You do realize circumcision is not legal and proxy consent is not obtainable, right? A doctor should know that intact genitals can more easily kill HIV/AIDS and provide other immune protections. My husband's parents and doctors had no right to ruin our sex life either. Perhaps this advertisement for circumcision was placed as an article so that people can make money off the sale of foreskins? At any rate, doing surgery on a baby with no or little pain killer is unethical and illegal.
Please tell me the amount of sexual functions and sensations that are lost with male genital mutilation [male circumcision] AND female genital mutilation [female circumcision] so we can accurately compare and contrast them. As someone who is biased towards circumcising boys, you will more likely than naught have no idea the sexual ramifications and adverse side affects on the total sexuality and functionality of the penis of the man. I am in no way advocating genital mutilation of either gender, or of intersex infants, I want it all to stop. However, to sit here and say that genital mutilation of a boy isn't comparable with that of girls, is completely ignorant and sexist. Tell the men who feel violated and raped and mutilated that they are wrong and should get over it, while telling the women who are happy that they are circumcised that they are mutilated and violated and raped, and see how happy they will be with you. It is a double standard, and HIGHLY sexist to belittle men, OR encourage parents to circumcise their sons and take that right away when you know full well that teens and adult males are statistically unlikely to choose it for themselves. Why? It's painful and they know the importance of all the parts of their genitals.
Williamof GA12:52PM April 28, 2013
you should be scared to do it. your kid might grow up like me and exact some "revenge"
anonof FL12:04AM September 24, 2012
If you think a teenage boy won't want to be circumcised, why would you force this on him when he's a baby?
Many men didn't want to be cut, but they had no choice. They feel robbed.
Foreskin is necessary for *normal* functioning of the penis. It's not a parent's choice whether the baby gets to keep this important organ. There is no medically valid reason to (painfully) amputate a baby's genitals.
Marisaof PA9:46AM September 02, 2012
There's a lot wrong with this article (it is basically just myth after myth) but I'll pick on this one:
"Experiences no discomfort"???? I've had local anesthesia injected into my private parts (repairing a small tear after giving birth). The injection ain't painless and neither were the stitches. It hurt a lot (I'm saying this as someone who gave birth twice without any drugs). And I was just having 2 or 3 stitches, not having anything removed.
Hannahof WA3:24PM February 29, 2012
Do you believe in God? I don't. Either way, if you do believe in God, and trust him, then why is it okay to remove something that he gave us from our GENITALS?
Non-believers: You were born with it, leave it on, and actually wash it. It's the people who already have bad hygiene that have problems. You know... it's like saying "oh, you have bad breath, let's rip out your tongue." Dramatic, yes, but it's the same idea.
foreskinless and sadof SC1:02PM October 08, 2011
Evidence indicating adult protection against cervical and penile cancer and HIV does not warrant infant circumcision. The evidence could warrant circumcision for sexually promiscuous adults.
Non-medical circumcision is cultural mutilation.
john b11:50AM August 01, 2011
Is God getting his kicks watching male boys being mutilated. Why did he give boys a foreskin in the first place?
Maybe male genitals should be like the animals. A penis inside a sheath... no foreskin. Like your dog... or horse.
Jason12:41AM June 05, 2011
I am in despair that we even need to have this discussion in America. Women have fought long and hard for the right to vote, for equal pay, for the right to make reproductive choices, and yet mothers allow their infant boys to be taken from the breast just hours after birth to have a piece of skin surgically removed from their genitals. Most don't even understand WHY this is being done--it's just done... Just as women have been taught that they are equal to men and should demand equal rights we should demand the same civil rights for our baby boys. If a man wants to be circumcised later in life then let him. But that is a choice he should be able to make...and I would be willing to bet my hard-earned paycheck (a paycheck I make as a woman whose grandmother fought for my right to vote and work outside of the home) that circumcision would die out in this country within 50 years.
Catherineof MT10:24AM May 07, 2011
It has been widely printed that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection by 50-60%, but no one prints 50% of what. The actual difference in the African study in which the general population has an infection rate of some 15-20% is a little less than 1% between the circumcised group and the uncircumcised group after almost two years of exposure in this group. So if the circumcised group has a 1.6% infection rate and the uncircumcised group has a 2.3% infection rate then 0.9% over the 1.6% is about a 56% reduction. But the real difference if you believe the African studies at all is still less than 1% in the two groups. Note that in excess of $80,000,000 that is 80 million dollars U.S. were on the table if circumcision is proven effective, if not effective then no money.. That may have had some effect on the outcome of the study, YOU THINK????
Reader Comments
Back to article
Mel of CA 1:03PM April 28, 2013
William of GA 12:52PM April 28, 2013
anon of FL 12:04AM September 24, 2012
Marisa of PA 9:46AM September 02, 2012
Hannah of WA 3:24PM February 29, 2012
foreskinless and sad of SC 1:02PM October 08, 2011
john b 11:50AM August 01, 2011
Jason 12:41AM June 05, 2011
Catherine of MT 10:24AM May 07, 2011
Steven Guillory M.D. of LA 6:50PM March 31, 2011