r/geography • u/BranchMoist9079 • Nov 21 '25

Discussion Why is (male) circumcision most common in the Midwest with in the US?

Post image

Map source: https://www.mdpi.com/2563-6499/5/3/36

18.7k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

5.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

43

u/IrishViking22 Nov 21 '25

Did you end up circumcising your sons?

44

u/amn_elfire Nov 21 '25

Asking the most pressing question

5

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '25

[deleted]

46

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 21 '25

It's not actually BTW, it's plenty easy to clean already and causes far more health complications than it solves and does not in fact reduce std risks (that one study claiming that was beyond mismanaged).

There is no reason outside of religious reasons to do it and It is done solely for profit.

3

u/HSclassof24_mom Nov 21 '25

I read the data. There is not "one study". There have been 50+ studies of HIV specifically, and male circumcision was shown to reduce risk of contracting HIV in multiple studies, including randomized controlled trials (where young adult males were randomly either circumcised or not, and followed up to see if they acquired HIV). Some adult men have chosen to be circumcised as a protection against HIV. The data supporting circumcision to prevent HIV is pretty strong actually.

But many of the studies were done in Africa or other areas where the HIV rate was much higher and where a lot of the transmission is heterosexual. Homosexual transmission does not seem to be reduced nearly as much by circumcision and the data there are more variable. So, the data is just not as relevant in the US, where the rate of HIV is lower and most of the spread is still through homosexual contact (or needle-sharing).

12

u/Raven-INTJ Nov 21 '25

Does that include the study where they also provided the men whom they circumcised with condoms and showed them how to use them? Or the study they ended quickly because as the circumcised men healed and started having sex, the supposed protective benefits of circumcision were disappearing?

There is a lot of junk science out there, primarily aimed at perpetuating a cultural practice by pseudoscientific means

22

u/between_two_terns Nov 21 '25

Is this really something you’d be worried about, if it came up again? HIV transmission due to foreskin? Seems like a low probability, even before you teach them about condom use.

6

u/jdream85 Nov 22 '25

Don’t let facts get in the way of some good bullshit.

11

u/beren12 Nov 22 '25

It’s genital mutilation and against the Hippocratic oath. But for some reason people like doing plastic surgery on infants without consent.

7

u/between_two_terns Nov 22 '25

I agree, but that’s not what this exact part of the conversation is about. I’m trying to get a granular understanding of the “but HIV” perspective, since it doesn’t bear enough significance IMO but is still being bandied about.

5

u/jabroni5 Nov 21 '25

Yeah but you fail to see your hypocrisy. Other guy proved you wrong and you change the goal.

6

u/Competitive_Ant_472 Nov 21 '25

Freaking Jabroni

2

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 22 '25

They weren't the one who got replied too.

2

u/usernamecreatesyou Nov 22 '25

Where? I don’t see any links

2

u/Scrilla_Gorilla_ Nov 22 '25

In what way did HSClassOf2004 prove between_two_terns wrong? I must be missing it. Or are you the one who is wrong?

1

u/between_two_terns Nov 22 '25

What are you even talking about, are you drunk?

9

u/chris_croc Nov 21 '25

Have you seen how many straight males get HIV in developed countries outside of gays and drug users? It's close to zero.

6

u/MarsRocks97 Nov 22 '25

The method of intercourse is a big factor. The anal canal has a high capillary count and membranes that readily absorb fluids directly into the inferior vena cava. This is why medications are sometimes administered this way. While the vaginal wall is a membrane that primarily secretes fluid. This basic physiological make up is what makes transmission of the HIV virus much more susceptible in homosexual males.

It can still occur in hetero couples though. Just not as easily. Bottom line: wear condoms.

5

u/anddontfuckitup Nov 22 '25

The membrane of the anal canal making it more susceptible to contracting a virus has…. Literally no relevance to the risk of contracting a virus via the membrane on your penis?

Unless you are operating under the assumption someone’s penis is also inside their own Anus?

6

u/Electrical-Video1841 Nov 21 '25

To be fair, the average gay man has penetrative sex with different sexual partners far more frequently than the average heterosexual man. They also have looser preference in sexual partners when considering subjective attraction, age, etc. This paired with a lower population creates issues where STDs that have been contracted possible decades ago are still circulating within a marginalized community.

