Type to search


Would an uncircumcised man be a stop sign in the bedroom?


Medical studies have shown circumcision markedly reduces chances of contracting a sexually transmitted disease as well as newborns’ risk of developing urinary tract infections.  Even so, Medicaid and other insurance companies in some states have stopped covering the practice, making the choice for some families.

At the same time anti-circumcision advocates, or “intactivists,” cry out against the practice, condemning it as genital mutilation upon an unwilling participant.

Consequently, a recent federal study showed a decline in circumcision in boys from over 50 percent in 2006 to less than a third in 2010.

But men in America without circumcisions are still the minority and there may be a muted prejudice against the appearance of their penises.

In the spirit of Valentine’s Day, would the sight of an un-circumcised penis be a stop sign in the bedroom or would you embrace diversity?


  1. Jack W. Feb 19, 2011

    I have posted my views on this in other discussions but I feel the need to keep at it to counter the misinformation being spread.

    Pro-circ advocates have yet to explain why developed countries where RIC does not take place have the same or lower incidents of HIV and STDs than the US where the majority of males now over 18 are circumcised. I could accept one statistical anomaly but when the data across the entire spectrum appears flawed I have to assume that circumcision is not a prophylactic procedure and there are other forces at work here.

    The flawed African studies have been cited as proof of the efficacy of circumcision in preventing HIV infection 50-60% of the time in unprotected heterosexual sex. (Notice, ladies, no protection for you; it allegedly protects female to male NOT male to female transmission.) Those data are being used to justify American parents ordering the mutilation of their son’s (and every newborn boy’s) genitals to protect him. Let’s talk about HIV and your son’s penis.

    Let’s do the math (based on US Census Bureau and CDC statistics).
    -US Population: about 300 million
    -People living with AIDS at any one time in the US: 2 million
    -Percentage that contract AIDS via homosexual activity 55%
    -Percentage that contract AIDS via sex with high risk individuals (Prostitutes and IV drug users); 30%
    -Percentage that contract AIDS via dirty IV needles (condition of the prepuce won’t protect him here): 14%
    -Percentage that contract AIDS by other means (health care workers, blood transfusions, CPR gone bad, bad luck) 1 %

    So your son will have to avoid sex with 1% of two million people (20,000). But wait. At least half (maybe more) of those will be male and there is no claim of homosexual protection. He will have to avoid sex with 10,000 women (maybe fewer). But wait; about half those will fall in the less sexual active/over 35 category. Cougars notwithstanding, his pool of possible hookups is about 5,000. But wait. What makes you think all those 5,000 women want to have sex with him? And vice versa? Let’s say a generous 10% will find mutual attraction. Let’s assume that the 500 possible female hookups spread across fifty states and six territories will desire to have unprotected intercourse with your son. If they know they have AIDS will they hide it from him and have sex anyway? We are talking about a miniscule risk here; .00000333% of the US population is a possible threat.

    Bringing the percentages into perspective it is obvious that there is very little risk for the average heterosexual male “catching” AIDS in America. However, there is a very high risk of catching a plethora of other diseases not claimed to be prevented by penile mutilation.

    According to the CDC one in six American adults carries the Genital Herpes virus. Pile all the other sexually transmitted diseases on and you’ve got a cesspool of disease out there. Why on earth would anyone in their right mind be having unprotected sex in this day and age?

    Here’s an idea. Let’s deal with some much higher percentages. Infant circumcision exposes baby boys to the risk of infection, scarring, meatal stenosis, amputation, and even death. Rather than surgically altering your son at birth to allegedly, partially protect him from minimally existent threats, why don’t you teach him to avoid promiscuous unprotected sex with multiple partners, prostitutes and IV drug users? Barring that, he could always fall back on the highly effective method of prevention, condoms (http://www.cdc.gov/nchstp/od/condoms.pdf)

    When he is old enough; he can make his own decision on what his penis should look like.

    And for the women who have responded negatively in this discussion; please remember, if a man were to make a negative judgment about you based on a normal anatomical feature of your body (breasts too small, areolas too big, etc.) he would be pilloried and put in stocks in the public square for being a sexist pig.

  2. Jacko Feb 17, 2011

    Many have pointed to the high circ rate and high HIV rate in the US compared to the low circ rate and LOW HIV rate in EU and JP. However, few mention that within the US, there is no HIV (nor HPV , STD) advantage to missing parts of the penis.

