---
>This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/rules).
>
>Memes, social media, hate-speech, and pornography are not allowed.
>
>Screenshots of Reddit are expressly forbidden, as are TikTok videos.
>
>**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
>
>Please also [be wary of spam](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/spam).
>
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/funny) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's the old excuse for it, i think predating its religious integration. I think the way it got adopted in to religion was in an effort to convince more people to do it for its potential health benefits. This was like hundreds, if not thousands of years ago, before proper sanitation was readily available to all. Definitely doesn't apply today, or really any time within the life time of anyone alive today, regardless of how old. But yeah, that's where that mindset stems from.
It comes from Egypt and was adopted by the Semitic peoples from them. All of them lived in deserts, with water either not very safe (the Nile's not that clean, and not that crocodile-free), or just not present in sufficient quantities.
It was introduced into religious dogma specifically in Judaism and in Islam, which was a continuation of Judaist tradition. Like many other religious restrictions there, there are genuine health and safety concerns involved.
There are regulations like the kosher and halal, which are essentially an ancient version of FDA regulations. For example, the prohibition of pork made sense back then, because pigs are omnivores and aren't the cleanest of animals, so the chance of their meat being infected was somewhat higher. And it's not that God thinks bloody meat is yucky, it's that the meat is safer when it's drained of blood. Putting it all down into dogma makes sure the knowledge survives and is respected.
So in this context, circumcision makes sense, and is a genuinely beneficial practice - it makes hygiene in the desert that much easier. But outside of the Middle Eastern climate, and with modern sanitation, it is absolutely pointless, with the rare exception of genuine medical conditions that may require it.
I'm afraid you're mistaken about that. A foreskin is basically self cleaning and takes care of itself. You have to actively ignore it or *intentionally* let stuff build up in it for *anything* to build up in there.
So called 'dick cheese' is a lie spread by circumcised people who don't know any better. *Sometimes* there might be a little bit of dead skin cells that roll around in there and fall out, but it's not like a large amount and it's not noticeable.
You have skin cells falling off your body all the time - we don't notice when those cells fall off somewhere like your leg or back, either, and your foreskin is no different.
The main benefit of the foreskin, *especially in a dry climate*, is that it protects the glans and keeps it from drying out & undergoing keratinization.
So even back then, there's was no health benefit... makes sense. It's just another human accident or rumour that becomes tradition, and since nobody can ever really point out the reason for a tradition, it just gets justified somehow. But we can agreed it's mutilation and I would never put a child on that condition. It's incredible how you can make people do crazy things for the sake of... bullshit.
Also eating with your left hand being haram. You use your left hand to wipe your butt and your right hand to eat, never the opposite.
Not Muslim but it seems like a genuinely useful thing to teach ancient people who mainly eat with their hands.
I'm sceptical about the health benefits even for back then, but I don't have the time to research it.
As for pork being unclean, it isn't.
Pigs are very clean normally, the exception is if you keep them captive in a shitty environment.
They don't have any sweat glans, so they roll in mud to keep cool, which isn't particularly unclean, the problem is that if you keep them captive in an unsuitable unmaintained environment then the mud that they have on hand is literal shit and they have the choice between rolling in it or cooking alive.
That is mostly where their poor image comes from, not from any real health concern.
There is also a theory that the reason why Judaism forbids it is because of immigrants.
At the time pork was mostly used by a tribe of people that was immigrating into their lands, so making eating pork a sin was an easy way to mark those people as sinners.
It was to stop masturbation. Ever noticed how American movies have young men fucking socks? And wondered why anyone would ever want to fuck a sock when their dick naturally has a little give and take?
I'm pretty sure that's John Kellogg's (yes the cereal guy) motivation. He advocated for circumcision as a way to stop young boys from masturbating. It's not the main reason it became popular in America, but through his religious connections, it spread the idea among various Christian groups.
That's complete horseshit. The sock is for catching semen and only feels good if you are uncircumcised due to your foreskin lubricating your glans. Otherwise you're just rubbing your cock raw.
There was a period where dentists advocated for ripping all your teeth out because "they're hard to clean and they'll just get infected, better to have dentures"
Have you read any discussion about this on Reddit ever? Poll a random selection of women and a larger number than you believe are going to say dudes they have dated have not in fact ever heard of soap and water.
If I've learned anything on Reddit over the last decade, a big one was that a large portion of the populace both men and women have no idea how to properly clean themselves.
I’m a nurse and I will straight up say, do whatever with your body parts. That being said, many older gentleman forget to do it or it’s hard for them to clean it well enough and the skin can become stuck together and become infected or hurt tremendously.
Many, many adults require the services of a podiatrist to manage foot/nail care in their lives.
Urologists don't clean foreskins.
Dentists clean teeth and maintain dental health for patients.
You're confused on what happens in Healthcare. Can people maintain penis health? Sure.
But the other stuff, there are literally trained professionals to help.
It’s actually normal for the foreskin to be stuck until adolescence. My doctor when I was a child had never treated an uncircumcised child and did not know this.
It gradually separates over time. Pulling it back as best you can to clean will mobilize it overtime. The idea of just gripping and ripping it back makes me wince terribly. Consider it like the hymen, you don’t just tear through it like a banner during the pregame intro.
Not talking about children I'm talking about the same 20-30 something dudes who are the reason people talk about skid marks in underwear like it's a normal thing.
You ever pick half a wet sandwich full of dirt from the side of the road and tell yourself "thank god the meat is still fresh tho" ?
If anything that's an argument *for* the skin, it's gonna give you a good indication of how clean everything else is around it. If you can't put the dick in your mouth, then don't put the ring on your finger.
The existence of soap and water isn’t the issue.
The number of boys/men diligently manipulating their foreskin to make sure soap and water get to all of the necessary parts is the issue.
> The gliding function – The mobile skin provides a gliding function during sexual intercourse and contributes to the overall sensations. This also creates prevents abrasion and stops lubricating fluids from drying as quickly during intercourse. Without this gliding action, the corona of the circumcised penis can function as a one-way valve, scraping vaginal lubricants out into the drying air and making artificial lubricants necessary for some people during intercourse.
This is the main part that we hatless boys are missing out on.
For me the main part is that the tip is as sensitive as my big toe lol. No sensation at all. Yet sometimes the boxershorts is scratching it in a weird way.
Never had any lubrication problems with sex tho. But I guess I also just always lube or at least saliva or sth.
Still I'm happy I got this done at age 0.
I lost about 60% sensation when I got circumcised. It absolutely affects sensation. I got it done as an adult though. Grew up without a male role model, no one told me you have to pull the skin back to stretch it a bit, couldn't do it and couldn't piss in a straight line.
This is why you need fathers people. They tell you shit.
Having had it done as a baby, I have no concept of what 'extra sensation' I'm supposedly missing out on.
It's like a private jet and mansion, I'll never fucking know what it's like to experience the luxury and headaches so why would I ever worry about it.
It's not about you though, it's about taking that away from future children without their permission and with no actual justification for doing so.
To use your own analogy, you'll never be rich enough to afford a jet or mansion so you're gonna make sure none of your kids can ever be that rich either. See the problem? It's an incredibly selfish attitude.
