Spengler Discovers Dangerous Circumcision

[Enki]

Our Jewish pediatrician could not make a case for circumcision being medically necessary and he was the son of a rabbi.

If it is unnecessary, it is indeed a violation, no matter how small.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Our Jewish pediatrician could not make a case for circumcision being medically necessary and he was the son of a rabbi.

If it is unnecessary, it is indeed a violation, no matter how small.

.

very much so, very much so

but

why do Rabbi say : circumcision, which many believe to be the “foundation” of their faith

simple reason, very simple

Rabbi "stamp" a boy child with "Jewish stamp = circumcision" for life

the boy is marked for life

imagine Hindu would cut one of new-born-boy's ear immediately after birth .. and call this a Hindu religious sanctity

that circumcision is a stamp for boys to not forget they Jew (no matter what whether they decide otherwise later)

that is why Rabbi consider circumcision a make or brake for their cause

should be criminalized worldwide , for Jews and Muslims and for everybody else


.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Germany Will Protect Circumcision

A terrible defeat for human rights at the hands of benighted bronze-age superstition, or a glorious triumph for human rights over totalitarian euro-bureaucrats, depending on your perspective.

.

this out of Merkel's hand

if law challenged, it will be taken to European human rights court in Brussels

and

will be upheld

this a human right issue

does a baby have rights or not ? ?

it will boil to that

if, European human right court says babies do not have human rights

if the court says religious rituals overrides baby's human right

if so

doors opens to all sort of weird stuff



.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

'.....imagine Hindu would cut one of new-born-boy's ear immediately after birth .. and call this a Hindu religious sanctity......'

This is the problem when equivalence is drawn where there ain't any. What could be in the Hindu philology that would make an ear lobe significant in such a way as to make its excisement a necessary requirement of faith - other than just to pull an example out of one's arse?........

Now the anteater.... howmaigawd......XDDDDDD.......

[AzariLoveIran]

.

.

'.....imagine Hindu would cut one of new-born-boy's ear immediately after birth .. and call this a Hindu religious sanctity......'

.

This is the problem when equivalence is drawn where there ain't any. What could be in the Hindu philology that would make an ear lobe significant in such a way as to make its excisement a necessary requirement of faith - other than just to pull an example out of one's arse?........

.

Look, Mademoiselle FishTits , seems you missed my point

there is no philology for Circumcision that makes sense

and

otherwise one can invent any rubbish and consider it as philology for doing all sort of things, cut one ear, mutilate clitoris, cut tip of the dick and and and

all these religions that are based on all those ridiculous RITUALS, all of them, use rituals as a
tenet for all garbage myth

in that sense , for Hindu or VooDoo to invent a dime a dozen philology should not be any problemo

How can spirituality dictate not putting egg and yogurt in same fridge

this all business to fool idiots to make a case for Charlatanry .. kosher sewing machine stuff

How come you folks ridicule Khomeini's book saying Muslims should enter toilet with left foot and have sex this way and do all those funny/ridiculous rubbish .. but when it comes to Jews, you have understanding for the garbage ? ? ?


why you guys so harsh when it comes to Muslims , and so lenient when comes to Jews .. for the same rubbish, Circumcision, Muslims would be ridiculed but sympathy for Rhubarb

be fair and evenhanded Mademoiselle



.

[Ibrahim]

Short answer:

Circumcision is inseparable from the effect of writing.

For preliterate civilizations, in which the Signifier lived by oral repetition, meaning was grounded in the body of the Woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurines



The semantic stability of repeated words needs a guarantor, a Sign of true constancy, and until the advent of writing the feminine figure supplied this constancy, enshrined in Priestesses and temple-prostitutes, of which the proliferation of Venus-figures was a universal reminder.

This grounding, Constancy in the Woman, is a classic instance of what is necessary and inevitable simultaneously being impossible and ultimately doomed.

Woman was able to contain the Signifier for a long time, but it escaped.

Writing transfers the root of memory out of orality, where the Woman dominates the Male through the dependency of the Breast, and into visibility and the Light. Writing made it possible to found a memory of the Signifier without the Woman. How? Through cutting and scarring. Orality grounded constancy in the Breast and in the Woman's body, Literacy grounds it on Pain and the Mark made visible on the man's body, (paper originally having been parchment-skin, which even more originally had been human skin.)

So the written signifier is first enacted through the tattoo, or scarification. Judaism comes onto the scene in a deviation from this. The body still offers too much openness, too much variability and ambiguity to satisfy the Signifier's mandate of One. (cf: Franz Kafka, In the Penal Colony)

The One God seeks out what is One on the body of Man: the penis.