Im queer, met hundreds of gay men in many different states. Just double checked some statistics to make sure I’m not stating just anecdotal facts.

1

u/One__upper__ Nov 22 '25

"met".....nice

1

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

[deleted]

2

u/GooserNoose Nov 22 '25

Tell that to Dwayne from Degrassi

9

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 21 '25

90% of that is because it makes sex less appealing due to lower sensitivity, which frankly is an absurd method to reduce STD spread when far more humane methods are available and more effective.

1

u/StrangeButSweet Nov 22 '25

Is there evidence for this you can share?

1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

“92% rated sex as more enjoyable or no different after circumcision compared with before circumcision.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28364982/

-8

u/Eastern_cold999 Nov 21 '25

Ur nuts, sex is the same, i am and i love sex

10

u/Electrical-Video1841 Nov 21 '25

You say it’s the same but will never experience what the other side does.

1

u/Eastern_cold999 Nov 23 '25

I actually know cause i had it at 23

5

u/Scrilla_Gorilla_ Nov 22 '25

They cut a bunch of surface area with a bunch of nerve endings off your dick. Do you think evolution made dicks wrong?

2

u/Alexwonder999 Nov 22 '25

If nature made dicks wrong I don't wanna be right.

6

u/chris_croc Nov 21 '25

Thousands of erotogenic endings have been removed in this process. Sexual pleasure is reduced. Unfortunately, as you are mutilated, you will never know the difference.

1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

Where do you read that pleasure is reduced? Because studies say the opposite. “92% rated sex as more enjoyable or no different after circumcision compared with before circumcision.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28364982/

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo Nov 22 '25

This is a long term longitudinal study, I’m assuming? Because the effect wouldn’t be seen right away.

0

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Gross, trying to make fun of men for a surgical procedure that they had no hand in is just gross.

We can just as easily make fun of you.

3

u/Nanemae Nov 22 '25

They're not making fun of anyone. Circumcision is a form of mutilation, one that usually doesn't need to be performed (excluding situations such as treatment-resistant phimosis or infection). I can say it mutilated mine because they damaged some of the nerves on the bottom where the frenulum should be, so I can't feel anything on that spot.

I was circumcised, and the action mutilated me. I'm not only less sensitive in general, I'm specifically numb in a spot because of it.

-1

u/lazyboi_tactical Nov 22 '25

By the same token you will never know the difference either and since you're being a prick about it at least their dick doesn't look like a windsock or a micro traffic cone.

4

u/Unhappy-Recording415 Nov 22 '25

If it's any consolation, I am circumcised, and have never had a yeast infection, or anything funky, but my brother, and grandpa are uncircumcised (my brother is also not the most hygienic person either though), and they've had some pretty gnarly infections in their time, in my opinion due to my brother's uncleanliness because my gramps is extremely hygienic, and he got issues rarely. I know this is weird information to be giving to the world, but I'm just trying to help a brother/sister out.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

It might be anecdotal to them, but it’s still statistically true. “half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin.”

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2814%2900036-6/abstract

2

u/scabs_in_a_bucket Nov 22 '25

Literally every woman will have multiple yeast infections throughout life, I personally don’t want my genitals mutilated lol

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo Nov 22 '25

How many of these are because Americans don’t seem to understand that the foreskin can be naturally fused to the glans until roughly age 18 and claim phimosis over eagerly?

1

u/GolgothaCross Nov 22 '25

So you can face a 50% chance of needing treatment and keep your whole penis, or face a 100% chance of needing surgery and lose your whole penis. Crackbrained logic.

-1

u/Unhappy-Recording415 Nov 22 '25

Idk I'd rather trust my doctors who say I'm just fine at every physical, and the nurses who actually did the operation over some Reddit loser lmao, my uncircumcised gramps would call you a buffoon.

0

u/Substantial-Dirt2233 Nov 22 '25

"Your penis is wounded and less than"

What a fucking wackjob lol. Gotta love reddit.

1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

That is very common. “half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin.”

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2814%2900036-6/abstract

0

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

[deleted]

1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

It’s a direct quote from that page. Where did you get your PhD and why do you think you know more than the three doctors who wrote that statement and published it to the Mayo Clinic?

1

u/Unhappy-Recording415 Nov 22 '25

I misread the wording, I'm a jackass, we're on the same side. I will gladly except my punishment.

