In recent years, there have been anti-circumcision movements gaining steam that mindlessly compares the circumcision of a boy with the genital mutilation of a woman. Circumcision is where the foreskin is trimmed to make my dong look awesome and reduce chances for STD's. What is done to women is equivalent to chopping the head of a penis off.
Before I go on further into this, just know that a lot of the language can be offputting, and the images, even though just drawings, can be NOT SAFE FOR WORK.
What really got me started on this rant is something that recently happened in my neck of the woods: A Detroit emergency department doctor was arrested with performing female genital mutilation on young girls at a medical clinic in Livonia, Mi (a
…show more content…
Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.
Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis.
Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men.
You can clean it easier, reduce the risk of a UTI (I have NEVER had one in my life), reduce the risk of an STD, prevent penile problems, and reduce the risk of penis cancer. No one wants penis cancer, or any other othe the things that comes with foreskin. The only problem with removing the foreskin and having sexual relations with someone from another country who is used to men with foreskin. Let's just say that the women are used to more to work with, so they may cause you pain by tugging to hard. That is a serious FYI, my circumcised friends.
Now let's look at what the anti-circumcision movement compares male circumcision