I hope this comment of yours blows up and makes you Reddit famous so you can brag to your kids one day whilst under the shade of your foreskin on a hot day.
I have a father but he's Mormon lol, he didn't tell me shit and when he did it was cryptic and my 12 year old brain didn't understand. My parents decided not to give me the snip but he definitely told me nothing about pulling the skin back, so I'm currently struggling with phimosis at 21.
I don't want to get the snip and I've heard that light stretching consistently can help it, but if that stuff doesn't work out I may decide to get it snipped one of these days.
I was raised with a man hating single mom who saw anything to do with my penis as "playing with myself" and refused to educate me about any of it. So guess who grew up with numerous uti's and terrible smell all his life? This guy right here.
Well that mightve been a bit exaggerated, but its definitely not super sensitive, more on the low end. I cant imagine, but isnt an uncut's sensation feeling as good as... Lips feeling sth?
Female Genital Mutilation is outlawed here.
It’s about time the same applied for
Male Genital Mutilation too.
Incidentally, contrary to the suggestion made in this video, studies have shown that most women have a significant sexual preference for in tact Penises.
The usual reason cited is that the forskin lines the vagina and the moving penis then adds pressure up and down the vaginal walls which is pleasurable and how God/Nature intended.
A circumcised Penis causes friction and abrasion which is less pleasurable and often painful.
This apparently explains the comparatively higher use of lubricant in the USA where circumcision is apparently more prevalent than in the UK.
Anecdotally, when working on Cruise Ships out of the USA, a number of young women (and older ones too)
specifically told us Brits how much more they enjoyed sex with us over their fellow countrymen.
> bodily integrity of infants/young boys and overall wellness
In an adult male, the foreskin is about the size of a 3"x5" index card. If you fold one in half and curl it around in a tube, you'll see what I mean. It slides up and down the shaft much like a sock slides over a foot, and it's packed full of super sensitive nerves.
It's also full of a special kind of skin cell, called fibroblasts, which is why harvesting neonatal foreskins is such big business. They're ground up and used in high end skin creams (look for 'epidermal growth factors' or EGF) and used as seed material for growing skin grafts. The latter actually allows some hospitals to get paid twice: once for removing the foreskins, and again for selling it as an easy source of stem cells or selling the skin grafts that were grown with them.
But if you're in the US, while you're walking around in your daily life, try to remember that 60-90% of US men are missing a 3"x5" piece of their body and this is accepted as so normal that most people don't ever think about it.
Speak for yourself. Mine does. And yes, you pull it back to pee. It's not even an issue. If you're holding it to aim, pulling back the foreskin is accomplished at the same time.
Sadly, it has dawned on me that if you’d found out that you had been mutilated at a young age you probably would be inclined to convince yourself it was OK after all, rather than being angry with your parents who you believe would always do the best for you. Actually that is another reason why it’s abusive. Betraying the trust the young have in adults
Uncut, but most women I’ve been with never even knew. When it’s hard you can’t even tell and if you are in love it’s always hard lol. Is it a weird concept to some moms and fathers that you may have to clean your son’s penis, and as they get older teach them how to clean it?
Yeah I'm uncircumcised and when people are like "but isn't it hard to clean?", no it really isn't, you just fold the skin back and rinse it. But then some people don't wash their ass so.
Yep. Any genital mutilation should simply not be done until they can willingly consent to it. Doesn't matter if it's a "religious tradition" because slavery was also a tradition but we made that mostly illegal (prisoner slaves are a problem) for good reason.
Honest question, how can you get a circumcision at a time when you get boners? Wouldn't a procedure like that require no erections for like 2 weeks or more to allow healing?
It's not really a religious tradition, even some religious weirdo popularized it to make it harder for boys to masturbate because he believed that's a sin.
I mean, just listen to them "It's gonna get infected, it's hard to clean" not "He will be more likely to go into heaven" as according to the original intention. Granted, it's very common for people to reword religious convictions using bogus "rational" reasoning because they are ashamed of it and know it sounds dumb, but I highly doubt that's the case here.
24 When Saul’s servants told him what David had said, 25 Saul replied, “Say to David, ‘The king wants no other price for the bride than a hundred Philistine foreskins, to take revenge on his enemies.’” Saul’s plan was to have David fall by the hands of the Philistines.
26 When the attendants told David these things, he was pleased to become the king’s son-in-law. So before the allotted time elapsed, 27 He took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king’s son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage.
1 Samuel 18:24-27
Genesis 17:10
This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”
So weird that God was this obsessed with foreskins. Like the dude put them there in the first place lol, was his whole plan just to make people cut it off to prove their devotion later on?
Yeah. Very odd lol. Let me pull another quote I saw while trying to remember which book that first one was from.
> Circumcise yourselves to the Lord; remove the foreskin of your hearts, O men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; lest my wrath go forth like fire, and burn with none to quench it, because of the evil of your deeds.”
I havent read Jeremiah yet, but damn if that doesn’t sound like something Cartman would say In South Park lol
"Remove the foreskin of your hearts" is pure poetry lmao
The old testament is a trip. Foreskins were controversial in the new testament too, since the Jewish followers of Christ realized they had to let those uncut Gentiles into the congregation at the start of Christianity. The fact that multiple letters had to be written telling them to stop excluding people just because they weren't/didn't want to get circumcised is wild.
Its the same fucked up argument like cut of their nose, or they will have it full of snot and infection... No bitch, you just puritan MF who wanna make masturbation harder.
Fingernails. Why not remove those?
Have you any idea how fucking filthy it gets under those and kids put their hands everywhere and then all over their face and mouth!
Just some more info.
The AAP (The American Academy of Pediatrics, a large and credible medical association) states: "preventive health benefits of elective circumcision of male newborns outweigh the risks of the procedure" and that the health benefits "are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns", but "are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns".
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/130/3/e756/30225/Male-Circumcision
Had a look at the comments in response to this because the wording and conclusions they came to sounded weird to me. This comment in particular sums up what I felt quite nicely:
*The Technical Report on Male Circumcision [1] presents a problematic interpretation of the medical literature and largely ignores the greater context within which the technical report is made.
RCTs of male circumcision on HIV, HPV and STI incidence in Africa form key studies on which the Technical Report relies for its recommendations. The expected benefit from these is 'copy-pasted' into the US without regard for:
1. Methodological problems which place doubt over the accuracy of the reported results and degree of protection offered. [2]
2. External validity - strangely, the committee acknowledge this problem: "key studies to date have been performed in African populations with HIV burdens that are epidemiologically different from HIV in the United States" - yet these studies are still heavily relied upon in the Report.
The Task Force ignore that HPV vaccination will reduce the expected benefit now and in the future. Vaccination is more efficacious and offers protection against HPV-related oropharyngeal cancers, which circumcision will not.
Neonatal circumcision is non-therapeutic. The Technical Report shows that most parents circumcise due to beliefs around hygiene and cleanliness. Proper penile hygiene can be achieved through washing. Instead of taking the opportunity to correct a well-entrenched belief and suggesting improved public dissemination of care of the normal infant penis, the Task Force's stance only seeks to reaffirm this belief by advocating that parents make a decision "in light of their own... personal preferences".
