Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Please register or sign in to remove these advertisements.
  • Research Studies on Circumcision

    In National Survey Circumcision Offers No Protection
    Contrary to the UN's official pro-mutilation (of men) policy, surveys throughout South African men have revealed that genital mutilation of men has no bearing in the prevention of HIV.
    It begs the question of why the UN would adopt such a position and spread myths regarding HIV transmission rates which claim to 'help women' (disregarding men's health & sexual integrity).

    Circumcision and Alexithymia
    A preliminary study investigated the role that distressing experiences (such as mutilating one's genitals by hacking off some 20,000 nerves) in the early stages of life may have in relation to alexithymia (difficulty in identifying and expressing feelings) acquisition for adults by controlling for male circumcision. Three hundred (300) self selected men were administered the Toronto Twenty-Item Alexithymia Scale checklist and a personal history questionnaire.

    The circumcised men had:
    • age-adjusted alexithymia scores twenty (20) percent higher than the intact men;
    • were over one & a half (1.57) times more likely to have high alexithymia scores;
    • were two and a third (2.30) times less likely to have low alexithymia scores;
    • had higher prevalence of two of the three alexithymia factors (difficulty identifying feelings and difficulty describing feelings);
    • were nearly five (4.53) times more likely to use an erectile dysfunction drug.


    This is a statistically significant number of men experiencing alexithymia in relation to circumcision distress and for drugs used for erectile dysfunction.

    Circumcision and Premature Ejaculation
    While premature ejaculation is common, it has been under-reported and under-treated and it is likely lacking in study material. The study intended to determine the frequency of premature ejaculation and to discover associated factors of premature ejaculation. This cross-section study was conducted at a primary care clinic over a three-month period back in 2008. Men aged from 18 to 70 years attending the clinic were asked to participate and they completed self-administered questionnaires. A total of 207 men were recruited with a response rate of 93.2%. The mean age was 46.0 years. The frequency of premature ejaculation was 40.6%. No significant association was found between age and premature ejaculation. Analysis showed that erectile dysfunction, circumcision, and sexual intercourse =5 times in 4 weeks were predictors of premature ejaculation.


    Circumcision and Sexual Difficulties
    Around 5% of men in Denmark are mutilated [circumcised]. A new survey has been documented examining associations between circumcision and a range of sexual measures of both men & women. Unsurprisingly, circumcised men had higher report rates for sexual issues such as orgasm difficulties. Meanwhile, women with a circumcised spouse also had higher report rates of unfulfilled sex lives and difficulties. Primarily their complaints focused on orgasm difficulties as well as painful intercourse. Given this, surely further investigation is required regarding the so-called benefits of mutilating baby boys.

    Circumcision Benefits Overstated & Premature
    Many articles in the popular press and scientific journals still tow the PC line by promoting circumcision as a 'cost-effective' means to combat HIV, despite there being no genuine explanation for such beliefs outside the UN's own wishes to mutilate SA men for women's alleged benefits.
    At the very least, this community should consider deeply how their presentation to the policy makers as well as the wider audience may be interpreted or misinterpreted. While news casters repeat unfounded claims along the lines of "circumcision in men reduces HIV by 60%" there is currently no actual data to support this claim.
    As it currently stands, it appears the pro-mutilation lobby (e.g. The UN amongst others) simply only seeks to reduce financial needs while promoting the opposite sex as the beneficiaries to men's sacrifice of a healthy sex-life.

    Insufficient Evidence
    An article endorsed by thirty-two professionals questions the results of three highly publicized African circumcision studies. The studies claim that circumcision reduces HIV transmission, and they are being used to promote circumcisions. Substantial evidence in this article refutes the claim of the studies.

    Women's vanity is paramount compared to baby boy's genital integrity.
    Why a picture of a woman rubbing face-cream into her cheek? See why here.
    Examples in the article include the following:


    1. Circumcision is associated with increased transmission of HIV to women.
    2. Conditions for the studies were unlike conditions found in real-world settings. In short, the studies used were manufactured to produce the desired results.
    3. Many other studies show that male circumcision is not associated with reduced HIV transmission.
    4. The U.S. has a high rate of HIV infection and a high rate of circumcision. Other countries have low rates of circumcision and low rates of HIV infection.
    5. Condoms are 95 times more cost effective in preventing HIV transmission as well as most other sexual diseases.
    6. Circumcision is mutilation and removal of perfectly healthy, functioning, unique tissue, raising ethical issues.