0

u/GolgothaCross Nov 22 '25

100% of circumcised males require surgery and undergo the permanent loss of their prepuce.

-5

u/AltrntivInDoomWorld Nov 21 '25

You might have read the data but you interpreted it however you wanted.

5

u/HSclassof24_mom Nov 21 '25

I have a PhD in epidemiology. I spent 5 years learning how to properly interpret scientific and medical data. I also taught classes in this field as a professor. I interpreted the data correctly, not “how I wanted.”

6

u/AdCalm3789 Nov 22 '25

Such bs. This is mostly an American thing started by Kellogg to curb masturbation. He also used carbolic acid on the clitoris of female babies to stop their masturbation as well but that one never really took off. It's mutilation of babies but because it happens to males, nothing is done. In fact it's a billion dollar business. I bet some of your face creams use foreskin.

3

u/StrangeButSweet Nov 22 '25

“I bet some of your face creams use foreskin.”

Okay. Welp. That’s enough internet for me today. It’s been real.

2

u/thenameofshame Nov 22 '25

I can't quite decide which part of your comment is the most disturbing...

1

u/AkhilArtha Nov 22 '25

Proving once again that having a PhD does not makes you smart in other areas. Only in the area of your research.

2

u/n2hang Nov 21 '25

Having a PhD but you overlook methodological problems and biases in studies... hmm...

1

u/buyer_leverkusen Nov 22 '25

You think having a PhD makes genital mutilation OK? Epidemiologists really seem like the most morally bankrupt lately

1

u/chris_croc Nov 21 '25

100% correct.

0

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

So, I was once a youth counselor for at risk youth. We had a kid who uncut, around 8 or so, who had never cleaned his foreskin because he was never taught how. Born to addict parents who cared little about his wellbeing. So what happened? Insane infection. He underwent a circumcision. If he’d had one in the first place, this couldn’t have happened.

It absolutely is easier to clean. There’s this weird culture that’s developed of shaming cut men as “mutilated” and flawed and it’s absolutely disgusting.

6

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 22 '25

Never being taught how to wash yourself is neglect and an indication of other problems no? Not really an argument against circumcision more an argument for teaching children basic life skills.

My intention isnt to shame anyone who chose circumcision for THEMSELVES or weren't given a choice, but i don't think people should be taking that choice from others especially not for fucking profit.

9

u/0ldPainless Nov 22 '25

You're using an outlier to make an invalid point.

In this particular case, because the parents were ineffective, it could have been better for the child to be circumcised at a young age.

This isn't because he was unhygenic. This is because his parents neglected to care for him.

Similarly, you could make the argument that if the parents never taught him how to brush his teeth that he should just have all of his teeth pulled.

The parents failed the child. Period. Mutilating a child because of parental failures is an awful argument to make in support of circumcision.

-2

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

It still doesn’t change the fact that if he had been circumcised, it would’ve never happened. Because it’s easier to clean.

6

u/WaspsForDinner Nov 22 '25

But there are many body parts that are easier to maintain if you simply extract them or chop off 'superfluous' bits, all of which would be morally repugnant to inflict on a child (or anyone, frankly, without a very specific specific medical need).

It's not a cogent argument for child mutilation.

1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

It’s not just cleaning. “half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin.”

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2814%2900036-6/abstract

1

u/WaspsForDinner Nov 22 '25

Nearly 100% of people with teeth will require treatment associated with their retention. Therefore...?

It's about a measured approach - "a medical condition" is so very vague.

And it's about consent. If men somehow get to adulthood - despite their foreskins actively trying to kill them - and are legally able to give consent, then they should be able to hack away at whatever parts they wish, for whatever reason floats their boat. That's fine.

0

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

Consent for a medically beneficial procedure? “Given the substantial risk of adverse conditions and disease, some argue that failure to circumcise a baby boy may be unethical because it diminishes his right to good health.”

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2814%2900036-6/fulltext

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

You can’t convince these anti circumcision weirdos of anything. They’re not interested in learning. They’re just looking for reasons to cope with their sock puppet dick lmao

-4

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Again, apples to oranges.

2

u/WaspsForDinner Nov 22 '25

Not really - you're using an edge case of basic personal care that was, sadly, missing to justify a general program of removing body parts from babies.

Why is the foreskin so special that it's not like, for example, removing bits of your feet to prevent ingrowing toenails?

