Circumcision cuts STD risk, major study shows

First of all, since msnbc.com is a feminist-influenced site, these pro-male genital mutilation stories are unfortunately run periodically there.

From the article:

“This analysis shows that the benefits of circumcision for reducing the risk of sexually transmitted infection “may be substantial,” the authors conclude. “The public health issues raised by these findings clearly involve weighing the longer-term benefits of routine neonatal circumcision in terms of reducing risks of infection within the population, against the perceived costs of the procedure,” they add.”

IN FACT………. if genital mutilation were ACTUALLY successful in preventing STD’s then WHY do European nations’ and Japanese male populations (who are almost always left with intact genitals!) suffer lower incidence of STD’s than Americans (who mutilate their baby boys’ genitals routinely)?

The answer is that Europeans and the Japanese practice safe sex more than Americans do. Genital mutilation is NOT safe sex.

And if genital mutilation is such a beneficial answer to STD’s, then why aren’t researchers spending copious amounts of time researching how female genital mutilation prevents STD’s?

The answer is that double standards are being practiced here – Women’s genital integrity is considered sacrosanct throughout the civilized nations, while men’s genital integrity is not…….. at least in the United States.

Neonatal male genital mutilation is an enormously lucrative practice in the U.S.

MGM is the most commonly performed surgical practice, with the physician and hospital being able to earn both from the “service” rendered, as well as through selling the baby’s purloined foreskin tissue to cosmetics and biotechnology companies.

Can anyone imagine the outcry if baby girls’ genital tissues were SOLD FOR A PROFIT?

And those “perceived costs” that the researchers are weighing neonatal genital mutilation’s puported benefits against……. do those REALLY include all of the physical and emotional risks that GM’ing a baby boy entails?

Even today, partial or total penile amputation or deformity, sepsis, gangrene and even coma and death are well established immediate risks of MGM.

While American medicine keeps no systematic record, estimates of US deaths rates range to over 200 per year.

The immediate psychological consequences of MGM are more readily discernable in older boys than in infants.

The older child perceives the (usually anesthetized) operation as a sexual assault, and grief, rage, aggression, “castration anxiety,” altered sexual identification, emotional withdrawl, reduction in intelligence test scores and regression to “more primitive modes of expression” are all commonly seen in recently GM’d boys.

The long term psychological impact of birth-related trauma is also relevant to the issue of MGM.

Studies have found striking connections between birth trauma and adult post traumatic stress and suicide, and adult victims of infant MGM often exhibit a spectrum of symptoms including:

- a sense of personal powerlessness
- lack of trust in others and life
- a sense of vulnerability to violent attack by others
- irrational rage reactions
- addictions and dependencies
- difficulties in establishing intimate relationships
- decreased ability to communicate
emotional numbing
- reluctance to be in relationships with women
- anger and violence toward women

http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html#CoI

First of all, since msnbc.com is a feminist-influenced site, these pro-male genital mutilation stories are unfortunately run periodically there.

From the article:

“This analysis shows that the benefits of circumcision for reducing the risk of sexually transmitted infection “may be substantial,” the authors conclude. “The public health issues raised by these findings clearly involve weighing the longer-term benefits of routine neonatal circumcision in terms of reducing risks of infection within the population, against the perceived costs of the procedure,” they add.”

IN FACT………. if genital mutilation were ACTUALLY successful in preventing STD’s then WHY do European nations’ and Japanese male populations (who are almost always left with intact genitals!) suffer lower incidence of STD’s than Americans (who mutilate their baby boys’ genitals routinely)?

The answer is that Europeans and the Japanese practice safe sex more than Americans do. Genital mutilation is NOT safe sex.

And if genital mutilation is such a beneficial answer to STD’s, then why aren’t researchers spending copious amounts of time researching how female genital mutilation prevents STD’s?

The answer is that double standards are being practiced here – Women’s genital integrity is considered sacrosanct throughout the civilized nations, while men’s genital integrity is not…….. at least in the United States.

Neonatal male genital mutilation is an enormously lucrative practice in the U.S.

