Circumcision is a process in which the foreskin on the penis is removed, a practice that has increased and decreased in popularity for thousands of years. In certain parts of the world, it is still a popular practice, such as in the Middle East and the United States, whereas in South America and Europe it has never been something men have done. In the Book of Genesis in the Jewish Torah, and the Christian Old Testament, we are told of God’s deal with Jewish patriarch Abraham – if Abraham his sons, his slaves and all descendants would practice circumcision, God would bless them with a kingdom on Earth. But this practice actually predated the even stated in religious scripts, and ancient hieroglyphs show that Egyptian men practiced circumcision. In fact, studies show that there are many cultures who have practiced this tradition; Mayans, Aztecs, Samoans and Ethiopians, to name but a few. For religious people, the reasons are clear. But why do people who are neither Jewish, Muslim or Christian continue to circumcise their offspring? It’s believed that as many as 75 per cent of non-Jewish, non-Muslim men in America were circumcised in 2007. For many people, it’s considered cleaner and healthier, but is this really the case? And shouldn’t a child be allowed to grow up with all of their parts in tact to enable them to make their own decision about such matters, without having the choice made for them?
There are valid reasons, medically, for circumcision; studies have shown that it can reduce the risk of contracting HIV by as much as 60 per cent. But if it’s so effective in reducing the risk of this health epidemic, why is circumcision more popular? Opponents of the practice rightly point out that basic safe sex practices will also reduce these risks, without young boys having to go through such a painful procedure. But while it isn’t a cure-all practice, it could work as part of a larger plan. It’s also been shown to reduce the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases, such as chlamydia and HPV. However, while there are arguments for the reduced rate of penile cancer with circumcision, this argument doesn’t take into account the rarity of penile cancer – there were just 1250 cases in the United States in 2008. The cleanliness factor is a common argument for circumcision, with the fact that it is easier to keep a penis clean and this encourages good hygienic practice. In men who are not circumcised, keeping the foreskin clean is vital in order to prevent bacteria from growing.
Anti-circumcision activists claim that this practice causes unnecessary pain to infants, and it’s no secret that the process is painful. Modern pain relief and improved surgical procedures have reduced the pain to a minimum however. Circumcised men don’t have to worry about the painful maladies that can sometimes affect uncircumcised men, such as phimosis (which occurs when the foreskin won’t retract) or paraphimosis (where the foreskin, once retracted, won’t recover the tip of the penis). These conditions can often require circumcision in adult life, to help remove the related swelling and accompanying pain. There are a number of competing claims regarding sexuality as well, with some people claiming that sex is better with an uncircumcised penis, and vice versa. It should be left, however, up to each parent to decide what is best for their sons, and to weigh up the pros and cons on this issue. For boys who have been circumcised, they will unlikely know or care either way, and the same with uncircumcised boys.
Comments are closed.