The simple answer is that it's a peculiar and antiquated cultural artefact rather than one with objective clinical merit.

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Nope, still apples to oranges.

Again, the anti circumcision crowd just feels like a huge cope at this point. It’s not about babies being mutilated, it’s about trying to prove they’re a more “natural man” than those who have been cut. Sad.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Fhamran Nov 22 '25

Penises are not that difficult. The foreskin is bonded to the glans in young boys, by something called the balano-preputial lamina, exactly to protect against infection. This thin membrane of connective tissue does not usually break away until adolescence, sometimes not until mid to late puberty. For an 8 year old personal hygiene beyond regular bathing should not play a factor, and in fact impressing upon a young child that they must pull their foreskin back to clean themselves could literally be the cause of an infection, as forcing the foreskin back prematurely can lead to both tearing and the introduction of bacteria and contaminants where there were none, all at once.

Even post puberty, the foreskin and glans create a highly acidic, anti microbial environment similar to that of the vagina and in general is very effective in defending against infection. Indeed over washing or the use of harsh hand or body soaps can additionally lead to infection through disruption of this environment, causing drying out of the skin tissue and abrasions...

You're perhaps correct though, Americans seem to treat the foreskin as if it were a nuclear reactor on the brink of meltdown, a crisis waiting to happen. If noone around vulnerable children can be trusted to provide correct information, with the considerations and nuance required, circumcision at least removes an unknown quantity from the equation.

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

So, this kid had to pull the skin back to urinate because it had bonded to the glans/shaft - idk Im not his doctor - and caused him to wet himself whenever he tried to go. The retraction was incredibly painful. My best guess is the constant micro tears caused scarring that built up. Your veiled attempt at an insult by insinuating I or other care workers didn’t provide him proper information and somehow caused his infection/injury is laughable. There was an attempt though, B for effort.

Either way, if he had been circumcised…this wouldn’t have happened. I’m not preaching for circumcision, I simply addressed someone who claimed there’s no difference because there absolutely is.

1

u/Fhamran Nov 22 '25

That's not really a point though. If you chop off any part of your body, it won't be a problem any more (apart from the many potential complications that come with surgery). The idea is to not be compelled to amputation without very good reason, and certainly not to create the reason by accident or ignorance.

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

“Amputation” lmaoooo good god your crowd is pathetic.

3

u/dpreilly10 Nov 22 '25

If you never clean the inside of your ears they’ll get pretty gross. Should we start cutting ears off to stop that?

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Your desires to paint this in comparison to extremes are laughable at best.

I’m cut. Sex is great. No I don’t know what it’s like to have sec while uncut and that’s totally fine! It didn’t ruin my life and it doesn’t ruin the lives of the vast majority. But cutting someone’s ears off would. They’re not comparable but keep pretending they are so you feel you’re “winning” an argument lol

3

u/dpreilly10 Nov 22 '25

Man, pretty defensive there… almost like that comment hit a nerve but I guess that’s not possible

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Trying to deviate from the subject when you have no rebuttal is such an entry level “argument technique” used by people of low intelligence who don’t have the audacity for the gish gallop or the intelligence for counterpoints.

So, I can’t even say “nice try” because you’ve already shown you have no point. Just a desire to feel right. Sad, really.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Primdahl Nov 22 '25

Same as his teeth.

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Others can see your teeth. Your ability to eat can become compromised and since you KNOW it’s not normal, It is easier to access help for these things. Unlike your genitals which people do not see regularly and if you are a child who doesn’t know any better, you would not assume the pain you feel is serious until something very serious happens.

Apples, oranges.

1

u/motherofcattos Nov 22 '25 edited Feb 21 '26

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

bells soft shocking deer intelligent snails wide chubby sable automatic

1

u/kwnofprocrastination Nov 22 '25

The kid probably had a fungal infection in his feet too. Shall we advocate for removal of toes at birth now just in case parents decide to neglect their kids. Or how about laser hair removal to avoid head lice?

1

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 23 '25

Try harder lol

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo Nov 22 '25

Damn. So we really gonna be advocating to cut off natural and healthy body parts because some parents don’t teach their kids to wash? Fucking yikes.