Phallus thus replaces Woman as the ground of what is permanent and True.

WTF is thus supposed to be? Just for starters, the basic fact of male-dominated oral cultures refutes this entire argument. Your claims about the history and evolution of writing are totally unsubstantiated, even before we start to address the arbitrary connections between writing and gender.

[Miss_Faucie_Fishtits]

How come you folks ridicule Khomeini's book saying Muslims should enter toilet with left foot and have sex this way and do all those funny/ridiculous rubbish .. but when it comes to Jews, you have understanding for the garbage ? ? ?

I do not ridicule the Quran..........

Rabbi "stamp" a boy child with "Jewish stamp = circumcision" for life

the boy is marked for life

imagine Hindu would cut one of new-born-boy's ear immediately after birth .. and call this a Hindu religious sanctity

that circumcision is a stamp for boys to not forget they Jew (no matter what whether they decide otherwise later)

I found this funny little website that makes the connection. Enjoy........

[monster_gardener]

.

*Reminds me of Spengler's story about how a Mullah told a woman who asked what the Muslim Paradise was like for women, told her that it was like an eternal shopping trip ....... Which prompted me to speculate that Hell for the men might consist in going on that eternal shopping trip with the women

.

a good one, Monster

2 things

Only Shia have Mullah (leading to Ayatollah) .. Sunni do not have (divine) clergy

and

saying to a woman, in paradise woman will be on "eternal shopping" trip, shows the pragmatism in Shia, adapting paradise to needs of the time (and individual), definition of reformation

and

shows different mindset of Iranian and those tribes of Arabia

for tribes of Arabia, paradise is "blond blue eye endless virgins that stay virgin despite"

interesting

if being devote Muslim (or any religion) is for love of G_D (what G_D represents), a Muslim believer should consider paradise as a place where he/she can entirely devote to G_D, without earthy needs .. but , NO .. the devote Muslim looking for sexual orgies and and and, all things he was dreaming of on earth but could not get but hopefully will get in paradise

what does this say ? ?

It does not say much about Islam

what it says, is, that believer no believer in goodness of G_D, but looking for goodies for not being nasty right now

that universal and not a Muslim phenomena .. notion, G_D rewards you if you a good human, therefore "rich people" must be (good human beings and therefor) liked by G_D (because G_D has rewarded them with wealth), Calvinism, and similar in Judaism

what that says, is, the quality of the believers


.

Thank you VERY Much for your post and the Kind Words, Azari........

Good post otherwise... too....... Good questions.........

I am glad that this fool was able to amuse.... Even though it was someone else's material.......... Unless Earl stole one of the cukes and I didn't notice........

I am not completely sure that it was a Mullah......... When I tried to go to Spengler Board to check, the Anti Malware alarm went off.... Could have been an Imam...

a Muslim believer should consider paradise as a place where he/she can entirely devote to G_D, without earthy needs .

That sounds more like the Buddhist Pure Land.........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Land_ ... _Pure_Land

A Methodist Minister friend of mine, gave me a laugh when she said in a sermon, "Most people's religion is Fire Insurance"
Very True...........

IMVHO while we Christians have grace, we also tend to emphasize the stick more than the carrot........

While Muslims add more carrots or rather the raisins ..........

We are supposed to love G_d/Good rather than doing it for the Raisins/Girls




AIUI Muslims believe that we are born good........ all Muslims at birth but our parents mess us up into in sinners / Agnostics, Athiests, Buddhists, Christians, Confuciians, Hindus, Jews. Pagans, Shintos, Sikhs, Zoroastians and Just Not Know or Care..

Christians contend the opposite...... We are born with a depraved sinful nature and need to get it fixed......

IMVHO Fire insurance is not bad......... or as bad at least..... It's one of the things that restrains our depraved sinful killer ape natures.........

And I don't count on being up to Rabia's rabid devotion to G_d

"O God! If I worship You for fear of Hell, burn me in Hell,
and if I worship You in hope of Paradise, exclude me from Paradise.
But if I worship You for Your Own sake,
grudge me not Your everlasting Beauty.”

at least not in her way..........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabia_Basri

that universal and not a Muslim phenomena .. notion, G_D rewards you if you a good human, therefore "rich people" must be (good human beings and therefor) liked by G_D (because G_D has rewarded them with wealth), Calvinism, and similar in Judaism

what that says, is, the quality of the believers

Some think that way but............
IMVHO Not so much......... Or at least you better not count on it.........

