#Men’s Health Thursday: Five Reasons You Should Thank Your Parents For Circumcising You

share on:

In the world of today, not a lot of men have a choice in determining whether they have the foreskin of their penis removed or not. In Nigeria, it is estimated that about 75 percent of all newly born males are circumcised at birth. Circumcision has a whole lot of advantages and there are more than enough reasons for you to thank your parents for taking that wonderful decision to remove your foreskin.

Its removal has a lot of impact on the reproductive health of all male species, and if you’re circumcised, here are five reasons to thank your parents for making that important decision.


Delays Ejaculation
A research study conducted in Turkey found out that having a circumcision can help to delay ejaculation and orgasm. The research recorded the time it took for men who were circumcised as adults to climax. The study recorded the time it took them to orgasm before circumcision and the time it took after they were circumcised. It was deduced that the men lasted 20 seconds longer after they had been circumcised.

It is however important to note that the minor time difference should not be confused as a treatment for premature ejaculation as there are other scientifically proven methods of delaying ejaculation.

Your Partner’s Orgasm Is Delayed Too
A research conducted in Denmark found that wives of circumcised men tend to take longer to orgasm. According to the lead researcher Sex Professor Debby Herbenick, Ph.D., women married to circumcised men reported feeling the glans penis shaft of their husbands along their vaginal walls during sex, with some saying it took them long to orgasm during sexual intercourse.
Surely, not all women prefer circumcised guys but in all, the fleshy foreskin made into a crown shaft increases the sweet sensations of vaginal intercourse for women.

Condoms Don’t Slip Off
Uncircumcised men can relate to the struggle of getting a condom that fits and stays on. The foreskin makes it easy for the rubber to slip off. As such, uncircumcised men have to pull back their foreskin during application as this allows the foreskin to move freely and easily during sex which helps the condom stay in place and helps the rubber stay put.

READ: Ladies, 11 Things Your Mom Didn’t Tell You About The Penis

You’re Better Protected from STIs
Circumcision reduces the risks of you getting a STI such as HIV. A study conducted by the Centre for Disease Control in Baltimore on men who were exposed to the HIV virus found that circumcised men were less likely to get infected.
Research is still ongoing as to why this is so but a prevailing theory says that the foreskin makes uncircumcised men more susceptible to the Human Immuno Virus than the skin on a circumcised shaft and that the foreskin provides an environment for an array of infectious bacteria and viruses to thrive. The CDC reports that the foreskin has a higher chance of tearing during sex which is an easy way for viruses to gain entry into the body. It is however important to note that circumcision is not a substitute for protection such as condoms or abstinence which are more safer.

It Reduces Your Chances Of Having Cancer
The chances of a circumcised man having prostrate or penile cancer is grossly reduced majorly because the foreskin tends to harbour Sexually transmitted infections and inflammatory diseases such as Human papilloma virus (HPV), which contribute to the development of cancer.
If you’re lacking a cut, you may want to consider getting one or wear condoms to protect you against diseases. Also, take your personal hygiene seriously by taking a shower after sex while retracting the foreskin of your penis to ensure it is properly washed.

READ: Men’s Health Thursday: The PENIS Problem Most Guys Completely Ignore



Normal everyday dude uniquely different in an everyday manner, a young man that strongly believes in the Nigerian project. I'm a mixture of science, arts and politics. I can be engaged on twitter @SheriffSimply


  1. Can you name one other mammal that has received a circumcision? One Single example, you have the entire internet to find a SINGLE example of a non-human mammal having a circumcision preformed. Can you find a single pet/livestock/endangered species who received this surgery.

    ” Circumcision has a whole lot of advantages and there are more than enough reasons for you to thank your parents for taking that wonderful decision to remove your foreskin.” If the following statement is true you should be able to find *numerous* examples where other foreskin possessing mammals benefited from this elective surgery….

    I’ll wait for your links.

  2. Studies show that circumcision causes significant pain and trauma, behavioral and neurological changes in infants, potential parental stress from persistent crying (colic) of infants, disrupted bonding between parent and child, and risk of surgical complications. Other consequences of circumcision include loss of a natural, healthy, functioning body part, reduced sexual pleasure, potential psychological problems, and unknown negative effects that have not been studied.

    Some circumcised men resent that they are circumcised. Sexual anxieties, reduced emotional expression, low self-esteem, avoidance of intimacy, and depression are also reported. Some doctors refuse to perform circumcisions because of ethical reasons. Relying on presumed authorities is not sufficient because of their personal, religious, financial, and political conflicts of interest. Instead, watch a circumcision video and trust your instincts.