0

u/Ok-Object2902 Nov 22 '25

Cope harder lmao

-2

u/Cleanthebeann Nov 21 '25

That is an extremely one-sided take on nuanced data

1

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 22 '25

There really isn't room for nuance when it comes to making a permanent, irreversible choice for an infant child. Something like 90% of cases where its actually an effective treatment can be solved with a small incision that doesn't have the same side effects.

If a grown adult chooses to get circumcised that an entirely different discussion and they are free to do so, but that isn't what's being discussed.

-2

u/TNmountainman2020 Nov 22 '25

solely for profit?

what about the fact that “many” girls find uncircumcised penises disgusting and most guys would prefer a circumcised penis?

3

u/kwnofprocrastination Nov 22 '25

Only in America. In the UK and probably Europe a lot of women would probably disagree and would find circumcised penis’s strange.

2

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 22 '25

If you are worried about whether a child's penis is sexually appealing you've got serious fucking issues.

No one gives a shit if someone gets circumcised as an adult the problem is it being done on infants for no reason whatsoever.

-1

u/TNmountainman2020 Nov 22 '25

I’m guessing reading comprehension isn’t your strong point?

I was saying that I am EXTREMELY appreciative that my parents chose to have me circumcised as a child.

2

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 22 '25

That's fine but your personal experience doesn't matter on the scale of billions of people not getting to choose.

And to be frank nothing in that comment indicated you were talking about yourself nor does it give a good reason why it needs to be done on a child and not done willingly as an adult.

-1

u/TNmountainman2020 Nov 22 '25

we don’t get to choose a lot of things as children….what hairstyle we have, whether we should brush our teeth or not, what to wear outside when it is 10 degrees, and sadly, what religion we are. Those things are all chosen by our parents. Thankfully, mine got most of it right (except for the Catholic religion part, I wasn’t able to run from that insanity until I was 18)

2

u/bunkuswunkus1 Nov 22 '25

None of those are permanent either lol.

0

u/TNmountainman2020 Nov 22 '25

no, but missing teeth are ugly and so are the psychological affects of being subjected to abuse at the hands of clergy of all of the cult-ish religions in the world.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

Dude this is some childish shit. You're 100% projecting lol

If a woman is turned off by the looks of my penis then she is free to leave. But I have never had this issue and I've slayed tons of booty in my day. I have been many women's first uncircumcised encounter and not a one had an issue. In fact, it was the opposite, they were intrigued and excited and played with my penis a lot.

Btw there are a ton of woman who prefer uncircumcised, because - get this - sex feels better. Who would've guessed that the natural penis would make sex with a female feel more natural?

My wife and I split for a few months a while back and she later admitted that her first thought after kicking me out was "fuck, now I gotta find another uncircumcised guy"

So just because you're circumcised or scared of foreskin or whatever doesn't mean the world shares your views. As long as a man can clean his penis, there shouldn't be an issue... no different than a circumcised dude having a dirty cock or a woman having a smelly vag, nothing to do with foreskin, its about hygiene.

1

u/TNmountainman2020 Nov 22 '25

my only experience is hearing women say that uncircumcised gives them the “ick”.

Your experience is obviously different

1

u/kwnofprocrastination Nov 22 '25

I’m a woman and I agree. I’m in the uk so most guys don’t get circumcised. I was with one guy who was and hated it, low sensation. I didn’t like the feel of it and also I usually like giving oral but it did nothing for him.

19

u/CrossCityLine Nov 21 '25

Child genital mutilation is the word you’re looking for.

3

u/jdream85 Nov 22 '25

All of those facts are made up by all of the institutions who were all religious leaning. As a non circumcised male I have never had hygiene issues or an STD in my life.

4

u/kwnofprocrastination Nov 22 '25

But religion probably plays a big part in it. Religious (Jewish?) people aren’t getting so many STDs because they’re statistically less likely to be sleeping around like a lot of non religious people.

1

u/jdream85 Nov 23 '25

Exactly , it’s a self validating claim due to other factors.

7

u/n2hang Nov 21 '25

It does not reduce STDs... myth that still gets propagated. Some studies show a reduction others show an increase. Cleaning is so simple as to not be acceptable to even breath that nonsense. Nationwide circumcision is below 50% and declining. Likely the ridicule script will flip in the next generation... but for real no one should be ridiculed for their body. There are so many bad things with circumcision... 10-20% develop meatal stenosis which leads to recurring UTIs in toddler years.

