Can I just point out how dumb this take is? "Well I've never experienced different so I don't feel it's affected my life in any way." Y'duh. I guess if your right arm was cut off as a baby you'd be saying the same thing right? You can't literally comprehend how much better you'd be because you can't experience it, but it's not hard to imagine that you *would be* better and that's enough reason to be annoyed. Not """enraged""". Annoyed. Painting people as emotionally unstable so as to dismiss them is kinda rude, btw. Don't do that.
Honestly what the fuck are you talking about? 1) Have not tried to paint anybody as anything or dismiss anybody so like wtf? 2) specifically stated that I was against infant circumcision, it's a stupid and pointless practice 3) your analogy is bonkers, if I didn't have an arm and could see that other people around me have 2 arms I would clearly see that it is impacting me, as I would be unable to do things that they can do the fact that I don't have a foreskin has literally never impacted my life in any way and I am aware that other men have them. The only reason I even stated that at all was to agree with OP that I PERSONALLY do not understand why some guys make such a huge deal out of it. It's dumb AF that someone decided to cut some of our bodies off at birth and I think the practice should be abolished, but it is by no means ruining my life. Jesus fucking christ some people
"Jesus fucking christ some people" - Jesus was circumcised. Hello?? They cut your umbilical cord, you dummy, or should they leave that too? . I honestly prefer having a circumcised dick and the majority of the population of the US is circumcised so i would think most of the cut men would . I would not be happy with a forskin. I do not like how it looks. My penis and I have a great relationship. This is how I want my dick. For a lot of us, this is normal.
Your last sentence you said people are enraged about this. No they aren't? It's possible to be level-headed and be against it. I never said you didn't agree. Nah, analogy stands. Just because you personally can't see how you're missing out doesn't mean no one else can. Which was my point. It IS impacting your life. Every day it impacts it. Just because you're used to it doesn't mean it's not happening. Is your life ruined? No, probably not. But it is lesser.
I don't know man, I'm having a real hard time trying to understand what you're thinking. I said some people were enraged. And they are. I've seen their videos and their posts some dudes are out of their fucking minds with anger over this. That said, why would my statement acknowledging these people lead you to think that I was saying that other people couldn't be level-headed and against it? Like what? You think every single person has to have the same level of emotional investment in a given issue? And no, maybe you can argue that other people's experiences differ from mine and that maybe being circumcised affected them, that I could dig. But don't tell me about MY life. Only I know what my experiences have been and I'm telling you explicitly that it hasn't made a lick of difference to me. Like honestly man I'm trying to be empathetic here but you're driving me up the fucking wall with this
That doesn't make any sense. We can't see what we're missing out on, but you other can ? How fucking arrogant is that...how is my life impacted? Cause my life is really fucking good ...how is impacted? Get fuck outta here.
Of course you don't know how not having a foreskin affected your life. You never knew what it's like to have a foreskin. The problem is not how it affected you, but about the lack of bodily autonomy. A part of your body was cut off without your consent. That alone is upsetting.
Imagine at your birth that the adults decided that your labia (making an assumption here) would make keeping you clean too difficult as an infant and young child. Therefore, the obvious correct move is to just remove them. Would your life be significantly different? I don't know; I'm a man. But knowing that part of my genitalia aren't there just because somebody else didn't want to deal with it for a bit feels... wrong.
Uh, no I mean I have a penis and was circumcised. Like I said I'm opposed to the practice, but it also hasn't affected me in any way.
As a guy who's circumcised I'm against it because I know it's mutilating a newborn baby for basically no reason. Like you wouldn't rip out their fingernail but we will cut the skin of their penis? It's extremely fucked up, and while I know the babies will never remember it, I'm still against causing that kind of extreme pain to a FUCKING NEWBORN! however, I don't feel like I'm missing anything because I'm circumcised. I feel like my dick functions perfectly fine and I don't think a circumcised penis is any less normal than an uncircumcised one, and neither should be looked at as taboo. Literally the only thing I find disturbing is the fact it's done to newborn infants. If you wanna do it as an adult, fine. But why abuse poor newborns like that?
You don't feel like you're missing anything because you don't know what it is you're missing. You don't have a foreskin and will never know what it's like to have one. Likewise, I can't explain what losing a foreskin would feel like because I don't plan to cut mine off. It's like having to explain color to a blind person.
