Percentage Of Males Who Are Circumcised By Country

[Mcuthigh]

Thank goodness for America. I'm cut and wouldn't have it any other way.

You got that right Reuben36!! It is interesting why the uncut dudes on these threads just keep asking about circumcision over and over and over. If they think that cut dudes will suddenly start loving foreskin because of media inundation by foreskin.fanatics. They would be very wrong. In fact, there are many cut bros who want their dicks just as they are.

 

[Mcuthigh]

Your are thankful because you are used to it or like it. But reflect upon those many men who didnt get to decide for themselves. Isn't "my body my choice"?

No your body was not yours when your parents made their choice to conceive you or not. If you were born with a cleft palette, club foot, or even redundant prepuce etc, it is the parent not you, who must-make the choices based upon the best time to perform the procedure.

 

[Mcuthigh]

"My body, my choice" is all very well if you don't go through a childhood of pain and embarrassment , and find yourself having to have it done when you are 16 or even older. The pain and embarrassment is even worse. By that age a man circumcised at birth will be well over the trauma. You do have to go through a whole new learning curve, to put it crudely about wanking.

Well said Andy

 

[samjones]

No your body was not yours when your parents made their choice to conceive you or not. If you were born with a cleft palette, club foot, or even redundant prepuce etc, it is the parent not you, who must-make the choices based upon the best time to perform the procedure.

Conception was to bring a life wheres circumcision is just mutilation (unless the foreskin causes pain & discomfort). A cleft palette, club foot impacts the ability of a child to perform daily duties and parents can take an early decision.

My prepuce or anyone's prepuce is not redundant to be chopped off before we consent as adults (I repeat, exception when the foreskin causes pain & discomfort). It was never vestigial to call it redundant.

So will you justify the horrendous FGM? Even here the parents "make their choice".

 

[Jacopus]

Jacopus, you are right, of course. My view is very much guided by how I felt from as long as I could remember.I don't resent my parents for leaving me uncircumcised, of course. They were only doing it because the felt it would be best for me. There would certainly not have been any suggestion they were doing it to hurt me - I just wish those men who resent their parents for circumcising them would adopt the same attitude.There are very, very few parents who would set out to damage their sons, physically or mentally. My parents felt circumcising babies was cruel and that was what stopped them

Unfortunately, here in the UK, where, long after the most dangerous part of Covid is over it is still more or less impossible to get a face to face consultation even now - the receptionist will ask a GP to phone you, and to be fair, they do, but it is far from satisfactory - imagine describing my pre-16 situation in a phone call with a tongue tied teenager.

You are lucky in your country so much attention is paid to your development, and in an ideal world that would be the norm, but not in Britain I am afraid. As I recall the first school medical you get is when you are 6 and they are mainly looking for sight and hearing defects, then another round about 9, slightly more in depth, but the major ones - at my time in school 12.14.16 though they examined your penis and testes, they really didn't act or advise on any problems they found - I don't believe they even wrote to the lad's GP.

Was those examinations you had as a young boy compulsory, or just if the parents agreed to it. It seems a good idea to me.

To be honest i have no idea right now how the situation is being handled with the covid pandemic, although many of the "routine" visits are coming back to 100%.

I can imagine explaining the situation via phone call, it must be horrendous actually...

To answer your question on how it worked when i was younger, they weren't compulsory but they were kinda routine. Here every child has a "national-health paid pediatrician" who is in charge of dealing with the direct contact between a family and the health system. You usually contact him/her if the child gets sick (or if you think he/she is) and with a medical check you are given a feedback on what to do next, if you need to take any pills, further special visits and so on. Plus when you approach adolescence it is not mandatory but they usually advice to have a meeting at least once a year to see if the growing is going good and there the "private parts" are checked. That is where it is kinda easy for a professional to spot any phimosis or similar issues and suggest further investigation with the urologist if it is needed. Finally with the arrival of the first period for the ladies and the first sign of sperm/full grown penis for boys, a visit to the gynecologist/urologist is strongly recommended, again using the national health system (i'm using the same name of the british NHS to give you some comparison, i have no idea how to translate it otherwise). I guess any parents could decide what to do without any repercussion, but why should anyone refuse free medical checks ?

A quick personal experience: i was actually having some problems with my foreskin being still attached to my glans during my adolescence, but with the help of my pediatrician (and some patience) we made it completely detach correctly. I guess without such a system it is actually better to cut directly from birth, because a regular parent with no background in medicine can't always figure it out by himself.

And finally: i actually don't know if i (visually and sexually) prefer cut or uncut... Maybe i'd say cut because they are so rare here it is a plus

 

[763790]

To be honest i have no idea right now how the situation is being handled with the covid pandemic, although many of the "routine" visits are coming back to 100%.

