To cut or not to cut: More parents are saying no to circumcision

Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2013-11-02 00:38

Article here. Excerpt:

'Despite health benefits, routine circumcision in newborn males is on the decline in the U.S.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, 79 percent of American men report being circumcised. Many parents of boys are opting out of the age-old tradition despite a recent study from the University of Illinois-Chicago that found a link between male circumcision and a decreased risk of HIV contraction.
...
Van Note and her fiancé, Grant Hammond, are part of a new generation of parents who don’t see a circumcision as a necessity; a movement helped along by educational programs put forth by the many ‘pro-intact’ advocacy groups currently popping up around the country.

“I guess it’s kind of funny to have to advocate for people to be allowed to keep body parts they’re born with, but that’s what we do,” said Georganne Chapin, the executive director of Intact America, an organization dedicated to ending the practice of routine circumcision in the United States.
...
“Even if I believed these studies, they don’t justify removing healthy, normal tissue from baby boys – Little babies are not having sex. Little babies are not at risk for sexually transmitted diseases like HIV. This should be a man’s choice to have that surgery on himself.”
...
“We don’t go removing other body parts from babies to reduce their risk of diseases,” said Chapin. “We could reduce the risk of skin cancer by removing people’s noses and giving them a prosthesis, we could reduce dental problems by removing people’s teeth and giving them false teeth – We don’t do that. It’s unethical. I’m not impressed by any medical claim that serves as a way of justifying an abhorrent unethical practice.”
...
“If you’re worried about STDs you should just teach your kid safe sex, don’t just cut his penis skin off!”''

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Yep, starts off not very promising... but gets better. :)

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2013-11-02 00:41

I like having sex with my wife. I also like masturbating. And I love my wife because the only thing she says to me during the night (when I do wake her up with a shaking bed) is "hurry up with that, I have to get to sleep."

The only times I do not like to masturbate is when I am raw.

And at those times, I ask my wife for more sex because sex is not only fun but easier on the skin of a circumcised penis. But she does get tired and she is good to me so I understand.

But this got me to thinking recently...

I wonder if there has ever been a correlation between a country's rape and circumcision rates. I have this nagging feeling that if men are left intact and able to enjoy their bodies without the need of lubrication (oils or vaginas), then the rape rate might also go down.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by bronxman on Sat, 2013-11-02 08:50

I've heard some claim that a correlation exists between the two, but personally I have to reject the claim. The reason being that domestic and sexual violence tends to be gender symmetric here in North America (despite what fembots will tell you). Since an overwhelming majority of girls are not circumcised in North America, I don't have any reason to believe that a link exists between the two.

You make an interesting point about how it is harder to achieve orgasm as a circumcised man just by masturbation though. But ultimately, it would vary from man to man. Being a victim of circumcision myself, I would never dream of violating someone else.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Sun, 2013-11-03 07:34