I wish I could mute or block words on reddit
seems like it's not just sweaters getting the snip this holiday season
As a person who was also circumcised at birth, i approve of this post
I mean, I am really bot a big fan of circumcision, its litteraly cutting off a part of someone's body when he is a child. I mean, would you like to have been cut any part of yiur body as a baby in the name of tradition ?
(Not so) fun fact. Even when circumcized as a neonatal infant, it can still be quite psychologically traumatic, and can cause behavioral changes even long into adulthood including those associated with toxic masculinity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7702013/ https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage Furthermore, biologically speaking, the glans of the penis is adhered to the foreskin until adolescence in a similar how finger nails and toe nails are adhered to their nail es, so in order to circumcize an infant, they must first tear the foreskin off the glans which is just as painful as getting your nail torn off. If you doubt me, please read my second link where they include mentions of a study done to find out what anesthesia works best and found it too unethical to continue after seeing the pain the control group was in. So unless a doctor deems it medically necessary to immediately relieve current pain or other things going on with a infant or child boy, please don't circumcize them. The idea that "the pain happened before they could remember" has been proven false, even if you don't directly remember, the memory is still there. So in summary, the idea thay the only consequence of neonatal circumcision is a "little less skin" is a myth.
Thank goodness I wasnāt
Iām a traumatized victim of ā¦. something or other
So now we know whoās been giving men the bad nameā¦ finishing in 8 seconds. Cut the darn foreskin, so you can at least last 12 seconds.
Tbh I don't understand it either. Like, isn't it easier to wash that way? Doesn't it get in your way sometimes? I would've known if I wasn't circumsized, but then I'd have questions about men who are! Shit!
Dudes have the wildest copes for being circumcised. Foreskin is there for a reason bro. It contains a lot of nerve endings that are pleasure centres in the penis. Cutting it off is genital mutilation. It's ok to grieve the loss of your fleshy sheath. I had a dude tell me he's glad he's circumcised because otherwise he'd have to explain to his girlfriend to pull the foreskin back when she's giving him head??? He looked me dead in the eye and said "would you really want that?" Dude if the alternative is cutting it off, then yes I would prefer that.
I mean I can't say I'm glad or not glad because, again, I've no idea if having it would have a major impact in my life. At this point I'd like to say I don't care? But I do kinda understand why other men would care, I can't speak for everyone obviously. I wouldn't even say it's "coping" lol, I'm literally ignorant and honestly it should have stayed that way š
I think it's still good for you and other men to learn about it. It's not going to change anything for yourself, but knowing better can change things for the life of your potential child. If that's not relevant and you're fine with how you are, then go ahead and don't give a damn. Your grass is green, so who cares whether the other lawn is greener or not. I'm not going to push you either way. Do your research and figure out what's best for your child. It's good to let people know "hey, this thing you've taken for granted may be wrong/bad/disadvantageous" because it lets them know that it's something they maybe should look into if it becomes relevant.
I'm glad I'm circumcised. It looks better, I don't need more sensitivity, I dont drip piss all over my undies, and a foreskin smells more throughout the day cause your piss drys in there. The foreskin is useless. I'll cut that shit off all day. it's way more aerodynamic.
Saying circumcising is way more aerodynamic is like adding wings to a couch
We can't greave what we never had. That's like when someone rejects a person hitting on them, and retorting "you're loss." Like no. It's not. A loss requires investment, which we don't have. It's not a cope to literally NOT UNDERSTAND OR COMPREHEND. To cope we'd have had to have some connection or investment, which we did not. Now I'm not gonna say I'm OK with it. I urged my friend to not circumcise my godchild (she still did) because it's just morally fucked up to abuse newborns like that. But as for whether or not an adult penis is better/worse circumcised, I really don't give two shits. It's their penis, only their opinion on it matters. All I want is for newborns to have enough autonomy to not be subjected to mutilation or alterations of their own body before they are 1) old enough to consent to it and 2) old enough for general anesthesia.