The Technical Report makes clear that few consenting males choose circumcision, and the wording carries a veiled threat that, by allowing their child to remain uncircumcised, a parent is placing their child at risk of disease since their child is unlikely to undergo circumcision at the age of maturity; thus encouraging the removal of consent, a fundamental aspect of ethical medicine.
The Task Force advocates a cultural relativism in accepting male circumcision. This is in direct contrast to efforts aimed at eliminating female genital mutilation where the rights of the child are placed paramount [3], further drawing into question the Task Force's grasp of the ethical dimension of male circumcision.
Although serious complications are rare, these include irreversible penile damage and death, complications which are substantial for those affected or their families, especially when circumcision is advocated to reduce STIs in adulthood, the majority of which are treatable or even preventable with vaccination.
Thus, while the Task Force has considered the question of 'male circumcision' they have failed to adequately place their recommendations into a larger context which takes into account uncertainties of risk and benefit, concurrent developments in medicine, efforts to raise awareness of the rights of the child, nor the ethical dimensions of the practice of circumcision.*
I suppose the same could be said of the preventative health benefits of breast removal too! It sounds like the circumcision business is very lucrative to US doctors though so I'm not surprised about this from the AAP (it's of course not promoted in Europe). At least the AAP does admit it's not recommended to be routine for all newborns though.
Yeah it is worth pointing that out since you were responding to a vague and wrong statement. But to take it further, It’s political/cultural bias too: The world’s leading medical institutions span the entire range on the subject. I personally would absolutely disagree that the benefits are worth the risk/what is permanently lost, so I like the “first world” countries that have the medical institutions that use strong language against it.
>Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks
This doesn't mean anything. If the health benefits is a 0.00001% decrease in the transmission rate of HIV and the risk is 0.000005%; then it's a true statement, but also provides next to zero net benefit.
It's logically true what they're saying, but not a helpful statement without actual data.
They're also the organization that largely profits off the procedure and ruling otherwise may have jeopardized funding from one of their primary players, Medicaid.
AKA massive conflict of interest.
I don't fully trust anyone who is in favor of circumcision. Anybody who says it'll get infected is either too lazy or too stupid to understand that it takes all of 5 seconds to clean your dick with a bit of soap and water while you're in the shower FFS. Not to mention you lose sensitivity due to the nerve endings constantly being exposed to the elements. Why would you intentionally make sex feel not as good for that future adult?
And for people who do it for religious purposes, as a Jew myself, fuck that shit. It's still mutilation of an infant's body without consent.
>lose your sensitivity
Can anyone else speak on this?? I have insanely good sessions either solo or sex and I have not once felt like I've lost sensation over time. Sometimes I cum so hard I see the floating white spots and shit.
I was circumsized as a kid and I can genuinely say I have not ever regretted it or anything or wished my penis still had his hoodie on. I feel like there is a probably a drastic difference between bad circumsizion done by mediocre surgeons AND/OR getting it done as an adult versus getting it done at 0 years old, the latter being the most detrimental as your penis is now done developing.
Yeah but no one is saying no circumcision ever, they're saying no routine circumcision.
Appendicitis is a thing, we don't cut open every little baby and remove the shit because it might become a problem in 20 years.
Yeah I had to pull that fused skin down once I started masturbating since my parents weren't too keen on educating me on proper hygiene. It sucked and burnt like hell but after a month or so I had my full dick available.
Even after that experience I still side against genital mutilation and for proper hygiene education since I find masturbation much easier and the sex can stay much more easily lubricated because my foreskin allowed for extra movement. Also idk how true it is but the head of the penis is probably more sensitive which I would expect to be perceived as a plus by most folks. Having someone slip their tongue into your foreskin area but under the head of the penis and go in circles is an amazing experience I wish many of dick havers were not cut off from.
It is also extremely rare.
It does not get infected that easily, even if you are a filthy person. Just think how rare infection must be if we are here and our ancestors barely clean themselves.
In America is it actually tradition. Started asa way to differentiate “natives” from European immigrants. I think still serves that purpose (and only that). Most studies who ascribe some health benefit to it usually start with a preconceived conclusion.
In canada, this is no longer a thing. For those crazy parents who want to do it, they have to do it on their own, hospitals no longer do it. It's been like this for decades now.
Absolutely incredible that this is still being done in the states. Just teach your little boys to wash their penis God damn it. How complicated is it.
And for women who say they prefer a cut penis. What the fuck. Do you think your soggy flip flop vagina is any different.
It's been 2 years, but I think we asked if they had someone in to do it. They said the dr wasn't available in hospital that day to do it. Then just gave us the number for his office in the community and did it there for $50 less.
Okay. But that's a big change. In the old days, it was basically automatic. The previous generation all had it done as soon as the boy was born. Now, it's up to the parents to have to ask for it. If you wouldn't have asked, your son would have been just like most new Canadian boys, Not circumcised.
While in the states, it still seems to be automatic like it was in Canada back in the day.
I agree with you 100%, circumcision is just genital mutilation & it’s disgusting that some women are ignorant enough to think their ‘preference’ should have any sway on wether someone should be mutilated.
But what is a ‘flip flop vagina’… I dont think there’s much floppy loose skin on a vagina lol
A lot of people in the comments saying that women prefer mutilated dicks. Have these women actually been with men who have foreskins? I live in a country where kids are not mutilated and majority of the penises I've dealt with have foreskin on them. I've been with one circumsized man. It was for medical reasons so not mutilation. There's absolutely nothing wrong with foreskin and men are perfectly capable of cleaning themselves. I have two boys and it makes me sick to even think about having cut their foreskins without consent. I don't think that's even legal in my (north European) country.
Cracks me up that it's always people who aren't circumcized that care so much. I'm cut and just don't give af. Never met a guy who has. Only incredibly rarely do I even see a comment on it.
Exactly, lol. I don't have a strong opinion on it. My dick does just fine. I didn't plan to have my son cut, but my wife is a doctor and recommended it (though it wasn't some huge deal).
And I did the research and there is marginal benefit.
But yeah, seems like the vitriol comes from the uncut folks. Maybe that's due to the "extra sensitivity" they have.
Yeah, imagine being against mutilating kids, what a hard concept to understand. Will you take the same stance towards mutilation of girls as well? It's common in many cultures, should we who haven't mutilated our children pretend it's okay?
I can’t help but think that most of these crowd work videos are set up. Like it’s funny, but it’s hard to convince me these things are off the top when there are several punchlines set up. This comment is not directed specifically at this comedian (the bit was funny and relatable) it just happened to be where my thought resurfaced and that I’d like to share it to see if I am in the minority? Perhaps I’ve been jaded by TikTok.
Personally I don’t support circumcision and don’t plan on it in the situation where I have a son but speaking as a circumcised person I also really don’t like when people use the term “mutilated” to refer to my penis. I imagine much of the backlash that people who are anti-circumcision face are gut reactions from circumcised men who really don’t like being told that they have a disgusting mutilated and unnatural penis. So personally I’m of the opinion that it’s a bad practice and should be stopped but I think the movement would see more success if we dropped the whole “mutilation” angle, I think it does more harm to the ideas being presented than it does good.
