What's the difference between circumcision and being uncircumcised?

[fullofsecrets]

My boyfriend is uncircumcised and he's the only guy I've ever been with so I didn't think it was that strange but then I opened up to one of my friends about it and she said that was "strange." I asked around and a lot of people are acting like the fact that he's uncircumcised is disgusting. Why is this? What's the difference between being circumcised and uncircumcised? Is one better than the other?

[Jack]

Well I'm going to assume you live in America yes? In America the majority of males are circumcised. Due to this many American's seem to think of an uncircumcised penis as disgusting merely because it's different and they've been brought up to think having a piece of your penis sliced off is a good thing. However in Europe the majority of guys are uncut so it's not weird or odd. Also there is no longer any national or international proffesional public health authority in the western world which advocates the routine circumcision of children, which tells you something.

As for: Is there a difference between circumcised and uncircumcised. Well yes there is. Each offers some pros and cons. Circumcised are more hygenic as dirt cannot become trapped under the foreskin, however the same level of hygeine can be achieved by an uncircumcised male simply by washing himself properly in the shower. I think this also another reason people think cuncircumcised guys are disgusting due to an over-exagerted focus on the hygeine when really there is not much issue.

Circumcised guys also have a slightly less chance of getting a UTI, however these are rare anyway and is not a particularly dramatic difference. Circumcised males are more suceptible to some genital infections (Eg Genital Warts) and more resistant to others (Eg HIV), so the pros and cons are pretty much equal in this regard.

If you're circumcised you also have a slightly less chance of getting phimosis or a very very rare form of cancer. These are both uncommon and if your boyfriend was going to have an issue with phimosis it'd already have happened so no issue there.

In terms of use as a sexual organ an uncircumcised penis is arguably better. Removing the foreskin has been shown to decrease sexual pleasure in both males and females. This is because, for the man, the foreskin contains a hell of a lot of nerves which make sex enjoyable. As for the women, when rolled down during sex the foreskin forms a sort of ridge which adds extra stimulation, similar to a ribbed condom. For extra info on this you might look at this quote from a medical study I have posted before:

The removal of the prepuce (foreskin) tightens the remaining skin and makes it relatively immobile. Since stimulation of the sex nerves normally occurs by movement of the mobile skin, this further desensitises the penis,17 perhaps even more than the removal of the ridged band of erogenous nerves noted by Taylor.6 Excision of sexual nerve endings necessarily reduces sensory input. A decrease in sensation may therefore decrease the sexual response.

Male circumcision also may adversely affect female sexual response. A survey of women found that they were markedly less likely to have an orgasm with a circumcised partner.

Source: http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/boyle-sti/

Basically the disgust at a lack of circumcision is mainly based on social norms and reinforced by misinformtaion. There is no such (or at least much less) disgust outside of America. There is very little difference between the two and it seems that, if anything, it is better not to be circumcised.

I hope this helps.

[LittleMiss]

My boyfriend is uncircumcised and I have no problems with it.

[MermaidMassacre]

Its not weird.
Its just more common in America for guys to be circumcised.
In Europe its more common not to be circumcised.
They each have their pluses and negatives.
So I wouldn't say one is better than the other.

[dancinfool]

Lol I didn't even know it was common in America. I thought people only did it for religious reasons... so yeah really don't worry about it!

[Baby_I'm_An_Anarchist]

My Bf is circumsized. As for the health reasons stated already, it does look different. I have np with my bf being circumsized. The sex is still very enjoyable

[Rhop101]

I'm uncircumcised but all of my friends are circumcised at least those who I've talked to about it.

[losing touch.]

here it's often seen as weird to be circumcised. i think it's an american thing..

[Loving Linux Penguin]

It's all sort of a matter of opinion. I'm not circumcised and have no problem with it. It's sort of funny, because here where I live (the SF Bay Area) the majority of guys AREN'T circumcised. And really, IMHO, there is no reason to remove a part of the body that we're born with.

[Double X]

Originally Posted by cwkguy

And really, IMHO, there is no reason to remove a part of the body that we're born with.

Yup

Speaking from personal experience, I had phimosis when I was 11/12 and they gave me some steroid cream and it fixed itself shortly after. Being circumcised to avoid phimosis is not really worth it at all, considering how much nerve endings you lose and how easy it is to cure.

[ml66uk]

Being intact is better. Being circumcised sounds weird to me.

If you were an Egyptian man dating a girl who wasn't circumcised, all your friends would think that was strange and disgusting.

It's worth remembering that no-one except for Jewish people and Muslims would be circumcised if it weren't for the fact that 19th century doctors thought that :
a) masturbation caused various physical and mental problems (including epilepsy, convulsions, paralysis, tuberculosis etc), and
b) circumcision stopped masturbation.

