For Swank: Scholarly and Peer Reviewed research!

Recent Medical Studies on Circumcision







Circumcision Policy Influenced by Psychosocial Factors

The debate about the advisability of circumcision in English-speaking countries typically has focused on potential health factors. The position statements of committees from national medical organisations are expected to be evidence-based; however, the contentiousness of the ongoing debate suggests that other factors are involved. Various potential factors related to psychology, sociology, religion, and culture may also underlie policy decisions. These factors could affect the values and attitudes of medical committee members, the process of evaluating the medical literature, and the medical literature itself. Although medical professionals highly value rationality, it can be difficult to conduct a rational and objective evaluation of an emotional and controversial topic such as circumcision. A negotiated compromise between polarized committee factions could introduce additional psychosocial factors. These possibilities are speculative, not conclusive. It is recommended that an open discussion of psychosocial factors take place and that the potential biases of committee members be recognized.

Goldman, R., “Circumcision Policy: A Psychosocial Perspective,” Paediatrics & Child Health 9 (2004): 630-633.





Circumcision is Not Good Health Policy

A cost-utility analysis, based on published data from multiple observational studies, comparing boys circumcised at birth and those not circumcised was undertaken using the Quality of Well-being Scale, a Markov analysis, the standard reference case, and a societal perspective. Neonatal circumcision increased incremental costs by $828.42 per patient and resulted in an incremental 15.30 well-years lost per 1000 males. If neonatal circumcision was cost-free, pain-free, and had no immediate complications, it was still more costly than not circumcising. Using sensitivity analysis, it was impossible to arrange a scenario that made neonatal circumcision cost-effective. Neonatal circumcision is not good health policy, and support for it as a medical procedure cannot be justified financially or medically.

Van Howe, R., “A Cost-Utility Analysis of Neonatal Circumcision,” Medical Decision Making 24 (2004):584-601.





Circumcision Results in Significant Loss of Erogenous Tissue

A report published in the British Journal of Urology assessed the type and amount of tissue missing from the adult circumcised penis by examining adult foreskins obtained at autopsy. Investigators found that circumcision removes about one-half of the erogenous tissue on the penile shaft. The foreskin, according to the study, protects the head of the penis and is comprised of unique zones with several kinds of specialized nerves that are important to optimum sexual sensitivity.

Taylor, J. et al., "The Prepuce: Specialized Mucosa of the Penis and Its Loss to Circumcision," BJU 77 (1996): 291–295.



Circumcision Affects Sexual Behavior

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that circumcision provided no significant prophylactic benefit and that circumcised men were more likely to engage in various sexual practices. Specifically, circumcised men were significantly more likely to masturbate and to participate in heterosexual oral sex than uncircumcised men.

Laumann, E. et al., "Circumcision in the U.S.: Prevalence, Prophylactic Effects, and Sexual Practice," JAMA 277 (1997): 1052–1057.



Researchers Demonstrate Traumatic Effects of Circumcision

A team of Canadian researchers produced new evidence that circumcision has long-lasting traumatic effects. An article published in the international medical journal The Lancet reported the effect of infant circumcision on pain response during subsequent routine vaccination. The researchers tested 87 infants at 4 months or 6 months of age. The boys who had been circumcised were more sensitive to pain than the uncircumcised boys. Differences between groups were significant regarding facial action, crying time, and assessments of pain.

The authors believe that "neonatal circumcision may induce long-lasting changes in infant pain behavior because of alterations in the infant’s central neural processing of painful stimuli." They also write that "the long-term consequences of surgery done without anaesthesia are likely to include post-traumatic stress as well as pain. It is therefore possible that the greater vaccination response in the infants circumcised without anaesthesia may represent an infant analogue of a post-traumatic stress disorder triggered by a traumatic and painful event and re-experienced under similar circumstances of pain during vaccination."

Taddio, A. et al., "Effect of Neonatal Circumcision on Pain Response during Subsequent Routine Vaccination," The Lancet 349 (1997): 599–603.



Circumcision Study Halted Due to Trauma

Researchers found circumcision so traumatic that they ended the study early rather than subject any more infants to the operation without anesthesia. Those infants circumcised without anesthesia experienced not only severe pain, but also an increased risk of choking and difficulty breathing. The findings were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Up to 96% of infants in some areas of the United States receive no anesthesia during circumcision. No anesthetic currently in use for circumcisions is effective during the most painful parts of the procedure.