    In England, where mutilation of boys is quite rare but still legal and practised commonly, medical professionals have found an amazing method of cleaning up penile infections without resorting to barbaric mutilation. Apparently, Mother nature is happy for boys to retain the full functionality of their penises. Skip to the 1:00 (one minute) mark to hear this 'amazing new' method that is taking the medical world by storm.





    For more related content, click: Circumcision tag



    http://www.ajol.info/index.php/samj/article/view/14003
    Connolly, C. et al., South African Medical Journal 98(2008): 789-794.
    http://mensstudies.metapress.com/content/2772r13175400432/
    Bollinger, D. and Van Howe, R. , "Alexithymia and Circumcision Trauma: A Preliminary Investigation," International Journal of Men's Health (2011);184-195.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02280.x/full
    Tang, W. and Khoo, E. "Prevalence and Correlates of Premature Ejaculation in a Primary Care Setting: A Preliminary Cross-Sectional Study," Journal of Sexual Medicine (2011) Apr 14.
    http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/06/13/ije.dyr104.short?rss=1
    Frisch, M., Lindholm, M., and Grønbæk, M., "Male Circumcision and Sexual Function in Men and Women: A Survey-based, Cross-sectional Study in Denmark," International Journal of Epidemiology (2011);1–15.
    http://jme.bmj.com/content/36/12/798.abstract
    Fox, M. and Thomson, M., "HIV/AIDS and Circumcision : Lost in Translation," Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (2010):798-801.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20965388
    Green, L. et al., "Male Circumcision and HIV Prevention: Insufficient Evidence and Neglected External Validity," American Journal of Preventive Medicine 39 (2010): 479-82.
    Douglas likes this.
    Comments 13 Comments
    1. Marx's Avatar
      Marx -
      Forceful circumcision in Mbale: Police fire teargas




      He said that so far they have received two cases where the victims had been circumcised badly putting lives in danger.
      This obviously can't be true because feminists keep insisting that men of any age, boys and baby boys have a delightful time while having their genitals mutilated whether it be in western culture or developing countries while only women & girls have a horrific time in which their health is at risk.

      Feminists keep saying it, so it simply must be true.
    1. FloatyBoaty's Avatar
      FloatyBoaty -
      No offense Marx, but sometimes your sarcasm makes a guy wanna puke - it sounds so much like the feminist propaganda. Keeps the reminder of what feminists are.
    1. Marx's Avatar
      Marx -
      Queen

      Inquest hears 28-day-old tot lost three-quarters of his total blood volume

      Rabbi Cohen was entirely blameless for the tragedy.
      Absolutely wrong... He sexually mutilated a baby who obviously couldn't consent. This mutilation resulted in the death of the baby.
    1. Celtic Druid's Avatar
      Celtic Druid -
      Hey Karl, your excellent compilation of research factors into this.

      Nearly 70 Zimbabwean MPs to undergo circumcision as part of huge anti-HIV drive
    1. Marx's Avatar
    1. TheCapitalist's Avatar
      TheCapitalist -
      Listen dudes I'm all for the men's rights movement but I'm not going to exchange feminist busybodies with masculinist busybodies.

      Circumcised men "can't express their feelings", "prematurely ejaculate", and "can't satisfy women"?? Are you kidding me right now? How is that any different from the male shaming language that feminists use?

      I was circumcised as a baby and am grateful for it... and you can keep your "telling me what's best for me" routine to yourself.

      The decision belongs to parents... NOT YOU!!

      Stick to the real issues of VAWA and the discrimination in the Family Courts. Your "ban circumcision" position is only going to cost you allies and create opponents unnecessarily... myself among them.
    1. Afternever's Avatar
      Afternever -
      Quote Quote from TheCapitalist View Post
      Listen dudes I'm all for the men's rights movement but I'm not going to exchange feminist busybodies with masculinist busybodies.

      Circumcised men "can't express their feelings", "prematurely ejaculate", and "can't satisfy women"?? Are you kidding me right now? How is that any different from the male shaming language that feminists use?

      I was circumcised as a baby and am grateful for it... and you can keep your "telling me what's best for me" routine to yourself.

      The decision belongs to parents... NOT YOU!!

      Stick to the real issues of VAWA and the discrimination in the Family Courts. Your "ban circumcision" position is only going to cost you allies and create opponents unnecessarily... myself among them.

