Conversation

Notices

1. cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 25-Oct-2024 05:02:41 JST cjd
   Circumcision is a contentious and slightly taboo topic - as such, there is a lot of superstition and bad information out there.
   
   Most people either know nothing, or have strong opinions.
   
   Most men are pre-disposed to prefer everyone be like them. Most doctors are pre-disposed to prefer whatever makes them the most money.
   
   If you search "Should I circumcise my son" on google, you will think there's a Scientific Consensus that it's beneficial.
   
   But if you seek out anti-circumcision material, you will think it's one of the most heinous and barbaric practices ever to have beset the human race.
   
   The reality is that the health benefits are minuscule at best, and the harm described in the anti-circumcision community is often overblown or lacking in concrete evidence.
   
   It should be immediately obvious that most cut men live normal fulfilling lives. It should also be obvious that being uncut does not carry any real health risks because otherwise these problems would be well known in Europe, where circumcision is near nonexistent.
   
   My personal opinion is that none of the perceived benefits outweigh the risk of complications from surgery (doctor slips with the knife). This type of thing happens with a non-trivial regularity, and the result are life-altering and sometimes deadly.
   
   Is there anyone here who is planning to become parents and is faced with this question?
   • xianc78 likes this.
   • xianc78 repeated this.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 25-Oct-2024 05:02:42 JST cjd

     in reply to
     On the "health benefits" of circumcision:
     
     > It reduces the spread of HIV
     
     This is kind of like when cheerios sponsors a study to prove that cheerios are good for your heart. It's very under-handed.
     
     The claim is that less mucus membrane, that is allowed to dry out, is less absorptive. Which is not wrong, but it's also not that effective. Whereas a condom is perfectly effective.
     
     The second reason why this is under-handed is because spreading HIV is REALLY HARD. In the worst case scenario (a man with HIV ejaculates inside of you), your risk of catching it is 1 in 20. Any sexual contact less than that, the risk is even lower.
     
     And that's just for one person to contract it, for it to actively spread through a community, the amount of promiscuity needs to be so high that circumcision is just not going to change the outcome.
     
     > It reduces the risk of penile cancer
     
     Well, not really. It eliminates the possibility of a condition called phimosis, which is a risk driver for penile cancer.
     
     Phimosis is a condition where the foreskin remains too tight to retract into adulthood. This is a relatively rare condition and is addressable in a number of different ways including steroid creams, stretching, minor surgical interventions - and of course adult circumcision.
     
     Men with phimosis SHOULD get it treated, but it's rare and not that hard to deal with. There are so many other "rare and not that hard to deal with" conditions out there, that singling out phimosis as the one you want to prevent doesn't really make any sense.
     xianc78 likes this.
     xianc78 repeated this.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Friday, 25-Oct-2024 05:02:45 JST cjd

     in reply to
     Circumcision and hygiene:
     
     If you have a foreskin, you retract it and wash under it, end of story.
     
     Using soap is fine, you just need to be sure that all of it is washed away before rolling the foreskin forward - otherwise some will tend to be pushed into the urethra which is painful.
     
     The foreskin doesn't have any magical properties that make it dirty more easily than say, an armpit. It is actually quite a bit LESS prone to smelling than either armpits or ball sack.
     
     If you're an uncut male who doesn't shower for a period of time, you begin smelling from everywhere BUT the penis.
     
     > What about babies?
     
     A baby's foreskin is attached to the penis head (like glue). That keeps out all foreign matter (like diaper shit). As a parent, you have absolutely nothing to do. Some doctors may suggest forcibly retracting it, this is a terrible idea for reasons that should be obvious.
     
     Some time around 6-8 years old, it will naturally detach. At this point your boy should already be able to at least partially wash himself, and you only have to instruct him to try to pull it back - if it hurts, that means it's not detached yet and he should try again later. Once he is able to do retract it, he can then begin washing it. Once he realizes it is pleasurable, there will never again be a concern for hygiene.
     
     ---
     
     If you are dogmatically opposed to masturbation, this is one of few cases where circumcision actually serves a purpose. Firstly, there is never any need for your son to wash his penis so he can pretend it doesn't exist. Secondly, when he does discover masturbation, it is somewhat harder to do without a foreskin.
     xianc78 likes this.