Studies are conflicted on whether it reduces risk of diseases, but what’s definitely true is that removing the foreskin removes most of the nerves associated with pleasure for the penis.
Of course it doesn’t take away all sexual pleasure, but people who get circumcisions later in life report that their sexual pleasure from sex and masturbation is greatly reduced from before the circumcision. This likely also applies to babies, although there’s no conclusive evidence to support that since people who were circumcised at birth report “normal” amounts of sexual pleasure, though it’s unknown if they and uncircumcised people have the same “normal”.
The reason circumcision became popular in the Western world outside of Jewish and Muslim culture is because of John Harvey Kellogg, the inventor of Corn Flakes, founder of the Kellogg cereal company, and activity against “immoral” sexual activity like masturbation. He invented Corn Flakes as a food to deter masturbation, as he believed that a cause of “unnatural” sexual appetites was flavorful food, so he made a blander source of nutrition to combat the urge to masturbate. He also heavily advocated for circumcision for both children and adults because he believed that it would decrease sexual pleasure for the penis, which would also discourage masturbation.
Take it from a Jew who’s been jerking the gherkin since he was 12: It doesn’t work. Don’t circumcise your baby unless it’s for a religious reason, or if the baby is born with a condition that requires it.
Oh, and among people who both enjoy sex with people with penises and care about whether or not it’s circumcised, it’s pretty evenly split about which variety they actually prefer, with the biggest factor in the preference being that individual’s culture.
Edit: There are a lot of non-Jews criticizing the practice in Judaism. I completely understand, and your criticisms are valid. All I can speak for is my own experience and what I’ve been able to look into. In my case and the case of many Jewish men that I’ve talked to, both religious and non-religious, the rates of resentment for circumcision are much lower among them than among non-Jews who have been circumcised. I understand if you still believe it to be wrong, but do not put out hate speech in the comments. This includes name-calling and generalizations about any particular cultures. If you still believe that it’s wrong for Jews and Muslims to do it, and that religion doesn’t justify it, you are entitled to your opinion. Just please be respectful about it.
Another edit: To build on the first point, consent of the child is a big issue that many parents face when deciding whether or not to circumcise. All I can say about that is that it’s a lot less risky to health to do it in infancy rather than as an adult. Again, I can only speak for myself, but if I hadn’t been circumcised as an infant, I’d be saying a struggle today about whether or not to do it, and it would be painful, mentally traumatizing, and risky, even if done with anesthesia. Yes, it is medically unnecessary in the vast majority of cases, which is why I reiterate that NON-JEWS SHOULD NOT DO IT. Please talk to Jews and get their perspectives before you judge because I can guarantee that they had the same considerations that you’ve had.
Third edit: If you’re not Jewish, there will just be aspects of the Jewish experience that you won’t understand on an intrinsic and fundamental level, just like there are things that I’ll never understand about your culture because I don’t belong to it. It seems that so far, I’m the only Jew who’s given a perspective on this, so these debates on the morality of circumcision are missing a crucial element.
Such a great write up!
Last I checked about 10 years ago, circumcision rates had dropped to about 50% of newborn boys in the US. Not low enough, but it’s awesome that it’s starting to swing the other way.
Yeah, I’d go so far as to argue that if it’s not for a religious or specific medical reason, it’s an unnecessary mutilation, and immoral.
It’s unnecessary and immoral when it’s for religious reasons, too. Religion isn’t a free pass for human rights violations, no matter how much the abrahamic pigs try to convince us it is.
I left this comment unremoved as an example of what not to do when talking about this topic.
So people shouldn’t be angry and disgusted that people are mutilating children’s genitals because a fictional story told them to?
You should be angry and disgusted that people are doing it without the necessary context and background of having the culture that necessitates it. Only Jews can speak for the Jewish experience of having been circumcised as a Jew, and unfortunately, the experience of non-Abrahamic people having been circumcised is often negative. However, the Jewish perspective on their own experience of it tends to be more positive for reasons that you just can’t explain to someone who doesn’t have that context. That’s why even if we’re not religious and don’t believe that Abraham spoke to God and formed a covenant with him, we still do it; it connects us in a way that’s simply not gonna be the case for non-Jews. I can’t speak for Muslims though.
I can’t say this enough: If you’re not Jewish or Muslim, please don’t do it. You don’t have the cultural context that we have.
Edit: I left the comment up but banned the commenter because their comment was a hateful attack directed at Jews and Muslims, calling us “Abrahamic pigs” as a form of hate speech, which will not be tolerated here. Resorting to name-calling is not the kind of discourse that is welcome here. I understand people’s moral objections to circumcisions, and have struggled with them myself, but please don’t attack us because of our culture, religious beliefs, or ethnic background.
Another edit: I didn’t mean to say that our culture necessitates circumcision even if a lot of Jews and Muslims feel that way, but the fact that we are Jewish inevitably adds that into the conversation on the pro-circumcision side.
A “culture that necessitates” mutilation of babies SHOULD BE CRITICIZED and no amount of “but I’m from a religious family and I’m a mod so it’s okay” will change that.
CLARIFICATION REPLY TO EVERYONE I AM DISCUSSING THIS TOPIC WITH: I need to clarify that I am not trying to defend the practice of circumcision, only that I understand from my perspective as a secular circumcised Jew why so many do it. I think the vast majority of people shouldn’t do it and even that many Jews shouldn’t. That’s why I made this post in the first place. I can’t in any good conscience recommend it to anyone, but I also don’t have any kind of authority to advise Jews against it. I can advise non-Jews against it because they ARE NOT JEWISH and therefore DO NOT HAVE A CONNECTION TO THE PRACTICE. I agree with your points on a general moral level.
We can talk about it being morally reprehensible without calling people of a certain religious sect pigs.
If an entire group of people is okay with rape, we are fine calling them pigs. When an entire group of people targets minorities for harassment, we are fine calling them pigs.
But when an entire group of people literally mutilates the genitals of an eventually-sentient-sapient-free-thinking being that cannot possibly consent we have to pump the brakes? What fucking backwards ass logic is that?
And why single out Jewish and Muslim faiths? Is Christianity not also abrahamic?
Any “religious” justification falls on deaf ears. My family is religious, incidentally Christian on my mother’s side, and both Jewish AND Muslim on my fathers side (although he pretended to be Christian for my maternal grandparents sake while they were alive) . I was circumcised. I understand the “religious importance” in their minds.
I still think my parents are barbaric fucking pigs for doing it.
I was wrong to imply that our culture necessitates circumcision itself. What I should have said was that the culture necessitates further discussion for an individual family to know if it’s right for them. That was my fault for using misleading language.
I think the point people are trying to make here is that it shouldn’t even be a discussion in the first place. The procedure is medically unnecessary, and therefore it’s unethical to perform it upon someone who can’t consent. Period.
Consider a different perspective: Say there was a culture that mandated all newborn girls have their hymens torn upon birth. Does that practice sound morally okay to you? It won’t kill the child (I assume; I’m not a doctor), and they’ll probably be able to go on to live a relatively normal life, but you did still make the decision to irreparably change their body for no other reason than “it’s what we do,” without ever asking her if she even wanted to be included in that “we.”
Ask yourself this: What is the meaning in a cultural practice if it’s not performed willingly? Are you part of a culture because you’re born into it, or because you choose to participate in it?
The problem is not that a culture necessitates further discussion. The problem is that the infant is *never included in the discussion".