Circumcision among Americans

  • Thread starter Thread starter Casper
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mrchatsworth said:
It has? Source?
Click to expand...
The last best numbers for nationwide infant male circumcision rate are from 2009, when it was about 32% and dropping rapidly. It has probably gone down substantially in the last eleven years.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/17/health/research/17circ.html?_r=3

Granted, there are major differences between regions (rare in the western states, most common in the Midwest) and demographic groups (less common among Hispanics, who are an increasing portion of society as a whole).
 
Last edited:
It’s still very popular here as a health based reason. I will say we did not circumcise our son, but being that boys are less likely to care about hygiene, I regret not doing it. He had a medical issue recently that I think wouldn’t have come up had he been circumcised.
 
Personally, I think we should cut out the questions about circumcision
 
Tis_Bearself said:
That’s interesting, and given that the Jewish people lived in the desert, adds a new dimension to their religious laws regarding circumcision.
Click to expand...
If you are referring to their forty-year sojourn in the wilderness from the time they left Egypt until they entered the Promised Land, the Jews did not do any circumcisions during that time. The males who were born in the wilderness weren’t circumcised until they entered the Promised Land. See Joshua 5:2-9.
 
It is my understanding that about 80 percent of the American male population are circumcised. However, in recent decades the practice of infant circumcision has fallen so that now only about 30 percent of male infants are now being circumcised.
 
Last edited:
Unnecessary cosmetic surgery on an infant’s genitals?
Well, why would anyone object to that?
 
I’m in the US, it’s becoming less common…especially since most insurance companies consider it cosmetic or voluntary surgery and don’t cover the cost. My son’s (born in the late 80’s) were not circumcised.
 
thatkoko said:
Yes it’s no longer needed since the medical field has highly developed.
Click to expand...
  • sarcasm mode on -
Yes, we discovered that the rare and previously unknown combination called “soap and water” was very useful in combatting diseases related to poor hygiene.
  • sarcasm mode off -
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Starting in about the 70s, many younger parents started rejecting the idea
Click to expand...
It began sooner than that. I was born in the 50s and my parents thought the idea was ridiculous. Thanks, Mom and Dad! It wasn’t very widespread until much later though.
 
Yes, there were isolated cases before the 1970s, but the vast majority of guys born before that time were circumcised. The exceptions were often people whose parents came from some other culture such as Europe where non-Jewish baby boys weren’t routinely circumcised.
 
I wish my parents had thought to question. They did in so many other ways, but the one that irrevocably changed the functioning of my body? That one they did without a second thought.
 
Yeah, probably about as rare as hygiene-related issues in uncircumcised males that were taught how to wash.
 
It depends on what side effects you are looking at. The really serious ones, like death and glans amputation are fairly rare (only a few hundred per year though I think that still works out to 1/15,000). Meatal stenosis is more common, affecting something like a 20th of circumcised men. Keratinization hits almost every single man who has been circumcised long enough.
 
Last edited:
Nepperhan said:
40.png
Inquiry:
Fewer. The circumcision rate among infant boys in America has dropped to around half. Which is good, because it is better not to make irrevocable changes to an infant if you don’t have to.
Click to expand...
I worked in personnel. The chance of a performance of an adult circumcision (which sometimes is medically prudent), when the pain and inconvenience is considered, should have every parent getting a boy child circumcised at birth.
Click to expand...
Based on that criteria all little girls should have mastectomies. They are much more likely to develop breast cancer and need one as adults than boys are to require circumcision as adults.
 
You’re not wrong. Hygiene is still an issue with a lot of men, despite what many like to claim. Believe it or not, this kind of problem is something that we see more than you’d like to know in hospitals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top