Job of Uz :Wink: is a classic example* and so is St. Paul..... amazing that such a little guy could take so much punishment and survive things like stoning.....**

FWIW Calvinists/Presbyterians will also remind you that except for G_D's Grace..... you are dead in your sins....

Or as I like to put it... Undead in your sins..

And they are BIG on St. Paul...........

There is also a passage warning against deferring to the rich......... Not that the poor aren't depraved sinners too....

Some of the early Christians were rich or at least well off enough to have a tomb........ Lazarus, Joanna the wife of Herod's CFO etc.......
But don't count on keeping it...... In Uz you may lose your job and end up like Job.....

*Yeah he got it all back at the end but I wonder how his kids felt about it........
**Reminds me a bit of the Energizer Bunny & a Timex Watch........

[Dioscuri]

Ibrahim,

The process of knowledge and formation begins between mothers and children in all but a very few circumstances often initiatory of a strange or tragic fate (raised by wolves or left in a basket or some such thing).

My observation is only about how things have changed since oral cultures. Surely men "dominated" them in certain overt ways by the fact of being men, no? But while men are off being men, mothers possess the children, and something else happens, not known to the men.

I am saying absolutely nothing controversial, it only appears that I am.

[monster_gardener]

Ibrahim,

The process of knowledge and formation begins between mothers and children in all but a very few circumstances often initiatory of a strange or tragic fate (raised by wolves or left in a basket or some such thing).

My observation is only about how things have changed since oral cultures. Surely men "dominated" them in certain overt ways by the fact of being men, no? But while men are off being men, mothers possess the children, and something else happens, not known to the men.

I am saying absolutely nothing controversial, it only appears that I am.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Dioscuri.

But while men are off being men, mothers possess the children, and something else happens, not known to the men.

What happens when a father raises the children as a single parent?

Suspect that it was not uncommon...........

Or with only male helpers...... Infants left at a Church a la Hunchback of Notre Dame.........


IIRC Childbirth was VERY Dangerous pre-Modern Medicine/Germ Theory/IOW Wash your dirty hands and use some antiseptic.........

AIUI it was especially dangerous in the period between when the Docs horned in on Childbirth pushing the midwives aside and when Semmelweis and Lister tried and eventually with the help of Pasteur got the Docs to wash their hands........

Usually more or less......

There are often problems between Infection Control Sisters and Doctors.....

Watch your own Doc if you can....

Try to politely make sure he or she washes up...........

Amazing how hard it was/is to get M.D.s to do what even Pontius Pilate knew to do in Roman times..........

[AzariLoveIran]

.

look, folks

that dog beaten to death

let Rhubarb handle it

let's move on


.

[Ibrahim]

Ibrahim,

The process of knowledge and formation begins between mothers and children in all but a very few circumstances often initiatory of a strange or tragic fate (raised by wolves or left in a basket or some such thing).

My observation is only about how things have changed since oral cultures. Surely men "dominated" them in certain overt ways by the fact of being men, no? But while men are off being men, mothers possess the children, and something else happens, not known to the men.

What is your basis for these claims?

I am saying absolutely nothing controversial, it only appears that I am.

I didn't say anything about a controversy.

[Dioscuri]

Ibrahim,

The process of knowledge and formation begins between mothers and children in all but a very few circumstances often initiatory of a strange or tragic fate (raised by wolves or left in a basket or some such thing).

My observation is only about how things have changed since oral cultures. Surely men "dominated" them in certain overt ways by the fact of being men, no? But while men are off being men, mothers possess the children, and something else happens, not known to the men.

I am saying absolutely nothing controversial, it only appears that I am.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Dioscuri.

But while men are off being men, mothers possess the children, and something else happens, not known to the men.

What happens when a father raises the children as a single parent?

Signifiers come in and do what they always do. Now all the parental unit does is channel the signifiers, to provide the child's mind with its categories, even if only in the form of the child overhearing. But long ago, mothers were able to change and add to the language in certain ways, establish flow.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

look, folks

all this started in Germany because of Turks .. they Muslim and they Circumcise

8 million Turks in Germany sayin nothing


police were alerted by a doctor who treated the 4-year-old son of first-generation Turkish immigrants Muhsin Sapci and his wife, Gonca, for bleeding after the boy underwent circumcision. A prosecutor sued the doctor in court.