Lander, J. et al., "Comparison of Ring Block, Dorsal Penile Nerve Block, and Topical Anesthesia for Neonatal Circumcision," JAMA 278 (1997): 2157–2162.



Circumcised Penis Requires More Care in Young Boys

The circumcised penis requires more care than the intact penis during the first three years of life, according to a report in the British Journal of Urology. The clinical findings of an American pediatrician showed that circumcised boys were significantly more likely to have skin adhesions, trapped debris, irritated urinary opening, and inflammation of the glans (head of the penis) than were boys with a foreskin. Furthermore, because there are large variations of appearance in circumcised boys, circumcision for cosmetic reasons should be discouraged.

Van Howe, R., "Variability in Penile Appearance and Penile Findings: A Prospective Study," BJU 80 (1997): 776–782.



Poll of Circumcised Men Reveals Harm

A poll of circumcised men published in the British Journal of Urology describes adverse outcomes on men’s health and well-being. Findings showed wide-ranging physical, sexual, and psychological consequences. Some respondents reported prominent scarring and excessive skin loss. Sexual consequences included progressive loss of sensitivity and sexual dysfunction. Emotional distress followed the realization that they were missing a functioning part of their penis. Low-self esteem, resentment, avoidance of intimacy, and depression were also noted.

Hammond, T., "A Preliminary Poll of Men Circumcised in Infancy or Childhood," BJU 83 (1999): suppl. 1: 85–92



Psychological Effects of Circumcision Studied

An article titled "The Psychological Impact of Circumcision" reports that circumcision results in behavioral changes in infants and long-term unrecognized psychological effects on men. The piece reviews the medical literature on infants’ responses to circumcision and concludes, "there is strong evidence that circumcision is overwhelmingly painful and traumatic." The article notes that infants exhibit behavioral changes after circumcision, and some men have strong feelings of anger, shame, distrust, and grief about having been circumcised. In addition, circumcision has been shown to disrupt the mother-infant bond, and some mothers report significant distress after allowing their son to be circumcised. Psychological factors perpetuate circumcision. According to the author, "defending circumcision requires minimizing or dismissing the harm and producing overstated medical claims about protection from future harm. The ongoing denial requires the acceptance of false beliefs and misunderstanding of facts. These psychological factors affect professionals, members of religious groups, and parents involved in the practice."


Expressions from circumcised men are generally lacking because most circumcised men do not understand what circumcision is, emotional repression keeps feelings from awareness, or men may be aware of these feelings but afraid of disclosure.

Goldman, R., "The Psychological Impact of Circumcision," BJU 83 (1999): suppl. 1: 93–102



Serious Consequences of Circumcision Trauma in Adult Men Clinically Observed

Using four case examples that are typical among his clients, a practicing psychiatrist presents clinical findings regarding the serious and sometimes disabling long-term somatic, emotional, and psychological consequences of infant circumcision in adult men. These consequences resemble complex post-traumatic stress disorder and emerge during psychotherapy focused on the resolution of perinatal and developmental trauma. Adult symptoms associated with circumcision trauma include shyness, anger, fear, powerlessness, distrust, low self-esteem, relationship difficulties, and sexual shame. Long-term psychotherapy dealing with early trauma resolution appears to be effective in healing these consequences.


Rhinehart, J., "Neonatal Circumcision Revistited," Transactional Analysis Journal 29 (1999): 215-221





Anatomy and Function of the Foreskin Documented

A new article describes the foreskin (prepuce) as an integral, normal part of the genitals of mammals. It is specialized, protective, erogenous tissue. A description of the complex nerve structure of the penis explains why anesthetics provide incomplete pain relief during circumcision. Cutting off the foreskin removes many fine-touch receptors from the penis and results in thickening and desensitization of the glans outer layer. The complex anatomy and function of the foreskin dictate that circumcision should be avoided or deferred until the person can make an informed decision as an adult.

Cold, C. and Taylor, J., "The Prepuce," BJU 83 (1999): suppl. 1: 34–44.



Male Circumcision Affects Female Sexual Enjoyment

A survey of women who have had sexual experience with circumcised and anatomically complete partners showed that the anatomically complete penis was preferred over the circumcised penis. Without the foreskin to provide a movable sleeve of skin, intercourse with a circumcised penis resulted in female discomfort from increased friction, abrasion, and loss of natural secretions. Respondents overwhelmingly concurred that the mechanics of coitus were different for the two groups of men. Unaltered men tended to thrust more gently with shorter strokes.

