Circumcision: A Social Status in the UK ?

[Amazonia]

Curiously in the UK, circumcision is now a matter of social class. While the "ordinary" folks rarely circumcise, circumcision is prevalent in the upper class as well as in the Royal family.

"Martorana: Most specialists would agree that newborn circumcision gives a far better aesthetic result than adult circumcision. Consequently, if parents seek the best for their children, they are not likely to wait until the child is able to consent."

Does that not rather depend on the assumption that a circumcised penis is more aesthetically pleasing than an uncircumcised one? Otherwise, by your reasoning, parents seeking the best for their children would not circumcise at all. Because, as we all- or at least, those of us capable of reading and understanding the data- know, there is no medical reason for routine circumcision of infant boys.

what the fuck is this shit?

op if you think sunburn and mosquito bits equate to mutilation, may I suggest you check a different dictionary to the one you are currently using?

And, anyway, I would do my damnedest to make sure my child wasn't sunburnt or stung by mosquitos too...........

WilsonFrickett : A fairly long overhang does not prevent that person from living. I mean, one would not die out of that. Therefore no medical need as such.

"a circumcised penis is more aesthetically pleasing than an uncircumcised one"

Is that just an... assumption?

You misunderstand me, Amazonia. Please read my post again.

Yes but then, there is no medical reason for combing one's hair or trimming one's nails. And yet....

both of which re-grow. The foreskin doesn't.

If a man finds his 'overhang' ridiculous or painful as you suggested in your post then yes, there is a medical need.

Are you actually following this discussion, or do you have some sort of status generator which sort of mixes up words in response to posters?

I said I wouldn't circumcise without medical need.
You made a point about a medical condition which may be embarassing and/our painful
I said that was a medical need
You said things are only 'medically needed' if they kill us.
I say: learn to argue in a logical and coherent fashion, please.

"Yes but then, there is no medical reason for combing one's hair or trimming one's nails. And yet...."

Neither of which, as far as I know, are irreversible, surgical procedures.....

Neither hair nor nails have nerve endings. The foreskin is, of course, amply supplied with these for a very good reason.

Circumcision should be for everyone. My great uncle died of chronic syphilis contracted Somewhere in France during WWI. Circumcised men have lower rates of HIV and STDs. Their long term female partners have less cervical cancer.

You are, of course, joking, Erica.............

Erica no one needs to die of syphillis nowadays. It's easily treated with antibiotics. There is a vaccine against the HPV virus, and condoms are the most effective method of preventing STDs.

condoms are the ONLY effective method of preventing STDs

Vaccinations may help keeping you alive for a certain while, but will not cure you once you've contracted AIDS.

Sallyingforth:"condoms are the ONLY effective method of preventing STDs"

Condoms are the most effective way, but only if you use them all the time. There is something BETTER than condoms...... circumcision AND condoms!

Nonsense. Like any safety precaution, condoms need to be used properly every time.
Telling people that MGM is effective against disease is just a sop to those who do it for religious reasons, and will encourage people to take risks that can only be circumvented by condoms.

fatlazymummy: "Erica no one needs to die of syphillis nowadays. It's easily treated with antibiotics. There is a vaccine against the HPV virus, and condoms are the most effective method of preventing STDs."

Antibiotic treatment can cure syphilis if it’s caught early, but medication can’t undo any damage already done. Syphilis can cause damage to the brain, heart, and nervous system. Syphilis in women can seriously harm a developing fetus during pregnancy.

STD's caused by virus (eg Herpes) are not curable.

Boys are not given the HPV vaccine and there is no evidence that it protects men from penile or prostate cancer because there are so many different strains of the virus, each causing different problems.

Condoms are very effective... but only if they are ALWAYS used. With so many women on the pill and pregnancy not such an issue there is a higher chance a guy will risk it if he has no condom to hand after a night out.

Condoms AND circumcision provide the best protection.

Actually, abstinence is the best protection from STDs.

Sallyingforth: "Nonsense. Like any safety precaution, condoms need to be used properly every time."

Yes. But sadly safety precautions and sex drive are not always compatible, especially where the young are concerned.

"Telling people that MGM is effective against disease is just a sop to those who do it for religious reasons,"

That's a big conspiracy theory you have there! All that money, all those researchers, all secretly plotting to promote circumcision to make the religious feel better!.

"and will encourage people to take risks that can only be circumvented by condoms."

Sadly, many uncircumcised young people take those risks too. At least being circumcised does give them some protection.

WilsonFrickett: "Actually, abstinence is the best protection from STDs."

True. Unrealistic for most, but true!

Very little protection.
So little that the NHS doesn't recommend it, and neither do the health services in any other EU country.

Sallyingforth: "...MGM..."

Since most of us are familiar with circumcision and know that most circumcised men don't have a problem with their penis, your use of MGM to describe circumcision doesn't make circumcision seem worse as you intend, rather it makes female genital mutilation seem not as bad as it is.

You do a great disservice to the victims of FGM by trying to make it seem no more than male circumcision.