  3. Not one of those claims is true.

    Frisch 2011, Tang & Khoo 2011, Denniston 2004, and O’Hara & O’Hara 2002 all found that circumcised men were *more* likely to suffer from PE.

    That Danish study (Frisch 2011) actually said this:
    “Conclusions Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfilment.”

    I’m intact and have used thousands of condoms, and never once had a problem. At least one study has shown that circumcised men are more likely to have problems with condoms failing.

    In Europe, almost no-one is circumcised unless their parents are Jewish or Muslim, but Europeans have lower rates of almost all the bad stuff (including STIs, cervical cancer and penile cancer) than the USA, where most men are circumcised.

    This is what some national medical organizations say:

    Canadian Paediatric Society
    “OTTAWA— In an updated statement released today, the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) continues to recommend against the routine circumcision of newborn males.”

    Royal Australasian College of Physicians
    “After reviewing the currently available evidence, the RACP believes that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision do not warrant routine infant circumcision in Australia and New Zealand.”
    (almost all the men responsible for this statement will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. “Routine” circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in Australia.)

    British Medical Association
    “to circumcise for therapeutic reasons where medical research has shown other techniques to be at least as effective and less invasive would be unethical and inappropriate.”

    The Royal Dutch Medical Association
    “The official viewpoint of KNMG and other related medical/scientific organisations is that non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors is a violation of children’s rights to autonomy and physical integrity.”

    Drops in male circumcision since 1950:
    USA: from 90% to 55%
    Canada: from 48% to 32%
    UK: from 35% to about 5% (about 1-2% among non-Muslims)
    Australia: 90% to 12.4% (“routine” circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in all states except one)
    New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans)
    South America and Europe: never above 5%

  4. Sorry for your loss bro. For others here’s the truth:

    After Circumcision: “I barely feel anything at all until the end.” “I lost almost all the sensation in my penis.

    “I’d mistakenly attributed the sensations I’d enjoyed during masturbation to the glans being stimulated by the foreskin,”
    (This commenter tells his truth after choosing circumcision. I thank him for putting his very personal experience publicly out there to warn others.)

    “I made the mistake of electing to be circumcised as a healthy adult, having been born in non-circumcising Denmark and raised in circumcising Alaska. The stigmatization of uncircumcised men can be considerable – at least, that used to be the case in the US. Getting circumcised was–without serious competition–the single most idiotic decision I’ve ever made. I was circumcised successfully–everything went exactly according to plan–and yet I lost almost all the sensation in my penis. The little erogenous feeling I have I owe to a miserable scrap of mucosa on the underside of the distal end, proximal to the glans. I’d mistakenly attributed the sensations I’d enjoyed during masturbation to the glans being stimulated by the foreskin, but in fact it’s the other way around: the glans is mostly useful for its size and shape – it’s an excellent anvil against which to work and over which to roll one’s foreskin.

    Now, during sex, I barely feel anything at all until the end. Condoms are a total loser for me – and my difficulties maintaining an erection, much less attaining orgasm (to say nothing of actually *enjoying* the experience) force me to engage in risky sexual practices that I know I really ought to avoid.

    People make a lot of assumptions about how the penis works, and they’re wrong. The glans is not the most erogenous part – it feels only deep pressure and pain (to which it *is* very sensitive). The ‘inner lip’ of the tip of the foreskin is just about all men have to get by on. We owe our convictions about male sexual response to intuition, and intuition is not science. In fact, intuition is a great threat to science.

    Don’t make the mistake I did, boys.”

    Nov 14th 2013, 19:02

  5. You’re wrong on all counts. Here’s just one so you know I speak the truth:

    From the American Cancer Society’s National Home Office, Doctors:

    Hugh Shingleton, M.D.
    National Vice President
    Detection & Treatment

    Clark W. Heath, Jr., M.D.
    Vice President
    Epidemiology & Surveillance Research

    Wrote to:

    Dr. Peter Rappo
    Committee on Practice & Ambulatory Medicine
    American Academy of Pediatrics

    Dear Dr. Rappo:

    As representatives of the American Cancer Society, we would like to discourage the American Academy of Pediatrics from promoting routine circumcision as preventative measure for penile or cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such cancers.

    Research suggesting a pattern in the relationship between circumcision and penile cancer is inconclusive. Penile cancer is an extremely rare condition, effecting one in 200,000 men in the United States. Penile cancer rates on countries which do not practice circumcision are lower than those found in the United States. Fatalities caused by circumcision accidents may approximate the mortality rate from penile cancer.

