CIRCUMCISTION: The conspiracy

Cut or un-cut

firstly, I am in no way looking at the religous implications of circumcistion.
Circumcistion for relgious purposes is in no way ment to be questioned by this thread. I am highlighting cultural debates.


Why are over 80% of American baby boys circumcised?

No other country in the world (excluding relgious regions) has such a high rate of circumcistion.

Circumcistion rates in the UK and France hovers around 3%

Circumcistion came into common practice in the mid nineteenth century.

The reason for this was the 'astounding health benifits'.

These health benifits however were not of the kind you might imagine.

Medical practitioners of the time believed that removing the foreskin would make it less likely that men would learn to masterbate! The belief was that masterbation was one of the key contributers to Mental illness, dementia, memory loss and sexual pervistity (homosexuality).

Other minor illness such migranes, asthma and heart palpatations were also linked to the foreskin and circumcistion was offered as a cure!

Mrs Kellogg, the wife of the famous breakfast cereal producer, actually published a health book praising the virtues of circumcistion and its role in promoting healthy mental development.

understandably circumcistion become very popular.

However only the middle and upper classes of the time could offered the luxury of the opparation. So by the early twentieth century circumcistion had become a mark of wealth and breeding. Many poorer families would try and save the money to circumcise sons in order that they would not be excluded from entering a higher class.

At this time Circumcistion rates (amongst those who could afford it) were very high, both in Europe and the USA.

By the mid 20th century over 60% of boys were circumcised.

However the practice soon declined in Europe and became ever more popular in America.

As modern medicine advanced it was revealed that the original medical reasoning behind circumcistion was laughable. Many doctors looked for more evidence of a health benift but non was forthcoming

Still to this day there are many people arguing over 'health' benifits of circumcistion. But the vast majority of experts have revealed that there is absolutly, positivly no difference whatsoever between an un-cut penis and a cut one. The only proven medical health difference is the chance of cancer in the forskin. The chance of getting cancer down there is astronomical, less than one in ten million, but of course if you have no teeth you can't get a cavity.

So if there is no proven medical reason, no greater chance of disease no health benifits, why are so many american men loosing their natural penis, lossing the most erogenous piece of their body?

1. Tradition. Everyone is doing it. Fathers had it done so naturally they want their sons to be like them.

2. The biggest reason however is: The Medical Establishment

Healthcare in Euroupe is public, it is paid for by the government. This means that the health benifits for circumcistion were revealed as false there was no reason continue the oparations.

However Healthcare in America is private and paid for through insurance. That means that every foreskin snipped is another cheque. Circumcistion in Amercia is worth BILLIONS of dollars. Why preach the fact that circumcistion is unnessicary when it is worth so much money to the health care system.

American men are being ROBBED of their right to make an informed desicion. American men are BEING ROBBED of a full and natural penis, by a greedy healthcare INDUSTRY.

Some may still choose a circumcistion, for cultural reasons or a percieved asthetic. But shouldn't you have the choice to experience it the way you were born.

Personally I see male circumcistion (excluding the informed/relgious choice) as mutilation, and no better than the act of female circumcistion carried out by force on many women in some african cultures.

cut or uncut? It should be a choice, not a money making opportunity.

I am failing to find what is educational or media related about this issue of the penis and it being cut or uncut.

Personally, this is not a conspiracy but simply a Judeo-Christian tradition. I found the below linked article quite informative, liberating, and thanking my parents for making such an early decision for me.
Circumcision Facts: Should You Circumcise Your Baby Boy?







seekerof

Very interesting thread to say the least. Being the mom of two boys, I have had to face the decision of whether to have my sons circumcised or not, I chose not.

While deciding what to do, I turned to our culture (men aren't circumcised) asked my doctor and pediatrician and read various opinions....all which lead me to make the decision I did. Circumcision when not a religious mandate is unneccessary and cruel treatment to our infant boys. There is no issue with cleanliness, if a child is shown the proper way to clean himself, so i don't buy the "health benefits" aspect of it.

I do agree with you that in today's American society, circumcision is big business and hence a major factor as to why average Americans go along with trend.

I did it to my son because my husband was also circumcised, it had nothing to do with religion for me or traditions.

None of the males in my family are circumcised.

I just felt it was better and cleaner.

All I know is I am very thankful my parents didnt have me butchered...

The cleanliness argument is a lazzyness argument.. Its no different then washing behind your ears...

This practice is no different then Female Genital Mutilation..

Hum . . . you know my son is nineteen and so far he has never complain about it.

BTW let me ask him right now If he feels butchered

HOOPs hes planing to sue me.

I dont think it should happen, it should be left till the male in question is old enough to make the dissian on his own. As i do not think it is right to do such things to someone else, especialy when it involves something so privert.

This is one of the few times i agree with Coole, as the argument about it being cleaner is just lazyness it takes nothing to give 'it' a wash every morning.

Religion is More the Reason then Medical Politics. (Maybe 50 Years ago, The original poster had a point.)

In America, The Jewish Religion is intertwined With Christianity. Hence our Fabled Judeo/Christian World View. (OR law.)

Most Christians in America. (Though Most would deny It.) Have Jewish Ancestry and Practices. My Family like other's Tried to hide that Fact. Yet still practiced a Secular form Of Circumcisism.

When I Did a Study of My ancestry. I found to my Surprise. That both Sides are predominately Jewish. I have more Yiddish Blood in me, Then anything else.

My Family Like Most American's. Denied their ancestry Yet Practiced a Secular Form of Judaism. (Much like Most American Jew’s Do. BTW.)

I Was Circumcised by a Rabbi, And sprinkled by a Presbyterian Minister. So like Most Americans, My Family practiced a Hodge-podge system of Belief’s. And truly Believed neither Except as Normative Secular Tradition.