MGM is the most commonly performed surgical practice, with the physician and hospital being able to earn both from the “service” rendered, as well as through selling the baby’s purloined foreskin tissue to cosmetics and biotechnology companies.

Can anyone imagine the outcry if baby girls’ genital tissues were SOLD FOR A PROFIT?

And those “perceived costs” that the researchers are weighing neonatal genital mutilation’s puported benefits against……. do those REALLY include all of the physical and emotional risks that GM’ing a baby boy entails?

Even today, partial or total penile amputation or deformity, sepsis, gangrene and even coma and death are well established immediate risks of MGM.

While American medicine keeps no systematic record, estimates of US deaths rates range to over 200 per year.

The immediate psychological consequences of MGM are more readily discernable in older boys than in infants.

The older child perceives the (usually anesthetized) operation as a sexual assault, and grief, rage, aggression, “castration anxiety,” altered sexual identification, emotional withdrawl, reduction in intelligence test scores and regression to “more primitive modes of expression” are all commonly seen in recently GM’d boys.

The long term psychological impact of birth-related trauma is also relevant to the issue of MGM.

Studies have found striking connections between birth trauma and adult post traumatic stress and suicide, and adult victims of infant MGM often exhibit a spectrum of symptoms including:

- a sense of personal powerlessness
- lack of trust in others and life
- a sense of vulnerability to violent attack by others
- irrational rage reactions
- addictions and dependencies
- difficulties in establishing intimate relationships
- decreased ability to communicate
emotional numbing
- reluctance to be in relationships with women
- anger and violence toward women

http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html#CoI

Well said Fourthwire,

In the U.S. (and from what I’ve read, in Western Societies), we (as children) have been subjected to the aberrations of the matriarchy for several generations now.

I believe there are a significant number of mothers who care more about their daughters than their sons.

I’m sure that there are a significant number of mothers who believe they know more about their daughters than their sons (they have the same physiology).

I know many of these mothers actively deprive their boys (and girls) of the companionship, wisdom, and nurture of their fathers (on the order of 20,000,000 non-custodial fathers in the U.S.!)

Once it becomes a crime to mutilate a males genitals (without their expressed adult consent), the number of “circumcisions” will drop to near nil.

Well said Fourthwire,

In the U.S. (and from what I’ve read, in Western Societies), we (as children) have been subjected to the aberrations of the matriarchy for several generations now.

I believe there are a significant number of mothers who care more about their daughters than their sons.

I’m sure that there are a significant number of mothers who believe they know more about their daughters than their sons (they have the same physiology).

I know many of these mothers actively deprive their boys (and girls) of the companionship, wisdom, and nurture of their fathers (on the order of 20,000,000 non-custodial fathers in the U.S.!)

Once it becomes a crime to mutilate a males genitals (without their expressed adult consent), the number of “circumcisions” will drop to near nil.

Well said Fourthwire,

In the U.S. (and from what I’ve read, in Western Societies), we (as children) have been subjected to the aberrations of the matriarchy for several generations now.

I believe there are a significant number of mothers who care more about their daughters than their sons.

I’m sure that there are a significant number of mothers who believe they know more about their daughters than their sons (they have the same physiology).

I know many of these mothers actively deprive their boys (and girls) of the companionship, wisdom, and nurture of their fathers (on the order of 20,000,000 non-custodial fathers in the U.S.!)

Once it becomes a crime to mutilate a males genitals (without their expressed adult consent), the number of “circumcisions” will drop to near nil.

Thanks for your kind words, Scott.

Informed parents have been questioning the practice of neonatal male genital mutilation in increasing numbers in recent years.

Neonatal MGM in America is driven by the greed of the medical profession, the ignorance of many parents, and the plethora of myths, lies, and damned lies on the subject.

http://www.mgmbill.org

Thanks for your kind words, Scott.

Informed parents have been questioning the practice of neonatal male genital mutilation in increasing numbers in recent years.

Neonatal MGM in America is driven by the greed of the medical profession, the ignorance of many parents, and the plethora of myths, lies, and damned lies on the subject.

http://www.mgmbill.org

Thanks for your kind words, Scott.

