American circumcision trends

5

554279

Guest
If (the physical side of) circumcision wiped off with a paper towel too, there would be much less objection to it.

Have to agree as long as the father, priest or reverend doesn't forget to pull your head out of the drink, it's pretty painless and does wipe off.

Slicing an unsuspecting foreskin on the other hand is kind of risky IMHO.

I'll draw the line at the baptism for religious risk taking, high fun and adventure.
 

thadjock

Mythical Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
4,722
Media
7
Likes
58,243
Points
518
Age
47
Location
LA CA USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
If (the physical side of) circumcision wiped off with a paper towel too, there would be much less objection to it.

ya my point was neither should be performed on the unwitting.

and mabye the psychological impact of being indoctrinated into a religion that says god and the church damns u to hell you if you're gay, is on equal footing with physical assaults like circumcision too .

how many gay catholics get married, have a family and lead miserable lives just because they were brainwashed as children.
 

FRE

Admired Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Posts
3,055
Media
44
Likes
828
Points
258
Location
Palm Springs, California USA
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Are you a Catholic or an Episcopalian? The Episcopal church is a Protestant denomination.

I am both Episcopalian and Catholic, and both Protestant and Catholic.

Contrary to what many people think, the term "Catholic" does not designate a particular denomination. There are several churches which consider themselves to be Catholic. The phrase, "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church" appears in the Apostles' creed for several denominations, and the phrase, "I believe in one Catholic and apostolic church" appears in the nicene creed of several denominations.

Unfortunately, there is one particular denomination which has attempted to limit the term "catholic" to its exclusive use thereby confusing many people.
 

TurkeyWithaSunburn

Legendary Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Posts
3,589
Media
25
Likes
1,225
Points
608
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
YEAH ... one more circumcision thread .... I guess now we have 1,033 circumcision threads! GREAT.
Yeah that was my thought too! :biggrin:

Personally, i'm very very happy to be circumcised. I will have my child circumcised as well, if I choose to have one.

I prefer the way mine looks and am totally not a fan of how the glans of an uncut penis will sometimes look strangely pinkish.

If you have one and like that sort of thing, more power to you.

"Strangely pinkish"? You mean looks like it's supposed to? (Presumably, at least on Caucausians.)
 

B_circin867

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Posts
81
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
43
Location
Mountains SoCA
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
Caucasian and Oriental circumcisions have remained the same: 85%-90%. African American circumcised men are much greater from 1970 on and now are in the 80-85% range. Pacific South Sea imigration, Hawaiians, Filipinos as well as Muslims and Jewish groups are at a 99% level.

In LA and other large cities, including NYC and Miami, the Latino males are about 20% circumcised. With this group which is growing fast the overall statistics are going down. Whether more Latinos are circumcised later is not known, of course.

The overall statistics are 35-40% when the Latino group is included.
 
Last edited:

B_Craiggers

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Posts
754
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
53
Location
Southeast, USA
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Caucasian and Oriental circumcisions have remained the same: 85%-90%. African American circumcised men are much greater from 1970 on and now are in the 80-85% range. Pacific South Sea imigration, Hawaiians, Filipinos as well as Muslims and Jewish groups are at a 99% level.

In LA and other large cities, including NYC and Miami, the Latino males are about 20% circumcised. With this group which is growing fast the overall statistics are going down. Whether more Latinos are circumcised later is not known, of course.

The overall statistics are 35-40% when the Latino group is included.

No offense, but you suck at math :tongue: 16% of the US population is Hispanic. They could have a 0% circumcision rate and it wouldn't pull down the national rate as low as it is if circumcision rates among other ethnicities were above 80%.

Those 80%+ figures you're quoting are probably the entire population (ie: age 0 to age 120).

If you're only talking about the circumcision rate of newborns (what's being done to infants right now in 2011), the rate for all ethnicities is significantly lower. The decline is not due to an increase in immigration so much as changing attitudes about the necessity/propriety for circumcision of infants.
 

B_thickjohnny

Cherished Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Posts
2,740
Media
0
Likes
494
Points
208
Location
Atlanta GA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I am both Episcopalian and Catholic, and both Protestant and Catholic.

Contrary to what many people think, the term "Catholic" does not designate a particular denomination. There are several churches which consider themselves to be Catholic. The phrase, "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church" appears in the Apostles' creed for several denominations, and the phrase, "I believe in one Catholic and apostolic church" appears in the nicene creed of several denominations.