    Portraying routine circumcision as an effective means of prevention distracts the public from the task of avoiding the behaviors proven to contribute to penile and cervical cancer: especially cigarette smoking and unprotected sexual relations with multiple partners. Perpetuating the mistaken belief that circumcision prevents cancer is inappropriate.

    February 16, 1996

  6. Simply Not At All True that it feels better for your female partner. What should be a moist, sensitive internal organ becomes rough, calloused and dry after loss of its protective covering. Think of an eye missing the eyelids. It can rub you raw and necessitate lube. And for the record, not that many women WANT their orgasm to take even longer. Look up all the functions of foreskin and see what you lost. You won’t be thanking anybody, nor will your partner.

  7. Circumcision propaganda at its finest. Let’s debunk this propaganda point-by-point.

    _Delays Ejaculation_
    And do you know why it takes longer for circumcised men to ejaculate? Because they are experiencing less pleasure. It’s just common sense that when you remove a lot of erogenous tissue, you’re going to have less erogenous feelings.

    You even concede that circumcision is “not be confused as a treatment for premature ejaculation”. Yeah… it actually CAUSES erectile dysfunction in many men. Edging or kegeling is a lot better for treating premature ejaculation than mutilating your body.

    _Your Partner’s Orgasm Is Delayed Too_
    Do I have to explain it again? Circumcision decreases pleasure for women as well. Though I suppose I can’t call common sense on this one, it’s simple: a circumcised man provides no lubrication of his own. An intact penis is self-lubricating. In addition, a circumcised penis actually REMOVES vaginal lubrication during sex. Women think that they have a problem being ‘dry’, when really it might be her partner’s fault.

    _Condoms Don’t Slip Off_
    Condoms slip off when you DON’T KNOW HOW TO PUT THEM ON RIGHT. Though you’re using this as a justification for your next two points…

    _You’re Better Protected from STIs_
    No you’re not. The largest outbreak of HIV in America or rather, the industrialized world, was amongst circumcised men. Europe doesn’t have rampant outbreaks of STDs and they’re not circumcised. You want to quote the CDC on a circumcision study, when they’re inherently biased in favor of circumcision? Ha.

    The only way to protect yourself from the majority of STDs is with condoms, which even you concede:

    “It is however important to note that circumcision is not a substitute for protection such as condoms or abstinence which are more safer.”

    So then why are you lauding circumcision in the first place?

    _It Reduces Your Chances Of Having Cancer_
    I have never heard of circumcision as a means to prevent prostate cancer.

    Though I have heard the excuse that it prevents penile cancer, the chance of getting penile cancer is < 1%. You want to circumcise to decrease that to < < 1%. Why aren't we removing girls' breasts when they are infants? We would decrease the risk of breast cancer by 12%!

    Once again, you prove my point:

    "If you’re lacking a cut, you may want to consider getting one or wear condoms to protect you against diseases."

    So are you saying that circumcised men can have as much unprotected sex as they want, without risk of acquiring an infectious disease? Because I'm sure that's how some of your readers will interpret what you're saying.

    Not only is this article entirely inaccurate; it's hazardous. You are going to continue spreading the belief that circumcised men have some great immunity to STDs, so they will continue to not wear condoms and continue to spread STDs.

  8. Wow, delaying orgasm is a thing good huh. I could also see that being very frustrating. So Circumcision makes it harder to cum…..got it…..and The American Cancer Society says Circumcision does not protect against cervical or penile cancer. And the USA has higher rates is STD’s than Europe where men aren’t mutilated. They forgot to mention Circumcision causes painful sex for men and women, difficulty orgasiming for men, and incomplete sense of sexual fulfilment. Circumcised men also can’t feel “Little orgasms” like Intact men can according to studies. I think we should stop mutilating healthy babies privates. Hands off the children’s privates, a good rule for us all to follow!

  9. Routine, forced infant male circumcision (RIC) – or more properly, male genital mutilation (MGM) – is a medically unnecessary surgery that violates four of the most basic and important principles of medical ethics. First, not to do harm. Second, not to “provide” (or inflict) a “treatment” in the absence of a medical problem (such as a disease or harmful congenital deformity). Third, to opt for the least invasive or aggressive treatment available when there is a disease or other medical problem. And, fourth, to obtain consent from the patient before rendering care unless the patient is incapable of providing consent and the treatment is required urgently to save life or limb. Forced, infant male circumcision violates every one of these principles. That is why there is not a single professional medical association on Earth that affirmatively advocates RIC/MGM on the basis of its putative “health benefits.” Of these – and they are scant – there is not a one that could not be achieved through less invasive means, such as the practice of basic hygiene, the administration of antibiotics, and the use of condoms to prevent the spread of STDs.