Informed parents have been questioning the practice of neonatal male genital mutilation in increasing numbers in recent years.

Neonatal MGM in America is driven by the greed of the medical profession, the ignorance of many parents, and the plethora of myths, lies, and damned lies on the subject.

http://www.mgmbill.org

My wife is pregnant. Too early to tell whether it is a boy or girl. If it is a boy I have already decided not to have him circumcized. My wife is fine with this since she is from Russia where circumcision is not the norm.

On the science of circumcision and STDs. I don’t think it does your cause any good if you don’t recognize the fact that circumcision does cut down on STDs. Don’t bring condoms into the discussion because it is not part of the conversation. Of course condoms cut down on STDs. Russia and Africa have this is common. Little circumcision and huge levels of STDs.

I just think that you do nothing for your cause by attacking correct science. Accept that it is true then bring up condoms. Also, you should make it a choice issue. I.e., give your son a choice.

Just my humble opinion.

My wife is pregnant. Too early to tell whether it is a boy or girl. If it is a boy I have already decided not to have him circumcized. My wife is fine with this since she is from Russia where circumcision is not the norm.

On the science of circumcision and STDs. I don’t think it does your cause any good if you don’t recognize the fact that circumcision does cut down on STDs. Don’t bring condoms into the discussion because it is not part of the conversation. Of course condoms cut down on STDs. Russia and Africa have this is common. Little circumcision and huge levels of STDs.

I just think that you do nothing for your cause by attacking correct science. Accept that it is true then bring up condoms. Also, you should make it a choice issue. I.e., give your son a choice.

Just my humble opinion.

My wife is pregnant. Too early to tell whether it is a boy or girl. If it is a boy I have already decided not to have him circumcized. My wife is fine with this since she is from Russia where circumcision is not the norm.

On the science of circumcision and STDs. I don’t think it does your cause any good if you don’t recognize the fact that circumcision does cut down on STDs. Don’t bring condoms into the discussion because it is not part of the conversation. Of course condoms cut down on STDs. Russia and Africa have this is common. Little circumcision and huge levels of STDs.

I just think that you do nothing for your cause by attacking correct science. Accept that it is true then bring up condoms. Also, you should make it a choice issue. I.e., give your son a choice.

Just my humble opinion.

Bill C,

Glad to hear that your “wife is fine with this” because if she weren’t, guess what……

I don’t need to tell you do I? THAT!, is the sad fact.

TMOTS

Bill C,

Glad to hear that your “wife is fine with this” because if she weren’t, guess what……

I don’t need to tell you do I? THAT!, is the sad fact.

TMOTS

Bill C,

Glad to hear that your “wife is fine with this” because if she weren’t, guess what……

I don’t need to tell you do I? THAT!, is the sad fact.

TMOTS

Bill C,

Congratulations.

Ahhh, the science. Haven’t you heard the adages about statistics? Correct science?!

(For example:

Statistics are like bikinis.
What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.
~Aaron Levenstein

Not everything that can be
counted counts; and not
everything that counts
can be counted.
~George Gallup

There are three kinds of lies:
lies, damn lies, and statistics.
~Benjamin Disraeli
)

Also, be prepared. If you plan to have home birth, it’ll be easier. If the delivery will be at a hospital, be prepared (at a time when you will be very tired) to expect those hospital “helpers” to coerce you to get a boy mutilated… I mean circumcised.

I’m glad you’re at least open to giving your son the choice of keeping or losing what god (or nature, if you must) gave him unless he chooses otherwise.

I didn’t have the choice, but was successful in ensuring my son does.

Perhaps the most important thing a boy’s parents can do is ensure he is clean (as a baby and toddler) and then as a child is ensuring that he learns how to clean himself. By the time he is a half dozen years old, he’ll know how to avoid those diseases that those who bandy statistics (and reap profit) say he’ll be prone to.

Good luck.

Bill C,

Congratulations.

Ahhh, the science. Haven’t you heard the adages about statistics? Correct science?!

