I've heard of smegma, but haven't experienced it first-hand. Some of these comments smell like concern-trolling. We don't lop off any other part that can get dirty when neglected, do we?
Regardless of the supposed health benefits, circumcision is a gross violation. I’ve seen this performed in hospital and I can tell you that it’s gruesome and traumatizing. Baby boys scream until exhausted and then over and over every time they urinate until it heals. My sons were not circumcised and did not suffer any ill effects from having their bodies intact. There’s thick propaganda around benefits but maybe we should know better at this point. Thank you for bringing this to light.
Simple solution: wait until the guy reaches the age of consent, say 18, and then ask him if he wants the end of his dick cut off. Sadly, I was not given this choice, and mine was chopped in my first week of life.
I never had a second thought about circumcision beyond well I want my sons to look like mine. Then at 8 months we discovered my sons was botched and would need corrective surgery to avoid a crook. ( It was successful and will be functional)Then it was shocking to discover how common this is. If I’m to be blessed with more sons they will be spared the ordeal.
Im not gonna lie? People who are against circumcising probably don’t understand that superstition in the past is usually in place for a functional reason.
Circumcising someone comes across as mutilation for the sake of gender roles, or religion but none of you know what smegma is, and it shows….
It’s like, how do you GET people to agree to snip skin off their genitals for their own good before medicine and science? The answer is the same as everything else : make it ceremonial.
After you get to an age where everyone has this weird view of sex but hates religion, how do you explain to everyone: “dude, you REALLY should get circumsiced unless you wanna clean moldy dick cheese off from under your penis skin” without coming off as crass or invasive ? Well, we COULD do sex-Ed, but adults don’t like that for kids so people either find out the hard way or do their due diligence on cleaning their bodies.
But considering how a surprising amount of people have an issue with showering , brushing their teeth , wearing deodorant or flushing the toilet…..
I don’t find it to be a particular hardship to pull the hood back and wash the head when I’m having a shower. Compared to, say, flossing your teeth, the effort required is minimal, so I don’t see that as a plausible reason to justify unnecessary surgery.
Reason and logic are rarely the basis of law. Tradition culture and mores are the more usual foundation, with the exception of course of the totalitarian state so popular in the West since the 19C.
The Biblical rite of circumcision, called brit milah (or brith milah or bris milah), entailed the trimming of just the very tip of the foreskin, only that amount that could be pulled down over the tip of the glans. It did not destroy the entire foreskin, it did not affect normal sexual functioning, it was not the brutal rite that baby boys undergo today. The procedure was so less intrusive than what is now practiced that many practitioners of the Old Testament religion could, by pulling on the foreskin that remained, easily make themselves appear to be uncircumcized -- and many did (1 Machabees 1:11-15, 1 Corinthians 7:18). Around A.D. 140 -- that is, around 110 years after Christ rose from the dead, and around 70 years after the Temple was destroyed -- rabbis reacted to those men who did this and instituted two procedures to follow brit milah. Thereafter, a brit peri'ah and a brit mezizah were to be performed on the child after the Biblical rite. All of these procedures are described like this in the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia:
Milah:
The child having been placed upon a pillow resting upon the lap of the godfather or "sandek" (he who is honored by being assigned to hold the child), the mohel [the circumcizer] exposes the parts by removal of garments, etc., and instructs the sandek how to hold the child's legs. The mohel then grasps the prepuce between the thumb and index-finger of his left hand, exerting sufficient traction to draw it from the glans, and places the shield in position just before the glans. He now takes his knife and with one sweep excises the foreskin. This completes the first act. The knife most commonly used is double-edged, although one like those ordinarily used by surgeons is also often employed. [Ed. This is where the Biblical procedure ends. What follows is from the Pharisees' Talmud.]
Peri'ah:
After the excision has been completed, the mohel seizes the inner lining of the prepuce, which still covers the glans, with the thumb-nail and index-finger of each hand, and tears it so that he can roll it fully back over the glans and expose the latter completely. The mohel usually has his thumb-nail suitably trimmed for the purpose. In exceptional cases the inner lining of the prepuce is more or less extensively adherent to the glans, which interferes somewhat with the ready removal; but persistent effort will overcome the difficulty.
Mezizah:
By this is meant the sucking of the blood from the wound. The mohel takes some wine in his mouth and applies his lips to the part involved in the operation, and exerts suction, after which he expels the mixture of wine and blood into a receptacle provided for the purpose. This procedure is repeated several times, and completes the operation, except as to the control of the bleeding and the dressing of the wound.
In modern Western hospitals, it is not the simple, Biblical brit milah that is performed, which is against Church teaching enough given that the Old Law is finished; after that Biblical trimming of the foreskin, the Pharisees' Brit Peri'ah is then carried out -- not with fingernails and clumsy knives, but with either a Gomco Clamp or a Plastibell, and scalpels -- and little or no anesthesia.
Looking at Michelangelo's David, the practice hadn't gotten to be all that wide spread in 1500s Italy. Let me know after closer inspection. Fig leaf, Mandela effect or medical history of the western world post industrial revolution guessing.
I've heard of smegma, but haven't experienced it first-hand. Some of these comments smell like concern-trolling. We don't lop off any other part that can get dirty when neglected, do we?
Regardless of the supposed health benefits, circumcision is a gross violation. I’ve seen this performed in hospital and I can tell you that it’s gruesome and traumatizing. Baby boys scream until exhausted and then over and over every time they urinate until it heals. My sons were not circumcised and did not suffer any ill effects from having their bodies intact. There’s thick propaganda around benefits but maybe we should know better at this point. Thank you for bringing this to light.