Unfortunately, there is one particular denomination which has attempted to limit the term "catholic" to its exclusive use thereby confusing many people.

Catholic with a capital C is the Roman Church. Catholic with a small c designates universal hence when the creed is read/spoken "one holy, catholic and apostolic Church", catholic is not capped thereby inferring the universal church.
 

thadjock

Mythical Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
4,722
Media
7
Likes
58,243
Points
518
Age
47
Location
LA CA USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Catholic with a capital C is the Roman Church. Catholic with a small c designates universal hence when the creed is read/spoken "one holy, catholic and apostolic Church", catholic is not capped thereby inferring the universal church.

i didnt' mean to derail the thread with a debate on religion, i was referring to the roman catholic church when i said "catholic kids get baptised early" sometimes i'm not good about capitalizing.
 

B_Craiggers

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Posts
754
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
53
Location
Southeast, USA
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Personally, i'm very very happy to be circumcised. I will have my child circumcised as well, if I choose to have one.

I prefer the way mine looks and am totally not a fan of how the glans of an uncut penis will sometimes look strangely pinkish.

If you have one and like that sort of thing, more power to you.

__________________________________________________________________________

I also want to be clear in that I was not emotionally scarred from being circumcised and I don't think my child will either. I've seen some uncomfortable cases of phimosis.

My father was circumcised. My parents made the choice to have me circumcised.

As an adult, I very much regret the decision they made for me. I would have greatly preferred that the choice had been left to me at an age when I was capable of making it, rather than them making a decision which affects my body in that way and is permanent.

There are health complications which can occur in either situation, some more common to circumcised penises, some more common to uncircumcised penises. On balance, the American Academy of Pediatrics does not recommend the procedure (nor do they discourage it. They basically say there's equivalent risks either way).

So given that it's not medically advantageous, and given that there are many men who had circumcised fathers and circumcised friends and still wish that they had not been circumcised, how can you still feel comfortable that your son would feel the same about his penis as you do about yours?

If he suffers some level of emotional distress as an adult over having been denied that irreversible choice about what happens to his own body, what will be your own response? "Sorry kiddo, I just didn't give a crap how you might feel about it?"

I was born at a time when the amount of information that was available to my parents about it was sorely limited, so while I do greatly regret their decision and will have to live my life with the impact of it, I don't hold a grudge against them for it. You, however, will not have that excuse...
 
Last edited:

D_Alec_Baldtwins

Account Disabled
Joined
May 6, 2010
Posts
413
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
53
If he suffers some level of emotional distress as an adult over having been denied that irreversible choice about what happens to his own body, what will be your own response?

I'm not answering for FLAWDATIGER or anyone else, but the explanation I've seen a lot of people give is that over the course of their child's life, they'll potentially make all sorts of decisions, medical and otherwise, that will have lasting ramifications for that child, and circumcision is just one more of those.

Again, I'm not answering for or accusing anyone here of anything, but for some people, having a child is the ultimate ego trip; it's the closest they can come to creating something in their own image. They look at circumcision no more differently than they would the child's style of haircut. That doesn't mean it's entirely an emotional decision, but the grounds can be that they don't like the look of an uncut cock, or the potential hygiene issues, or the fact that their son may be different from others if they leave him uncut, or the perception that women don't like guys with uncut cocks (a justification I've heard here in the U.S.).
 

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,422
Media
6
Likes
318
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I'm not answering for FLAWDATIGER or anyone else, but the explanation I've seen a lot of people give is that over the course of their child's life, they'll potentially make all sorts of decisions, medical and otherwise, that will have lasting ramifications for that child, and circumcision is just one more of those.
You're right, that's how they see it, but there are some serious flaws with that logic. Unlike other "decisions parents make for children" cutting part of his genitals off is

  • permanent (cf haircuts, piercings)
  • visible (cf vaccination, indoctrination)
  • with effects mainly of adult onset (cf vaccination)
  • highly debatable (most of the developed world don't do it, cf vaccinaton)
  • without diagnosis (cf braces, tonsillectomy, appendectomy)

Again, I'm not answering for or accusing anyone here of anything, but for some people, having a child is the ultimate ego trip; it's the closest they can come to creating something in their own image. They look at circumcision no more differently than they would the child's style of haircut. That doesn't mean it's entirely an emotional decision, but the grounds can be that they don't like the look of an uncut cock, or the potential hygiene issues, or the fact that their son may be different from others if they leave him uncut, or the perception that women don't like guys with uncut cocks (a justification I've heard here in the U.S.).
All of those are really rotten reasons, as would be immediately clear if we were talking about any other body modification.
 

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,422
Media
6
Likes
318
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I also want to be clear in that I was not emotionally scarred from being circumcised and I don't think my child will either.
But you have no basis for making that cliam. Times have changed since you were born, and male genital cutting is now more controversial. Many more of his peers will be intact than yours were.
I've seen some uncomfortable cases of phimosis.
Ah, the power of the vivid instance! And you've seen, without ever knowing about them, gazillions of "cases" of non-phimosis, so the chances of your son being one of the latter are much greater than of being one of the former.

Phimosis can be prevented and treated without circumcision. (Prevented by encouraging boys to pull their skin back when they masturbate, according to Dr Michael Beauge - in France, where they are more relaxed about such things).

You'll have also seen without ever knowing about them, some painful (or "just" sexually unsatisfying) cases of consequences of botched circumcision.
 

CorsicanU

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Posts
57
Media
12
Likes
17
Points
43
Location
Florida
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
most catholic kids get baptized as soon after they're born as possible, so they're not able to consent to that either.


Your comparison of having water sprinkled on the head of an infant
to a practice which is a physical amputation is ridiculous.

To begin with, you shouldn't discuss your take on religion on a thread
that had nothing to do with it, but since you have;
you should realize that when two people decide to raise a family, it is up to them TO GUIDE THAT CHILD THROUGHOUT HIS/HER EARLY LIFE
and, yes, that includes a "faith" of some sort and most people will
pass on a spiritual belief system to which they themselves were indoctrinated.
There is NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS PRACTICE especially when dealing with the ritual of infant baptism in and of itself, it is a
fleeting moment in ones history that is not recalled because NO TRAUMA ensued when being held and prayed over AND THIS AND THE SPRINKLING OF HOLY WATER
FORMS THE ENTIRE PHYSICAL ASPECT OF INFANT
BAPTISM.

Note the abscence of a knife.

Not "having a say", as you put it, to whether or not a priest will sprinke Holy water on the head of an infant and recite ancient ritual prayers over him makes little, if any, sense, since the practice of baptism in itself has no physical or emotional ramifications for the individual and common sense should dictate this. Millions
of people have been baptised into various Christian denomintions as infants and have quietly and gently lived their lives outside the spiritual framework of Christian doctrine with no hostility towards their parents or
the faith of their parents let alone harbor regret over
having been "baptised".

The ramifications of baptism should be, and are, soely spiritual IF... the individual takes up the path of the faith according to its doctrinal laws as the individual matures.

The number of posters who are willing to jump on the bandwagon to slam Catholics for their spirituality is appalling and was insulting to me. To call us "brainwashed" is a foolish and mean spirited
assumption that is part of the (very) acceptable zenophophobic attitude so prevalent today among those who openly hate the Catholic church and excercise their idiotic bigotry unnaposed by most BUT NOT BY ME. I'm proud of being Catholic and this forum should not have been a venue for open discussion on some imaginary
and idiotic comparison between a surgical procedure forced upon an infant and a delicate ceremony that is, ultimately, an act of love bestowed upon a baby by individuals who care about what that babys spiritual path should be as it grows and matures in a world in
which PARENTAL GUIDANCE IN ALL MATTERS IS absolutely necessary.

Baptism is water, not a blade.

You are entitled to your bigotry, but please don't assume that
Catholics, like me, are going to read your nonsense and find it
acceptable.

This is a forum about dicks and circumcision.

YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT MY FAITH OUT OF IT.
YOUR APPROXIMATION OF BAPTISM AND CIRCUMCISION WAS VULGAR AND UNNECESSARY.
 
Last edited:

thadjock

Mythical Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
4,722
Media
7
Likes
58,243
Points
518
Age
47
Location
LA CA USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Your comparison of having water sprinkled on the head of an infant
to a practice which is a physical amputation is ridiculous.

