Is circumsizing your penis nessesary?!

Is circumsizing your penis nessesary?

and what are the benifits from it?
pros and cons??

No it's a mutilation that some people mistakenly believe is a good thing to do but all medical authorities now admit is totally unnecessary.

Using surgery to mutilate the genitals instead of washing in a modern western society makes no sense. Normal intact male genitals are, if anything, easier to wash than female ones and the same substance, smegma collects in the folds of both sorts.

Since its introduction into the west as an anti-masturbation measure in the 19th century, circumcision proponents have trotted out endlessly changing justifications for the procedure, as earlier ones are disproved. Most of these proposed reasons have later been proved to be based on flawed studies but the myths continue. Even if the claims for benefit were accepted the level of any protection from disease is so low as to be easily outweighed by the risks involved in the surgery. A few babies even die each year from circumcision complications and some lose their penis from necrotic infection. More common complications of infant circumcision, like skin bridges or too much skin removed, do not show up until much later in life. So the statistics do not include them in the complication rate. (A penis with a skin bridge is much harder to clean and causes major sexual difficulties.) However even on these artificially lowered statistics all the major medical authorities in the world now say that these risks outweigh the dubious benefits of routine infant circumcision.

Circumcision removes over half the skin of the penis (about 15 square inches or 40 square centimetres, in an adult) and it's not just simple skin. It's packed with nerve endings, special anatomical features like the ridged band and has a unique elastic gliding action, allowing it to slide on itself and act like lube. This action is what most males use to masturbate with except those who are cut so tightly that they have to use lube or just rub it dry. Of course the intact male has the option to use lube too if he wants to. During intercourse it acts like lube on entry and may act as a dam, preventing lubricating secretions escaping from the vagina. In one study women reported that sex with an intact partner was gentler and more satisfying since he doesn't have to thrust as hard to feel enough stimulation. Removing the foreskin turns the surface of the glans from an inner mucosal membrane to outside skin. Newly circumcised adults usually go through some weeks of intense discomfort as the glans is constantly exposed to rubbing on clothing, until it develops a thicker keratin layer and becomes less sensitive. A new study has shown real differences in fine touch sensitivity between circumcised and intact penises and that the most sensitive parts of the intact penis are those that would be removed by circumcision.

A few intact males have problems with tight foreskin but this is only a tiny proportion of intact males. The condition can now be almost always treated with simple stretching exercises, sometimes in combination with a steroid cream that speeds up the process. However doctors who do not value the preservation of the foreskin often still trot out circumcision as a first-option treatment in the US and even some other countries.

I myself am circumcised. I have hated it ever since as a 12 year old I saw a mate masturbating with a foreskin and realised a little of what I had lost. Many men resent being circumcised, some so much that they stretch to try and regain some of their lost foreskin's function. They can never recover all the complex anatomy and lost nerve endings though. Infant circumcision is a violation of a man's right to intact genitals and I will never forgive my parents and the medical profession for doing it to me.