Real scientists study the evidence and accept what it shows, whether they like it or not. These people are determined to prove that circumcision is beneficial, and they’ll just keep on doing studies till they get one that seems to show it is. Then they’ll headline it worldwide.

FGC may be different from MGC, but having baby girls’ genitals left alone is exactly the same as having baby boys’ genitals left alone – a human right.

Having it done later in life Lucius is a whole different matter, be it for medical reasons, whatever. If its medically necessary, then yes, I would probably submit to it as well if it means my health would be affected if I didn’t have it done. But at least its done in a medical setting under anaesthesia.

Zeke, I believe American baby boys who aren’t jewish or muslim have it done under anaesthesia. Either way, I still think its a barbaric practice when its done without someone’s consent. I don’t buy the aesthetic nonsense abour having it removed either. Its all in the mind and I think an American phenomenon. Most people in Europe aren’t circumcised I don’t think, among other places.

As for saying the skin and the anus are used for other purposes, yes, that is fine if you are an adult and wish to do those things to your body. By your same token would you allow children tattoos, or even anal sex? That is a really CRAP argument.

There are some medical conditions such as phimosis (where the foreskin cannot be withdrawn), and these require surgery which can often mean full circumcision, and I know of two people that have had this and apparently even with anaesthetic, it still hurts like buggery for days.

“But their lives aren’t ruined, neither sexually nor in any other way”

Oh yes they are.

My boyfriend experiences next to no sensation whatsoever due to this mutilation.

Whereby, myself being a hoodie squirm at the slightest touch.

A UNAIDS multi-site study found that male circumcision was the principal factor in the differences in HIV infection rates across the continent.

Whilst my personal view is that circumcision is something that should have died out in medieval times, I will not so easily dismiss a study by the United Nations that shows that it has the ability to save the lives of millions of people living in another part of the world.

I wouldn’t have it done myself. Were I to have children I would not allow them to have it done. I prefer to have sex with people who have not had it done. However, on the basis that the United Nations and many other health organisations believe it saves vast number of lives, then absolutely, I’ll all for it.

http://www.africanvoices.co.za/culture/circumcision.htm

You don’t need a study to prove that.

There were many other problems with the methodology. You might want to research it before you put your own reputation for accuracy on the line promoting it.

It might not be a valid solution for Western gays but it has probably saved tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives in Africa.

Like you, I promised myself that I wouldn’t “go there” but I simply must. It’s embarrassing and upsetting for me to admit this but I was the victim of a “botched” involuntary circumcision. Perhaps this is why this topic is so personal to me. I didn’t even realize until I was in my late twenties, that the scars and missing layers of tissue on the glands of my penis was not a natural variation of a widely varying organ (and I’m a gay man who has seen more penises than the average man). It wasn’t until I moved to Florida and went to a doctor who wasn’t obsessively pro-routine infant circumcision that I realized that the horrible condition of my penis was due to my circumcision. The word the doctor used was “butchered”. Not only was I not involved in the decision to do the procedure on my genitals, I have absolutely no recourse to be compensated for what was done to me because it was done in Mississippi which only requires the consent of a parent to absolve the physician of liability; besides the physician I have since learned, is dead.

I can only imagine how many other males were “butchered” but don’t realize it, and even if they do are too ashamed to speak of it, as I was until a few years ago. Additionally, few people speak of how many males lose all or part of their penises due to surgical mistakes or infections. This is VERY common in Africa. Do we not consider this mutilation? Do we not consider circumcising 5 to 18 year old boys in Turkey, across Africa and in many parts of the world “torture”? Is that not somewhat equivalent to what is done to females? Please don’t compare procedures done in sanitary hospitals under anesthesia with what happens in the bush of Africa or in the town square in Turkey during circumcision festivals. If you do that then of course you can’t see relation. It’s comparing apples to oranges when there are actually real apples to compare to.

One more point and I’ll shut up (at least for now). How interesting it is to me that when the extremely methodologically flawed circumcision study came out of Africa ALL the headlines, including the one here at PinkNews screamed “New Study in Africa PROVES that Circumcision Slashes HIV Infection” and “Circumcision Cuts HIV Infection by 60% in African Study”; NEVER was the word “may” included in these headlines or in the reports. Now a study comes out saying that circumcision doesn’t prevent HIV infection in gay men and the word “many” is in EVERY headline on EVERY website that I’ve seen it. Even within THIS story the African study is still presented as unquestioned fact despite the fact that many physicians and scientist have shredded it for glaring methodology flaws.

I understand why this is done in America. There’s a whole industry behind promoting circumcision here. I find it curious as to why it’s done on a European site.

Barebacking can lead to HIV infection. However when one is the receptive partner the risk is higher. That perhaps explains why circumcision does not reduce HIV infection rates among gay men.

Being the active partner in anal sex does not eliminate the risk, but it’s a proven fact that it is less risky than being the receptive partner.

Assuming most gay men are versatile then I can see why circumcision is ineffective.

Its crazy. No parent or doctor has any right to decide if a child should get to keep his foreskin. Its his CHOICE.

Over a three year period seven percent of the men became HIV+. So what percentage of the guys who routinely barebacked became positive I wonder? It stands to reason that it must be MUCH higher than seven percent? It would be interesting to know if that figure exists.

Zeke, I made it my very point about this: don’t throw in the same basket the circumcisions being performed on children and the voluntary ones. I refuse to be branded (even implicitly) a self-mutilator when there are people with body dysmorphia around. I just can’t cede to that, sorry.

And yes, my points were perhaps conveyed a bit erratically. But I’m not a native speaker and I’m currently snowed in, so I really can’t be bothered too much about coherence, let alone eloquence.