Circumcision, Why do it? Whats the reason.?

The benefits of having part of your penis cut off are contrived and a matter of opinion. The benefits of a natural penis with all of its parts are real and not a matter of opinion. The nerves blood vessels and protective and sexual mechanisms and pleasure of a natural penis are FACT.

The foreskin is not just skin and does not just protect the glans(head). This surgery takes away the main male pleasure zones with over 20000 fine touch and stretch nerve endings amputated. The stretch pleasure sensation goes away. The foreskin has several parts including the ridgid band that is great for ones pleasure (that is why nutters like Kellogg wanted to chop em off, to curtail masturbastion), and the ridged band directly contacts the vagina for very great pleasure all around. The foreskin does not make men do it too soon and instead gives pleasure and feedback to help time orgasm with the partner.

Also the ALLEGED lowering of HIV risk to the man (male circumcision raises the risk of HIV to the female partner) change is minimal (3.2% to 1.8% risk) and not observed outside Africa. It may be linked to how often one showers or be non-existent as the cut men did not have sex during a large part of the study and were told to use condoms. A condom is still needed for unsafe sex and circumcision raises the risk of women catching HIV (in the same Africa study). However female circumcision lowers a woman’s risk of HIV. Any women want to be circumcised to reduce the HIV problem?

For unsafe sex, a condom is always needed. Why not let it feel as good as it can.

BTW, army forced circumcision is such and ABUSE. Stop the sexual mutilation of baby boys.

B-B FYI, premature ejaculation is more of a problem for the circumcised male. Some cut guys have PE at a young age as circ scar sends wrong signals to the brain. Natural guys have more control. Sensation is not = to orgasm. More sensation is during sex is good.

Really there is no good reason for circumcision if you keep your junk clean you will not have a problem. As for the disease factor it has not been proven that circumcision reduces the chance of getting an STD or HIV. As for the infections the only thing it has been proven to reduce is the chance of urinary tract infections in infants and who has ever heard of a urinary tract infection in an infant. There really is no good reason to circumcise unless you like loosing nerve endings cause that is all getting a circumcision will cause you to loose a whole bunch of nerve endings which means less sensation especially if you are thinking of having this done as an adult. Hope this helps.

People used to think (and some uneducated people still think) that circumcision protects against infections or disease and it doesn't.
We have running water and soap here in America. There is no need for circumcision.

And circumcision males lovemaking LESS enjoyable since it removes 66% of the nerve endings in the penis and exsposes the head to rub against clothing all day every day for yeears and years making the had much less sensitive.

-Connor

What lakemr69 says. There is no good reason for the circumcision of a normal healthy male. NOT ONE. In Europe and the rest of the civilized world circumcision is seen, for what it certainly is, as a hideous, barbaric ritual mutilation--and, significantly, virtually no doctors in Europe will perform the procedure. The REAL reasons for its popularity in America are twofold: it increases obstetric fees, and a circumcised penis is easier for a squeamish American mother to wash. If I sound bitter, it's because I am.

It makes all sexual activities less enjoyable, by quite a lot apparently. People in America used to do it because they thought you had less chance of catching aids..

There is no proven benefit that circumcision conveys. Pro-circumcision activists tend to tout a lot of very questionable studies done on African males to support circumcision in the US.

As for lovemaking, circumcision makes it less enjoyable for both the man and the woman. The circumcised male has between 50% and 75% less sensation in his penis than an uncircumcised man has. For the woman, the circumcised penis can cause chafing and discomfort that the foreskin is designed to prevent.

In terms of disease, there are no definitive studies that have shown circumcision to prevent or mitigate any disease or infection.

In response to Roxy's answer, this whole idea that an uncircumcised penis is smelly, and that boys can't keep clean unless they're circumcised, is nonsense. To keep a penis clean you have to rinse it with water. That's it. The penis is self-cleaning until puberty, and even after puberty all it requires - in fact the MOST a man should do - is retract the foreskin and rinse it clean. That way the healthy bacteria are left to do their thing - just as it is for a woman's vagina (which by the way contains much more bacteria - and so tends to be more smelly - than a guy's penis - and no one suggests that women should get circumcised for the sake of cleanliness).

Yes it minimizes urinary tract infections in men and women. Especially yeast related ones. A unkempt uncut man is an incubator for lots of things. Older persons with diabetes also have some issues with sores that will not heal inside a foreskin. That is just a few of the reasons to circumcise a male child.

I was done as a baby because it was considered 'healthy' and a family thing not religious. It certainly did not affect my feeling or sensation in any way. In fact I now wonder if it did the opposite, i.e. make me become oversensitive because I was very prone to premature ejaculation and masturbated alot.
I have read some doctors do believe it could give you more protection from catching venereal disease (inc HIV, herpes etc). Some of my friends have had to have it done when they were adults because the foreskin was too tight.
Although I was not given a choice I have no regrets whatsoever.

Reason For Circumcision

The practice of circumcision is an ancient custom, it is older than the Jewish Faith, so that is not it's unique origin. The ancient reasons are many and not scientific. For English speaking cultures in the 1800s, doctors were looking for ways to control sexual appetites and masterbation by weakening/damaging the sexual organs. Modern evaluation of risk vs benefit , statistical data did not show medical benefits for routine circumcision so the UK dropped it from their national health system coverage in the 1940s. The UK was also the place of origin for circumcision of English speaking cultures. Other European cultures never sought a way to control sex by cutting sexual organs, the majority of the world didn't have the same fear of normal sexuality as the Victorians, and never saw any medical/scientific reasons to justify routine circumcision.