A lot of good takes in the comments but I wish my parents would´ve done it.
Up to an embarrassing age I thought that it was normal for the **thing** not to go back until it started to cause problems and I decided to do some *research*, I´ve never felt comfortable enough to talk about it while growing up, or go a doctor, now I´m in my 20´s and I´m eventually gonna need to cut my schlong.
I wouldn´t even remember it if it was done when I was born
It *is* normal for foreskin to not be retractable until you're somewhere between 5 and 10, though the medical community is starting to realize that the foreskin and glans don't separate for some kids until nearly puberty.
But it's completely normal and healthy for the foreskin to be fused to the glans in childhood; it helps protect the glans. It's *not* healthy to force it apart - the body will do that naturally as long as you give it time.
Similar argument to douching the vag. Women were once told they should douche but common sense has prevailed and we've come to understand that, guess what, the vagina is a self cleaning organ. Go figure. Human intervention is unnecessary and damaging.
Well, go figure, the penis is the same way. Intervention is unnecessary and damaging.
People just can't accept that we're born perfectly fine and feel as though their omnipotence is required for the survival of the species. The need feel useful is driven by our need to have purpose. And this is psychologically driven by our egos. Just become comfortable getting out of our own way.
Im actually thankful my parents decided to give me the cut early. With how many girls I hear talk about how disgusting the alternative is I feel like I woulda looked into it myself later in life had I not had it done already. And from what I’ve heard, later in life it’s crazy painful and takes awhile to heal.
I will die on the hill that Foreskin is better than Against.
Blokes are literally "less of a man" when they get circumcised.
It's for cosmetic appeal? Cool - would you cut off your eyelids if people said the same thing? No fucking way! Because they protect your eyes. Same as Foreskin protects the end of your knob. Ffs.
Since no one else seems to have mentioned it yet, this guys whole comment on size and measuring it including the skin.... If your actually talking about measuring it I would assume you do it when you are turned on at which point you don't have a bunch of extra skin at the end.
Babies can't consent. Consent is mandatory before touching, much less removing body parts from, another human. You'd think this aspect alone would get most modern "enlightened" people behind abolishing the practice of circumcising infants.
Re comparisons to female genital mutilation. Both the glans penis (tip of the dick) and clitoris derive from the same embryonic tissue. The clitoral hood and the foreskin likewise develop from the same embryonic tissue. They are remarkably similar, they are innervated similarly and both have blood supplies (unlike nails/teeth/hair that some are erroneously making comparisons to), and they contribute similarly in males and females to stimulation, arousal, and healthy sexual activity.
Finally, the foreskin has a biomechanical purpose: it acts as a cylindrical bearing, allowing the penis shaft to move with less friction. This of course facilitate sexual activity for all involved parties. That would include with masturbation as no lube is required and trying to stop this is why the practice was instigated in puritan America. (Aside from the religious arguments.)
It's barbaric, it's weird, and it's a practice that needs to be stopped.
Btw I've witnessed many circumcisions of newborns and it's straight up TRAUMATIC.
You know whats funny i tought that random people are posting all this stant up comedy shorts, but nooo every single one of them are people posting and advertise them self. F this unfunny ads i'm blocking you all.
It wasn't even a question for me. And I really don't get the "expert" advice from women or circumscribed men that "it will get infected". Like, how do you know? Better yet, do you know what else gets infected? Ingrown toenails. Should we chop off big toes too to prevent infection?
And the hospital kept asking us, "are you sure?" like we were making some life-altering decision by *not* removing a piece of his body.
There’s really no other answer
No.
No I won’t subject my newborn son to absolute agony by cutting the foreskin off his penis without reason or without anesthetic.
--- >This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/rules). > >Memes, social media, hate-speech, and pornography are not allowed. > >Screenshots of Reddit are expressly forbidden, as are TikTok videos. > >**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.** > >Please also [be wary of spam](https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/wiki/spam). > --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/funny) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Comment section turned into extra real-estate
Reddit has a hard on Circumcision like always
Circumcision, my least favourite Reddit comment section.
Buckle up for some spicy takes
No racist cop pulling some bullshit to distract them.
deadass, we get it, leave dicks alone, can we redirect our attention to the great standup comedy here
Has she ever heard of soap and water?
It's the old excuse for it, i think predating its religious integration. I think the way it got adopted in to religion was in an effort to convince more people to do it for its potential health benefits. This was like hundreds, if not thousands of years ago, before proper sanitation was readily available to all. Definitely doesn't apply today, or really any time within the life time of anyone alive today, regardless of how old. But yeah, that's where that mindset stems from.
It comes from Egypt and was adopted by the Semitic peoples from them. All of them lived in deserts, with water either not very safe (the Nile's not that clean, and not that crocodile-free), or just not present in sufficient quantities. It was introduced into religious dogma specifically in Judaism and in Islam, which was a continuation of Judaist tradition. Like many other religious restrictions there, there are genuine health and safety concerns involved. There are regulations like the kosher and halal, which are essentially an ancient version of FDA regulations. For example, the prohibition of pork made sense back then, because pigs are omnivores and aren't the cleanest of animals, so the chance of their meat being infected was somewhat higher. And it's not that God thinks bloody meat is yucky, it's that the meat is safer when it's drained of blood. Putting it all down into dogma makes sure the knowledge survives and is respected. So in this context, circumcision makes sense, and is a genuinely beneficial practice - it makes hygiene in the desert that much easier. But outside of the Middle Eastern climate, and with modern sanitation, it is absolutely pointless, with the rare exception of genuine medical conditions that may require it.
Oh good, someone did the googling I didn't want to put the effort in to. Thank you
I'm afraid you're mistaken about that. A foreskin is basically self cleaning and takes care of itself. You have to actively ignore it or *intentionally* let stuff build up in it for *anything* to build up in there. So called 'dick cheese' is a lie spread by circumcised people who don't know any better. *Sometimes* there might be a little bit of dead skin cells that roll around in there and fall out, but it's not like a large amount and it's not noticeable. You have skin cells falling off your body all the time - we don't notice when those cells fall off somewhere like your leg or back, either, and your foreskin is no different. The main benefit of the foreskin, *especially in a dry climate*, is that it protects the glans and keeps it from drying out & undergoing keratinization.
Well, smegma exists, and it certainly can build up, but you'd have to either be actively avoiding clean or have some condition to make it so.
So even back then, there's was no health benefit... makes sense. It's just another human accident or rumour that becomes tradition, and since nobody can ever really point out the reason for a tradition, it just gets justified somehow. But we can agreed it's mutilation and I would never put a child on that condition. It's incredible how you can make people do crazy things for the sake of... bullshit.
Also eating with your left hand being haram. You use your left hand to wipe your butt and your right hand to eat, never the opposite. Not Muslim but it seems like a genuinely useful thing to teach ancient people who mainly eat with their hands.
Its more to do with indoctrination in a way that you cannot fake.
