Circumcision: Top 5 Myths
Many new parents in America do not hesitate to say “yes” when asked if they will be having their newborn son circumcised. For many Americans, circumcision has always been just what is done. Our fathers, partners and brothers were all circumcised. Woman gawk at the thought of a man with a foreskin even though they may have never actually seen one. With that, like many things surrounding pregnancy, comes many myths and “old wives tales”. The top 5 that heard the most often are laid out below.
Myth #1: “Uncircumcised penises are just ugly and dirty”
Fact: The penis in its natural form is an unfamiliar sight to many American women/men. Like trying a foreign food delicacy, the thought of trying something new and unfamiliar can bring uneasiness to a person. However, this is not the case for the majority of the people in the world. An approximate 70-80% of the world’s male population is left intact from birth. To the men and woman of these countries, the thought of having their foreskin removed is “ugly and dirty”. Cleaning their penis is just part of good hygiene. If the penis smells or is dirty, that is the fault of the owner, not the foreskin. They simply retract the foreskin and rinse with water after they hit puberty and the skin naturally retracts on its own.
Myth #2: “It’s no big deal. It’s just a useless piece of skin. Followed with “my husband/brother/father is circumcised and are just fine “
Fact: Foreskin is a far cry from “useless”. It actually has many, wonderful uses. Many people have no idea that the glans or “head” of the penis is intended to be an internal organ. It is meant to be kept moist and protected by the surrounding prepuce. Actually, all mammals have a foreskin, all with the same purpose. The foreskin is filled with more than 20,000 erogenous (fine touch) nerves making the tissue surrounding the penis the most sensitive part of his body. These nerves actually enhance the sexual pleasure the man feels during intercourse. In addition to feeling for the man, the skin is retracted to gather behind the head of the penis during sex. This not only creates the ridged band that many condoms and adult toys try to replicate but it helps keep the fluids that the woman produces inside, eliminating the need for artificial lubrication. Additionally, the foreskin acts as a mobile sheath or gliding mechanism. All of these wonderful uses combined, the foreskin is most certainly more than a “useless piece of skin”. Finally, it is estimated that the penis of an intact male will grow to be 25% larger.
Myth #3: “Circumcision prevents Cancer, HIV, STDs and UTIs”
Fact: Doctors have been known to spread this false information for years. There are several studies that prove just the opposite of what the doctors want to hear. Doctors cannot make this easy money if people are shown the truth.
Cancer/HPV: There have been no studies showing enough benefit in cancer reduction to warrant routine infant circumcision. The American Cancer Society released a statement in 1996 stating that
“Research suggesting a pattern in the circumcision status of partners of women with cervical cancer is methodologically flawed, outdated and has not been taken seriously in the medical community for decades.” The full statement can be read here: (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/letters/1996-02_ACS/)
HIV/STDs: Many people are flaunting studies about Circumcision in Africa being beneficial in reducing transmission of HIV and other STDs. These studies are flawed, at best. 1) They do not apply to developed countries such as the USA based on economic/lifestyle reasons alone. 2) All developed countries where circumcision is not common (i.e: Europe/ China etc.) HIV rates are significantly lower than the USA by a staggering rate. 3) Recent polls coming out of Zimbabwe are showing an increase in HIV transmission among circumcised men and the numbers are now actually higher than those who are not circumcised. 4) Sadly, the most important discovery of all has been silenced by the push for African circumcisions. Scientists have discovered Langerhans cells in the foreskin. These cells are actually shown to provide a natural barrier against HIV transmission. More on all of these can be found here (http://www.thewholenetwork.org/research-circumcision.html#myths)
Myth #4 “Everyone is circumcised. He will be made fun of if he isn’t”
Fact: As stated before among the world’s men, approximately 70-80% are intact. So what about the USA? As of 2009 it was estimated that 60% of American boys are now being left just as they were made. We can only assume that this is because more and more parents are doing the research for themselves. With so much access to information and videos
of the operation itself, not researching circumcision is willful ignorance. That being said… as rare as it is for boys to share a locker room or to even change in the same room anymore the one looking are more likely the ones who will be made fun of.
