Circumcision (yup, the real thing!)

Okay, this is about to get as personal as it gets without being naked, but what is a blog if it isn't to embarrass yourself in public?

Several times over the last few years I have tripped across articles stating that circumcision doesn't impact on how pleasurable sex is and that men need have no fear of such an operation impacting their love life. The last one I read of was by a female doctor, whose name I can't recall, but who I would like to meet in person so that I can ask her if she thinks that female circumcision would impact her ability to be pleasured during sexual intercourse? I think it is rather rude for anyone who has not undergone such a procedure to make any sort of broad and narrow-minded statement such as those I have mentioned. Here is the example of one such:

The American Academy of Family Physicians states "no valid evidence to date, however, supports the notion that being circumcised affects sexual sensation or satisfaction."

Here are the medical statistics: The foreskin of an uncircumcised male has 150,000 more nerve endings than in their circumcised counterparts, but according to these doctors (most likely all pedaling the chop block and have been previously indoctrinated by having themselves been circumcised young and are therefore unable to admit that their organs might be inferior), these nerves serve no function and won't be missed. Secondly, the glans (the head of the penis) becomes tougher after circumcision from the build up of keratin, which in turn makes the penis more resistant to diseases, such as AIDS, which is why there is such a huge push in Africa to chop whole cultures into extinction. I say extinction, because to many tribes in Africa, the only way that they are able to be distinguished from those of a neighbouring tribe is by the practise, or not, of circumcision. Essentially doctors are pushing forward on a continental scale a cultural genocide. However, apparently this tougher glans ALSO doesn't reduce the pleasure of sexual contact.

"With the proliferation of hospitals in urban areas, childbirth, at least among the upper and middle classes, was increasingly undertaken in the care of a physician in a hospital rather than that of a midwife in the home. It has been suggested that once a critical mass of infants were being circumcised in the hospital, circumcision became a class marker of those wealthy enough to afford a hospital birth"

"The major medical societies in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand do not support routine non-therapeutic infant circumcision. Major medical organizations in the United States state that parents should decide what is in their child's best interests, explicitly not recommending the procedure for medical reasons. Neonatal circumcision remains the most common pediatric operation carried out in the U.S. today."

And this is what a so called, balance review of the circumcision debate has to say about it: (pay close attention here).

"Circumcision is one of the most common medical procedures in the world, with 25 circumcisions performed every minute worldwide [147]. It is also one of the oldest [97, 212], and one of the simplest. The fact that it is still popular must mean that there is something in it! In the USA, which has the greatest medical knowledge and medical expertise in the world, 65-90% of males are circumcised (> 1.2 million newborns per year."

Here is the personal note: I am uncircumcised. Due to those extra 150,000 nerve endings sex is often painful. The foreskin itself can pinch you if it isn't pulled back just so, which is also quite painful. Cleanliness is always an issue, because of the softer, more sensitive glans and greater risk of disease, or simple infection from bacteria under the foreskin, but it is nothing that daily showers don't take care of. Something that I think that circumcised men should also consider doing too! Despite these challenges with sexual intercourse, I have no intention of lopping off my foreskin to suit the pseudo-religious zeal of the Western establishment, nor do I think that the answer to AIDS is to emasculate half of the continent of Africa. Society has quietly passed from the Pax Romana, to the Pax Britannica, to the Pax America with barely a whimper. "When in Rome, do as Roman's do...” So we are encouraged dogmatically to circumcise the boys and rail in horror if it is suggested that it also be done to girls; it would after all help prevent infection for them as well, but we, the Western European, We, feel that it is barbaric to butcher a woman like that, but is a measure of status when done to a male.

It is my opinion that such an operation as circumcision should only be taken when consented to as an adult, of for medical reasons and no other, because if the argument is strictly preventive, I guess we should all remove our prostates too to prevent the risk of cancer, and the testes to reduce sex drive and the occurrence of AIDS. Until such draconian times as these become law, I will keep that extra-sensory foreskin that allows me to be teased and pleased with the most tentative touch of tongue, or tremulous cavern of mystery.

Also in my opinion, tight underwear holds a greater risk to male health than an uncircumcised penis does.

Here are sites that state information in a concise medical manner:

http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

http://www.infocirc.org/welcome2.htm

Here are the pro-circumcision sites:

http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/index_home_new.html

http://www.circinfo.com/guide_to_decision/index.html

http://www.circinfo.net/

Brucefur