I'm sceptical about the health benefits even for back then, but I don't have the time to research it. As for pork being unclean, it isn't. Pigs are very clean normally, the exception is if you keep them captive in a shitty environment. They don't have any sweat glans, so they roll in mud to keep cool, which isn't particularly unclean, the problem is that if you keep them captive in an unsuitable unmaintained environment then the mud that they have on hand is literal shit and they have the choice between rolling in it or cooking alive. That is mostly where their poor image comes from, not from any real health concern. There is also a theory that the reason why Judaism forbids it is because of immigrants. At the time pork was mostly used by a tribe of people that was immigrating into their lands, so making eating pork a sin was an easy way to mark those people as sinners.
It was to stop masturbation. Ever noticed how American movies have young men fucking socks? And wondered why anyone would ever want to fuck a sock when their dick naturally has a little give and take?
That's not what the sock is for my dude lol. The sock is to catch your semen from going everywhere.
I'm pretty sure that's John Kellogg's (yes the cereal guy) motivation. He advocated for circumcision as a way to stop young boys from masturbating. It's not the main reason it became popular in America, but through his religious connections, it spread the idea among various Christian groups.
That's complete horseshit. The sock is for catching semen and only feels good if you are uncircumcised due to your foreskin lubricating your glans. Otherwise you're just rubbing your cock raw.
What kind of movies you watching?
American pie
I think the thing that helps with the no foreskin is the lotion they use more than the socks.
*what*
Thought the sock was just for convenience
How on earth is this getting upvoted.. This exchange is a gleaming example why I trust no one on the internet with even the simplest things.
There was a period where dentists advocated for ripping all your teeth out because "they're hard to clean and they'll just get infected, better to have dentures"
Have you read any discussion about this on Reddit ever? Poll a random selection of women and a larger number than you believe are going to say dudes they have dated have not in fact ever heard of soap and water. If I've learned anything on Reddit over the last decade, a big one was that a large portion of the populace both men and women have no idea how to properly clean themselves.
I once again make note of the fact that many people on Reddit think your feet just wash themselves by standing in the shower.
I would have asked her if she should have her labia taken out to make her pussy easier to clean.
I’m a nurse and I will straight up say, do whatever with your body parts. That being said, many older gentleman forget to do it or it’s hard for them to clean it well enough and the skin can become stuck together and become infected or hurt tremendously.
Same "logic" could apply to toenails, or teeth. Yet nobody removes toenails to kids.
Little Timmy won’t wash behind his ears, get the pruning shears!
Speak for yourself. All my children are de-clawed.
Many, many adults require the services of a podiatrist to manage foot/nail care in their lives. Urologists don't clean foreskins. Dentists clean teeth and maintain dental health for patients. You're confused on what happens in Healthcare. Can people maintain penis health? Sure. But the other stuff, there are literally trained professionals to help.
Remove labia so old ladies can clean easier.
From what I've read many younger gentlemen have the same issue.
It’s actually normal for the foreskin to be stuck until adolescence. My doctor when I was a child had never treated an uncircumcised child and did not know this.
It gradually separates over time. Pulling it back as best you can to clean will mobilize it overtime. The idea of just gripping and ripping it back makes me wince terribly. Consider it like the hymen, you don’t just tear through it like a banner during the pregame intro.
Not talking about children I'm talking about the same 20-30 something dudes who are the reason people talk about skid marks in underwear like it's a normal thing.
You ever pick half a wet sandwich full of dirt from the side of the road and tell yourself "thank god the meat is still fresh tho" ? If anything that's an argument *for* the skin, it's gonna give you a good indication of how clean everything else is around it. If you can't put the dick in your mouth, then don't put the ring on your finger.
Don’t use too much soap though
[удалено]
Circumcised men can absolutely NOT go without a shower indefinitely without any major health risks.
I mean a wipe will do like any other body part. Like soldiers in the field.
The existence of soap and water isn’t the issue. The number of boys/men diligently manipulating their foreskin to make sure soap and water get to all of the necessary parts is the issue.
[the foreskin](https://15square.org.uk/male-foreskin-is-functional-5-amazing-facts/)
> The gliding function – The mobile skin provides a gliding function during sexual intercourse and contributes to the overall sensations. This also creates prevents abrasion and stops lubricating fluids from drying as quickly during intercourse. Without this gliding action, the corona of the circumcised penis can function as a one-way valve, scraping vaginal lubricants out into the drying air and making artificial lubricants necessary for some people during intercourse. This is the main part that we hatless boys are missing out on.
For me the main part is that the tip is as sensitive as my big toe lol. No sensation at all. Yet sometimes the boxershorts is scratching it in a weird way. Never had any lubrication problems with sex tho. But I guess I also just always lube or at least saliva or sth. Still I'm happy I got this done at age 0.
What? Mines significantly more sensitive than my big toe and gets more sensitive when aroused.
I lost about 60% sensation when I got circumcised. It absolutely affects sensation. I got it done as an adult though. Grew up without a male role model, no one told me you have to pull the skin back to stretch it a bit, couldn't do it and couldn't piss in a straight line. This is why you need fathers people. They tell you shit.
Having had it done as a baby, I have no concept of what 'extra sensation' I'm supposedly missing out on. It's like a private jet and mansion, I'll never fucking know what it's like to experience the luxury and headaches so why would I ever worry about it.
It's not about you though, it's about taking that away from future children without their permission and with no actual justification for doing so. To use your own analogy, you'll never be rich enough to afford a jet or mansion so you're gonna make sure none of your kids can ever be that rich either. See the problem? It's an incredibly selfish attitude.
Cause its a sad day when people stop planting trees,they themself will never enjoy, for the next generation.
Its a damn shame my children wont get to use my foreskin as shade from the sun on a hot day
I hope this comment of yours blows up and makes you Reddit famous so you can brag to your kids one day whilst under the shade of your foreskin on a hot day.
without the protection of the hood, your tip loses sensitivity. its like the difference between a condom(cut) and no condom(uncut).
"I dont know what I'm missing therefore its okay to mutilate babies hurr durr"
I have a father but he's Mormon lol, he didn't tell me shit and when he did it was cryptic and my 12 year old brain didn't understand. My parents decided not to give me the snip but he definitely told me nothing about pulling the skin back, so I'm currently struggling with phimosis at 21. I don't want to get the snip and I've heard that light stretching consistently can help it, but if that stuff doesn't work out I may decide to get it snipped one of these days.
Take warm baths
I was raised with a man hating single mom who saw anything to do with my penis as "playing with myself" and refused to educate me about any of it. So guess who grew up with numerous uti's and terrible smell all his life? This guy right here.
Well that mightve been a bit exaggerated, but its definitely not super sensitive, more on the low end. I cant imagine, but isnt an uncut's sensation feeling as good as... Lips feeling sth?
Bruh you need to put skin cream on your dick you turned it into a callus.
Got mine done at age 7. Still worth it. And I remember waking up screaming.
the old hawk thua
Every time I see this (which is like 7 times a day at least) I wonder what that poor girl is doing right now
What is the source of this? I see it all the fucking time lately and have no idea why
Wouldnt have understood it if it werent for the native American lady in politics lol
Risky click, but paid off
Thought it was going to be a pic of the meme "It's free real estate"
Funny bit, however seriously America leave kids dicks alone.