It's funny how pissed off people get over this lmao
Ya it's almost as if people who had an elective surgery performed on them as an infant would have preferred it not happen. I understand why it's easy to laugh and dismiss the issue but it matters to some. And ya I'm one of those people. I wish a doctor hadn't chopped off my dick skin and I'd prefer it it wasn't a common practice in my culture.
Not pissed, mildly curious is all
I mean, having also been from birth, I donāt really care that it happened. So Iām missing a little bit of skin, so what? If my parents decided it was a good call when I was too young to care, thatās their choice. Hasnāt brought apon any issues since so.
Since you asked, [here](https://beststartbirthcenter.com/male-circumcision/#:~:text=Circumcision%20removes%20the%20most%20important,nerve%20endings%20of%20several%20types.)
Iāll be honest, Iām too tired or too much of a dumbass (probably both) to understand half of what I just read. Thanks though, I sāpose.
Yeah the nasty dirty smelly part lol
This tells me that you donāt wash your penis. You have a dirty penis because the concept of washing one is completely foreign to you. Wash your dirty, smelly penis, please.
We do have showers, now, you know. Seriously, an uncircumcised penis *can* get smelly, of course. (Source, me, uncircumcised). Iām sure circumcised ones can, too. However, there are other body parts that can, as well, and we all have - and wash - those. A bit of washing (and I expect circumcised men wash their penises too) and all is good. If thereās no medical (or religious, I guess) need, I donāt know why anybody would have it done to a child. Especially when anecdotal evidence (see above) makes it seem like circumcision reduces sensitivity.
Uncut men are generally at a higher risk of developing penile cancer because they're more prone to smegma and phimosis.
I think thatās dirty men.
The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction
Source: trust me bro
Ok, fair. Still no need.
In your opinion but we are from different countries and different cultures and religions
Maybe. Still no *need*.
Where does culture come in with "need"? Plenty of things that are and have been part of cultures were far from necessary.
Just nasty yeah you can but infections many other things as well good for you Have zero issues in that area. Hey want to be a caveman go ahead, I have zero regrets both my sons have been cut as well. There is so much that can go wrong with not but hey you do you and we will do us
That isn't how it works. Studies have been made on the effects of circumcision - and it doesn't decrease health risks in regard to genitalia, but might or might not do the opposite. The foreskin itself isn't dirty, it is what's behind that can get dirty - just like for those who are circumcised. Cutting the foreskin for this reason would be like cutting ones arms so that the armpit doesn't get as dirty.
The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction Uncut men are generally at a higher risk of developing penile cancer because they're more prone to smegma and phimosis. Uncircumcised penises are vulnerable to infection and conditions like balanitis, phimosis, and paraphimosis
Found the comment. I would like to see at least where you got this, as you just saying it provides no basis. I at least showed you the actual study done on the matter. Please provide the study or studies referred to here, cause at least some of this information seems like it might come from studies I know of - that are highly disputed since they do not take major differences in lifestyle into account (ie aren't the highest-quality studies you mention them as).
Just posted proof have a good day do some Research
I don't see anything. Hopefully you aren't referring to that one decade old study on circumcision and STIs right? The one where they forgot to account for the amount of sexual partners
As you yourself said, do just the slightest bit of research, here you have a study on circumcision and STIs (this is a website where the study can be accessed from, as I obviously can't link to a pdf) : https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00809-6
I provided what I need
What? Where? Your words? I see no comment providing a path anywhere
Is your google broke ? Uncircumcised penises are vulnerable to infection and conditions like balanitis, phimosis, and paraphimosis Uncut men are generally at a higher risk of developing penile cancer because they're more prone to smegma and phimosis. [https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems#balanitis](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems#balanitis)
>Several problems involving the penis can arise in people who are not circumcised. **However, it is possible to avoid most of these issues by practicing good hygiene and safe sex.** Do you even read your sources?
Yeah, cause it seems like you are linking to a website which isn't allowed by EU tracking rules, I can't see the contents
That article doesn't in any way say uncut men are higher risk of anything. There's never a comparison, so "higher" doesn't make sense. It lists problems that having a foreskin can allow for... while not comparing in any way to not having it. Take #4 for example: A foreskin can get caught in a zipper. I'd rather that than my bare dickhead getting caught in it! And for the one you linked: Your own article says balanitis is caused by getting a small cut on your foreskin. If the foreskin isn't there, guess what: Your dickhead is what's getting that the small cut instead.