    RIC/MGM – to the extent that it is invariably performed without the victim’s consent – is always a human-rights violation because it deprives the victim of the right to choose for himself what is done to his body. In this respect it is no different from absolute bans against abortion or contraceptives. And just like female genital mutilation (FGM), routine infant circumcision is a surgical modification to genitalia that is performed primarily for cultural reasons. The World Health Organization has defined all forms of FGM – even those forms of it that are significantly less invasive and harmful to the genitalia than male circumcision is – as a human rights violation. It follows, therefore, that involuntary infant male circumcision is also a human rights violation.

    RIC/MGM differs from FGM only in that the former is pushed by an interested lobby that attempts to cloak it in the mantle of medical legitimacy, despite the fact that the vast majority of its adduced benefits have been soundly discredited by modern science and medicine, including every single one of the claims listed in this astonishingly ignorant and outdated opinion piece.

    What is not fully appreciated in the debate about circumcision is that RIC achieved the popularity that it enjoys in the United States today mainly because of the success of its boosters in the 19th century who promoted it as an effective remedy for a host of ailments including but not limited to rheumatism, epilepsy, asthma, skin cancer, insanity, and venereal disease. But it was as a remedy for “masturbatory insanity, ” which was believed to result from masturbation or “self-abuse,” that circumcision was most widely promoted by its supporters during the 19th century. These are the historical and pseudo-scientific roots of routine infant male circumcision as it is practiced in the U.S. today. RIC thus takes its rightful place alongside other notorious outrages committed in the name of public health and physical and mental hygiene such as the forced sterilizations of tens of thousands of women and men and Tuskegee experiments on African American men during the 20th century.

    As for the absurd claims in this piece, they are patently false. The prepuce (or foreskin) is the most sensitive part of the penis and removing has a significantly deleterious effect on the male sexual experience. What remains – the glans, which is supposed to be a mucosal surface – then becomes desiccated and keratinized, making this secondary structure even less sensitive. Circumcision also makes intercourse less comfortable and pleasurable for the woman because it removes the natural motility of the skin of the penis while also removing the natural lubricant provided by the presence of a foreskin. The paragraph about the condom doesn’t even make sense so it’s nor worth commenting on. This article also peddles now completely discredited myths about circumcision’s putative role in reducing one’s risk of contracting an STD or cancer. Cutting off part of the penis is not a substitute for wearing a condom. On the other hand, by some twisted and amoral logic, I suppose you could argue that by removing a body part you are prophylactically preventing a disease to that organ but, by that logic, all girls and women should undergo forced excision of their breast buds at birth in order to eliminate breast cancer, which kills 40,000 women annually in the U.S. And while we’re at it, we should be removing infant boys’ breast buds, too, since men are statistically more likely to develop breast cancer than penile cancer.

    This is a profoundly ignorant, outdated, and frankly irresponsible bit of commentary advocating a medically unnecessary surgery which is routinely performed in violation of basic medical ethics and in violation of the basic human right of bodily autonomy of its victims and this advocacy is made on the basis of entirely discredited and bogus claims.

    Let me conclude with a personal note. I do not thank my parent for succumbing to the prevailing cultural norm of male genital mutilation. I was well into my 50s before it even dawned on me that men are supposed to experience physical pleasure during intercourse. That is because the most erogenously important part of my penis was stolen from me without my consent without a shred of medical justification. I have never known nor will ever know what intercourse is supposed to feel like. I will never experience shared physical intimacy with my wife because circumcision destroys the sexual sensation of the penis. So to the author of this piece, FUCK YOU.

  10. Amazing the lengths that some men will go to to justify an unnecessary, cosmetic procedure done to them. One that is known to decrease sexual pleasure and intimacy. FWIW, my NIGERIAN partner wishes he were not circumcised. Our 2 yo son is intact and so will our next son who I am carrying.

  11. Brava, Gabriella! And big applause to the other commenters here. I can add nothing more except to say: “Nobs”, you are clearly out of your depth here. (So to speak.) Maybe you should turn your attention to a topic about which you can actually write with authority.

  12. 5 reasons you should be insulted by the choice to cut you.