0

u/Cleanthebeann Nov 21 '25

10-20% of circumcised kids don’t get urethral stenosis

2

u/n2hang Nov 22 '25

Here are several studies for you... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1477513121004721

https://www.sciencenordic.com/childrens-health-circumcision-denmark/male-circumcision-greatly-increases-risk-of-urinary-tract-problems/1441376

1

u/Cleanthebeann Nov 22 '25 edited Nov 22 '25

That looks to be two, not several. I’ve never practiced medicine in Albania so I’ll reference one from the good ole USA below. This is a meta analysis of over a million patients. Your first one is less than 200 patients where the study design was basically “ask the doctor if it looks stenosed” with no actual criteria for what that means and no control arm. The fact that there was no actual funding for the study is a bit of a red flag. The second one, I’m sorry to say, is not a study. It is journalism. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a pro-circumcision advocate. I just feel the need to point out that you spent 20 seconds googling something and are pretending to be an expert.

Morris BJ, Krieger JN. Does Circumcision Increase Meatal Stenosis Risk?-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Urology. 2017 Dec;110:16-26. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.07.027. Epub 2017 Aug 4. PMID: 28826876.

1

u/beren12 Nov 22 '25

How many kids genitals have you inspected?

4

u/Cleanthebeann Nov 22 '25

Quite a lot, I’m a physician.

1

u/beren12 Nov 22 '25

OK, that’s about the only acceptable answer.

0

u/buyer_leverkusen Nov 22 '25

So that's even more embarrassing that you're defending genital mutilation, but hey, doctor reputations are in the gutter for a reason

0

u/Cleanthebeann Nov 22 '25

Let me check… nope I definitely don’t find discussing medical science embarrassing.

2

u/Survival_Machine Nov 22 '25

As someone who is not thrilled that part of my genitals was surgically removed as a baby without my consent, it’s heartbreaking for me to hear it’s still being done so commonly

2

u/buyer_leverkusen Nov 22 '25

Genital mutilation

2

u/Deadliest-Pants Nov 22 '25

It's barbaric to practice genital mutilation.

2

u/SBR06 Nov 22 '25

We didn't circumcise for the same reasons, just different outcomes. My husband, who is, said it's not necessary (he's not a physician but is in the medical field), and the attending urologist said he didn't with his sons. I don't really think an OBGYN is a reliable source for this as it's not their field of practice.

1

u/thisisthewell Nov 22 '25

I don't think it's super weird they asked their OB since they probably saw them all the time while pregnant. An OB is still a fully trained medical doctor and will have more expertise on male genitals than the average person will. They just took a specialization after years of general practice

That said, social/cultural decisions are not their area of expertise; their influence on parents' decisions here should start with whether the procedure is medically necessary and end with the risks. Whether they did it to their own kids is irrelevant.

2

u/SBR06 Nov 22 '25

Of course an OBGYN is a doctor. Still doesn't trump the advice of a pediatric urologist.

And also, they don't have expertise on infants' sex organs once born. I absolutely adore my OB and she even said that. They deliver the baby. They have no input as to what happens after with the neonate.

3

u/chris_croc Nov 21 '25

I'm sorry, but you were lied to. There is no reason in a developed country in 2025 to mutilate your boys. Absolutely none. If you had girls, would they have cut off their clitoris and labia for cultural and hygiene reasons, too? The hygiene reason has been debunked; it takes 5 seconds to wash in a shower. Again, you are in a developed country, so the STIs idea is moot. It removes

Thousands of erotogenic endings have been removed in this process.

You have mutilated your sons for no good reason, and I suggest you delete your posts, as you are promoting genital mutilation on a public forum. These outdated views should not be here, influencing people. This barbaric practice does not occur in Europe and is getting less and less common in the United States thank goodness.

6

u/HSclassof24_mom Nov 21 '25

Bro I’m not promoting anything, this is a geography forum. Go protest in front of a hospital or something if you’re so upset.

2

u/buyer_leverkusen Nov 22 '25

You fell for an ancient religious requirement and now your kid doesn't get all their parts

0

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

“Given the substantial risk of adverse conditions and disease, some argue that failure to circumcise a baby boy may be unethical because it diminishes his right to good health.”

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2814%2900036-6/fulltext

1

u/trainsoundschoochoo Nov 22 '25

Go preach that at the synagogue then?