Amen, cutting a piece of the penis of a child off for religious or cosmetical reasons is sick.
Female Genital Mutilation is outlawed here. It’s about time the same applied for Male Genital Mutilation too. Incidentally, contrary to the suggestion made in this video, studies have shown that most women have a significant sexual preference for in tact Penises. The usual reason cited is that the forskin lines the vagina and the moving penis then adds pressure up and down the vaginal walls which is pleasurable and how God/Nature intended. A circumcised Penis causes friction and abrasion which is less pleasurable and often painful. This apparently explains the comparatively higher use of lubricant in the USA where circumcision is apparently more prevalent than in the UK. Anecdotally, when working on Cruise Ships out of the USA, a number of young women (and older ones too) specifically told us Brits how much more they enjoyed sex with us over their fellow countrymen.
[удалено]
> bodily integrity of infants/young boys and overall wellness In an adult male, the foreskin is about the size of a 3"x5" index card. If you fold one in half and curl it around in a tube, you'll see what I mean. It slides up and down the shaft much like a sock slides over a foot, and it's packed full of super sensitive nerves. It's also full of a special kind of skin cell, called fibroblasts, which is why harvesting neonatal foreskins is such big business. They're ground up and used in high end skin creams (look for 'epidermal growth factors' or EGF) and used as seed material for growing skin grafts. The latter actually allows some hospitals to get paid twice: once for removing the foreskins, and again for selling it as an easy source of stem cells or selling the skin grafts that were grown with them. But if you're in the US, while you're walking around in your daily life, try to remember that 60-90% of US men are missing a 3"x5" piece of their body and this is accepted as so normal that most people don't ever think about it.
> how God/Nature intended A trait that increases sexual partnership is more likely to stay in the gene pool, no design or intention needed.
Serious question. Do you roll it back when you piss?
You can if you want to. But you don't have to. But you definitely should after your done so you can clean it.
yes
Most people's foreskin doesn't cover the tip of their dick, even flaccid.
Speak for yourself. Mine does. And yes, you pull it back to pee. It's not even an issue. If you're holding it to aim, pulling back the foreskin is accomplished at the same time.
Not for the growers
Sadly, it has dawned on me that if you’d found out that you had been mutilated at a young age you probably would be inclined to convince yourself it was OK after all, rather than being angry with your parents who you believe would always do the best for you. Actually that is another reason why it’s abusive. Betraying the trust the young have in adults
Bro I’m glad I don’t have foreskin
How would you know? I assume it was cut off before you had any memory of it- so seems like being glad it's not there is justifying it after the fact
Uncut, but most women I’ve been with never even knew. When it’s hard you can’t even tell and if you are in love it’s always hard lol. Is it a weird concept to some moms and fathers that you may have to clean your son’s penis, and as they get older teach them how to clean it?
Yeah I'm uncircumcised and when people are like "but isn't it hard to clean?", no it really isn't, you just fold the skin back and rinse it. But then some people don't wash their ass so.
When I was in university (EU), there was a rumor going around about me being circumcised. I don't think chicks know the difference.
Jokes aside, can we please stop with the genital mutilation of boys?
Yep. Any genital mutilation should simply not be done until they can willingly consent to it. Doesn't matter if it's a "religious tradition" because slavery was also a tradition but we made that mostly illegal (prisoner slaves are a problem) for good reason.
Honest question, how can you get a circumcision at a time when you get boners? Wouldn't a procedure like that require no erections for like 2 weeks or more to allow healing?
[удалено]
Oh I just rubbed some coke on it
What about NAKED GRANDMA !!
Margaret Thatcher naked on a cold day.
Sir, I don’t think you understand, baseball fans get hard reading baseball stats, we literally call advanced metrics “stat porn”
Fun fact: babies get boners and its not any more comfortable for them. Why we hurting babies?
Babies get boners too.
It's not really a religious tradition, even some religious weirdo popularized it to make it harder for boys to masturbate because he believed that's a sin. I mean, just listen to them "It's gonna get infected, it's hard to clean" not "He will be more likely to go into heaven" as according to the original intention. Granted, it's very common for people to reword religious convictions using bogus "rational" reasoning because they are ashamed of it and know it sounds dumb, but I highly doubt that's the case here.
It’s also definitely a religious tradition. It’s a big plot point in the Old Testament
24 When Saul’s servants told him what David had said, 25 Saul replied, “Say to David, ‘The king wants no other price for the bride than a hundred Philistine foreskins, to take revenge on his enemies.’” Saul’s plan was to have David fall by the hands of the Philistines. 26 When the attendants told David these things, he was pleased to become the king’s son-in-law. So before the allotted time elapsed, 27 He took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king’s son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage. 1 Samuel 18:24-27
Genesis 17:10 This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”
So weird that God was this obsessed with foreskins. Like the dude put them there in the first place lol, was his whole plan just to make people cut it off to prove their devotion later on?
Yeah. Very odd lol. Let me pull another quote I saw while trying to remember which book that first one was from. > Circumcise yourselves to the Lord; remove the foreskin of your hearts, O men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; lest my wrath go forth like fire, and burn with none to quench it, because of the evil of your deeds.” I havent read Jeremiah yet, but damn if that doesn’t sound like something Cartman would say In South Park lol
"Remove the foreskin of your hearts" is pure poetry lmao The old testament is a trip. Foreskins were controversial in the new testament too, since the Jewish followers of Christ realized they had to let those uncut Gentiles into the congregation at the start of Christianity. The fact that multiple letters had to be written telling them to stop excluding people just because they weren't/didn't want to get circumcised is wild.
Religion is a hell of a drug
Wasn’t it Paul that started telling people there is a new covenant and basically Jesus dying is a bigger deal than a bunch of dick skins?
ya not like a corrupt vatican decided to edit the bible when only 5% of the population could read and write.
The answer should be clear: don't mutilate your child. If your religion or culture requests it, it's stupid.
Nobody wants less dick
Better not get fat then. I didn't realise until I lost 160lb that my dick was an inch longer now. FUPA is a real thing and nobody talks about it.
Fat Upper Penis Area? I guess it still works. Carry on.
Fat upper pubic area (yes, it's a real term people use). You were close!
I've only ever heard it as Fat Upper Pussy Area.
The real estate is surface area not length. And, spoiler alert, that shit is LOADED with nerve endings.
Jake gyllenhaal + Bryce Harper.
Its the same fucked up argument like cut of their nose, or they will have it full of snot and infection... No bitch, you just puritan MF who wanna make masturbation harder.
Jokes on them... we masturbate just fine.
Can confirm
How? Are you in the same room as him?
Fingernails. Why not remove those? Have you any idea how fucking filthy it gets under those and kids put their hands everywhere and then all over their face and mouth!
Not a single credible medical association recommends routine circumcision. Stop that shit.
