Cut or Uncut?

[Geminize]

@Lalo Thanks for the considered response. I need to say that I am by no means a proponent of circumcision. I AM a proponent of science. Fuck the Old Testament Judaic laws: their relevance passed over a thousand years ago. My own son is intact (a term I prefer to 'uncut'), by my choice. I agree that the practice is barbaric, and fortunately it is declining in the US.

As a side note, circumcision rates in the US vary widely: 87% in West Virginia and 12% in Nevada. (I haven't done a "red state/blue state" comparison, but I have a hypothesis.) I'm soooo glad I live on the west coast!

[cardiganwearer]

This recent study, which appears to be of high quality, supports the idea that circumcision reduces the transmission rate of HIV and other STD's. http://mbio.asm.org/content/4/2/e00076-13.full

The new info from this study is that they may have identified how circumcision reduces transmission -- by causing changes to the bacterial fauna on the penis. One of the study's authors notes in the conclusion that this information could lead to new ways to reduce HIV transmission, by altering bacterial fauna without circumcision.

I have no doubt that there have been sloppy studies done and used by people with an agenda. The authors of this study, however, don't seem to be promoting circumcision.

From their abstract

The reduction in anaerobes may partly account for the effects of circumcision on reduced HIV acquisition.

and

The bacterial changes identified in this study may play an important role in the HIV risk reduction conferred by male circumcision. Decreasing the load of specific anaerobes could reduce HIV target cell recruitment to the foreskin.

A lot of could piled upon maybes there.

They also go with the usual

Male circumcision (MC) reduces the risk of HIV acquisition in men by 50 to 60%

ignoring the way that relates to actual incidence (see my post above) and ignoring the fact that condoms offer better protection for men and women without surgical intervention.

It's another paper by American authors from a culture where circumcision is pretty well the cultural norm. It may be declining now but when these authors were in medical school it was much more widespread. It just reads to me as another attempt to justify promoting circumcision in other cultures because they're losing the battle at home.

[cheerypie]

i don't know if it's true but most men in the USA have theirs cut
maybe there are uncut ones, well might they be immigrants

[ardus]

As I have already expressed my opinion on the sexiness of cut vs uncut I will focus just on my opinion on the subject.

To establish baseline, I am cut, and I hate the fact that my parents took that choice away from me.

I absolutely, and totally am against infant circumcision, unless there is a medically necessary reason for it. Taking a part of a person's body when they are a defenseless infant is morally reprehensible.

If your religion espouses that philosophy, I.E. Jewish, I understand it, but I would counsel why not let that person choose for himself.

It's not the practice I abhor, it's the forcing it on babies who are hours old and can't defend themselves.

Richard

[thegrungerpunk]

I find it incredibly silly that somebody judge your penis and hygiene because you're cut or uncut... I think as long as you're clean then it shouldn't be a problem about that. It shouldn't even be discussed....
Anyway, I don't have any preference on that matter. I'm perfectly fine with both

[Ekwarph]

@Geminize : Circumcision = barbarity?
Well, I never felt traumatized by the fact of being traumatized, it's a religious tradition and a way of transmitting that family "thing". Even if I'm not a believer, if one day I have children, I would like them to get circumcised because it's something which reminds them from where they come and I think it's important.
Saying you're mutilated because you're cut and didn't choose it is a bit abusive cause concretely it changes abolutly nothing, for me it's a whim.

[Johnny]

@ Geminize There are weaknesses to the aforementioned study. First and foremost was the fact that the study was completed in Uganda. There are cultural dynamics at work which could also affect the results of the study and which are dramatically absent from the final report. Ugandan women are much more likely to participate in IVP- Intravaginal practices. These include applying herbs, water, soap and other mixtures into the vagina. These practices have also been linked to an increased risk of HIV transmission. There is not a single mention of this in the reported study. Also, Ugandan men, unlike uncircumcised men in more developed parts of the world, are much less likely to engage in proper penile hygiene and have less access to filtered water sources and soap. So the broad-sweeping generalizations regarding anaerobic bacterial loads really have no merit when one is addressing the specific situation of industrialized nations.

Having said that, Old Testament Judaic laws were often associated with a real threat to health and welfare. For example, eating pork or other "unclean" meats might have developed from poor cooking practices associated with the nomadic life. In the same way, living in dry arid regions does not lend itself to keeping a penis clean when a foreskin is involved. For the time and the place, those things made sense. As far as studies in today's western society, however, there doesn't appear to be any conclusive scientific evidence either way, supporting circumcision or not. The study above basically boils down to "look, we found increased bacterial growth in a warm, moist, dark place"- hardly earth-shattering news really.

As far as I am concerned, the fact that we tolerate this barbaric practice being performed on children is obscene. In my opinion, no child should be circumcised without their consent, barring an individual's religious beliefs. As a society, would we allow a practice of removing female children's labia at birth? I would hope not! Yet what we do to boys has become so commonplace that we don't even question the morality of it. Personally, I think that that is disgusting. At the very least, men should be given the choice when they are old enough to make that choice. I am happily uncircumcised and if I ever had a son, he would be too.

I find it quite scary that you can talk so strongly against circumising boys but seem to just drop in that "its fine if for religious reasons"!
Is this because you are religious? As you are arguing against yourself here as you say "become so commonplace that we don't even question the morality of it." Surely you have just done what you seem to be arguing against by giving religion a free hand to do whatever they wish under the name of religion.

[chrisconker]

im uncut...i like em both..i live in the usa..so cut is more common

[Kiid]

Natural. I don'r know why you'd want to have your weeny chopped. Doesn't sound like a good time to me u.u

[VNight2014]

Does it really matter? Both offer good experiences!