.
The court ruled that the removal of the boy’s foreskin amounted to bodily harm and involved intolerable health risks. The Economist writes that circumcision was deemed to violate Germany’s constitutional protection of individuals' physical integrity – religious freedom and parents’ rights came second – and thus should be considered a crime. The court further suggested waiting until the age of 14 so boys themselves could decide whether to be circumcised.
.

.
Medical risk

Given the legal uncertainty, medical practitioners are afraid lay people will start performing the operation, and ritual circumcisions will go underground. The New York Times reports that the German Medical Association condemned the court's decision for potentially exposing children to medical risk, but it also warned surgeons not to perform circumcisions for religious reasons until legal clarity was established.

“Right now everything is controlled, most people go to a doctor and the child is covered by insurance,” Muhsin Sapci, the young boy’s father said. “If they try to outlaw it, it will still be done, but differently, and that could have consequences.”
.

.
Dieter Graumann, president of Germany’s Central Council of Jews, asserted that the verdict, if it is upheld, “would make Jewish life in Germany, just as it is blooming again, practically impossible.”
.

what a garbage , what a garbage


.

[AzariLoveIran]

.


Swiss too stop Circumcision

.

Beim Kinderspital Zürich macht man sich Sorgen um mögliche strafrechtliche Konsequenzen bei Beschneidungen. Deshalb hat es per sofort ein Operationsmoratorium für nicht medizinisch begründete Beschneidungen verhängt ....

Betroffen sind Kinder, die nicht selbst zum Eingriff Stellung nehmen können.

.

Swiss say ,

Children must personally consent for Circumcision .. otherwise, later, they could sue the hospital & the doctor

well, folks .. that is what I exactly am saying

parents can not order Circumcision .. the boy himself must agree and want Circumcision


.

[Parodite]

Swiss say ,
Children must personally consent for Circumcision .. otherwise, later, they could sue the hospital & the doctor
well, folks .. that is what I exactly am saying
parents can not order Circumcision .. the boy himself must agree and want Circumcision.

Agreed. Next question: should parents be allowed to "circumcise" the vulnerable and spongy minds of their children with religious dogma? A foreskin that ends up in the trashbin may be a disgusting sight...but a penis without foreskin seems less of a discomfort for a man than having his mind being irrevocably programmed into a life that is as hard to remove or even change as is your mother tongue. You can emigrate to a place where you speak a different language every day and convert to secularism or to another variation on the same theme... but your mothers grammar with be with you all life long.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

.


Swiss say ,

Children must personally consent for Circumcision .. otherwise, later, they could sue the hospital & the doctor

well, folks .. that is what I exactly am saying

parents can not order Circumcision .. the boy himself must agree and want Circumcision.

.

Agreed.

Next question:

should parents be allowed to "circumcise" the vulnerable and spongy minds of their children with religious dogma? A foreskin that ends up in the trashbin may be a disgusting sight...but a penis without foreskin seems less of a discomfort for a man than having his mind being irrevocably programmed into a life that is as hard to remove or even change as is your mother tongue. You can emigrate to a place where you speak a different language every day and convert to secularism or to another variation on the same theme... but your mothers grammar with be with you all life long.

.

Parodite ,

you preachin to a convert

Am 100% with you

no minor should be indoctrinated with religious stuff

ethics, moral, good and bad and and and .. all fine and a must

but no Moses this Jesus that, Mohammad this Buddha that

when child reached an age that can consent to sex, at that age, religious teaching can begin

I had posted that view here and other fora many times .. and was attacked and ridiculed


.

[AzariLoveIran]

.


Circumcision for Non-Medical Reasons Is Wrong

.

No Medical Benefit

After birth, the foreskin protects the head of the penis (the glans) and prevents the external urethral orifice from abrasion and drying out. Following circumcision, the surface of the glans regularly thickens and calluses. This can lead to a constriction of the opening of the urethra, the most common complication associated with circumcision in infancy, occurring in up to 30 percent of cases. It's not unusual for several operations to be required before affected children can empty their bladder properly.

The foreskin also plays a role in arousal. In contrast to the glans, which has deep sensitivity, the foreskin has what are known as tactile corpuscles which can only be found in similar density in the tips of the fingers, the lips and the eyelids. It's therefore hardly surprising that the foreskin is considered a male erogenous zone. A significant majority of men who are circumcised in adulthood, and are therefore in a position to make comparisons, say they are less sensitive in this area after surgery. But that's not the only reason why circumcision affects sexuality: Couples in which the man is circumcised uniformly report a loss of male secretions during sex and therefore greater friction and resulting pain. It can therefore be assumed that circumcision can indeed have a negative impact on sexuality and the sex life of both circumcised men and their partners. These findings are not new. Major studies and surveys have been conducted and published as far back as the 1990s.