(For example:

Statistics are like bikinis.
What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.
~Aaron Levenstein

Not everything that can be
counted counts; and not
everything that counts
can be counted.
~George Gallup

There are three kinds of lies:
lies, damn lies, and statistics.
~Benjamin Disraeli
)

Also, be prepared. If you plan to have home birth, it’ll be easier. If the delivery will be at a hospital, be prepared (at a time when you will be very tired) to expect those hospital “helpers” to coerce you to get a boy mutilated… I mean circumcised.

I’m glad you’re at least open to giving your son the choice of keeping or losing what god (or nature, if you must) gave him unless he chooses otherwise.

I didn’t have the choice, but was successful in ensuring my son does.

Perhaps the most important thing a boy’s parents can do is ensure he is clean (as a baby and toddler) and then as a child is ensuring that he learns how to clean himself. By the time he is a half dozen years old, he’ll know how to avoid those diseases that those who bandy statistics (and reap profit) say he’ll be prone to.

Good luck.

Bill C,

Congratulations.

Ahhh, the science. Haven’t you heard the adages about statistics? Correct science?!

(For example:

Statistics are like bikinis.
What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.
~Aaron Levenstein

Not everything that can be
counted counts; and not
everything that counts
can be counted.
~George Gallup

There are three kinds of lies:
lies, damn lies, and statistics.
~Benjamin Disraeli
)

Also, be prepared. If you plan to have home birth, it’ll be easier. If the delivery will be at a hospital, be prepared (at a time when you will be very tired) to expect those hospital “helpers” to coerce you to get a boy mutilated… I mean circumcised.

I’m glad you’re at least open to giving your son the choice of keeping or losing what god (or nature, if you must) gave him unless he chooses otherwise.

I didn’t have the choice, but was successful in ensuring my son does.

Perhaps the most important thing a boy’s parents can do is ensure he is clean (as a baby and toddler) and then as a child is ensuring that he learns how to clean himself. By the time he is a half dozen years old, he’ll know how to avoid those diseases that those who bandy statistics (and reap profit) say he’ll be prone to.

Good luck.

I’m a syndicated columnist who’s against circumcision. I consider it genital mutilation due to primitive religious beliefs. That said, the studies I’ve read have good data in them. However, it is also correct that condom use can prevent the STDs — and proper washing prevents penile infections. It seems terribly wrong to give a child an unnecessary operation when he cannot speak in the matter. If the kid grows up and, for some reason, feels it’s wise and prudent to get a piece of his penis hacked off at age 25, well, then, fine. I doubt you’re going to have many takers for that offer, STD protection or no. The bottom line is, we shouldn’t be operating unnecessarily on baby boys mainly for reasons of religious idiocy gone wild. There are some good books on why circumcision doesn’t make sense, one of them by Paul Fleiss.

I’m a syndicated columnist who’s against circumcision. I consider it genital mutilation due to primitive religious beliefs. That said, the studies I’ve read have good data in them. However, it is also correct that condom use can prevent the STDs — and proper washing prevents penile infections. It seems terribly wrong to give a child an unnecessary operation when he cannot speak in the matter. If the kid grows up and, for some reason, feels it’s wise and prudent to get a piece of his penis hacked off at age 25, well, then, fine. I doubt you’re going to have many takers for that offer, STD protection or no. The bottom line is, we shouldn’t be operating unnecessarily on baby boys mainly for reasons of religious idiocy gone wild. There are some good books on why circumcision doesn’t make sense, one of them by Paul Fleiss.

I’m a syndicated columnist who’s against circumcision. I consider it genital mutilation due to primitive religious beliefs. That said, the studies I’ve read have good data in them. However, it is also correct that condom use can prevent the STDs — and proper washing prevents penile infections. It seems terribly wrong to give a child an unnecessary operation when he cannot speak in the matter. If the kid grows up and, for some reason, feels it’s wise and prudent to get a piece of his penis hacked off at age 25, well, then, fine. I doubt you’re going to have many takers for that offer, STD protection or no. The bottom line is, we shouldn’t be operating unnecessarily on baby boys mainly for reasons of religious idiocy gone wild. There are some good books on why circumcision doesn’t make sense, one of them by Paul Fleiss.