Let me clarify something here,

Laziness has nothing to do with the area of the genitals looking clean when the penis is circumcise.

To me is more attractive. Occurs is personal opinion I did it and don't regret it and so far my son have not problems with it.

Neither my husband when his parents chose for him.

I had not idea this thread was going to turn into "againts circumcision bashing thread."

I want my damn pagan foreskin back!



Depriving me of pleasure!? SUCH HERESY!!!!!!!!





and now? How do I get in pron?






I wouldnt desire it for a child I agree with picklewash if they wanna splice it later on in life. that's just uber.

A physiology book that I have mentions that if a male is circumcised, this reduces the possibility of contracting various bacterial infections. It doesn't list any negative aspects, or any other positive ones, but it does mention that the practice remains controversial.

Hmm, One Wants Circumsized men, and another wants to be Mr Holmes.

And if I was a "Fiddler on the Roof".

Oh, nevermind.

(You can regrow Fore Skin by either methods of pulling or Sucking of left over fore skin for a long period of Time.)

I gotta say, I don't miss the old foreskin much.

I imagine if the decision is ever in my court, I'll likely make it based on practical concerns. Does it come free with the delivery? If so, what the Hell, it can't be totally bad if it's free.

Unless it's Hepatitis. And I bet one feels even more ripped-off if one was unlucky enough to pay for it...

...

...

Street walker jokes on a thread about the physiology of the common tool..did I wander into BTS?

Additional random thoughts I've had recently in relation to the topic:

- The procedure is not comparable to the clitorectomies still going on. Circumcision doesn't reduce sexual pleasure in any meaningful way, at least not that I'm aware of, and in comparison it's a much less violent and severe mutilation. It's really more comparable to pierced ears or some other minor adjustment, of the sort we're quite accustomed to seeing (even in very small, non-compliant children), in order to compensate for nature's many errors in judgement.
- Let's not forget aesthetics in our frenzy to abandon the practice on logical grounds. Do you want to be a cheapskate and gift your kid with a spam slug, or do you want to be wise and charitable, facillitating the inheritance of a proper sceptre-shaped sceptre?
- What about the pleasure factor for future partners? Is there any data on that? Is it a valid concern in making the decision? (I don't know the answer to either of those questions, which is why I'm asking)

Like I said, some random thoughts. Maybe there is a conspiracy, but I suspect it would be more accurately classified as a trend. Does the medical establishment profit? Yes. Of course they also profit from delivering babies and performing abortions, and yet they still market contraceptives. I'm certainly not a fan of the medical establishment, but it seems to me this particular conspiracy that involves them is a non-starter.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
- The procedure is not comparable to the clitorectomies still going on. Circumcision doesn't reduce sexual pleasure in any meaningful way, at least not that I'm aware of, and in comparison it's a much less violent and severe mutilation.

Thanks for the nice explanation of the two, BTW my son was born in a military hospital and on the second day of his birth all the ladies with baby boys were taken to a room and were given a class on the pros and cons of circumcision, later the babies that the mothers chose to have it done were taken away.

It didn't cost me a penny but I bet the tax payers pay for it.

Surprisingly most of the ladies including me went with it.

my gynacologist advised me to do it........
my pediatrician advised me not to........

then I figured it out, my gynacologist wanted me to do it, because, well, he would be the one doing the operation....$$$$$

my pediatrician had nothing to profit by advising me to do it, and well, with nothing to gain, opted for what she believed was best for the baby.
or at least that's how I saw it..

I went along with my pediatrician.

Originally posted by marg6043
Hum . . . you know my son is nineteen and so far he has never complain about it.

Why would he complain about loosing something he cant even remember having?

Originally posted by C0le

Why would he complain about loosing something he cant even remember having?

Bingo!!!!!! he lost it at age two days so he never had it to Begin with.

Occurs he is old enough now and he has seen it with skin he actually find it not very attractive I mean the skin.

I guess is just personal preferences. If you have it all your life then is part of you. If you grew up without it you won't miss it.

Yeah, I don't think anyone realizes that they're missing something until they see an uncircumcized guy in the locker room, etc....kind of weird.

I am but probably wouldn't have it done to my child if I ever have a boy.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
- Let's not forget aesthetics in our frenzy to abandon the practice on logical grounds. Do you want to be a cheapskate and gift your kid with a spam slug, or do you want to be wise and charitable, facillitating the inheritance of a proper sceptre-shaped sceptre?

Uhhh... I submit that the only reason some think a circumcized penis is more asthetically pleasing is because it's what one is accustomed to. (I don't know about some of the other words you used, and I'll just leave it at that.)

- What about the pleasure factor for future partners? Is there any data on that? Is it a valid concern in making the decision? (I don't know the answer to either of those questions, which is why I'm asking)

Uhhh... How can I say this? Once a couple are in the position to be concerned about this, there is no difference in a circumcized and uncircumcized penis. So, the pleasure factor is not an issue at all.

I've got to say as I go through this thread and see how willing my 'fellow members' (pardon the puns) are to reveal their particular experiences, I get interesting pictures in my mind's eye.

Now, to the subject of the original post, I agree with the original poster 100%. Marg, I'm not saying you did something wrong, not at all. But I would never choose to do this to my child simply because there's not a good reason that I can see. I also wouldn't pierce my baby, crop a dog's ears or dock it's tail. IMO, it's totally unnecessary.

It's their body and if they want that stuff, they can have it done when they are old enough to decide for themselves.

If you people want your turtle necks fine. But I wouldnt want it back it looks weird. Heck I didnt even know what foreskin was untill like a week ago