But the direct consequences of an operation must also be considered. Post-surgical complications occur in between 0.19 and 2 percent of circumcisions, but rise to 11 percent for patients circumcised in infancy. These complications primarily involve secondary bleeding or infection. In rare cases the urethra or the glans may be damaged or even need to be amputated. I see such complications time and again at our clinic, even though they occur in less than one percent of medical procedures. They mean painful surgery for the child.

Often enough, circumcision is deemed to be of medical benefit, for instance in preventing infectious diseases or cancer. But it's worth taking a closer look at the figures and the findings of related studies: Circumcised infants may have only a tenth as many urinary tract infections in their first year, but these infections generally occur so rarely that 100 circumcisions would be needed to prevent a single urinary tract infection. This doesn't make sense in otherwise healthy babies. There is no medical benefit to routine circumcision.

.

.

Wait For Consent

Nor does it reduce the likelihood of passing on or contracting sexually transmitted diseases. As early as 1855, a study suggested a possible link between circumcision and the transmission of venereal diseases. Since then, more than 30 studies have been published on the matter. However, the findings of these studies are extremely inhomogeneous. In effect, circumcision doesn't have any effect on the incidence of most sexually transmissible diseases (gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes and AIDS).

In 2007, the World Health Organization recommended circumcision as a prophylactic measure against HIV infection. This recommendation was based on studies from Kenya and Uganda that suggested that the risk of infection with HIV was 50 percent lower in circumcised heterosexual men than in non-circumcised ones. But demands for routine or blanket circumcision don't take into account the fact that the WHO considers circumcision only for adult males who can decide for themselves and are at a high risk of infection.

From an epidemiological perspective, the practice makes no sense for Germany. Furthermore, circumcision for this purpose could also be carried out at an age at which the person in question can make their own decisions. The same concern also applies to the supposed preventative nature of circumcision with regard to penis carcinoma or even cervical cancer: If circumcision had an unambiguously positive influence -- and not all scientists agree it does -- this operation would only make sense at an age when the man is sexually active, in other words at an age when the young man can consent himself.

A Chance For Dialogue

Medically, there is no evidence of advantages for boys. Therefore non-medically indicated circumcision is not in the child's best interests either. This is the key argument against the inadmissible comparison of circumcision with a recognized vaccine. The effectiveness and therefore the utility of the vaccine for the child have been scientifically proven.

Doctors have to weigh potential risks and benefits. There are no medical benefits to circumcision on religious grounds. For this reason it's all the more significant that it's a serious surgical procedure fraught with risks and complications. Whether it's carried out under local or general anesthetic, circumcision causes boys undue suffering. This procedure must therefore be rejected from both a medical and an ethical perspective.

As a devout Catholic, I have great respect for the concerns of religious communities. As a scientist, I feel discredited by Chancellor Angela Merkel's comments about how the circumcision ruling makes Germany "a laughing stock." The Cologne Regional Court presented us with an opportunity to work together with the various religious communities to consider the rights of physical inviolability and religious freedom. Some Muslims have already shown a willingness to accept that boys be circumcised only when they are old enough to give their consent. But in Berlin the debate is at risk of being stifled politically, robbing us of the chance for dialogue.

.

well, folks , that is what I said from beginning

and

here something new

Jews or Muslims insisting on Circumcision their son are forcing on the child Islam or Judaism

what about if the boy does not want 2B Muslim or Jew ? ?

many, new generations, would like to make their own choice

and

what does it say about a religion when Circumcision would be the heart & soul of that religion, instead of being good human being and things of that sort


.

[Hans Bulvai]

You guys are funny.

The majority of the planet and the poorest have no access to water or sanitary water. No soap. No proper medical clinics. Multiply like rabbits. Can you imagine the bacteria that can spread? Even the chances of AIDS are reduced between homosexuals if both are circumcized. It is a vaccination of sorts.

'round these parts, they don't cut. They just slip a plastic ring over the penis, and draw two strings around the skin. It falls of by itself a few days later. Not even a pinch.

But, religion is only forcing what makes sense.

I say cut away. Nothing barbaric about it. Unlike females, no sensation is lost in the transformation.

[Typhoon]

You guys are funny.

The majority of the planet and the poorest have no access to water or sanitary water. No soap. No proper medical clinics. Multiply like rabbits. Can you imagine the bacteria that can spread? Even the chances of AIDS are reduced between homosexuals if both are circumcized. It is a vaccination of sorts.