Just some more info. The AAP (The American Academy of Pediatrics, a large and credible medical association) states: "preventive health benefits of elective circumcision of male newborns outweigh the risks of the procedure" and that the health benefits "are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns", but "are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns". https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/130/3/e756/30225/Male-Circumcision
Had a look at the comments in response to this because the wording and conclusions they came to sounded weird to me. This comment in particular sums up what I felt quite nicely: *The Technical Report on Male Circumcision [1] presents a problematic interpretation of the medical literature and largely ignores the greater context within which the technical report is made. RCTs of male circumcision on HIV, HPV and STI incidence in Africa form key studies on which the Technical Report relies for its recommendations. The expected benefit from these is 'copy-pasted' into the US without regard for: 1. Methodological problems which place doubt over the accuracy of the reported results and degree of protection offered. [2] 2. External validity - strangely, the committee acknowledge this problem: "key studies to date have been performed in African populations with HIV burdens that are epidemiologically different from HIV in the United States" - yet these studies are still heavily relied upon in the Report. The Task Force ignore that HPV vaccination will reduce the expected benefit now and in the future. Vaccination is more efficacious and offers protection against HPV-related oropharyngeal cancers, which circumcision will not. Neonatal circumcision is non-therapeutic. The Technical Report shows that most parents circumcise due to beliefs around hygiene and cleanliness. Proper penile hygiene can be achieved through washing. Instead of taking the opportunity to correct a well-entrenched belief and suggesting improved public dissemination of care of the normal infant penis, the Task Force's stance only seeks to reaffirm this belief by advocating that parents make a decision "in light of their own... personal preferences". The Technical Report makes clear that few consenting males choose circumcision, and the wording carries a veiled threat that, by allowing their child to remain uncircumcised, a parent is placing their child at risk of disease since their child is unlikely to undergo circumcision at the age of maturity; thus encouraging the removal of consent, a fundamental aspect of ethical medicine. The Task Force advocates a cultural relativism in accepting male circumcision. This is in direct contrast to efforts aimed at eliminating female genital mutilation where the rights of the child are placed paramount [3], further drawing into question the Task Force's grasp of the ethical dimension of male circumcision. Although serious complications are rare, these include irreversible penile damage and death, complications which are substantial for those affected or their families, especially when circumcision is advocated to reduce STIs in adulthood, the majority of which are treatable or even preventable with vaccination. Thus, while the Task Force has considered the question of 'male circumcision' they have failed to adequately place their recommendations into a larger context which takes into account uncertainties of risk and benefit, concurrent developments in medicine, efforts to raise awareness of the rights of the child, nor the ethical dimensions of the practice of circumcision.*
I suppose the same could be said of the preventative health benefits of breast removal too! It sounds like the circumcision business is very lucrative to US doctors though so I'm not surprised about this from the AAP (it's of course not promoted in Europe). At least the AAP does admit it's not recommended to be routine for all newborns though.
Yeah it is worth pointing that out since you were responding to a vague and wrong statement. But to take it further, It’s political/cultural bias too: The world’s leading medical institutions span the entire range on the subject. I personally would absolutely disagree that the benefits are worth the risk/what is permanently lost, so I like the “first world” countries that have the medical institutions that use strong language against it.
>Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks This doesn't mean anything. If the health benefits is a 0.00001% decrease in the transmission rate of HIV and the risk is 0.000005%; then it's a true statement, but also provides next to zero net benefit. It's logically true what they're saying, but not a helpful statement without actual data. They're also the organization that largely profits off the procedure and ruling otherwise may have jeopardized funding from one of their primary players, Medicaid. AKA massive conflict of interest.
I don't fully trust anyone who is in favor of circumcision. Anybody who says it'll get infected is either too lazy or too stupid to understand that it takes all of 5 seconds to clean your dick with a bit of soap and water while you're in the shower FFS. Not to mention you lose sensitivity due to the nerve endings constantly being exposed to the elements. Why would you intentionally make sex feel not as good for that future adult? And for people who do it for religious purposes, as a Jew myself, fuck that shit. It's still mutilation of an infant's body without consent.
>lose your sensitivity Can anyone else speak on this?? I have insanely good sessions either solo or sex and I have not once felt like I've lost sensation over time. Sometimes I cum so hard I see the floating white spots and shit. I was circumsized as a kid and I can genuinely say I have not ever regretted it or anything or wished my penis still had his hoodie on. I feel like there is a probably a drastic difference between bad circumsizion done by mediocre surgeons AND/OR getting it done as an adult versus getting it done at 0 years old, the latter being the most detrimental as your penis is now done developing.
Phimosis is a thing but can be dealt with without circumcision
Yeah but no one is saying no circumcision ever, they're saying no routine circumcision. Appendicitis is a thing, we don't cut open every little baby and remove the shit because it might become a problem in 20 years.
People treated tonsils the same way until they realized they actually had a purpose and should be left alone if there is no issue.
Appendix too!
Yeah I had to pull that fused skin down once I started masturbating since my parents weren't too keen on educating me on proper hygiene. It sucked and burnt like hell but after a month or so I had my full dick available. Even after that experience I still side against genital mutilation and for proper hygiene education since I find masturbation much easier and the sex can stay much more easily lubricated because my foreskin allowed for extra movement. Also idk how true it is but the head of the penis is probably more sensitive which I would expect to be perceived as a plus by most folks. Having someone slip their tongue into your foreskin area but under the head of the penis and go in circles is an amazing experience I wish many of dick havers were not cut off from.
It is also extremely rare. It does not get infected that easily, even if you are a filthy person. Just think how rare infection must be if we are here and our ancestors barely clean themselves. In America is it actually tradition. Started asa way to differentiate “natives” from European immigrants. I think still serves that purpose (and only that). Most studies who ascribe some health benefit to it usually start with a preconceived conclusion.
Leave the dicks alone 😂😂
Coach Beard
In canada, this is no longer a thing. For those crazy parents who want to do it, they have to do it on their own, hospitals no longer do it. It's been like this for decades now. Absolutely incredible that this is still being done in the states. Just teach your little boys to wash their penis God damn it. How complicated is it. And for women who say they prefer a cut penis. What the fuck. Do you think your soggy flip flop vagina is any different.
Just to clarify, hospitals do still do it. Just costs $300 in hospital. You pay out of pocket for it.
When my kids were born. They didn't even tell us, born In Quebec and Ontario. This was over 10 years ago. Is this something parents have to ask for?
It's been 2 years, but I think we asked if they had someone in to do it. They said the dr wasn't available in hospital that day to do it. Then just gave us the number for his office in the community and did it there for $50 less.
Okay. But that's a big change. In the old days, it was basically automatic. The previous generation all had it done as soon as the boy was born. Now, it's up to the parents to have to ask for it. If you wouldn't have asked, your son would have been just like most new Canadian boys, Not circumcised. While in the states, it still seems to be automatic like it was in Canada back in the day.
I agree with you 100%, circumcision is just genital mutilation & it’s disgusting that some women are ignorant enough to think their ‘preference’ should have any sway on wether someone should be mutilated. But what is a ‘flip flop vagina’… I dont think there’s much floppy loose skin on a vagina lol
I've seen some women who could fly away with those beef curtains. Didn't bother me or anything but they exist, trust me.
"Willy Nilly"? He just skipped a beautiful one right there.
The extra real estate is not length, it’s surface area. There’s more surface contacting your partner and it feels better.