O’Hara, K. and O’Hara, J., "The Effect of Male Circumcision on the Sexual Enjoyment of the Female Partner," BJU 83 (1999): suppl. 1: 79–84




Male Circumcision and Psychosexual Effects Investigated

Infant male circumcision continues despite growing questions about its medical justification. As usually performed without analgesia or anesthetic, circumcision is observably painful. It is likely that genital cutting has physical, sexual, and psychological consequences, too. Some studies link involuntary male circumcision with a range of negative emotions and even post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some circumcised men have described their current feelings in the language of violation, torture, mutilation, and sexual assault. In view of the acute as well as long-term risks from circumcision and the legal liabilities that might arise, it is timely for health professionals and scientists to re-examine the evidence on this issue and participate in the debate about the advisability of this surgical procedure on unconsenting minors.

Boyle, G., Goldman, R., Svoboda, J.S., and Fernandez, E., "Male Circumcision: Pain, Trauma, and Psychosexual Sequelae," Journal of Health Psychology 7 (2002): 329-343.




Surveys Reveal Adverse Sexual and Psychological Effects of Circumcision


A survey of the 35 female and 42 gay sexual partners of circumcised and genitally intact men, and a separate survey of 53 circumcised and genitally intact men, and a separate survey of 30 genitally intact men themselves indicated that circumcised men experienced significantly reduced sexual sensation along with associated long-lasting negative emotional consequences.

Boyle, G. and Bensley, G., "Adverse Sexual and Psychological Effects of Male Infant Circumcision,". Psychological Reports 88 (2001): 1105-1106.



Foreskin Reduces the Force Required for Penetration and Increases Comfort


Masters and Johnson observed that the foreskin unrolled with intercourse. However, they overlooked a prior observation that intromission (i.e., penetration) was thereby made easier. To evaluate this observation an artificial introitus was mounted on scales. Repeated measurements showed a 10-fold reduction of force on entry with an initially unretracted foreskin as compared to entry with a retracted foreskin. For the foreskin to reduce the force required it must cover most of the glans when the penis is erect.

Taves, D., "The Intromission Function of the Foreskin," Med Hypotheses 59 (2002): 180.



Survey of Men Circumcised as Adults Shows Mixed Results


Men circumcised as adults were surveyed to assess erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and overall satisfaction. Over 80% of these men were circumcised to treat a medical problem. The response rate was 44% among potential responders. Mean age of responders was 42 years at circumcision and 46 years at survey. Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function, decreased penile sensitivity, no change in sexual activity, and improved satisfaction. Of the men 50% reported benefits and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having been circumcised. Note: Results may be affected by the fact that there was no sample of normal, healthy, intact men for comparison.

Fink, K., Carson, C., DeVellis, R., "Adult Circumcision Outcomes Study: Effect on Erectile Function, Penile Sensitivity, Sexual Activity and Satisfaction," J Urol 167 (2002): 2113-2116.



Survey Finds Circumcision Contributes to Vaginal Dryness


The impact of male circumcision on vaginal dryness during coitus was investigated. We conducted a survey of 35 female sexual partners aged 18 to 69 years who had experienced sexual intercourse with both circumcised and genitally intact men. Women reported they were significantly more likely to have experienced vaginal dryness during intercourse with circumcised than with genitally intact men.

Bensley, G. and Boyle, G., "Effects of Male Circumcision on Female Arousal and Orgasm," N Z Med J 116 (2003): 595-596.



Early Adverse Experiences May Lead to Abnormal Brain Development and Behavior

Self-destructive behavior in current society promotes a search for psychobiological factors underlying this epidemic. The brain of the newborn infant is particularly vulnerability to early adverse experiences, leading to abnormal development and behavior. Although several investigations have correlated newborn complications with abnormal adult behavior, our understanding of the underlying mechanisms remains rudimentary. Models of early experience, such as repetitive pain, sepsis, or maternal separation in rodents and other species have noted multiple alterations in the adult brain, correlated with specific behavioral types depending on the timing and nature of the adverse experience. The mechanisms mediating such changes in the newborn brain have remained largely unexplored. Maternal separation, sensory isolation (understimulation), and exposure to extreme or repetitive pain (overstimulation) may cause altered brain development. (Circumcision is described as an intervention with long-term neurobehavioral effects.) These changes promote two distinct behavioral types characterized by increased anxiety, altered pain sensitivity, stress disorders, hyperactivity/attention deficit disorder, leading to impaired social skills and patterns of self-destructive behavior. The clinical importance of these mechanisms lies in the prevention of early adverse experiences and effective treatment of newborn pain and stress.