The evidence for this is not as solid as promoters claim.

[Hans Bulvai]

Nothing is solid but the simple fact is that if not cleaned properly, the chances of bacteria growing in a hospitable enviroment increases.
Folds of skin that can hold water are prone to growing bacteria. Jock itch or athletes foot are an example.

[Ibrahim]

That's why I had all my teeth extracted and only eat gruel. No brushing!

[Marcus]

You guys are funny.

The majority of the planet and the poorest have no access to water or sanitary water. No soap. No proper medical clinics. Multiply like rabbits. Can you imagine the bacteria that can spread? Even the chances of AIDS are reduced between homosexuals if both are circumcized. It is a vaccination of sorts.

'round these parts, they don't cut. They just slip a plastic ring over the penis, and draw two strings around the skin. It falls of by itself a few days later. Not even a pinch.

But, religion is only forcing what makes sense.

I say cut away. Nothing barbaric about it. Unlike females, no sensation is lost in the transformation.

You're pissing in the wind, Hans, and all you're gonna get is wet pants.

Such common sense carries little weight in the face of the ideological gale blowing here . .

[Hans Bulvai]

That's why I had all my teeth extracted and only eat gruel. No brushing!

The penis spreads far more dangerous germs than a mouth full of unbrushed teeth.
How a mouth with no teeth handles an umcircumcizrd penis's bacteria is more than what I am willing or care to research.
Care to let us know?

(Sorry! That was rude but I couldn't help myself... )

[Hans Bulvai]

You guys are funny.

The majority of the planet and the poorest have no access to water or sanitary water. No soap. No proper medical clinics. Multiply like rabbits. Can you imagine the bacteria that can spread? Even the chances of AIDS are reduced between homosexuals if both are circumcized. It is a vaccination of sorts.

'round these parts, they don't cut. They just slip a plastic ring over the penis, and draw two strings around the skin. It falls of by itself a few days later. Not even a pinch.

But, religion is only forcing what makes sense.

I say cut away. Nothing barbaric about it. Unlike females, no sensation is lost in the transformation.

You're pissing in the wind, Hans, and all you're gonna get is wet pants.

Such common sense carries little weight in the face of the ideological gale blowing here . .

Common sense that ain't so common!

http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/ ... rcumcision

Circumcision is the surgical removal of the foreskin, the tissue covering the head of the penis. It is an ancient practice that has its origin in religious rites. Today, many parents have their sons circumcised for religious or other reasons.

When is circumcision done?

Circumcision is usually performed on the first or second day after birth. (Among the Jewish population, circumcision is performed on the eighth day.) The procedure becomes more complicated and riskier in older babies, children, and men.

How is circumcision done?

During a circumcision, the foreskin is freed from the head of the penis (glans), and the excess foreskin is clipped off. If done in the newborn period, the procedure takes about five to 10 minutes. Adult circumcision takes about one hour. The circumcision generally heals in five to seven days.

Is circumcision necessary?

The use of circumcision for medical or health reasons is an issue that continues to be debated. Currently, the American Academy of Pediatrics does not recommend routine circumcision for newborn males stating the evidence was not significant enough to prove the operation's benefit. The procedure may be recommended in older boys and men to treat phimosis (the inability to retract the foreskin) or to treat an infection of the penis.

Parents should talk with their doctor about the benefits and risks of the procedure before making a decision regarding circumcision of a male child. Other factors, such as your culture, religion, and personal preference, will also impact your decision.

What are the benefits of circumcision?

There is some evidence that circumcision has health benefits, including:
A decreased risk of urinary tract infections.
A reduced risk of sexually transmitted diseases in men.
Protection against penile cancer and a reduced risk of cervical cancer in female sex partners.
Prevention of balanitis (inflammation of the glans) and balanoposthitis (inflammation of the glans and foreskin).
Prevention of phimosis (the inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (the inability to return the foreskin to its original location).

Circumcision also makes it easier to keep the end of the penis clean.

Note: Some studies show that good hygiene can help prevent certain problems with the penis, including infections and swelling, even if the penis is not circumcised. In addition, using a condom during sex will help prevent STDs and other infections.

What are the risks of circumcision?

Like any surgical procedure, there are risks associated with circumcision. However, this risk is low. Problems associated with circumcision include:
Pain
Risk of bleeding and infection at the site of the circumcision
Irritation of the glans
Increased risk of meatitis (inflammation of the opening of the penis)
Risk of injury to the penis