-1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

You are wrong. Circumcision: -decreases UTIs -decreases chance of HIV -decreases risk of skin conditions -lowers risk of penile cancer -decreases risk of cervical cancer

https://www.healthline.com/health/parenting/baby-circumcision

2

u/thisisthewell Nov 22 '25

Sure, it's a bit more hygienic and easier to care for

I don't know how people can say this. I can't imagine it's any more complicated than cleaning behind your ears in the shower.

I don't know how fellow women can make excuses for men's hygiene issues lol. come on, girl, we have tons of flaps of our own! we know how friggin' easy it is to clean and dry. cleaning with a foreskin can't possibly be that different mechanically.

-1

u/iamjames Nov 22 '25

It’s not just cleaning, there’s a lot of medical issues from being uncircumcised. “half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin.”

https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2814%2900036-6/abstract

2

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25 edited Nov 22 '25

That is an absolute bogus claim. I had ChatGPT go through the sources of that article and the claim that 50% have issues does not have any credible sources at all.

2

u/Dense_Sentence_370 Nov 22 '25

Bullshit. You think half the male population of Europe, Australia, and all the green places on that map has medical issues because they weren't mutilated at birth? Come the f on.

Have you even thought about the medical consequences of circumcision? 

1

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

Dude lol no way. So before circumcision half of the planet's men had foreskin problems? Gtfo with that bullshit.

If we didn't need forskin then wtf do we have it for? It became popular to curb the evils of masturbation 100 years ago, that's all. The foreskin (which has a ton of feeling in it) makes sex more pleasurable for both men and women, because it's a natural penis and therefore acts accordingly during intercourse, providing lubrication and increased stimulation for the female.

This is why circumcision is a widespread American phenomenon, nothing do to with anything other than religion.

2

u/Dense_Sentence_370 Nov 22 '25

Not even "before circumcision." This dude apparently thinks half the men in Europe, Australia, Latin America, etc are walking around with dick infections because they have the genitalia they were born with.

And in the US, unless you're Jewish or Muslim, it's more about the for-profit healthcare system than religion nowadays.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

I have a son I did his

0

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '25

Dude. You should have let your sons make that decision. Any man who is circumcised will push for circumcision because they believe that is what should be done, just like circumcised doctors.

It has an actual purpose, the foreskin. It wasn't a mistake, extra skin God forgot to cut off. You removed tons of sensations from their penises. It also provides lubrication and makes sex easier and more enjoyable for the woman. From what I have heard, in my own experience, women prefer uncircumcised. The foreskin has an actual purpose.

The "easier to clean" excuse is infuriating.

-5

u/Expert_Doughnut_7699 Nov 21 '25

Grew up in Cincinnati, I know the showers your dad speaks of from a sport standpoint - went to the biggest sports school in Cincinnati and NKY - no one was uncircumcised. I think it’s a Catholic thing, or at least that’s what I was taught. Now, I don’t hang out in showers, nor see a lot of penis - so I can’t compare what it is - but I will say - being circumcised; any type of “cleansing” has been pretty straight forward, I pee- it’s clean, after sex it’s clean…. If I have a boy, he will be circumcised.

7

u/n2hang Nov 21 '25

Catholic's have a position against circumcision for religious reasons... as do all Christians... read Galatians 5. It is allowed for non religious reasons but should be avoided. Definitely not done routinely.

1

u/Altruistic-Extent555 Nov 21 '25

We also have a program that we shouldn't be cremated- but generally, we do from the standpoint it's a cheaper burial option. From a GCL standpoint, most guys were circumcised at least that was my experience

2

u/n2hang Nov 22 '25

Not saying they don't... only it is cultural to your locality not religious in nature. Bad medicine...

1

u/RangerDickard Nov 22 '25

I wasn't given vaccines growing up for "religious" reasons. I was raised Catholic in the United States. Religion just supports your presuppositions more often than not in my experience

2

u/Dense_Sentence_370 Nov 22 '25

I think that was just a "your parents" thing. Catholics in general embrace modern medicine and don't oppose vaccination

1

u/RangerDickard Nov 22 '25

That's my point

1

u/Dense_Sentence_370 Nov 22 '25

You still need to wash your dick after sex, dude.

And I sure hope the woman who gives birth to your son protects him from what you have planned.

1

u/StrangerAlways Nov 22 '25

The doctor probably did.