Anand, K. and Scalzo, F., "Can Adverse Neonatal Experiences Alter Brain Development and Subsequent Behavior? Biol Neonate 77 (2000): 69-82.

Note from Kong: Most of these medical "findings" seem to be easily answerable using common sense, but medical science in the US seems to heed the call of profit more often than knowledge...

What do you say now, Swank? Still clinging to your preconcieved notions with the same hysterical close-mindedness? These are excerpts from actual scholarly peer-reviewed research papers and studies.

I am interested in hearing your college-educated (read "ominscient" :D ) opinion. I am sure however-- from past experience -- that you will merely declare these research articles bunk or resort to personal attacks.

Kong, there is indeed some interesting information here.

Would you please post the links to the articles where you found the quotes so that I can read them in their full context?

Also, I have never argued that it does not cause infant pain (though I know that due to the nature of neurobiology we cannot and do not remember anything from this age - otherwise the trauma of childbirth would never wear off. The brain is incapable of retaining experiences from this age) or that it is a somehow necessary procedure. Quite the opposite, I agree there is no real reason for it except social tradition.

To be clear: It is my contention that circumcision does not cause significant sexual or health problems for most men that have the procedure.

It is also my contention that FR does not increas penis size or necessarily intensify orgasms/increase female pleasure (for explanations on these look at past threads regarding FR where I have debated Kong).

Please post the links, thanks.

Not to get into the middle of your all's debate. The one thing I noticed more than anything was this line;

"Specifically, circumcised men were significantly more likely to masturbate and to participate in heterosexual oral sex than uncircumcised men."

Does that mean that us cut guys are more likely to get head than uncut guys? If that's the case, I love me some head! Sorry Kong, I wouldn't trade my 3-4 times a week BJ's for 5 forskins. But, I have been experimenting just with the taping to help stretch skin and to maybe regain a little sensitivity. If I am misreading this part Kong, please correct me.

Just kooky' 2 cents

Damn good post, Kong....

Actually...damn bad post, kong.

First, why OH WHY do you have to say stupid SHIT:

"What do you say now, Swank? Still clinging to your preconcieved notions with the same hysterical close-mindedness? These are excerpts from actual scholarly peer-reviewed research papers and studies.

I am interested in hearing your college-educated (read "ominscient" ) opinion. I am sure however-- from past experience -- that you will merely declare these research articles bunk or resort to personal attacks."

Actually, I can clearly see your college-educated post is superior...that's omNIscient. But getting away from the "personal attacks"...must you be that ignorant that your stupidity takes control of your brain because clearly Swank did not have one comment like that to you. You ALWAYS seem to have the need to insult people or make disparaging comments when they question you or your information. Im sorry, I forgot...you are "that foreskin guy" sheesh...I should have realized your true awesomeness and that since I am circumcised I am nowhere near being a man, I am but a female with a chopped-off clit because the clit and the foreskin removed from circumcision are the same, remember? :hammer: YOU ARE THE ONE WHO RESORTS TO Penis EnlargementRSONAL ATTACKS BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT AND YOU CANT TAKE SOMEONE CRITICIZING YOUR SOURCES AND INFORMATION. :bootyshak :bootyshak :bootyshak :bootyshak :bootyshak :yes: :bootyshak :blasting: :blasting: :blasting: :banghead: :finger:

Ah yes...studies, studies, and more studies. Studies are everywhere. There is one study that shows chocolate will cure coughing. There is another study that explains how both male and female students from the ages of 10-24 do 39% better educationally because their ear-obes are not attached to their heads, unlike those without attached or "free" earlobes. Another study shows that cell phone radiation killed brain cells in lab rats...it actually lets brain cells come into contact with neurons from the radiation and voila! It could possibly be the same for humans and scientists breifly stated to not "gab on the cell phone too often". The last study I am going to bring forth is the study that concluded that drinking 8 oz. of ice water after exercise could burn over 150 calories than drinking tap water or cool water. Im gonna market that shit...$19.99 for a plastic bottle that has an "8 oz. line" for the water, and you just add several ice cubes and drinking that will make you burn 150 calories.

