For context, I’m circumcised and expecting a son and my wife and I are torn about the circ. We’re American so from a cultural standpoint circumcision is the default choice. Thing is, there’s no real benefit besides practicing a religion we don’t believe in, and I’m uncomfortable about cutting the tip of my son’s dick off.
On the other side, I’ve met a guy who was bullied in high school so bad for it he got a circ as an adult. Apparently crazy painful recovery. I’ve also talked to women who are generally grossed out by uncircumcised men. I don’t want to make him feel like something’s wrong with him his whole life because I was uncomfortable with the idea.
From a moral standpoint I’m against it, but from a social and cultural standpoint I feel like I should do it? It’s a crappy situation. If there’s any uncircumcised American men who want to talk about their penis I’m all ears.
Edit: I really appreciate everyone’s responses I never expected to hear from so many people. With the decision hinging on social and cultural norms it’s been really helpful to be able to take the temperature like this. I obviously need to talk to my wife, but given the overwhelming support of dick hats I don’t thing we’re going to do it. Thanks, lemmings!
No.
You are wrong.
There are literally 0 upsides.
There are 0 medically valid reasons to fully or partially circumsize a penis that is not suffering from some kind of rather rare, actual congenital malformation.
The only things you list as upsides are aesthetic, fashion choices, they’re only ‘popular’ where you are … because they are common where you are.
It literally is a disfiguring injury.
It signifcantly changes how the thing looks, and works. Thats disfigurement.
No, it is not as severe as female clitoral removal.
But, the foreskin has a ton of nerve density in it, comparable to how many nerves your head/glans has in it, as opposed to the significantly lower nerve density on a cut shaft.
A circumcised XY male person literally is not physically capable of experiencing the same level and variation of sensation, of sexual pleasure, as an uncircumcised person.
It also removes the ability of the penis to ‘glide’ along the foreskin when inserted, which means it changes how it functions.
Automatic male circumcision at birth is literally a brutal, nonconsensual method of reducing the pleasure an XY man can experience from sex.
Thats what it is.
Thats a cultural norm in the US, mainly, and not so much anywhere else.
For the record:
Circumsized guy here, done at birth, then, I learned things.
The US is a brutal and delusion place by the standards of basically everywhere else.
We are the weird ones, we are the brainwashed ones.
We just happen to also make the most porn, and we invented the internet, so our cultural norms have had an outsized importance and level of influence.
Outside of the US, male circumcision is generally only done by fairly extreme religious groups, and for very rare but actually medically necesssary and valid reasons, like some kind of actual congenital abnormality/malformation of the penis that is present at birth.
You say their are literally 0 upsides, but then you name a couple of upsides. Lol.
Also, if you want to be a dick about it, there have been several scientific studies done showing that HIV and most other STI’s are significantly less at risk of contraction if you’ve been circumcised.
You realise people can scroll up and read what he said?
Outside very rare medical conditions, circumcision has zero medical benefit.
Several studies have proven circumcisions significantly reduce the risk of getting an STI, including HIV, during sex.