As American Humans, you are granted certain rights. Rights to choose your own religion or freedom from religion; rights to choose whom you shall date or marry; rights to be protected from harm and the right to protect one’s self from harm. Circumcision removes all of these rights from the man he will become. In 1997, law was passed making any form of female circumcision a felony. This raises a question of why boys are not offered the same rights.
Courtney Gonzalez is a Midwife Apprentice and contributing writer.
Thank you for this informative and unbiased article! I hope it helps many parents. So many do not understand what circumcision is or the harm it can cause and you have laid it out in a simple factual manner. Excellent job!
A great article and summary for those who want or need education on this subject. This debunks the common myths and replaces them with verifiable science and fact. No one can dispute the facts any longer.
Great article, sad that these myths are perpetuated among doctors and parents in the US and boys continue to lose perfectly healthy erogenous parts of THEIR bodies.
Great article! Thank you for the un-biased truth. I am a first time mom and leaving my son intact is one decision I thank myself every single day for making. We are a Christian family and I know first hand that circumcising the penis is not something we are told to do. I pray every day that more and more parents will wake up and put an end to this unnecessary procedure that kills more babies per year VS penile cancer killing men per year. There is no sense in it. Please don’t stop spreading the knowledge!
I don’t know about “unbiased” I’ve known at least two people in the past year whose son developed a severe infection in the uncircumcised skin. The truth it is not “unhealthy” to have a circumcised penis either. I had a friend who lived with continuous yeast infections. Was so upset that she kept getting them understandably. Turned out her partner was uncircumcised and was causing her chronic yeast infections because it can actually live in the uncircumcised skin.
My point is, is a personal choice like breast feeding, natural birth, vaccines, and other options. I don’t think women should be condemned for choosing what they feel is best for their child or themselves.
A truly unbiased article would show pros and cons for both. I have 3 boys and they are all circumcised. I don’t think ill of someone who chooses not to. I just don’t like to see one sided articles that make it sound like someone who chooses to do so made a poor decision.
sorry can’t cut out an infected eye now can you???
And the appropriate treatment for an infection is antibiotics, NOT amputation. Skin does not cause an infection. I bet either forced retraction and/or cleaning with soap are the causes. Additionally, as Me points out below, if the woman gets a yeast infection both partners must be treated. The issue was not that your friend’s partner had a natural, whole penis but that they had an ignorant doctor.
The only person who has the right to make the personal choice to be circumcised is the owner of the penis as an adult. It is not a valid parenting choice but a human rights violation. Circumcision is NEVER best for the child and there are no true pros to it-only myths and lies. That is why this is an unbiased article-it rejects those myths and provides the truth.
Sadly, in the USA, where circumcision is so customary, most doctors are not taught anything about the foreskin except how to cut it off. Some anatomy textbooks don’t even show or mention the foreskin, or define it as “the part that is cut off by circumcision”. And many doctors and parents are wrongly taught that a boy’s foreskin must be retractable by a certain age, and that it must be forcibly retracted “to clean under it”. This CAUSES many infections, which then “require” circumcision.
If your friend’s husband was giving her yeast infections, she was giving them right back to him, because they can live in “the uncircumcised skin” of women too. What they need to do is eracticate them from both partners at the same time.
“My point is, is a personal choice” Exactly. His person, his choice. It is not like breast feeding, vaccines, natural birth or other options, because unlike those, it permanently reduces his options as an adult man.
And it’s no coincidence that circumcision is done to a sexual organ. It’s historical roots are murky.
Parents who choose to circumcise are not to be condemned because there is a lot of misinformation out there. But the rest of the developed world doesn’t do it – and not through ignorance. The rest of the English-speaking world tried the experiment, found it did no good, and has given it up, with no ill-effects.
A male partner needs treating for yeast infections too, circumcised or not. I have a circumcised partner and had repeated infections – he had to have treatment as well. My intact boys have had the occasional infection, it’s not uncommon and is easily treated. We live in a country where circumcision is NOT routine, it is ONLY done for medical reasons. Even if you want it done on religious grounds you have to search for someone to do so.
Why should anyone have the right to choose to remove part of another person’s body?