Both of those sound ridiculous today I know, but how that's how they thought back then, and that's how non-religious circumcision got started. If you don't believe me, then google this: "A Short History of Circumcision in North America In the Physicians' Own Words". Heck, they even passed laws against "self-pollution" as it was called.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by Jack

Well I'm going to assume you live in America yes? In America the majority of males are circumcised. Due to this many American's seem to think of an uncircumcised penis as disgusting merely because it's different and they've been brought up to think having a piece of your penis sliced off is a good thing.

I have a girlfriend in America, she didnt think it was weird, She just asked how it worked, which is pretty much the same.

Although we devided if we had kids, circumcised is the way, but this is probably due to my earlier issues with phimosis

Originally Posted by Double X

Yup

Speaking from personal experience, I had phimosis when I was 11/12 and they gave me some steroid cream and it fixed itself shortly after. Being circumcised to avoid phimosis is not really worth it at all, considering how much nerve endings you lose and how easy it is to cure.

It mayy have been easy for you, but for me i went trough 3 years of near depression because of it, and i hate doctors and was so scared to do anything.....so dont assume its easy, yes the cure is easy but people react differently

[SingleMom]

Originally Posted by ml66uk

If you were an Egyptian man dating a girl who wasn't circumcised, all your friends would think that was strange and dissgusting.

This is new information to me. I've never heard of females being circumcised or why it would be beneficial. I'd like more info on this, just to learn more, if there is an online source you could point me to.

Originally Posted by ml66uk

It's worth remembering that no-one except for Jewish people and Muslims would be circumcised. . .

What about Christians also? My understanding is that it is part of Jewish, Islamic, and Christian religions. It also exists geographically -- ancient Egyptians, in Africa, western Asia, and the Pacific, including Australia. The religious thoughts continue today, to my knowledge.

That was one of the reasons I had my son circumcised. Partially because of Christian beliefs and partly because the medical info I found at the time recommended it (more hygienic and "The public health benefits are enormous, and include protection from urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted HIV, human papillomavirus, herpes, syphilis and chancroid, penile and prostate cancer, phimosis, thrush, and inflammatory dermatoses. In women circumcision of the male partner provides substantial protection from cervical cancer, herpes and chlamydia.")


This may or not be true today, but it is the information I had access to at the time, what the doctors I consulted recommended, and what I based my decision on outside of being a Christian. However, I did not have it done right after birth since I was told that pain medicine would not be administered and that he would feel no pain. I could not see how anyone could know whether it would hurt them at that age or not since nobody remembers back to their first few days of birth and the infants obviously can't tell them. I had it done when he was a month old since they would provide pain meds at that age. He was calm when they brought him back out to me and didn't seem to have any pain issues after the meds wore off, or at least none that caused him to cry or seem upset.

However, I still believe that the opinions of others can differ and mine is neither right or wrong for others. It was right for us, but that's just us.

[LittleMiss]

Actually, female circumcision is also known as female genital mutilation. It is a highly contentious issue as is it still performed in cultures such as Africa and Egypt.

The procedure ranges to the stitching of the vaginal opening to the removal of the labia minora, majora and clitoris.

[Jack]

Originally Posted by SingleMom

What about Christians also? My understanding is that it is part of Jewish, Islamic, and Christian religions. It also exists geographically -- ancient Egyptians, in Africa, western Asia, and the Pacific, including Australia. These religious thoughts continue today, to my knowledge.

Actually the New Testament varies from saying circumsicion is downright bad to saying that it is unnecessary. If you're Christian your religion doesn't really want you to circumcise your kids.

Galatians 5:2-6

2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

Philippians 3:2-3

2Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh. 3For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh.

1 Corinthians 7:19

Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is (B)the keeping of the commandments of God.

Those are just two such examples. If you put all the quotes to do with circumcision in Christianity together it is seen as unncecesary or just plain bad. Basically nonobservance of circumcision was one of the ways Early Christians differentianted Christianity from Judaims and is not necessary or encouraged for Christians.

Also, I'm not so sure it's widespread in Australia as the Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons has this to say on the matter:

The Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons does not support the routine circumcision of male neonates, infants or children in Australia. It is considered to be inappropriate and unnecessary as a routine to remove the prepuce, based on the current evidence available.

And Royal Australasian College of Physicians in 2009 say:

The RACP does not recommend that routine circumcision in infancy be performed.

Apparently only 10-15% of infants are circumcised there.

[Loving Linux Penguin]

I wouldn't really go so far as to call it "needless mutilation", but I do think it's unnecessary. I mean, for goodness sake, it's something that we are born with. There is almost NO medical reason to remove the foreskin. As for the Jewish, many parents do chose to circumcise their sons as was written in the Torah. Some, however, do not. Some have an alternative welcoming ceremony for their children. As far as those who are Christian, I think it's largely a matter of preference for the parents.