    5. 20 thousand (or more) sexually responsive nerves, stretch receptors, estrogen receptors, fine touch receptors, glans protection, immunological cells, gliding action that keeps the wet where it belongs, inside, and reduces friction. (there are NO friction sensitive nerves inside the vagina)

    4. Someone decided how YOUR penis should be based on THIER preferences. just. gross.

    3. Someone assumed you couldn’t be trusted to use condoms and good judgment.

    2. Someone assumed you’d be too stupid to figure out how to wash your penis.

    1. It’s your body. You have the right to look into all the claims being made about benefits, and know all the facts about what it is you’re losing and MAKE THAT PERSONAL DECISION YOURSELF.

  13. Delays Ejaculation
    ME. 20 seconds? O wow!!!
    A study of this nature requires intact subjects. Turkey is 99%+ Moslem. Where are the intact Turkish men?
    Was the time to ejaculation truly recorded with a stop watch? To have sex while a technician with a stopwatch is watching intently, does not sound like a pleasant prospect.
    Most of all, delayed ejaculation does not make for better sex. Her coming one or more times before he does, now that’s better sex.

    Your Partner’s Orgasm Is Delayed Too
    ME. “Research conducted in Denmark found that wives of circumcised men tend to take longer to orgasm.”
    How is this bad?

    Condoms Don’t Slip Off
    ME. Women tell me that condoms are more likely to break with circumcised men. I also strongly suspect that circumcised men resist condom use more because they start with less sensation.
    Before my wife’s menopause, I used condoms, and they became entangled with my foreskin in a way that ruled out their slipping off.
    “…uncircumcised men have to pull back their foreskin during application as this allows the foreskin to move freely and easily during sex which helps the condom stay in place and helps the rubber stay put.”
    How this is a bad thing?

    You’re Better Protected from STIs
    ME. The CDC did not studies of this nature, only cited problematic African studies.
    The circumcised USA has the highest HIV+ rate in the first world. Japan does not have a higher HIV+ rate than South Korea. In Africa, only one country where the % of men of both circ statuses was in double digits, had a materially higher HIV+ rate among intact men than among circumcised men: Kenya.
    “It is however important to note that circumcision is not a substitute for protection such as condoms or abstinence which are more safer.”
    Agreed, which is why lingering over this point is likely to have a pernicious outcome. See risk compensation in Wikipedia.

    It Reduces Your Chances Of Having Cancer
    ME. What genital cancers are more common in Europe than in the USA? More common in Japan than in South Korea? More common in Greece and Italy than in Israel?

    “…take your personal hygiene seriously by taking a shower after sex while retracting the foreskin of your penis to ensure it is properly washed.”
    ME. Doing this pretty much eliminates any need for prophylactic circumcision.

  14. A Google search for “functions of the foreskin” is truly eye-opening. The foreskin is an erogenous zone with thousands of specialized nerve endings that produce pleasure. It also facilitates comfortable intercourse by providing a gliding action.

  15. I’m sorry for your loss ! Cognitive dissonance is a real problem in these/our baby cutting nations…. maybe some day humans will see the absolute barbarianisim and sexual rape in the unnecessary cutting of a babies genitals! SICK

  16. All these fake ass white racists here telling us about circumcision with their ugly, stinking dicks. Writer, you forgot to add that uncircumcised dicks stink as well. Circumcision is now barbaric. These people are just funny. No wonder your women keep going after Nigerian dicks. Get yourselves cut and stop yapping nonsense

    1. “Get yourselves cut and stop yapping nonsense” thank goodness circumcision can be preformed at ANY AGE. If showering is too difficult, an adult can CONSENT to this elective surgery.

    2. Lots of body parts stink if you don’t wash them (including circumcised dicks). Washing is the answer though, not cutting parts off.

      I’d pay a year’s salary rather than be circumcised. Why would I want the most sensitive and pleasurable parts cut off? That little bit of skin makes a big difference.

  17. Dear https://www.360nobs.com,

    Your article represents the epitome of American propaganda based on false claims. If I were you I would remove this article immediately. It is an embarrassment to your publication.

    I am sharing your article over the globe, for shaming purposes. The world needs to be aware of this sickness within our country.

    1. Thank you for your concern, Mundaca. The writer has every right to write what he wills as long as he doesn’t slander anyone’s character. Feel free to send in your own written article to dispute his and we will publish it.
      And by the way, we don’t feel embarrassed in anyway. Feel free to try to ‘shame’ us.

