For most of my life I have never given circumcision a second thought. It was done for health reasons and that's it. As far as I knew every guy was circumcised and an uncircumcised penis was unsanitary. About three years ago I was just walking through my university library when I noticed a book on the floor. It was about circumcision written by a member of a group called Mothers Against Circumcision. Why any mothers or anyone for that matter would be against circumcision was beyond me. I just skimmed through it briefly and dismissed it as absurd and continued on my way. I didn't think about circumcision again until this past October when a friend told me that the vast majority of men even in 'civilized' countries were uncircumcised so I decided to research it for myself.
Circumcision was originally introduced into the United States in the late 1800's as a panacea for many illnesses including 'masturbation' [1]. By the 1950's non-religious circumcision was common in many English-speaking countries but has since declined dramatically in every country except one. Presently the US is the only nation to routinely circumcise a majority (65.3% in 1999 [2]) of its baby boys for non-religious reasons. There is no medical organization in the world that recommends routine infant male circumcision for medical reasons, yet hygiene and believing circumcision is inevitable later in life are the most oft-cited reasons why parents decide to circumcise [3].
For most American men circumcision was their parent's choice. Unfortunately however most parents were/are not aware that the foreskin is actually not a 'small piece of extra skin'. The foreskin provides almost half of the penile skin, enough to provide partial to full coverage of the glans (head of the penis) when erect [4]. The glans is an internal organ that was never meant to be exposed to the abrasion of clothing and be allowed to dry out. The foreskin protects the glans from desensitization and keeps the glans in a mucosal environment that provides natural lubrication during masturbation and sex so that the use of artificial lubricants is not necessary. If you are circumcised you may have noticed that the skin from your scar to the head of your penis is sexually sensitive; so was your foreskin. The foreskin is the primary erogenous tissue of the penis and necessary for normal sexual function [5]. Without a foreskin the sensitivity of the glans can become dulled which may be the reason why circumcised men are more likely than uncircumcised men to seek out oral and anal sex [6].
Even though female circumcision (as it's called in countries where it's part of the culture) or female genital mutilation (as it's called here) can be significantly more impairing than male circumcision (as it's called here) or male genital mutilation (as it's called by those who know the foreskin is erogenous tissue), both are involuntary surgical alteration of a minor's genitalia for cultural reasons. In the US it is now illegal to surgically alter the genitals of a girl, yet why can't we offer boys the same protection?
In the circumcision debate consider these three things: that it is controversial, irreversible, and there is a sizable number of men who are not happy with the choice that was made for them [7]. Just considering these three things alone is enough to conclude that we should end routine infant male circumcision and instead let circumcision be a choice each individual makes for himself when he reaches an age where he can decide what's best for his body.