What I am getting at, is the insane amount of "studies" performed all the time, all over the world are ludicrous (not all of them). Going back and re-reading those "studies" you call, I cant help but laugh. Just because there is a study performed somewhere, or a book or an article written from a scientist, or where there are credits given for the study, doesnt mean that everything should be believed to the fullest extent. Also:

"...Adult symptoms associated with circumcision trauma include shyness, anger, fear, powerlessness, distrust, low self-esteem, relationship difficulties, and sexual shame. Long-term psychotherapy dealing with early trauma resolution appears to be effective in healing these consequences..."

You know, kong, it sorta sounds like you are one of those adults. Maybe you shouldnt feel powerless or have a low-self esteem. There is such a high rate of variability on the controls in these studies that if you read them and think about them, hopefully people will see what I am talking about. No, I am not going to give the credits for the studies that I mentioned, nor am I going to nit-pick every study that you posted, kong because it is getting late and i need to get started on my heroin fueled bender.

aares, by resorting to criticizing my typing, you show just how petty you are being, not to mention the two lines of insulting emoticons. Time to grow up! These are exactly the sort of personal attacks that made me so defensive! Believe me, you are not the first.

kooky, what you are refering to does not mean that men get more blowjobs when they are circumcised, only that they request it of their mate more. Can you guess why?

swank, I'm really done debating this with you. I have no more interest in whether you believe or not. I have satisfied all your requests for proof and yet you ask for even more. Do you want me to Fedex you all those reports, journals, magazines and texts? Are you willing to pay the shipping? Would it even matter in the end? Your mind is hopelessly closed. Have a good life.

I am sorry Kong but I still don't get it or read it the same way you do. The part of that study that you listed does not say WHY cut men were, "significantly more likely to masturbate and to participate in heterosexual oral sex than uncircumcised men. " it just says that they do. It made no reference to WHY that is. Maybe that is in another study or maybe it's not. I am only talking about the specific one that you listed. That particular one makes absolutely no referencs as to why. It also says in the previous line that, "circumcised men were more likely to engage in various sexual practices" and then the next line says, "Specifically, circumcised men were significantly more likely to masturbate and to participate in heterosexual oral sex than uncircumcised men.". Which I find kind of funny because wasn't one of the original reason for the common practice in this country was to keep little boys from masturbating? I do not mean to nit-pick you here or your believes and I as well find the modern day practice of these to be almost barbaric and I am not convinced of the absolute need for this practice to continue and I have no plans of doing this should I ever have a son. My original post was meant to draw a laugh but I know for me and Mrs. kooky, I get more head now than I would if I restored and I personally like the way it looks more. But, I also agree with you that there is no doubt that cut mean loose a great deal of sensitivity but I guess I am lucky that it never got as bad for me as you say it did for you. That is why I am experimenting with the tape and I also believe that this will help a great deal with skin stretch and will aid with future Penis Enlargement gains. But also Kong, to be as respectful as I can here, you must realize how offensive you can come off sounding calling all cut men
"psuedo-males". You must realize how offensive this can be for those of us who don't neccaserily measure "manhood" by our units. Many of us consider "being a man" things like taking care of your wife and kids, being a hardworker and a value to society, being a good family member and helping other when you can. For most of us who are cut and who still try to live as a "man" it can be very offesive for someone to call you a "psuedo-male" espescially when I can promise you that there are many uncut men who do not take care of their family and are a wart on the face of society.

kookmeister

You are perfectly right, kooky. As an "Intactivist" I have to come off a little bit strong to get a reaction out of folks and to maybe make them think about it. If I was mild and quiet, most folks wouldn't give it a passing thought. Yes, I am dedicated and truly believe what I say, but I know it may come across as offensive at times. I think most open-minded men like yourselves kind of know what I am doing and so can let it pass. Mainly what I aim for in my posts is to make my ideas "stick" in the brain, whether it is insulting someone who is close-minded and uneducated about circumcision, like swank and aares, or merely to entertain those like you, kooky, who are open to it but not necessarily passionate.

Oh, believe me Kong, I quite understand how it is to really be passionate about something you believe in and what to open the eyes of others around you. I am convinced enough about how needless it is and to not ever want to have it done should I ever have a son. But I am not prepared to go all out and try to restore myself. But like I have said, I am interested in going through the process of taping at night and also I believe that the slight skin stretch this will give will aid in my Penis Enlargement goals. Let me give you a very real example Kong of how some of this can come off as offesive. Before I start off, every bit of what I am about to say is 100% true and not embellished one bit. It is a story from my own life and I am sure many may have others like it.