Well said! I expanded a bit on this above-I hope that’s okay.
So a woman should have the right to choose whether or not to abort an unborn child and not ask that child’s opinion, but it’s wrong for her to make decisions for her child if she does have him? (such as whether or not to circumsize).
The hypocrisy in this world is amazing. The parent(s) should research thoroughly and then make the decision they see best from there, end of story. There’s no right or wrong choice here, it’s up to personal preferences. The parents will be making plenty of decisions about their child’s body for years, this is just another one. NBD
It is indeed a personal preference — of the person to whom the foreskin is attached.
What circumcision removes sits at the Ground Zero of foreplay and vaginal intercourse. When my better half is in the move for sex with me, she plays with my foreskin and frenulum with her fingers. This stimulates my natural lubrication. The foreskin captures this lubrication and distributes it in a nice way. My foreplay on her includes my playing with her clitoral foreskin with my thumb and index finger. Ladies, if your clitoral hood retracts (if it doesn’t, that is completely normal), then you have a fair idea of what it’s like for a man to have a foreskin.
When I pay my marital respects to my better half, it is my moving foreskin that interacts with her vaginal wall. As an intact man, I can assure you that circumcision would have discarded the most sexual parts of my body. American doctors and sex researchers, who are circumcised men or the spouses thereof, are oblivious to these raw sexual facts. American women who have been intimate with both kinds of men, often say that intact is more thrilling.
American medicine has yet research the extent of botched and catastrophic RICs. The possible correlation of RIC with adult PE, ED, and vaginismus. The number of marriages damaged because she cannot enjoy vaginal intercourse with his circumcised penis.
BTW, I am pro life.
Are you saying that there is no right or wrong about abortion, it’s up to personal preferences? I’m confused. Abortion and circumcision are very different issues. For example, the mother is not affected in any way by circumcision. We may disagree about exactly when human rights begin, but they don’t END at birth.
The parents will be making no other decisions quite like this, to cut a normal, healthy, functional, non-renewiing part off their child’s body, for life.
It’s not legal to tattoo a baby. It’s not legal to pierce a baby’s genitals. It’s not legal to cut any part off a baby girl’s genitals, or even to make a token ritual pinprick in them. (The AAP suggested this in 2010, calling it “much less extensive than neonatal male genital cutting” but they were howled down and had to withdraw within a month.). It’s not legal to circumcise an adult man without his consent, though the outcome is almost identical to circumcising a baby boy. So why is it “just another parental decision” to circumcise a baby boy?
They forgot one huge myth; the myth that circumcision itself is a safe procedure. It nearly killed my son. He was a perfectly healthy, normal baby, I brought him home after the plastibell procedure, and his wound never stopped slowly oozing blood. After his nap, I changed his diaper and it was like a crime scene. He needed a blood transfusion and emergency surgery to save his life. It is not a risk free procedure, it is surgery on a tiny infant! He is ok now, although he had issues with adhesions for over 2 years.
The AAP’s “Task Force on Circumcision” could not find any statistics for major complications and death for its 2012 policy statement, so it just ignored them, then said “the benefits outweigh the risks”. A Brazilian study found an average of one death per 7700 circumcisions. (This would translate to 156 deaths a year in the USA.) A court has ruled that patients have to be warned of half that risk (and then “only” for loss of sight after an eye operation).
The other important thing to point out is the myth that an intact penis needs the foreskin pulled back in order to clean it. Pulling back the foreskin, retracting it, causes problems that would never have happened if the foreskin was treated properly. All that needs to be done is wiping the outside, or swishing around in the bath – no soap, no scrubbing, no forcing the foreskin back. The foreskin is fused to the glans and is not meant to retract until the boy is older, at which time he can wash his own penis, inside and out (as he sees fit). Since North American doctors and parents haven’t known how to care properly for an intact penis, they have increased problems by this poor hygiene advice.
For the person suggesting that a yeast infection is a reason to circumcise: did your friend have some of her folds surgically removed because of the yeast infection that was hiding in her labia, vagina and clitoral hood? No, she got some cream and was cured. Why cut off bits from our baby boys to remedy simple infections?