wouldn't surprise me if most of us couldn't, either...

+1
They're all good, so who cares?

If I'd had a son, though, I most likely would've circumcised him.

Of course it's mutilation. You're slicing off a bit of someone's genitalia against their consent.

The health argument is utter bullshit. If you're too dumb to wash your cock, then it says a lot more about the modern society's desire to circumvent natural selection than it does about how circumcision makes your pecker maintenance-free.

In Europe, we stopped slicing 'n dicing our babies ages ago, but here the ol' "everybody else does it" - or social norm, to be fancy about it - seems to still be a widespread excuse.

Well, there is the mounting evidence that it can reduce the spread of HIV for at-risk populations...

Yeah, there's also evidence that AIDS is 50% more prevalent among gay men than heterosexuals.

And?

I don't have a sock on my cock, and having seen guys that do, I'm glad. Of course, if I went uncircumcised, I would probably think that circumcised dicks looked fucked up. I think people should be able to have it done if they want, or not have it done if they don't. Who gives a shit?

Any idiotic idea can be backed up by "statistics" and "evidence".

Get rid of homosexuality - reduce AIDS by 50%. It's the "homo disease" after all, right?

What the fuck are you talking about?

Comparing one idiotic notion to another.

Circumcision does not prevent contracting HIV. That's no less retarded a reason to butcher one's child's genitalia than religion or "because everyone else does it."

Facts are facts. Pretending they don't exist because you find them unpleasant is foolish.

Currently, there are multiple (at least 31, if you trust the CDC) studies of various design which support the assertion that increases in circumcision rates are associated with a decrease in HIV transmission rates. 3 of these studies were randomized controlled clinical trials. Suitably sized randomized controlled clinical trials are the bees fucking knees when it comes to epidemiological standards of evidence. Apparently, these studies showed that circumcision was so effective at reducing transmission rates (50-60%) that the folks running them stopped midway through after having decided that it would be unethical to continue them.

Credible evidence suggests that circumcision can have an affect on HIV transmission rates. This doesn't mean that circumcision is an appropriate replacement for a condom. What it does mean is that less condom-inclined populations would benefit, HIV-wise, from having all their little fellas snipped.

Didn't we have this discussion already? In fact, I'm nearly sure of it.

Well to my vote, circumcision is most definitely mutilation. There is no longer a purpose for it. It is no less sanitary. Period. I'm uncircumcised and I've never had any issue of cleanliness. The women I've slept with seem to agree. Not only that, but at first they couldn't even tell I was uncircumsized to begin with. There is literally zero reason to circumsize anymore.

Not in this thread. Unless you're talking about how the three times these studies have been brought up, various folks have chimed in with half-formed noncriticisms?

Except for the effects of circumcision on HIV transmission rates.

Even if circumcision affected HIV transmission rates, it is not an excuse to mutilate newborns. Improve availability of sexual health education and condoms. Or let people elect to get circumcised, should they choose to do so, when they are old enough to make that decision for themselves.

What you're advocating is mutilating the genitalia of a newborn child whose right to his own intact body you are denying at the ridiculous pretense that he might someday contract and spread HIV to someone else. You're saying that the child cannot be entrusted to make his own decisions regarding his sexual health and behaviour; that's a bullshit cop-out. You don't know what he will do. You are just half-assedly denying him the right and opportunity to decide for himself.

I'm not sure what's got your foreskin in a shredder. I've not once advocated a particular course of action. So what you think I'm advocating has absolutely nothing to do with reality. I've merely referenced factual information.

I'm not in a position to make public health policy decisions. If I were, I certainly wouldn't force anyone to get a circumcision against their will. However, I would inform them of the facts and let them make their own decision.

If it makes you feel any better, if me and my lady ever have a son, we aren't planning on having him circumcised.

In terms of circumcision, yes it is as stupid, IMO.
This is how I see it: "But if you don't wash your uncut penis you'll get infections." ..."Well, why wouldn't you wash your penis? Most people who work, and get out of the house take showers, and cleaning a penis takes 20 seconds or less."

"But you're more likely to get HIV with a uncut penis?" "Not if you wear a condom."

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think they're both sort of stupid. If you take your precautions in life, like brushing your teeth, eating well, showering, etc etc, you're less likely to deal with disease, obesity, general health problems.

Clearly, the message "Just wear a condom." hasn't caught on in certain places. Especially given that there's a certain funny hat wearing Palpatine impersonator who seems to have no problem telling his followers that condoms don't protect against HIV.

What's your plan to fight obesity? Telling people to stop eating so much? I think these problems are more complicated than you think.

Oh, sure, it hasn't worked. I think we can get there, though. And I think circumcision to prevent HIV spread is kind of similar to surgical operation to reduce stomach size at birth, to prevent overeating. Workarounds when there are (in my opinion) better solutions.

I think coming up with a solution for AIDS in Africa is probably even harder than tackling obesity in the US.

But even though this sounds too idealistic, I'll always be in support of education, not semi-preventative surgery.

I'm in support of whatever works, as long as it works in an ethical way.

Yes, but the uncircumsized of the world feel an overwhelming need to start a thread on the subject every few months.

Circumcision-envy, Freud would call it.