I can imagine explaining the situation via phone call, it must be horrendous actually...

To answer your question on how it worked when i was younger, they weren't compulsory but they were kinda routine. Here every child has a "national-health paid pediatrician" who is in charge of dealing with the direct contact between a family and the health system. You usually contact him/her if the child gets sick (or if you think he/she is) and with a medical check you are given a feedback on what to do next, if you need to take any pills, further special visits and so on. Plus when you approach adolescence it is not mandatory but they usually advice to have a meeting at least once a year to see if the growing is going good and there the "private parts" are checked. That is where it is kinda easy for a professional to spot any phimosis or similar issues and suggest further investigation with the urologist if it is needed. Finally with the arrival of the first period for the ladies and the first sign of sperm/full grown penis for boys, a visit to the gynecologist/urologist is strongly recommended, again using the national health system (i'm using the same name of the british NHS to give you some comparison, i have no idea how to translate it otherwise). I guess any parents could decide what to do without any repercussion, but why should anyone refuse free medical checks ?

A quick personal experience: i was actually having some problems with my foreskin being still attached to my glans during my adolescence, but with the help of my pediatrician (and some patience) we made it completely detach correctly. I guess without such a system it is actually better to cut directly from birth, because a regular parent with no background in medicine can't always figure it out by himself.

Interesting, and thanks. Here in the U.K Urology is one of the specialities and you only get to see one if our G.P. recommends it. They will write a letter, and if you are lucky, a few months later you will get an appointment. The system you had when your had problems when the foreskin was fused to the glans probably saved your foreskin. I think here in the U.K. circumcision would have been the go-to option, at least where I and a few others I have known were concerned. There is also the question that the British can be quite shy/reserved. When I offered to show my dad "the problem" when I was about 14, he went red and said "er, no. I don't think that is necessary"

And finally: i actually don't know if i (visually and sexually) prefer cut or uncut... Maybe i'd say cut because they are so rare here it is a plus

 

[Mcuthigh]

Conception was to bring a life wheres circumcision is just mutilation (unless the foreskin causes pain & discomfort). A cleft palette, club foot impacts the ability of a child to perform daily duties and parents can take an early decision.

My prepuce or anyone's prepuce is not redundant to be chopped off before we consent as adults (I repeat, exception when the foreskin causes pain & discomfort). It was never vestigial to call it redundant.

So will you justify the horrendous FGM? Even here the parents "make their choice".

Your statements above are at best a non sequeters. Parents can ask themselves, “Shall we conceive a child or not?” Yes or No? Your attempt to answer this question by declaring “(…circumcision is just mutilation …) is illogical and a blatant attempt to stir irrational behavior!!

A Human Timeline For Individual Choice

Conception - 9 mos 0. +48 Hrs. + - 14 y/o +18y/o
I————————————-I—————I———————————————————————-————I-
Parental Volition. Par. Vol. Sliding scale of demonstrated responsibility and maturity.

You contend that parents do not have the right to choose circumcision including age for the procedure. Well for sure you own only one penis and you may choose as you wish for only you and you are free to refer to yourself as mutilated. Your desire to describe circumcised men as mutilated approaches cruelty and is libelous.

Also, Historical Biologists have referred to prepuce as redundant.

 

[Niccolo]

In Australia, mutilation of newborn bouys was pretty much routine when I came into the worldI wish I'd had a say in it and now, towards the end of my life I am attempting to restore. Already I feel better and more of a man.

In Tasmania, circumcision of neonate males is now banned. Circumcison of girls is banned throughout Australia.

The practice of circum,cision is mutilation , often of peopple who were too young to give informed consent. Some religions think it is a requirement of their faith but how can little boys either assent to their mutilation when they are too young even to know about the religion concerned?

The UN Convention on the rights of the child should be enforced around the world. There is no justification of religious based mythologies on this matter and the principle of freedom of religion requires that parents should not impose their mythologies and prejudices on their innocent children

If any adult man want sto have a piece of his dick cut off, that's his right, but he must be mad. Motto must surely be Lose it to use it.

 

[samjones]

Your statements above are at best a non sequeters. Parents can ask themselves, “Shall we conceive a child or not?” Yes or No? Your attempt to answer this question by declaring “(…circumcision is just mutilation …) is illogical and a blatant attempt to stir irrational behavior!!

Did you notice your last reply is a non sequitur too. Damn !! Couples & parents have been planning conception for decades. It's not a new trade.
Let me type it again for you. Please give it another read. I said, "Circumcision is just mutilation (unless the foreskin causes pain & discomfort)." This I said keeping context the parents' decision and not the decision made by adult men.

Can you show me when did I call circumcised men as mutilated?