      1. These are the same people who believe they have the right to mutilate an infant who is unable to give consent. The truth is emerging and I am glad to be on the side on those who do not support this human rights violation. By promoting a human rights violation you are just as guilty as those who cut.

  18. I’m so tired of efforts to paint circumcision as this wonderful thing. The best case scenario with circumcision is that a man is left with a semi-functional sex organ and penile scarring.

  19. There couldn’t be a better portrait of sour grapes.

    This guy wants to talk about desensitivity and inorgasmia as desirable outcomes. This is why women fake orgasms; it’s been a few hours and you’re not even close.

    I’m intact and I’ve never had problems with condoms. Can a guy who doesn’t know what having an intact organ feels like even be talking about a struggle he’s never experienced? How pretentious. 70% of men globally, or so, aren’t circumcised. Is there an epidemic of condoms slipping off in the world I don’t know about?

    No, circumcision does not, cannot prevent STD’s. Circumcision is so ineffective at preventing them that the WHO stresses that circumcised men and their partners must still use condoms for any real protection.

    80% of American men are circumcised from birth. And yet, according to the CIA World Factbook, we have a higher HIV prevalence than 53 countries where circumcision is rare or not practiced. We have more HIV than MEXICO.

    HIV prevalence was higher in circumcised men in 10 out of 18 African countries.

    People want to talk about male circumcision as if this were about a genuine interest in public health. What if female circumcision were shown to have the same “protective” effect as male circumcision? Would you do it to your daughter? Would publications be posting stories of women encouraging other women to appreciate the fact they were forcibly circumcised?


    Let’s not lose focus on the issue here.

    The foreskin is not a birth defect. Neither is it a congenital deformity or genetic anomaly akin to a 6th finger or a cleft. Neither is it a medical condition like a ruptured appendix or diseased gall bladder. Neither is it a dead part of the body, like the umbilical cord, hair, or fingernails.

    The foreskin is not “extra skin.” The foreskin is normal, natural, healthy, functioning tissue, present in all males at birth; it is as intrinsic to male genitalia as labia are to female genitalia.

    Unless there is a medical or clinical indication, the circumcision of a healthy, non-consenting individuals is a deliberate wound; it is the destruction of normal, healthy tissue, the permanent disfigurement of normal, healthy organs, and by very definition, infant genital mutilation, and a violation of the most basic of human rights.

    Without medical or clinical indication, doctors have absolutely no business performing surgery in healthy, non-consenting individuals, much less be eliciting any kind of “decision” from parents.

    Genital mutilation, whether it be wrapped in culture, religion or “research” is still genital mutilation.

    It is mistaken, the belief that the right amount of “science” can be used to legitimize the deliberate violation of basic human rights.

  20. Two million years of evolution designed human males to have a foreskin, and then modern idiots attempt to outthink evolution?? I look forward to the day when baby boys aren’t mutilated and when sex can be enjoyed by both men and women the way NATURE INTENDED.

  21. To Rida, so vagina doe not stink?? It is the worse! No wonder you women have a shelve in the pharmacy to douche leaving a fresh and clean “box”.
    I find this article to be full of s–t! I’m intact and never encountered a problem mentioned in the article including the smell which is exactly like circumcised penis.
    You will still get infected by STD and HIV regardless, condom is the ONLY way to protect form the diseases and hygiene also is part of the preventive profylaxis to a healthy intac penis…what’s so hard about that??? Enough of this circumcising propaganda that’s full of greed among the doctors and pharmaceutical companies….Leave the male newborn children alone as mother nature intended them to be, NATURAL.

  22. My dad had his seven sons circumcised at birth. As we grew up, he developed physical and psychological dysfunctions which are caused from the nerve damage and trauma caused from his own ritual infant circumcision and watched his sons develop some of the same problems as we grew up. When he learned about the negative effects from sexually assaulting, traumatizing, and mutilating men as infants, and that circumcision caused his sons to loose desire at becoming fathers, he apologized and begged our forgiveness for forcing circumcision on us and begged us for grandchildren. It was too late. We were not thankful for his ignorance. People who’s religions depend on having faith in circumcision make up all kinds of unethical and immoral ideas to justify their faith in ritual and childhood circumcision, going as far as to claim females must be circumcised as well for the same reasons. The need to justify circumcision is a psychosis based on misinformation, superstitions, and a psychopathic mentality. If you learn about the natural neurological functions and the physiological development of both sexes prepuces, it becomes clear that forced infant circumcision is used as religious, racist and sexist population control on weak minded uneducated people.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.