I know this girl who dated a guy named "Bob" we'll say. Now, I have known this girl almost all my adult life. She has told me that "Bob" is uncut. She and Bob had a baby together. They broke up and Bob has never paid one cent in child support, has never paid any bills for medical expenses or insurance for his child and has actually pawned some of the child's toys for drug money. And he rarely, if ever, wants to try and spend time with his child or even keep the child when the mother has to work and he doesn't.

I on the other hand am cut. I also have a child with my first wife and I have never ever missed a child support payment or have let any insurance premiums slip on my child. I pay all of her medical expenses and half of her clothing bills for school. I spend as much time as possible with my child and keep her as much as I can.

Now, by almost any other definition I am much more the "man" than our friend "Bob". But by what you have said, compared to him I am a "pseudo-male". I got news for you Kong, and please don't take this the wrong way, but if anyone ever tried to imply that "Bob" was much more of a man than I am, he and I would have to have a much deeper discussion about it outside. It is offensive, insulting, and disrespectful to all the time and effort and more importantly LOVE I give my child while "Bob" acts as if he is bothered and put out because his child only wants to spend a small amount of time with his dad.

I hope this gets the point across Kong. I really do because I think you are very much a credit to this board and you have always seemed to help anyone who has had serious questions about what you believe in so passionately. I hope maybe you can find a happy medium between making a point and being passionate about your beliefs, and going across as a disrespective, offensive jerk who is only out to insult people. And one last thing, I know you never meant to be so offensive at times, and I also don't think you are saying what you say with the intent to piss people off.

kook

With anything written, there is intent and then there is comprehension. Circumcision removes 30 to 50% of the surface flesh of the penis and denudes the organ or many valuable structures. That, in my mind, would put the victim of the procedure in the category of "psuedo-male" in a strictly anatomical view. However, "male" and "man" have a countless array of meanings. However, when speaking about FR, I am, in essence, talking about anatomy most of the time. I think that should be pretty obvious. Finally, all I can say is this: anything can be construed as offensive, if you are looking to be offended.

Are you suggesting that you own all of those publications and went through your personal archive and typed out quotes for me? Am I to believe that you subscribed to the BJU and Transactional Analysis Journal over six years ago?

One again, I don't think anybody, myself included, believes that. Which only confirms what I already know, which is that you're perfetly willing to bullshit in order to support your views.

Post the links and be a good sport.

Ever hear of "google"?

Be a good sport and do the work yourself!

I have adequately supported my view. You are only trying to frustrate me with more and more demands for proof. I'm not responding to any more of those demands. Frankly, I have written you off as hopeless, and just a pain in the ass now. Anyone who wants to see proof need only look at the countless reports and excerpts and personal anecdotes I have posted already in response to your previous demands.

I have real work to do, and lots of foreskins to save!

Have a good life and God Bless!

Post some links to your studies, they ought to just be in your browser history right? Why won't you do it? Maybe other men would like to read them? Where they that difficult to find (there is an enormous cache of circumcision info online, surely they're easy to find again)?

What's the problem here, it will take two minutes and just serve to strongly validate your sources. Please post the links.

In the meantime, here's some reading for anybody interested in this, a page full of links.

http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2754/

Keep in mind, the fellow who runs this site takes my view that all this "circumcision is the worst thing on earth" is hyperbole to say the least. His sources, however, are quite clear, and cannot be reasonably misconstrued as having a pro-circumcision origin (BBC world news or the economist are generally reliable new agencies and quite well known). The studies linked that I looked over appear to be validated research. Anway, have a look while we wait for Kong to publish some links to the articles he has taken the time to quote, but appearently has no access to.