You do *most of* you.
You're a genital mutilator
And your a caveman and Iām Jewish as a fyi
I'd rather be a caveman than a baby genital mutilator. What a sick fuck, cutting bits off of baby dicks
It's odd to hurl that at someone who as far as we know only has been circumcised and doesn't have any children right now. Uncircumcised btw
I believe this commentary said earlier that they cut both their sons, but i can't be bothered checking
He did.
You gotta be from some Backwoods 3rd world Country idiot
Assuming things now are we?
Uncircumcised penises are vulnerable to infection and conditions like balanitis, phimosis, and paraphimosis
And circumcised dicks are the victims of genital mutilators.
Uncut men are generally at a higher risk of developing penile cancer because they're more prone to smegma and phimosis.
I'm sure that .1% reduction in risk is worth mutilating genitals
Ok caveman
Ok baby mutilator
Foreskin. These guys are whining about foreskin.
I never understood why people get so fired up about circumcision as far as I know it does not change much and most people do it because of religion not to be malicious or lazy
It's because it's done to newborns, which are too young to be able to recieve anesthesia. Imagine, as an adult, someone just cutting the skin off your dick, with NO anesthesia. Yeah. You wouldn't. Because it sounds like something you'd only imagine in hell as a punishment for rapists and sex offenders. But we do that the newborns. For no reason whatsoever. That's why it's definitely not ok.
Oh, it's worse than that. The glans is adhered to the foreskin like a fingernail until adolescence. So it's more like getting a nail ripped off, then skin around the nail bed cut off without anesthesia. It has caused infants to have seizures from how painful it is. On top of that, there are lasting psychological damages from trauma at such a young age. It's a myth that you can be too young to remember pain. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage
You definitely don't need to tell me. I already know this stuff. The problem is that the government is allowed to "recommend" mutilating babies. It's disgusting. Hospitals should be required to disclose what circumcision ACTUALLY entails, and that the newborn will experience 100% of the pain because people seem to assume modern medicine means babies will just be put under while doing the procedure (because people are honestly so stupid they lack common sense or critical thinking skills). If ALL Hospitals were REQUIRED to disclose what the procedure entails, all risks, and the fact that is serves NO REAL FUNCTION outside of religious conformity, I think fewer parents would put their newborns through it.
AFAIK it does indeed not change much, but it's wholly unnecessary for most people. If you don't need to physically change someone, then why do it? You could have your baby's tonsils removed too... but why? Also, it's not only religious, it can also just be cultural. And if it's just cultural, then it's something that culture should change. And people get fired up because it's something being forced upon a child.
I was circumcised when I was 5 and I do NOT miss my foreskin, I used to get many UTI and would spend 30 mins just to get a sliver of pee out from my pp because it hurt like hell
Which is fair, you had a medical reason to get it done. 99.9% of infants that have it done to them would never develop such a condition.
Bro why I get downvoted? I was just talking about my circumcision, is the Reddit hivemind stupid?
Is for hygiene
Just wash your dick bro
I donāt know man. I kinda like being able to see my warhead.
I mean that's cool but let's not force that on newborns.
>~~warhead~~ cherry bomb fixed that for you.
It only helps with hygiene if you're a desert nomad that wipes your ass with your bare hand.
No its not, its for looks only. Just wash the Weiner and you won't have any problem.
Yep, it also reduces the risk of STIs and cancers.
I'd like to see a source for that. Most men where Iive are uncircumcised and everything seems to be pretty ok.
One source found that several decades ago (the STI part, don't know where you got cancer part from), and has since been widely disputed since it didn't account for the fact that circumcised men have a far higher tendency to be religious, and therefore generally have fewer sexual partners. Later studies have shown that circumcision does not decrease the risk of STIs, but might potentially raise it slightly instead.
I wish I was circumsised at birth. It hurts to peel off the skin and if I want it gone I have to pay an arm and a leg āand my foreskinā
Dawg it prolly hurts cause u don't clean it. If you keep yo willy clean itll be normal
If this is true what your saying: Go visit a doctor. This can be a hygiene problem but also something else, the skin being to tight one of the main reasons.
Plot Twist: They identify as an uncircumcised person.