re: What is the latest OT sentiment on circumcision for infant male children?

quote:

---

I'm aware of the lack of iron-clad proof. The evidence isn't fantastic, but it makes conceptual sense. The statement "USA has the highest rates of circumsision and the highest rates of HIV" also is not perfectly sound.

There are risks of transmission to an unprotected penis, regardless of whether it's circumcised or not. Mucosal surfaces make HIV transmission more likely. The fore skin creates a near-mucosal like surface with a different cellular makeup than that on the uncircumcised male, thus the concept makes sense.

How clinically relevant this is remains to be seen because of the high likelihood of repeat exposures in the group who is exposed even once with a lack of being able to design a study capable of proving this. You would basically need to take a group of uncircumcised males and circumcised males, expose them, intentionally, to HIV (or whichever STD we are talking about), re-test, re-expose until everyone becomes positive and see if the number of exposures prior to becoming positive is different among the groups.


I wrote and deleted "theoretical risk reduction for STDs including HIV" but figured it looked better the other way and that I would explain that the risk reduction is theoretical with poor/inconclusive clinical data to represent the claim.

---

Thank you for replying in a respectful and intelligent manner. Also, I agree with your sentiment about the general shortcomings of various studies related to the subject.

Many individuals on here espouse the belief that circumcision is right simply because non-circumcision will supposedly lead to social ostracization.

I have no problem with people who are indeed circumcised. I don't necessarily agree with the decision made by their parents, but I will never directly criticize or mock someone who has undergone such a medical procedure.

What I have a problem with is people belittling individuals who were not circumcised as infants, a decision which was beyond their control. I have a problem with these same people engaging in this widespread but erroneous rhetoric related to theoretical medical benefits of the procedure.

I really is the most ridiculous thing for people to be concerned with. Some of you seem to view it as child abuse akin to the parental decision of avoiding child vaccinations. For the record, I am pro-vaccination.

Same here. Too bad the insecure 17yos on here won't stop knee jerking long enough to realize maybe they've been lied to.

quote:

---

Yeah, I think they took a couple inches mine too. I feel your pain.

---

My biggest complaint is the lack of feels.

quote:

---

Circumcision is supposed to help mitigate that?

---

It mitigates it in the same way it mitigates HIV. By providing less surface area that is ripe for infection (i.e. your interior foreskin). That's oversimplified of course, and HIV contraction isn't a huge concern in the US. But the HPV infection rate in this country is absolutely nuts, and it's proven that HPV is responsible for about 1/3rd of oral/throat cancers and an even higher percentage of cervical cancers. And I've seen way too many of the former to believe a little snip-snip poses a greater risk than a tumor.

quote:

---

That's oversimplified of course. The HPV infection rate in this country is absolutely nuts, and it's proven that HPV is responsible for about 1/3rd of oral/throat cancers and an even higher percentage of cervical cancers

---

Didn't seem to help me at all. Thank goodness for duct tape, although that doesn't help the probable mass of warts lining my esophagus.

quote:

---

It does not say otherwise. The statement basically reads that reducing phimosis and smegma reduce the rates of penile cancer. Both circumcision and hygiene are effective ways of reducing both smegma and phimosis. Yes, evidence points to hygiene being roughly as effective as circumcision for reduction in rates of penile cancer. that is one reason why it is still basically up to the parents rather than pushed for/against by any major organization.

---

But that is my point. Some posters are acting as though an uncircumcised male is vulnerable to a multitude of hygienic ailments and STDs and has no means of mitigating these risk factors.

Why do so many parents consent to the genital mutilation and bodily disfigurement of their male child rather than instill a proper sense of hygiene?

That would be like tattooing a child at a young age. The child cannot provide consent for the procedure and does not possess the knowledge or awareness to determine whether or not they are for or against it.

quote:

---

It'd be nice to climax without having to drill at lightspeed to the point of exhaustion. Don't get me wrong, the lack of sensivity can help with the ladies satisfaction, but goddamn, it'd be nice to have a pump and dump for once in my life.

---

I don't know what its like to be circumcized but for me it can go both ways. its not like you can't control yourself. and at full erection its all pulled back and stretched out to the point you can't even see extra skin

quote:

---

It's like y'all have Stockholm Syndrome for justifying why your dick got cut. Sorry brethren, we got fricked over. Best accept it and not repeat the same mistakes.

---

Thank you.

Again, if an adult male decides that they are not satisfied with the physical appearance of their penis and find that it contributes to hygienic issues or social impairment, then by all means have yourself circumcised.

quote:

---

you fricking coward.

---

Take it down a notch Cad