You sound increasingly desperate. For someone who is purportedly "nuetral" on the issue of circumcision and doesn't see what all the hubbub is about, you are taking a positively aggressive stance. You were more convincing earlier. :s

BTW, I've seen that page before. I find it hard to believe that someone could justify describing what is basically a human rights movement as "fanatical". So sad... Kill some baby seals while you're at it... :D

I do not understand why this is such an issue. If you want to restore, restore. If not then don't. This reminds me a great deal of the DLD size issue, which is continuous. Who cares??? Kong has proven his point, with what would appear to be accurate information. Swank you have stated your arguement, and provided support as well. Who's right??? Who's wrong??? Who cares??? Just let it go. Kong I feel you about the circumcision issue, and I truly understand what it is you are talking about. Swank I still can not understand why you're so aginst restoring the foreskin. You don't have to do it, it really seems that one of two things is going on: 1. You are anti-restoration for some reason. 2. You are simply opposing Kong's viewpoint. I'm not saying that i side with kong on everything he says, but I see his point. You're talking about a man who had a terribly tight circumsision. I did not have to deal with a tight circumsision myself, I feel like it was done just fine. Although, I do feel that it should have been left up to me if it was done or not. My cousin is in med-school and has done rounds in the maternity wing of a few of the hospital and there have been instances when the parents have not been asked whether or not the child could be circumsized, that it is so common most don't even think to ask. This is indeed tragic and whether or not it is common practice is irrelevant, the fact that it is going on anywhere is a terrible thing.

Millionman, I have stated over and over again elsewhere (but not as much in the current debate) that I have no problem with FR if men wish to pursue it.

For the record: I am not bothered by, offended by, annoyed by, or in any way upset about the proposition of FR.

What I am posting about is what I believe to be circulation of bad information from Kong, and an attempt to counterbalance what is a very one-sided collection of information.

My main concern, as stated in other threads, is that this bad and almost always unsupported information can lead men who lead normal and happy sex lives with their circumcised penises to doubt themselves due to lack of a foreskin.

Likewise, cicrcumcised men who are experiencing any sexual or penis related problems (and I think most anybody does at some point, cut or uncut) are encouraged to automatically assume that it is related to their circumcision. They are also led to believe that FR will solve all their problems. In many cases I think this will be detrimental and distract them from really exploring the difficulty or seeking more effective treatment.

Also, I just take general issue with poorly supported arguments and information. Most of the biological arguments behind Kong's claims are dubious and often small suggestions of informational tidbits from archane studies are stretched into absurdity. One particular istance of this is the "male clitoris argument." Kong has also claimed in the past that circumcised mn with a 6 inch long penis would have been 8 inches if not for their circumcision.

Kong has fashioned himself as an authoratative figure and often dispenses sexual advice. While he's spot on with many things, I think that in the case of circumcision he's bought into a lot of bad information and ingrained in deeply into his thoughts about sexuality in general. That being said, as an influential poster, I feel he may negatively influence younger people with less ability to evalute the credibility of information (especially on the internet where standards are ungodly low) into thinking they are sexually handicapped because they are circumcised. There is no doubt that many underaged individuals probably browse these forums, and I can imagine quite a few of them might be chagrined and taken in my Kong's assertions that they can't please women and are "psuedo-males."

I believe Kong's anger at me is generally derived more from the fact that my comments undermine his self-styled "advisor/sexual authority" status more so than my lack of belief in his views. In any thread where his claims or opinions on any matter have been questioned by myself or others he tends to get surly and defensive very quickly. Though he tends not to believe me, I harbor no ill will against Kong, despite his frequent personal remarks and insults. I understand that it is just an internet forum and it's contents in no way relate to my self-confidence or well-being.

I continue to post because I personally feel that my perspective makes a contributuion to the subject and I also feel that a dissenting opion ought to be heard. As Kong continues to make claims that I find questionable, I will indeed raise my objections as I see fit, just as members would for any other topic. This is not the "We hate circumcision and it ruins your penis forum," it is the "foreskin restoration" forum. All points of view and opinions are valid.

By the way, since Kong has avoided the topic of providing his links and brushed the matter off, here is where he got them:

http://www.circumcision.org/studies.htm

The studies are just pasted from the site verbatum, and there are no links.

I find it rather entertaining that you suggested you would have to "fed-ex" them to me at your own expense, then suggested I just google for them myself, when in fact most of them probably aren't available on line or free.

This, old buddy, shines a bit of a sickly light on your credibility. Since you have repeatedly accused me of being a desperate idiot, I would suggest you evaluate your own feelings and actions at the moment. Once again, I have my record of posts as consolation, can you say the same?

By the way, I will no longer be responding to ad hominem attacks (read: going after me instead of my arguments as a means of actually not addressing the issues I raise) or insults from Kong in the interest of keeping the debate on topic.

So, post as many snide remarks and slights as you see fit. Call me a moron, liar, desperate, stupid, close-minded (all recent additions to the insult collection) if it makes you feel better. All I will do is continue to remind that you have not addressed the issue.