      Wrong, my friend.The decision doesn't belong to the parents.The decision belongs to the individual getting circumcised.If an adult wants to be cut, so be it....but it's wrong to force an irreversible and unnecessary medical procedure on a child.Children are not property that one can do whatever they please with.
    1. Traveler's Avatar
      Traveler -
      Quote Quote from Afternever View Post
      Wrong, my friend.The decision doesn't belong to the parents.The decision belongs to the individual getting circumcised.If an adult wants to be cut, so be it....but it's wrong to force an irreversible and unnecessary medical procedure on a child.Children are not property that one can do whatever they please with.
      And yet we have parents who DO force their sons and daughters to undergo circumcisions. And if they don't do anything that disturbing, there's always the parents who pierce infant ears, make their kids get tattoos, etc.

      Perhaps just as bad as circumcision (or maybe worse, in a way) are those parents who have a hermaphrodite infant and assign the gender themselves. From the stories I've read, they usually choose quite incorrectly...I actually was a good acquaintance of someone who went through this. She was torn because she was attracted to girls but was from a VERY Christian family. In 11th grade her family finally told her she was born as a hermaphrodite and had her (unfunctional) micropenis sculpted into a clitoris to match her more defined vagina/labia. Gods, was she shocked!

      Point being...let the children decide what they want done to them!
    1. Celtic Druid's Avatar
      Celtic Druid -
      Quote Quote from Traveler View Post
      Point being...let the children decide what they want done to them!
      Indeed, boy and girl, as with the right to vote, smoke, drink and have sex, requires an age of consent. Why should something as extreme as circumcision be any different?

      If there's rightfully moral outrage at girls being circumcised, then this concept must extend to boys also, or let those who propound 'equality' be shown for the hypocrites they are.
    1. Marx's Avatar
      Marx -
      Quote Quote from TheCapitalist View Post
      Listen dudes I'm all for the men's rights movement but I'm not going to exchange feminist busybodies with masculinist busybodies.
      Those 'quotes' you used have not been said by anyone in this thread. If you're going to use quotation marks, at least put a quote between them instead of making up your own quote and implying they've spoken by someone else. Deceit is for feminists, not men.
    1. Douglas's Avatar
      Douglas -
      Quote Quote from TheCapitalist View Post
      Circumcised men "can't express their feelings", "prematurely ejaculate", and "can't satisfy women"?? Are you kidding me right now? How is that any different from the male shaming language that feminists use?
      Such phrases as you quote are just those used by feminists in their shaming language. When you find people saying such things, call them out on it. (You can see that it is not being said here.)

      Quote Quote from TheCapitalist View Post
      I was circumcised as a baby and am grateful for it... and you can keep your "telling me what's best for me" routine to yourself.

      The decision belongs to parents... NOT YOU!!
      If parents decided on some other pointless operation that they might consider they want performed - say, to remove a baby's ears - would that also be right? After all, the ears don't do much and could be removed without harm. How much of a baby is it acceptable to have removed or altered for no medical reason? Try to separate from your own culture when thinking that question through.
      Other examples of child alteration:
      Which of these is acceptable and why?
      Foot Binding


      Infant oral mutilation
      Attachment 2021

      (Female) Circumcision
      Attachment 2022
      Why should decisions like this belong to parents? They obviously don't belong to whoever you were addressing either, so why should such decisions not belong to YOU, the person being affected? If you want to remove your foreskin, your ears, your toenails or any other part of you that you can get by without, is this not YOUR decision to make and YOURS ALONE?

      That you are grateful for what was done to you has no bearing on the issue of whether the choice generally should be the person's own. If your parents had left you intact you could still have had your foreskin removed at a later time in accordance with your own wishes.

      Quote Quote from TheCapitalist View Post
      Your "ban circumcision" position is only going to cost you allies and create opponents unnecessarily... myself among them.
      There is no '"ban circumcision" position' being espoused. If a person wants to be circumcised (and is able to make that choice freely) then no-one that I've read or heard of in the MRA says they should not be allowed to do it.

      I repeat .. there is no concept of banning circumcision. For males or females.

      There is the matter of a man's body belonging to himself and - as with females - him being legally protected until he is considered able to make that decision for himself.
    1. yinyangbalance's Avatar
      yinyangbalance -
      Can you cite the UN policy that is pro Genital Mutilation for males?

