I did read recently that it was much easier to contract or spread AIDS for men who are uncircumcised. So I think they're really trying to promote circumcision in African countries where the risk of AIDS is really high.

I think if I ever have a son, I probably would NOT choose to have him circumcised. I think education is a better method of disease protection, and I don't think it'd be that big a chore for him to learn to keep clean! I also understand that a person CAN choose to have that operation later in life if for some reason he wanted it. I think I'd prefer for him to have that option. (I also don't have religious reasons for wanting him circumcised.)

It does seem a bit odd to me after seeing my uncircumcised brother when we were tiny little kids. I mean, why not have a little protection over it, eh? I hear it's pretty sensitive. :-) I guess since I saw his first when we were little, that seems more natural to me. But I haven't seen an uncircumcised adult male ever.

One doctor friend of mine said he thought about 50% of American males were circumcised. I'm betting it's a lot higher than that though.

I guess some of the other sexual acts besides intercourse (and I'll leave that to everyone's imagination) might seem a little different with someone uncircumcised? Or maybe the skin's just readily out of the way when it needs to be? After all, I've known men who could get naked in less than .5 nanoseconds. I bet a little extra skin never got in the way.



[Edit: Just saw the bit in another post that the skin retracts as the penis enlarges, so I guess maybe it's never an issue?]

Sidony