Is circumcision necessary ?!
Question: i heard tt u get infections if oen hasnt had circumcision ? is it true ? plz help
Answers: i heard tt u get infections if oen hasnt had circumcision ? is it true ? plz help
No of course it's not necessary. It's just a rumour pro-circumcision say - the lame excuse of "infections" if you don't get it done. I'm not going to lie. The foreskin is a body part and like any body part it can get infected (usually only if you have poor hygiene, and usually easily treated with antibiotics). But that's no reason to remove the foreskin before you even get an infection. And you can get infections even after you have been circumcised, not to mention infections *from* the circumcision (it's a surgical wound).
No who said that but in some religion they do it..............don't worry nothing will happen if you don't do it also.......
nah i heard u just need 2 keep it clean an it wuld be fine. my friend is uncircumcized an he just cleans it realy good after he pees an stuff an when hes in the shower. i wish i wasnt circumsized. i think it wuld be better. so ur cool.
No it isn't necessary to be circumcised. It isn't true that you will get infections just because you are not cut as long as your personal hygiene is good. Keep your penis clean and always be safe when having sex by wearing a condom and you will be fine...
No not at all as long as your clean , lots of doctors do not do it any more they say it doesnt need to be performed
Circumcision is not necessary. By leaving a boy uncircumcised, if he's not satisfied with it he can always get cut and end up satisfied in the end. One survey found that about half of circumcised guys would have preferred to had made the decision themselves:
http://www.jackinworld.com/qow/q15.html
Circumcision has become less common. Circumcision rates were as high as 90% back in the 1960s and 1970s (that's partly why today's adults are so... brainwashed, I supposed you could say, about thinking that circumcision is better) but they have fallen to as low as 14% in some states. Here are the statistics:
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/U...
The USA is the last developed nation doing it to a large number of newborns without religious or medical needs. (Europeans, Latin Americans, Japanese, and most Australians, Canadians, and Asians don't circumcise):
http://www.circumstitions.com/Maps.html
Why?
There's pain involved, often why doctors don't want you in the room when it's done:
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9712/23/circum...
http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/1f21e.htm
(you can search online for a circumcision video, too)
In a medical study, it was found that females are more likely to hit orgasm with an uncircumcised man:
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/...
The lubricated foreskin (on the inside... like your eyelids) slides up and down during sex and masturbation to stimulate the head (which is why you don't hear of uncircumcised guys needing lube to masturbate).
http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/
Studies have found that circumcision reduces sensitivity (this article also mentions how it has lost popularity in the USA in recent times):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2855...
And despite being more sensitive, uncircumcised guys still last in the same six minute range (average) that circumcised guys do:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs...
Circumcision makes masturbation more difficult:
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs...
Which makes sense, that's how circumcision was promoted in the USA:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/health/...
Increases erectile dysfunction rates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez...
If too much skin is removed in circumcision, it can make the penis smaller since the penis needs some skin to expand during an erection:
http://drgreene.org/body.cfm?id=21&actio...
http://www.altermd.com/Penis%20and%20Scr...
Circumcision does not completely stop penile cancer. The American Cancer Society has already confirmed the myth that circumcision = no cancer.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/conten...
If circumcision did stop penile cancer, then penile cancer would not be more common in the USA (most circumcised adults) than in some European nations, where circumcision is not practiced other than for medical/religious reasons.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Cancer.htm...
And a new study found that circumcision does not reduce your chances to get HIV/AIDS. Unlike other studies, this one was done in a developed nation; the USA.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22096758/
The American Pediatric Association officialy declared more than 20 years ago that there are no benefits whatsoever to this procedure.
You do know that some american believe that the Earth is 6000 years old and that men and dinosaurs roamed the Earth together like in the Flintstones. So it's not surprising that some are not aware of what Doctors from APA have to say.
It's the paradox showing that you can have retarded people in the most advanced countries.....
Circumcision is only strictly "necessary" if medical conditions make it so, or when the foreskin cannot be freely and fully retracted for cleaning and for sex. However it is always desirable to be circumcised. Circumcised men enjoy better hygiene, with complete freedom from smegma accumulation and odour, improved health, with less occurrence of infection and disease, improved comfort, more attractive appearance to women, greater self-esteem and FAR FAR better sexual sensation during intercourse for both themselves and their female partner(s). Also most mature experienced women who have tried both circumcised men and uncuts and have learned the sexual and hygiene benefits that come from male circumcision, usually much prefer a circumcised man as a sexual partner. There are NO disadvantages to being circumcised and the anti-circumcision people here who tell you otherwise should be ignored - they are either unfortunate uncuts (uncircumcised boys and men) or young, inexperienced, "politically correct" girls and none of them are in a position to know how much better it is to be circumcised.
not at all.
Nonsense.
About 85% of the men in this world have foreskins, and very, very few of them have ever had a problem with infections there.
The only medical indications for circumcision are frostbite, gangrene or cancer on the foreskin itself. These are all extremely rare. A tight foreskin can be easily stretched in less time than a circumcision takes to heal.
Circumcision is a cure in search of an ailment. It has been justified by saying it prevents masturbation and infidelity, as well as a myriad of other unrelated conditions. Not one of the arguments used to justify this procedure are valid. Currently the arguments are mostly that it's more hygienic -- NOT TRUE, The foreskin needs to be washed like any other body part -- not difficult. And it protects the glans from all kinds of lint and filth that it might otherwise be exposed to. All the pro-circ justifications are MYTHS. Don't fall for them! If they were true, would so many men (85%, remember) keep their foreskins? (And many of the 15% who are cut were cut because it is a religious rite in Islam and Judaism to circumcise babies, not because they wanted to be.)
First, I have to say that one of your answerers has lied to you horribly. The AAP has NEVER said that there are no benefits to circumcision. They actually say that circumcision has indeed many medical benefits. However, because of the rarity of the conditions it prevents and because they consider the risks and benefits to be very balanced, they dont' recomment ROUTINE circumcisions for all newborn babies. They claim it should be the parents' choice.
So, people, really. DOn't lie to this guy through your teeth. I know anti-circs love paraphrasing to fit their agends, but at least be discreet.
Here's a summary on the benefits of circumcision:
* Urinary tract infections (UTIs): uncircumcised boys and men