      I remember there was a psuedo-scientific study that claimed circumcision prevented AIDS. Many REAL scientists (that is people that stick to the scientific method) and doctors have denounced the study for being unscientific. One douche bag somehow got his book endorsed by NPR called "Tinderbox", where he made outlandish claims that the circumcised man can't get or spread AIDS. He blamed the foreskin. 'Tinderbox': How The West Fueled The AIDS Epidemic : NPR

      ========Tinderbox============
      The Douchebag's name is Craig Timberg, a circumcised Zionist Jew (circumcision is also a Jewish practice, he is trying to support himself being circumcised).
      Go to his website
      Tinderbox
      Check in periodically for he sometimes travels and posts up locations. If he comes to your town, find a way to boo him out.

      =======About the so-called study==============
      It is not SCIENTIFIC at all, because the study was conducted with a small sample size, within a small time sample (1 year), and all of them were grown men. Many scientist have pointed out that no conclusion could be made from that kind of dataset.

      Also, It took the men that were circumsized up to 6 months to recover from the mutilation, which isn't addressed. The implications of that is the men with genital mutilation had REDUCED events of sexual intercourse compared to their un-mutilated counterparts). The so-called "study" tries to get around this fact by saying they asked the men if it has affected their sex life and only "a few" said "yes", but "most" said "no". This isn't science.

      They also gloss over the fact that many men have to deal with oversensitivity and the reduced desire for sex. Again, they attempt to address this with a questionnaire, which is sociology not science (sociology is a JOKE in science circles). If anything men that had sex issues will not admit that! Men and their sexual 'performance' is intimately tied to their state of manhood. Therefore the sociology factor in all this is that these men will say they are stallions in bed no matter the circumstance (no pun intended). Only uncircumsized males can understand the sensitivity of having their penis head exposed and subject to rubbing on the clothes and and so on, circumcised men have lost sensitivity and formed calluses and scaring on the penis head from overexposure. A woman can understand this feeling if they just expose their clitoris and feel the abrasiveness of cotton fabric against it. It is VERY UNPLEASANT, after a few months of this you will loose sensitivity.

      So in other words, if anything, the test shows that circumcision (i.e. genital mutilation) in adults might have an impact on the frequency of sexual intercourse, thus, reducing chances of getting AIDS. The book and "study" make a completely outlandish, and very dangerous, conclusion (Circumsize men and they will be immune to AIDS and thus will save WOMEN from AIDS exposure) when this is not true at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Their goal is to genitally mutilate men, at the same time Feminism is working hard and spending federal tax $$ to have the UN band FEMALE circumcision. Hmmm whats going on? Isnt it obvious?

      =====The next study======
      Nex thing you know, they will be doing a study on cutting the damned Penis off Who cares they are black men, right? Feminists would love it . They will claim it is a victory for women. Of course, we will give the victims a questionnaire on how it has affected their sex life. I'm certain that "a few" will say that it "hasn't affected" their sex life one bit!
    1. Celtic Druid's Avatar
      Celtic Druid -
      Quote Quote from yinyangbalance View Post
      Can you cite the UN policy that is pro Genital Mutilation for males?

      I remember there was a psuedo-scientific study that claimed circumcision prevented AIDS. Many REAL scientists (that is people that stick to the scientific method) and doctors have denounced the study for being unscientific. One douche bag somehow got his book endorsed by NPR called "Tinderbox", where he made outlandish claims that the circumcised man can't get or spread AIDS. He blamed the foreskin. 'Tinderbox': How The West Fueled The AIDS Epidemic : NPR
      Nearly 70 Zimbabwean MPs to undergo circumcision as part of huge anti-HIV drive

      A promulgated myth that male circumcision prevented AIDS, began with 3 studies in Africa several years ago. It claimed circumcision was effective as a 60% effective vaccine (Auvert 2005, 2006). The sample size in studies were small, inherently flawed & stopped before all the results were finalized. The Lancet, refused to publish the male circumcision trials due to ethical concerns. The World Health Organization, heavily focused on gender politics, got hold of this myth (without concerning themselves with peer-review or that it was discredited), & the WHO's HIV/AIDS Department stated unequivocally that circumcision would give a significant "additional benefit" to men trying to avoid HIV infection. A study led by Dr. Maria Wawer at the BloombergSchool of Public health in Baltimore, concluded that circumcising men did not reduce HIV transmission to their female partners (see also Connolly 2008). Conversely, a large study from John Hopkins University, Baltimore, demonstrates that women are more likely to get HIV/AIDS from a circumcised male partner (see also Wawer 2009, Jameson 2009).
    Comments Leave Comment

    Click here to log in

    Which sex is this site primarily geared towards?

1e2 Forum

LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO