- Joined
- Jun 15, 2010
- Posts
- 1,095
- Media
- 33
- Likes
- 395
- Points
- 328
- Location
- New jersey
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- 69% Straight, 31% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Military practices
- Thread starter Tibia
- Start date
carlgordon
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Posts
- 30
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 4
- Points
- 153
- Location
- North Dakota
- Sexuality
- 50% Straight, 50% Gay
- Gender
- Male
I had heard that back in the 30's and 40's, the military had the recruits circumsized as they thought it was easier to keep the cock head clean that way. One less thing to worry about when at war.
I think it was a practise in the Navy years ago. Maybe that's why I love Sailors so much. :biggrin1:
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
This looks like a fairly legit site: History of Circumcision
Short story: Military encouraged circumcision during World War II, making it a mandatory part of "military discipline," but it's certainly no longer a policy.
Short story: Military encouraged circumcision during World War II, making it a mandatory part of "military discipline," but it's certainly no longer a policy.
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2007
- Posts
- 7,425
- Media
- 473
- Likes
- 15,288
- Points
- 468
- Location
- Alamosa (Colorado, United States)
- Verification
- View
- Sexuality
- Unsure
- Gender
- Male
This was part of history and mainly came to happen in tropical areas such as the pacific theater. There really is not a clear line as to where the practice ended, some stating that it was at the end of the Viet Nam conflict.
The whole thing was based on the lack of personal hygiene facilities in both battle theaters. In addition to VD from the local prostitutes there were tons of cases of NGU which came from bacteria in the unclean water in the battle areas. Men would be crawling on their bellies trying to keep from getting their asses shot off and of course their equipment was wet and in the slime. Over a period of time the infections because of lack of hygiene resulted in the thinking that the foreskin itself was the problem rather than the lack of any kind of bathing facilities. The local native populations of most of these areas were not circumcised and did not suffer the problems that American Servicemen did.
Remember that we have the "thinking" of the "greatest minds in government" mixed in to this so in their eyes it was far easier at 20 times the cost to offer circumcision complete with a phony sales pitch to servicemen rather than to find a way to get clean water and some sort of bathing facilities to the trenches. It was not compulsory, but the deal was that if you volunteered to be "chopped" you ended up with a vacation and a bunch of percs while things healed. Many did it to get their rear ends out of the line of fire and to get some rest. The main health hazard it prevented for many was getting their butts shot off. My late biological Father served in the Pacific Theater in WWII and my late Stepfather who was an MD and served as a MASH Doctor also during WWII clarified the procedure to me many years ago.
It was not at any time "compulsory" but those serving their country were presented with a cornucopia of misinformation in order to get them to go along with it. Some were even told that it would "prevent" VD in those years.
The point here is not that we agree or disagree with the practice of circumcision, but the practice of deception based on misinformation in order to do so.
The whole thing was based on the lack of personal hygiene facilities in both battle theaters. In addition to VD from the local prostitutes there were tons of cases of NGU which came from bacteria in the unclean water in the battle areas. Men would be crawling on their bellies trying to keep from getting their asses shot off and of course their equipment was wet and in the slime. Over a period of time the infections because of lack of hygiene resulted in the thinking that the foreskin itself was the problem rather than the lack of any kind of bathing facilities. The local native populations of most of these areas were not circumcised and did not suffer the problems that American Servicemen did.
Remember that we have the "thinking" of the "greatest minds in government" mixed in to this so in their eyes it was far easier at 20 times the cost to offer circumcision complete with a phony sales pitch to servicemen rather than to find a way to get clean water and some sort of bathing facilities to the trenches. It was not compulsory, but the deal was that if you volunteered to be "chopped" you ended up with a vacation and a bunch of percs while things healed. Many did it to get their rear ends out of the line of fire and to get some rest. The main health hazard it prevented for many was getting their butts shot off. My late biological Father served in the Pacific Theater in WWII and my late Stepfather who was an MD and served as a MASH Doctor also during WWII clarified the procedure to me many years ago.
It was not at any time "compulsory" but those serving their country were presented with a cornucopia of misinformation in order to get them to go along with it. Some were even told that it would "prevent" VD in those years.
The point here is not that we agree or disagree with the practice of circumcision, but the practice of deception based on misinformation in order to do so.
I don't know how many times military docs asked me if I wanted to "take that off". It was still solicited, offered and encouraged, but not mandatory or required post Vietnam.
It was not mandatory in WWII. I have worked in a Nursing Home and there were several WWII and Korea Vets. Not one was circumcised. My own father was a sargent in WWII and Korea. He kept his foreskin. I asked him about the mandatory military circumcision and he said that was bullshit.
No disrespect, but you heard a "rumor" and "bullshit". No policy and certainly wasn't mandatory.
Not true that it was "military discipline". "Discipline" has no relationship to doing any sort of body modification. "Discipline" is a state of a persons mind and attitude.
NOT TRUE that it was MANDATORY in any way in any theater or in any war. period. It was sometimes offered at physicals as an elective surgery but a simple "no thanks" ended the conversations. It was NeVER a policy. But some docs being called up for mobilization from civilian life, just like the recruits, were pediatricians in civilian life & circumcision was part of their "enlightened" training of the few years previous. So now that they were in the military, they weren't pediatricians or "family docs" any more...they were general practise doing boring, repetitive medicine at bases or trauma combat medicine in combat areas. And some of the bored docs at big training bases may have offered some conscript the surgery, but it was not mandatory, compulsory, required, or even common.
I've spoken to dozens and dozens of WWII, Korea, VN vets about this. And more importantly, I've known & worked with several docs who served in those wars & they told me the truth to this rumor and all the real world background.
Last edited:
My dad was in the Korean Conflict. He still has his foreskin. His uncles were in WWII and they kept their foreskins. Dad says he never heard of any guys getting circumcised when he was in the Army. Almost all the guys in his platoon were uncircumcised. There were a couple of Jewish guys.