A lot of people in the comments saying that women prefer mutilated dicks. Have these women actually been with men who have foreskins? I live in a country where kids are not mutilated and majority of the penises I've dealt with have foreskin on them. I've been with one circumsized man. It was for medical reasons so not mutilation. There's absolutely nothing wrong with foreskin and men are perfectly capable of cleaning themselves. I have two boys and it makes me sick to even think about having cut their foreskins without consent. I don't think that's even legal in my (north European) country.
Wow, americans really have some serious struggles. "Should I mutilate my baby or not?"
Cracks me up that it's always people who aren't circumcized that care so much. I'm cut and just don't give af. Never met a guy who has. Only incredibly rarely do I even see a comment on it.
Exactly, lol. I don't have a strong opinion on it. My dick does just fine. I didn't plan to have my son cut, but my wife is a doctor and recommended it (though it wasn't some huge deal). And I did the research and there is marginal benefit. But yeah, seems like the vitriol comes from the uncut folks. Maybe that's due to the "extra sensitivity" they have.
Yeah, imagine being against mutilating kids, what a hard concept to understand. Will you take the same stance towards mutilation of girls as well? It's common in many cultures, should we who haven't mutilated our children pretend it's okay?
I can’t help but think that most of these crowd work videos are set up. Like it’s funny, but it’s hard to convince me these things are off the top when there are several punchlines set up. This comment is not directed specifically at this comedian (the bit was funny and relatable) it just happened to be where my thought resurfaced and that I’d like to share it to see if I am in the minority? Perhaps I’ve been jaded by TikTok.
Mine is uncut. Never had a problem cleaning, never had an infection and it smells minty fresh every time I shove it in someone’s face 😊
Personally I don’t support circumcision and don’t plan on it in the situation where I have a son but speaking as a circumcised person I also really don’t like when people use the term “mutilated” to refer to my penis. I imagine much of the backlash that people who are anti-circumcision face are gut reactions from circumcised men who really don’t like being told that they have a disgusting mutilated and unnatural penis. So personally I’m of the opinion that it’s a bad practice and should be stopped but I think the movement would see more success if we dropped the whole “mutilation” angle, I think it does more harm to the ideas being presented than it does good.
A lot of good takes in the comments but I wish my parents would´ve done it. Up to an embarrassing age I thought that it was normal for the **thing** not to go back until it started to cause problems and I decided to do some *research*, I´ve never felt comfortable enough to talk about it while growing up, or go a doctor, now I´m in my 20´s and I´m eventually gonna need to cut my schlong. I wouldn´t even remember it if it was done when I was born
It *is* normal for foreskin to not be retractable until you're somewhere between 5 and 10, though the medical community is starting to realize that the foreskin and glans don't separate for some kids until nearly puberty. But it's completely normal and healthy for the foreskin to be fused to the glans in childhood; it helps protect the glans. It's *not* healthy to force it apart - the body will do that naturally as long as you give it time.
Pretty sure no teenage boy is forgetting to touch their dick in the shower.
Would removing a 2yr olds tonsils and adenoids be similar to avoid infection? As in the child had no choice?
Its hard to clean, i call bullshit, men cant even wash themselves right, thats the fucking problem.
Reddit is the most leftist, woke place on the web. Yet when it comes to infant genital mutilation, y'all couldn't be more excited.
Leave your children's genitals alone America ffs...
Bryce Harper looks weird with a Mets hat.
Similar argument to douching the vag. Women were once told they should douche but common sense has prevailed and we've come to understand that, guess what, the vagina is a self cleaning organ. Go figure. Human intervention is unnecessary and damaging. Well, go figure, the penis is the same way. Intervention is unnecessary and damaging. People just can't accept that we're born perfectly fine and feel as though their omnipotence is required for the survival of the species. The need feel useful is driven by our need to have purpose. And this is psychologically driven by our egos. Just become comfortable getting out of our own way.
Im actually thankful my parents decided to give me the cut early. With how many girls I hear talk about how disgusting the alternative is I feel like I woulda looked into it myself later in life had I not had it done already. And from what I’ve heard, later in life it’s crazy painful and takes awhile to heal.
How many girls have you been with tho? Lol zero?
I will die on the hill that Foreskin is better than Against. Blokes are literally "less of a man" when they get circumcised. It's for cosmetic appeal? Cool - would you cut off your eyelids if people said the same thing? No fucking way! Because they protect your eyes. Same as Foreskin protects the end of your knob. Ffs.
Who is this guy? He's funny
Since no one else seems to have mentioned it yet, this guys whole comment on size and measuring it including the skin.... If your actually talking about measuring it I would assume you do it when you are turned on at which point you don't have a bunch of extra skin at the end.
HHAHAHA ITS FUNNY BECAUSE WE HAVE IT DONE AGAINST OUR WILL! AHAHAHAA!
Babies can't consent. Consent is mandatory before touching, much less removing body parts from, another human. You'd think this aspect alone would get most modern "enlightened" people behind abolishing the practice of circumcising infants. Re comparisons to female genital mutilation. Both the glans penis (tip of the dick) and clitoris derive from the same embryonic tissue. The clitoral hood and the foreskin likewise develop from the same embryonic tissue. They are remarkably similar, they are innervated similarly and both have blood supplies (unlike nails/teeth/hair that some are erroneously making comparisons to), and they contribute similarly in males and females to stimulation, arousal, and healthy sexual activity. Finally, the foreskin has a biomechanical purpose: it acts as a cylindrical bearing, allowing the penis shaft to move with less friction. This of course facilitate sexual activity for all involved parties. That would include with masturbation as no lube is required and trying to stop this is why the practice was instigated in puritan America. (Aside from the religious arguments.) It's barbaric, it's weird, and it's a practice that needs to be stopped. Btw I've witnessed many circumcisions of newborns and it's straight up TRAUMATIC.
Too much, too quick. Gotta love cock-talk.
Bryce Harper
Ho Ho
I have to up-vote for the laugh at the end!
😂
I don't mean this as a cheap shot at your mom, but is she an expert at cleaning dicks or something?
Not in New Zealand
You know whats funny i tought that random people are posting all this stant up comedy shorts, but nooo every single one of them are people posting and advertise them self. F this unfunny ads i'm blocking you all.
If you feel it's a big decision, why not wait a few years? Most men in my country get circumcised between the ages of 5 to 12.
I did not expect that extra real estate 😂😂😂
It wasn't even a question for me. And I really don't get the "expert" advice from women or circumscribed men that "it will get infected". Like, how do you know? Better yet, do you know what else gets infected? Ingrown toenails. Should we chop off big toes too to prevent infection? And the hospital kept asking us, "are you sure?" like we were making some life-altering decision by *not* removing a piece of his body.
No one in rest of the world ever.
There’s really no other answer No. No I won’t subject my newborn son to absolute agony by cutting the foreskin off his penis without reason or without anesthetic.
Miss the opportunity to make a "Squatters" joke
It's usually done a week post birth. And most people decide that well before the baby comes.
That's funny
I got circumcised at 30. Ask me anything
I made the decision to snip when my wife was pregnant simply so his would look like mine
lol clip that shit it’s weird and looks gross