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.

It's possible that baggins was abnormally filthy and stinking prior to his unusual accident, or possibly he is unusually fretful.

You must be kidding.

I came across a survey where a large majority of men said they wouldn't want to poke their nose in there on a daily basis. They are prepared to devote themselves , every now & then, to make sure their partners trust they enjoy that, bot not more.

"We chose to do it for hygiene reasons...they will never have to worry about keeping foreskins clean"

You could keep their heads shaved too- then they'd never have to worry about keeping their hair clean......

What is so difficult about washing a penis, for heaven's sake!!!!!

Well, there are threads here often enough asking about how to teach little boys to wash properly and debate over whether cleaning under the foreskin should be done at all and PLENTY of little boys that have had to deal with all sorts of issues (balinitis, UTIs etc), so it seems it's not as easy as one would think.

I suppose I could have their heads shaved if I was so inclined...some Mums around the world choose to do that too, for various reasons. I personally prefer the look of hair on little boys and washing it really isn't that difficult for little kids to do on their own, plus no real issue with infection on that particular part of the body.

You mean if we cannot find a rational answer for women, we should not seek any solution for men either?

Wait, so cutting up a man's genitals for the sake of hygiene is ok, but not a woman's? Neither are rational. That is exactly my point.

Children have dot be taught how to wash their feet and their ears too. And their hair. Once they've learned then there's no problem. Penises are just th same.

And if you shaved their heads there'd be no dandruff, no nits, no hair brushing.....

My husband has managed to keep his uncircumcised penis clean without any problems for his entire life so far. It has never caused him problems medically, or in the bedroom. And.. no, it has never been horrifying or smelly at the end of the day. I would never circumcise my sons unless it was a dire necessity.

Honestly, a little soap goes a long ways. It just seems a little hysterical to cut a person's genitals because you can't be bothered to teach them basic hygiene.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with not being bothered and more to do with them being willful and distractible little individuals. I suppose it would be much easier to oversee that process when they're little and in the bath, but mine are nine and seven now and take showers (and want privacy). I'm not only not getting anywhere near their genitals nowadays (rightfully so) but they need frequent and insistent reminders to use shampoo and soap for their intended purpose while they are in there. I never have to remind them to wash under their foreskins too.

It seems we go from one benefit of circumcision to the next and each time the response is, "Why would you circumcise just to .... keep the penis clean / reduce your chance of getting an STD / eliminate your chance of getting penile cancer?" When you circumcise you get all these benefits, not just one.

Are the benefits so great that any parent who chooses not to circumcise their child is an idiot? No, of course not. But then those who do choose to circumcise are not the idiots some seem to think either. You may not think the benefits are great enough to warrant circumcision and that is fair enough.

However if you do argue against parents who do choose to circumcise on the basis of all the nonsense the intactivists spew about screaming babies, circumcision deaths, mutilation, consent and penises with no feeling then you really need to check the facts.

Martorana didn't say, "Thank you for providing me with the statistics I wanted. I can see now that circumcision DOES provide some protection against STD's."

Why, thank you, Martorana. That is most gracious of you.

Is this thread still going?
baggins just because you are so convinced, doesn't mean you are right.
As has been pointed out in other threads, countries in Europe with the lowest rates of MGM (circumcision to you) also have the lowest rates of disease.
It's also rather strange that we have lower rates of e.g. HIV than the US, even though doctors there benefit from cutting a very large proportion of boys.

"cutting up a man's genitals for the sake of hygiene is ok, but not a woman's?"

Are you convinced women would benefit from a better hygiene if their genitals were cut????? Frankly??

It would be extremely difficult to prove that womens' genitalia were any more or less hygienic than mens'. Both are subject to very similar influences.

Sallyingforth said:

baggins just because you are so convinced, doesn't mean you are right.

Hmm. I could say the same to you. So lets concentrate on evidence rather than opinion.

As has been pointed out in other threads, countries in Europe with the lowest rates of MGM (circumcision to you) also have the lowest rates of disease.

Which disease?

It's also rather strange that we have lower rates of e.g. HIV than the US, even though doctors there benefit from cutting a very large proportion of boys.

Why is that strange? HIV is passed on by dirty needles with drug addicts and through homosexual sex as well as heterosexual sex. A comparison of Europe with America would need to take these figures into account. The five separate sceintific studies into the protective effect of circumcision and heterosexual HIV have used similar populations with similar behaviours and have found a 60% decrease in HIV infection in the circumcised males.

Personally, as far as UK life is concerned, I wouldn't put HIV infection high on the benefits of circumcision list since most HIV is passed on through other means in this country. In Africa it is a different story.

brokenhearted55a: Have you cut your inner labia out and your clitoral hood so you dont have to worry about keeping all those folds of flesh clean?

No?

Why not?

This really is such a silly argument. Just because you can't make everything clean doesn't mean you shouldn't keep anything clean. Removing the foreskin has several benefits and very few drawbacks (don't believe the intactivist websites, they are full of lies and exaggerations), cleanliness is just one of them.

The same cannot be said of removing the inner labia or clitoral hood.

It's quite ridiculous to treat the male & female genitalia the same way. The male genitalia is external whereas the female gen. is internal. The situation is therefore not comparable.

One can imagine that the removal of the clitoral hood would be similar to male circumcision but that's almost as far as one can go, in terms of comparison. The question then : would the removal of the clitoral hood significantly improve local hygiene ( or at least to an equivalent level to the removal of the male foreskin) ?

(don't believe the intactivist websites, they are full of lies and exaggerations)
But we should believe you instead, because you say so.

I'm greatly encouraged to see that in the US the MGM rate is going down. Not as fast as it has in Europe, but it's heading in the right direction. Long may that continue.

When we say UC are we talking landed or just money?

The nonsense about diminished sexual pleasure has been disproved by the recent rise in circumcisions among African men who have the chance to compare previous and post op experience.

You are going to find men who don't care much about their partner's experience among both circumcised and uncircumcised men. If someone told you he was rough because he couldn't feel much he is lying.

Equating male circumcision with FGM to the point of calling it MGM is hugely insulting to the millions of women who have undergone FGM, which has as its only aim the elimination of the chance that women will achieve sexual satisfaction and the maintenance of patriarchal power over women in dirt poor and very backward societies where women have no rights whatsoever and no way of even feeding themselves unless they are attached either to their father or their husband.

Not as fast as it has in Europe ???

But how can it go down in Europe, since it has NEVER been up?

Very small sample size of 1 here but i was circumcised at 38 and am now 44 so have experience of both. I would say there is quite a lot less feeling now than before but you get used to it and work around it.

Good point mathanxiety

It wound be quite interesting to focus on those thousands of African men who are currently undergoing circumcision, as they can compare the before and after.

In Europe or in the US, those who are circumcised have had it done at birth or in their early childhood and they can see only one side of the coin.

shouldkeepquiet : Any comment on the hygienic aspect (before & after) ?