To begin with, you shouldn't discuss your take on religion on a thread
that had nothing to do with it, but since you have;
you should realize that when two people decide to raise a family, it is up to them TO GUIDE THAT CHILD THROUGHOUT HIS/HER EARLY LIFE
and, yes, that includes a "faith" of some sort and most people will
pass on a spiritual belief system to which they themselves were indoctrinated.
There is NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS PRACTICE especially when dealing with the ritual of infant baptism in and of itself, it is a
fleeting moment in ones history that is not recalled because NO TRAUMA ensued when being held and prayed over AND THIS AND THE SPRINKLING OF HOLY WATER
FORMS THE ENTIRE PHYSICAL ASPECT OF INFANT
BAPTISM.

Note the abscence of a knife.

Not "having a say", as you put it, to whether or not a priest will sprinke Holy water on the head of an infant and recite ancient ritual prayers over him makes little, if any, sense, since the practice of baptism in itself has no physical or emotional ramifications for the individual and common sense should dictate this. Millions
of people have been baptised into various Christian denomintions as infants and have quietly and gently lived their lives outside the spiritual framework of Christian doctrine with no hostility towards their parents or
the faith of their parents let alone harbor regret over
having been "baptised".

The ramifications of baptism should be, and are, soely spiritual IF... the individual takes up the path of the faith according to its doctrinal laws as the individual matures.

The number of posters who are willing to jump on the bandwagon to slam Catholics for their spirituality is appalling and was insulting to me. To call us "brainwashed" is a foolish and mean spirited
assumption that is part of the (very) acceptable zenophophobic attitude so prevalent today among those who openly hate the Catholic church and excercise their idiotic bigotry unnaposed by most BUT NOT BY ME. I'm proud of being Catholic and this forum should not have been a venue for open discussion on some imaginary
and idiotic comparison between a surgical procedure forced upon an infant and a delicate ceremony that is, ultimately, an act of love bestowed upon a baby by individuals who care about what that babys spiritual path should be as it grows and matures in a world in
which PARENTAL GUIDANCE IN ALL MATTERS IS absolutely necessary.

Baptism is water, not a blade.

You are entitled to your bigotry, but please don't assume that
Catholics, like me, are going to read your nonsense and find it
acceptable.

This is a forum about dicks and circumcision.

YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT MY FAITH OUT OF IT.
YOUR APPROXIMATION OF BAPTISM AND CIRCUMCISION WAS VULGAR AND UNNECESSARY.

welcome back......vinylboy?

I AM Catholic and have openly discussed my faith and the issues i have with it countless times over the 5+yrs i've been a member here. you might want to gather some background information b4 u vent your spleen.

the only thing vulgar and unnecessary is your post.
 

ConanTheBarber

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Posts
5,305
Media
0
Likes
2,087
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Have said this before - it should be left to the individual - much like being Baptized or not.
most catholic kids get baptized as soon after they're born as possible, so they're not able to consent to that either.
Your comparison of having water sprinkled on the head of an infant
to a practice which is a physical amputation is ridiculous.

Thad was not comparing baptism to circumcision.
He was responding to uncutoakland, who asserted that baptism, unlike circumcision, is normally left to the individual.
Thad's response was that baptism is frequently NOT left to the individual. This is a kind of harmless FYI that shouldn't have insulted anyone.
 

snoozan

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2006
Posts
3,449
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Sex feels much better with a man who is not circumcised. More lube, more friction, more fun things moving around down there. I wouldn't have known this had I not happened upon a partner who was uncut.

I did not and will not circumcise a male child unless medically necessary.
 

flawdatiger

Experimental Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Posts
121
Media
2
Likes
4
Points
488
Location
Florida!
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
How did I miss all these responses for me? I'm flattered.

I was recently told that the circumcision brigade is like a set of piranhas waiting for blood.

I won't take time to respond to some of your ridiculous responses like lip removal, saying it should look light pink (i'm not white), etc. As a few of you know, I do not believe anyone on this site can ever, ever, ever, ever speak to whether my child will "resent" me with any accuracy regarding my decision, and neither can I.

If this is an American phenomenon, that's fine, he won't be raised here anyway.

Saying i'm taking away his choice is pretty accurate, but if making decisions for my kid until he is old enough to think intelligently about them is bad, then i'm ok with that.

You should all recruit Catharsis to be your anti-circ. rep, he is the least insane regarding this issue. By a long shot.

So, I know this won't stop ANY of you from quoting, misquoting or making comical assumptions about me, but I won't be reading your responses.

Happy Tuesday to all!