“I don’t think it does your cause any good if you don’t recognize the fact that circumcision does cut down on STDs.”

BillC, you are mistaking a values-laden bit of research that was no doubt INTENDED to TRY to prove that male genital mutilation prevents or minimizes incidence of STD’s.

That’s not the same as a “fact”.

Furthermore, other research has indicated the male genital mutilation actually resulted in INCREASED levels of STD’s.

Still other research showed little difference between the incidence of STD’s with intact and circumcised men.

The relevant point that you ought to try to understand is that mutilating America’s baby boys is BIG BUSINESS – generating many millions of dollars annually for physicians, hospitals, biotech companies, the companies that supply equipment and supplies used in the “procedure”, and middlemen.

Who do you BELIEVE funds many of those REPEATED attempts to provide neonatal male genital mutilation with a medical basis?

Any bells going off yet, BillC?

With respect to HIV/AIDS, as an example, the incidence of male genital mutilation is POSITIVELY CORRELATED in industrialized nations.

The U.S. has the greatest incidence of neonatal MGM AS WELL AS the greatest incidence of HIV/AIDS!

“Don’t bring condoms into the discussion because it is not part of the conversation.”

Focus please. I realize that logic and/or intellectual integrity might be foreign concepts to you, so I will be direct:

1. I decide whether or not to bring condoms into a discussion related to STD’s and male genital mutilation if I wish. If you don’t like that fact, you can go fvck yourself.

2. Condom usage is EXTRAORDINARLY relvant to the topic, since condom usage is PROVEN to reduce the incidence of STD’s, without causing the physical and emotional risks involved with neonatal male genital mutilation.

That’s one of the reasons why European nations (who have progressed a bit beyond America in protecting their children, particularly their male children) do not subject their infants to genital mutilation, but promote “safe sex” (using condoms) to reduce THEIR incidence of STD’s BELOW those levels recorded in American society.

“Russia and Africa have this is common. Little circumcision and huge levels of STDs.”

But Russian and African societies do NOT generally practice “safe sex” with condoms, although efforts are being made in both geographic areas to promote this concept.

American society, Western and industrialized, has LESS condom usage than European nations (other Western and industrialized natinos) but greater STD incidence.

“I just think that you do nothing for your cause by attacking correct science.”

And I believe that you do nothing for yours because you are clearly ignorant of the fundamental dynamics involved with male genital mutilation and STD’s.

And you quite likely would not be able to recognize “correct science” if it bit you on the ass……

“Accept that it is true then bring up condoms.”

Why should anyone “accept that it is true” when “it” is not?

Neither Japanese nor European societies’ medical authorities promote genital mutilation to reduce STD’s.

And American medical authorities have trapped themselves into condoning male genital mutilation of babies, first by profiting from this barbaric and backwards practice, also out of fear of the coming legal backlash against it.

“Also, you should make it a choice issue. I.e., give your son a choice.”

Second intelligent sentence that you wrote on the subject.

And based on common sense as well as statistics, when America’s boys are allowed to grow up with intact genitals, they invariably choose to keep their foreskins with all of the inherent functionality.

“I don’t think it does your cause any good if you don’t recognize the fact that circumcision does cut down on STDs.”

BillC, you are mistaking a values-laden bit of research that was no doubt INTENDED to TRY to prove that male genital mutilation prevents or minimizes incidence of STD’s.

That’s not the same as a “fact”.

Furthermore, other research has indicated the male genital mutilation actually resulted in INCREASED levels of STD’s.

Still other research showed little difference between the incidence of STD’s with intact and circumcised men.

The relevant point that you ought to try to understand is that mutilating America’s baby boys is BIG BUSINESS – generating many millions of dollars annually for physicians, hospitals, biotech companies, the companies that supply equipment and supplies used in the “procedure”, and middlemen.

Who do you BELIEVE funds many of those REPEATED attempts to provide neonatal male genital mutilation with a medical basis?