Historical biologists? I rather refer newer studies calling the prepuce a utilitarian part of the body.
I am so looking forward for your invaluable opinion on parental choice for FGM.

 

[763790]

In Australia, mutilation of newborn bouys was pretty much routine when I came into the worldI wish I'd had a say in it and now, towards the end of my life I am attempting to restore. Already I feel better and more of a man.

In Tasmania, circumcision of neonate males is now banned. Circumcison of girls is banned throughout Australia.

The practice of circum,cision is mutilation , often of peopple who were too young to give informed consent. Some religions think it is a requirement of their faith but how can little boys either assent to their mutilation when they are too young even to know about the religion concerned?

The UN Convention on the rights of the child should be enforced around the world. There is no justification of religious based mythologies on this matter and the principle of freedom of religion requires that parents should not impose their mythologies and prejudices on their innocent children

If any adult man want sto have a piece of his dick cut off, that's his right, but he must be mad. Motto must surely be Lose it to use it.

Generally speaking, most Jewish and Muslim parents expect or hope their children will follow the faith they were born in to. But I half agree with you in some circumstances. Forgive me being political for a moment, and I assure you had it been Boris Johnson I would be saying the same thing, but what does anger me is when, politicians or entertainers (much the same profession these days) use their child/children as a gesture. I read not long ago that Keir Starmer, the leader of the Opposition here in the UK, is not Jewish himself, but his wife is, and he decided to bring his children up in the Jewish faith - we all know one of the main tenets of the Jewish faith is to circumcise the boy baby at 8 days. Mr Starmer has both a son and a daughter. It did occur to me it was highly presumptuous of him to assume his son would wish to follow his mothers religion, or an religion at all. It might be argued Mrs Starmer is not 100% Kosher, because I believe if you are, you would not consider marrying a goy (non Jewish person). As Mr. Starmer is conducting an exercise in wiping out perceived anti-semitism in his party, (understandably this perception has impacted on his party's share of the vote at the 2019 election) it did occur to me that his action towards his son was a political gesture, and not for the sons benefit but for his own, in which case, in this case it was an unnecessary operation. Anybody who uses a baby in a political way is bang out of order.

If I might be allowed to say so, I have heard of restoring, and I wish you well with it: I imagine it is a long process, but surely you are only extending the skin which remains, in other words, if there are thousands/millions of nerve endings in the excised foreskin, with the greatest respect, they cannot be regrown, can they?. I am happy how I look, am grateful that the ;procedure helped me a great deal and I really wouldn't want to restore, even if you could do it overnight.

As regards feeling "more of a man" - again, with respect, watching those brave military men as they evacuated the citizens of Afghanistan last week, and many present when the bomb went off at the airport, you have to reflect that 80% of the American men and a fair few of the British soldiers taking part don't have foreskins, but they are just as much men as those who do.

 

[Jagtstein]

Uncut he looks better!
Circumcision without medical indication is nonsense, I am glad that I still have my foreskin, it is great to masturbate with it. With the cleanliness I have no problems, because I wash the glans (glans) with retracted foreskin, twice a day and after use (masturbation, sex).
But the Frenulum Praeputii remove (frenulectomy) I can only recommend the benefits are:
1. The foreskin can be pulled further backwards, thus a larger stroke during masturbation is possible and the foreskin is more mobile.
2. The penis looks better, because the foreskin can be pulled back almost without creases.
3. The penis can be kept much better clean.
I completely removed the frenulum myself with three interventions. But every urologist does that too.

 

[Stu311]

Uncut he looks better!
Circumcision without medical indication is nonsense, I am glad that I still have my foreskin, it is great to masturbate with it. With the cleanliness I have no problems, because I wash the glans (glans) with retracted foreskin, twice a day and after use (masturbation, sex).
But the Frenulum Praeputii remove (frenulectomy) I can only recommend the benefits are:
1. The foreskin can be pulled further backwards, thus a larger stroke during masturbation is possible and the foreskin is more mobile.
2. The penis looks better, because the foreskin can be pulled back almost without creases.
3. The penis can be kept much better clean.
I completely removed the frenulum myself with three interventions. But every urologist does that too.

What does this have to do with the topic?

 

[Mcuthigh]

What does this have to do with the topic?

Not a thing. Also, we could not care in the least about his love of his foreskin. My opinion is that it sounds rather nasty, I am looking for the appropriate posting and will transfer my opinion, once it is located.

 

[kato_boi]

Not a thing. Also, we could not care in the least about his love of his foreskin. My opinion is that it sounds rather nasty, I am looking for the appropriate posting and will transfer my opinion, once it is located.

I don't get why he (or others like him) feels the need to go off topic and post pics/videos of a penis (unattractive IMO) nobody asked to see. It spams the thread and it's completely uncalled for