Well, if you're happy with the medical decision that you made as an adult male, then more power to you. But that doesn't mean that the procedure should automatically be done to infant boys who have no problems with their foreskins. That's my biggest issue, routine infant circumcision. At least as an adult, you know why the procedure is happening, you know why you are in pain, you will receive pain medication after the procedure, and you CHOSE to go through this. An infant has no choice.

Female genital mutilation is classified (at least in the US) as any unnecessary surgery on the genitals of a female minor. When most people think of female circumcision, they think of the removal of th...

Well, if you're happy with the medical decision that you made as an adult male, then more power to you. But that doesn't mean that the procedure should automatically be done to infant boys who have no problems with their foreskins. That's my biggest issue, routine infant circumcision. At least as an adult, you know why the procedure is happening, you know why you are in pain, you will receive pain medication after the procedure, and you CHOSE to go through this. An infant has no choice.

Female genital mutilation is classified (at least in the US) as any unnecessary surgery on the genitals of a female minor. When most people think of female circumcision, they think of the removal of the clitoris, clitoral hood, labia minora, labia majora, and the sewing-up of the resulting raw wound. But in some cultures practice female circumcision without doing all that. Some only remove the clitoral hood, which is the female equivalent of the male foreskin. The clitoral hood is considerably smaller than the foreskin. This DOES NOT make it OK. Both practices, IMO, should be stopped. At least for infants/children who cannot make the decision for themselves.

As for the AIDS and cancer studies, I'm already hearing people (both teenagers and adults) saying, "Circumcision prevents STDs. I'm circumcised, so I don't need a condom." This is incredibly dangerous thinking, and is not something that should be encouraged.

What you've neglected to take into account jklugman, is that hygiene is just as significant a factor. Most of the places in the world where circumcision (or lack thereof) is a factor in the spread of AIDS, HPV and other diseases are places where good hygiene and medical care are more scarce. Simple cleanliness more than makes up for the difference, so much so that the average man in the US, Canada, Europe or other similarly developed area in the world would find no significant medical advantage in getting cut. In fact, circumcision did not really become widespread in the west until some Victorian-era doctors promoted it as a means of discouraging masturbation by making it (and, by implica...

What you've neglected to take into account jklugman, is that hygiene is just as significant a factor. Most of the places in the world where circumcision (or lack thereof) is a factor in the spread of AIDS, HPV and other diseases are places where good hygiene and medical care are more scarce. Simple cleanliness more than makes up for the difference, so much so that the average man in the US, Canada, Europe or other similarly developed area in the world would find no significant medical advantage in getting cut. In fact, circumcision did not really become widespread in the west until some Victorian-era doctors promoted it as a means of discouraging masturbation by making it (and, by implication, all sex) less pleasurable.

All I can say is that after my own cutting, I wasn't able to walk for about a year.