Any bells going off yet, BillC?

With respect to HIV/AIDS, as an example, the incidence of male genital mutilation is POSITIVELY CORRELATED in industrialized nations.

The U.S. has the greatest incidence of neonatal MGM AS WELL AS the greatest incidence of HIV/AIDS!

“Don’t bring condoms into the discussion because it is not part of the conversation.”

Focus please. I realize that logic and/or intellectual integrity might be foreign concepts to you, so I will be direct:

1. I decide whether or not to bring condoms into a discussion related to STD’s and male genital mutilation if I wish. If you don’t like that fact, you can go fvck yourself.

2. Condom usage is EXTRAORDINARLY relvant to the topic, since condom usage is PROVEN to reduce the incidence of STD’s, without causing the physical and emotional risks involved with neonatal male genital mutilation.

That’s one of the reasons why European nations (who have progressed a bit beyond America in protecting their children, particularly their male children) do not subject their infants to genital mutilation, but promote “safe sex” (using condoms) to reduce THEIR incidence of STD’s BELOW those levels recorded in American society.

“Russia and Africa have this is common. Little circumcision and huge levels of STDs.”

But Russian and African societies do NOT generally practice “safe sex” with condoms, although efforts are being made in both geographic areas to promote this concept.

American society, Western and industrialized, has LESS condom usage than European nations (other Western and industrialized natinos) but greater STD incidence.

“I just think that you do nothing for your cause by attacking correct science.”

And I believe that you do nothing for yours because you are clearly ignorant of the fundamental dynamics involved with male genital mutilation and STD’s.

And you quite likely would not be able to recognize “correct science” if it bit you on the ass……

“Accept that it is true then bring up condoms.”

Why should anyone “accept that it is true” when “it” is not?

Neither Japanese nor European societies’ medical authorities promote genital mutilation to reduce STD’s.

And American medical authorities have trapped themselves into condoning male genital mutilation of babies, first by profiting from this barbaric and backwards practice, also out of fear of the coming legal backlash against it.

“Also, you should make it a choice issue. I.e., give your son a choice.”

Second intelligent sentence that you wrote on the subject.

And based on common sense as well as statistics, when America’s boys are allowed to grow up with intact genitals, they invariably choose to keep their foreskins with all of the inherent functionality.

“I don’t think it does your cause any good if you don’t recognize the fact that circumcision does cut down on STDs.”

BillC, you are mistaking a values-laden bit of research that was no doubt INTENDED to TRY to prove that male genital mutilation prevents or minimizes incidence of STD’s.

That’s not the same as a “fact”.

Furthermore, other research has indicated the male genital mutilation actually resulted in INCREASED levels of STD’s.

Still other research showed little difference between the incidence of STD’s with intact and circumcised men.

The relevant point that you ought to try to understand is that mutilating America’s baby boys is BIG BUSINESS – generating many millions of dollars annually for physicians, hospitals, biotech companies, the companies that supply equipment and supplies used in the “procedure”, and middlemen.

Who do you BELIEVE funds many of those REPEATED attempts to provide neonatal male genital mutilation with a medical basis?

Any bells going off yet, BillC?

With respect to HIV/AIDS, as an example, the incidence of male genital mutilation is POSITIVELY CORRELATED in industrialized nations.

The U.S. has the greatest incidence of neonatal MGM AS WELL AS the greatest incidence of HIV/AIDS!

“Don’t bring condoms into the discussion because it is not part of the conversation.”

Focus please. I realize that logic and/or intellectual integrity might be foreign concepts to you, so I will be direct:

1. I decide whether or not to bring condoms into a discussion related to STD’s and male genital mutilation if I wish. If you don’t like that fact, you can go fvck yourself.

2. Condom usage is EXTRAORDINARLY relvant to the topic, since condom usage is PROVEN to reduce the incidence of STD’s, without causing the physical and emotional risks involved with neonatal male genital mutilation.

