CIRCUMCISED VS. UNCIRCUMCISED: WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT REALLY MAKE?

I will be honest — it’s very rare that I’ve mulled over the concept of male circumcision. But recently during a catch-up with a friend who just welcomed a baby boy into the world, she told me about her brother-in-law’s disproportionate reaction to the news that her son had not been circumcised. His stance on the matter: circumcision is simply the American way. 

But the numbers actually say otherwise. Since the 80s, the number of boys circumcised at birth has been on a consistent decline in the United States. In 16 states including California, Nevada, and Washington, circumcision is deemed a cosmetic surgery and therefore not covered under Medicaid unless proven to be a medical necessity for the child’s overall well-being. And in the Western U.S., the movement against neonatal circumcision is going strong. There’s even a growing movement of circumcised men who seek to reclaim their foreskin, feeling they were robbed of this decision at birth.

Many of us got wind of the myths about circumcision during our formative years of puberty, and of course, we had questions. Was it possible that a foreskin could spread bacteria and disease? Did men who kept their foreskin feel less sensation during the act? What about their potential partners? And as we entered our lives as sexual beings, those myths hung around.

Finish reading this article on TheSkin