Simple solution: wait until the guy reaches the age of consent, say 18, and then ask him if he wants the end of his dick cut off. Sadly, I was not given this choice, and mine was chopped in my first week of life.
I never had a second thought about circumcision beyond well I want my sons to look like mine. Then at 8 months we discovered my sons was botched and would need corrective surgery to avoid a crook. ( It was successful and will be functional)Then it was shocking to discover how common this is. If I’m to be blessed with more sons they will be spared the ordeal.
Im not gonna lie? People who are against circumcising probably don’t understand that superstition in the past is usually in place for a functional reason.
Circumcising someone comes across as mutilation for the sake of gender roles, or religion but none of you know what smegma is, and it shows….
It’s like, how do you GET people to agree to snip skin off their genitals for their own good before medicine and science? The answer is the same as everything else : make it ceremonial.
After you get to an age where everyone has this weird view of sex but hates religion, how do you explain to everyone: “dude, you REALLY should get circumsiced unless you wanna clean moldy dick cheese off from under your penis skin” without coming off as crass or invasive ? Well, we COULD do sex-Ed, but adults don’t like that for kids so people either find out the hard way or do their due diligence on cleaning their bodies.
But considering how a surprising amount of people have an issue with showering , brushing their teeth , wearing deodorant or flushing the toilet…..
Ah, you’ll be fine….
I don’t find it to be a particular hardship to pull the hood back and wash the head when I’m having a shower. Compared to, say, flossing your teeth, the effort required is minimal, so I don’t see that as a plausible reason to justify unnecessary surgery.
Reason and logic are rarely the basis of law. Tradition culture and mores are the more usual foundation, with the exception of course of the totalitarian state so popular in the West since the 19C.
Many also don't know that modern circumcision is not the same as circumcision in the Old Testament. From https://www.fisheaters.com/circumcision.html :
The Biblical rite of circumcision, called brit milah (or brith milah or bris milah), entailed the trimming of just the very tip of the foreskin, only that amount that could be pulled down over the tip of the glans. It did not destroy the entire foreskin, it did not affect normal sexual functioning, it was not the brutal rite that baby boys undergo today. The procedure was so less intrusive than what is now practiced that many practitioners of the Old Testament religion could, by pulling on the foreskin that remained, easily make themselves appear to be uncircumcized -- and many did (1 Machabees 1:11-15, 1 Corinthians 7:18). Around A.D. 140 -- that is, around 110 years after Christ rose from the dead, and around 70 years after the Temple was destroyed -- rabbis reacted to those men who did this and instituted two procedures to follow brit milah. Thereafter, a brit peri'ah and a brit mezizah were to be performed on the child after the Biblical rite. All of these procedures are described like this in the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia:
Milah:
The child having been placed upon a pillow resting upon the lap of the godfather or "sandek" (he who is honored by being assigned to hold the child), the mohel [the circumcizer] exposes the parts by removal of garments, etc., and instructs the sandek how to hold the child's legs. The mohel then grasps the prepuce between the thumb and index-finger of his left hand, exerting sufficient traction to draw it from the glans, and places the shield in position just before the glans. He now takes his knife and with one sweep excises the foreskin. This completes the first act. The knife most commonly used is double-edged, although one like those ordinarily used by surgeons is also often employed. [Ed. This is where the Biblical procedure ends. What follows is from the Pharisees' Talmud.]
Peri'ah:
After the excision has been completed, the mohel seizes the inner lining of the prepuce, which still covers the glans, with the thumb-nail and index-finger of each hand, and tears it so that he can roll it fully back over the glans and expose the latter completely. The mohel usually has his thumb-nail suitably trimmed for the purpose. In exceptional cases the inner lining of the prepuce is more or less extensively adherent to the glans, which interferes somewhat with the ready removal; but persistent effort will overcome the difficulty.
Mezizah:
By this is meant the sucking of the blood from the wound. The mohel takes some wine in his mouth and applies his lips to the part involved in the operation, and exerts suction, after which he expels the mixture of wine and blood into a receptacle provided for the purpose. This procedure is repeated several times, and completes the operation, except as to the control of the bleeding and the dressing of the wound.
In modern Western hospitals, it is not the simple, Biblical brit milah that is performed, which is against Church teaching enough given that the Old Law is finished; after that Biblical trimming of the foreskin, the Pharisees' Brit Peri'ah is then carried out -- not with fingernails and clumsy knives, but with either a Gomco Clamp or a Plastibell, and scalpels -- and little or no anesthesia.
How nauseating. Thank you.
Anything God commands can’t be inherently immoral, and therefore can’t be off the table, morally speaking.
Tl;dr - why get circumsiced you ask? Read this : https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-smegma
What about Christians who get circumcised? How is "logic" and "reason" going to square with their religious beliefs?
Looking at Michelangelo's David, the practice hadn't gotten to be all that wide spread in 1500s Italy. Let me know after closer inspection. Fig leaf, Mandela effect or medical history of the western world post industrial revolution guessing.
https://www.cirp.org/library/history/peron2/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3QbnNCzBbTEqBbr8ZyJPeHfFtTNOoYSOoJOwXZb8zBJZfia7SzZwNkS8w_aem_ARCoQ0oD0O044mokpjt0OxzNAskdVTZedUDKzCcw73dxjEhw79U4-c96cIngMv_kDuYBe9YGgu6uY1_Y2h850lNQ&mibextid=NOb6eG
I just read this article recently and found it fascinating