That’s one of the reasons why European nations (who have progressed a bit beyond America in protecting their children, particularly their male children) do not subject their infants to genital mutilation, but promote “safe sex” (using condoms) to reduce THEIR incidence of STD’s BELOW those levels recorded in American society.

“Russia and Africa have this is common. Little circumcision and huge levels of STDs.”

But Russian and African societies do NOT generally practice “safe sex” with condoms, although efforts are being made in both geographic areas to promote this concept.

American society, Western and industrialized, has LESS condom usage than European nations (other Western and industrialized natinos) but greater STD incidence.

“I just think that you do nothing for your cause by attacking correct science.”

And I believe that you do nothing for yours because you are clearly ignorant of the fundamental dynamics involved with male genital mutilation and STD’s.

And you quite likely would not be able to recognize “correct science” if it bit you on the ass……

“Accept that it is true then bring up condoms.”

Why should anyone “accept that it is true” when “it” is not?

Neither Japanese nor European societies’ medical authorities promote genital mutilation to reduce STD’s.

And American medical authorities have trapped themselves into condoning male genital mutilation of babies, first by profiting from this barbaric and backwards practice, also out of fear of the coming legal backlash against it.

“Also, you should make it a choice issue. I.e., give your son a choice.”

Second intelligent sentence that you wrote on the subject.

And based on common sense as well as statistics, when America’s boys are allowed to grow up with intact genitals, they invariably choose to keep their foreskins with all of the inherent functionality.

A typical American circumcision results in the loss of approximately 50% of the total surface area of the penis and between 50% and 80% or more of its erogenous sexual nerves, including:

- The Taylor “ridged band” [sometimes called the "frenar band"], the primary erogenous zone of the male body.

This unique, highly specialized and exquisitely sensitive structure is equipped with soft ridges designed by nature to stimulate the female’s inner labia and G-spot during intercourse.

- The frenulum, the highly erogenous V-shaped tethering structure on the underside of the head of the penis.

- Between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which can feel slight variations in pressure and stretching, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture.

- Thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner’s corpuscles, which are also found in the fingertips.

Also lost are:

- The foreskin’s gliding action, the non-abrasive gliding of the shaft of the penis within its own sheath, which facilitates smooth, comfortable and pleasurable intercourse for both partners.

- The “subpreputual wetness” which protects the mucosa of the glans (and inner foreskin), and which contains immunoglobulin antibodies and antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as the pathogen-killing enzyme lysozyme, a potent HIV killer which is also found in tears and mothers’ milk.

- Estrogen receptors, the purpose of which is not fully understood.

- The foreskin’s apocrine glands, which produce pheromones.

- The protection and lubrication of the erogenous surface of the penis, which is designed by nature to be an internal organ like the vagina.

Natural sex involves contact between two internal organs.

http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html

A typical American circumcision results in the loss of approximately 50% of the total surface area of the penis and between 50% and 80% or more of its erogenous sexual nerves, including:

- The Taylor “ridged band” [sometimes called the "frenar band"], the primary erogenous zone of the male body.

This unique, highly specialized and exquisitely sensitive structure is equipped with soft ridges designed by nature to stimulate the female’s inner labia and G-spot during intercourse.

- The frenulum, the highly erogenous V-shaped tethering structure on the underside of the head of the penis.

- Between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which can feel slight variations in pressure and stretching, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture.

- Thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner’s corpuscles, which are also found in the fingertips.

Also lost are:

- The foreskin’s gliding action, the non-abrasive gliding of the shaft of the penis within its own sheath, which facilitates smooth, comfortable and pleasurable intercourse for both partners.

- The “subpreputual wetness” which protects the mucosa of the glans (and inner foreskin), and which contains immunoglobulin antibodies and antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as the pathogen-killing enzyme lysozyme, a potent HIV killer which is also found in tears and mothers’ milk.

- Estrogen receptors, the purpose of which is not fully understood.

- The foreskin’s apocrine glands, which produce pheromones.

- The protection and lubrication of the erogenous surface of the penis, which is designed by nature to be an internal organ like the vagina.

Natural sex involves contact between two internal organs.

http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html