  3. Donner Feb 16, 2011

    Last time I checked baby boys do not contract or transmit STD’s. So this is a non-issue.

  4. Dee Feb 15, 2011

    Q: Would the sight of an un-circumcised penis be a stop sign in the bedroom or would you embrace diversity?

    A: For health and safety reasons, I vote for circumcision but with all the hullabaloo of free will and choosing for oneself, then by all means, I would be OK with guys being circumcised or not. I don’t think it makes anyone more or less of a man… HOWEVER, I would not sleep with a man who is uncircumcised because of the infectious repercussions.

    1. Hugh7 Feb 16, 2011

      And would it be OK if he wanted you to have parts cut off to protect him?

    2. Moe Feb 16, 2011

      This post could not be more ignorant. “health and safety reasons” “infectious repercussions” I guess all the people in Europe and the majority of the world are sick, dangerous, and infected because they left their penises alone at birth. Please do some research before you speak.

  5. Christine Feb 15, 2011

    I have slept with both kinds of penis, and I don’t find there is any difference in sensation at all.
    ?? :-o They all feel the same.

    “Genital mutilation” is way far right, but then I suppose not when you are trying to make a point. However, not everyone wants their ears pierced, and so I do believe the owner of the penis should decide, not their parents.

  6. Chert Feb 15, 2011

    As one who had a foreskin well into my 30’s, my impression from the women that I was with, is that it wasn’t really that big of a deal either way. However over time I learned that circumcised was really the prefered way for a partner to be. I got it done at the age of 33 and have never regreted it. I have had my sons circumcised at birth. Check out this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G09dp5jxj5M and ask yourself which way you would rather be.

    1. Hugh7 Feb 15, 2011

      Since you invite us, I’d much rather have all I was born with (as I do) than have a very enjoyable part cut off.

      You second-guessed your sons, without any idea which they would have preferred, and with the rate going down, they will be in the minority (and their partners will be much more used to whole ones). Since the topic is becoming more public, they are quite likely to wish they were not.

    2. Dee Feb 15, 2011

      Way to go!

  7. Jbholland988 Feb 15, 2011

    I’m a RIC male (Canadian) and would never and have never wanted a foreskin. No women I have ever been with sexually has complained and in fact my wife loves my circumcised penis and of course hoped that I was before we even had sex for the first time – I didn’t disapoint her !!!!!!!!!
    We both come from family’s that believe in circumcision and we would have had a son or son’s done without question.

    1. Hugh7 Feb 15, 2011

      You can’t say what you would have wanted if you’d had a complete penis all your life. Those who have very rarely want less.

  8. Dan Bollinger Feb 15, 2011

    Embracing diversity would be considering having sex with a man who is circumcised. He is the one with the adulterated penis, and worldwide, in the minority.

    Hygiene is a good thing for men and women, particularly before a hot date.

    Women who have had sex with circumcised and intact men prefer intact men 8 to 1. (O’Hara)

    Parents considering infant circumcision should check out circumcisiondecisionmaker.com

  9. Anonymous Feb 15, 2011

    Actually these studies suggest only a mild prophylactic effect. Any statistician would confirm that. Also, with the exception of the African HIV studies, the other STD studies are contradicted by other studies. Indicative of the weak correlation is the fact that the US has, since WWII, had higher STD rates than any other western country, even when its circumcision rates were approaching 95%.

    1. Hugh7 Feb 15, 2011

      And urinary tract infections? By arch-circumcisionist Thomas Wiswell’s own figures, it would take >440 circumcisions to prevent one. They are more common in girls, in any case, and then readily treated with medicine, not – of course – surgery.

  10. oddboyout Feb 15, 2011

    There is this thing called a condom that, when applied, negates that study.

  11. Restoring Tally Feb 14, 2011

    Other studies show that women have an increased risk of HIV infection when having sex with a circumcised man. There is no clear concensus that male circumcision has a net benefit. I think life itself is risky. Why should baby boys be circumcised because of fears of their parents?

    I was cut at birth and I am restoring my foreskin. My partner loves my restored foreskin. She likes that we do not need to use lube like we used to. Also, she does not get sore from sex like she used to. Having a foreskin, even a restored one, is a win-win for both of us.

  12. Anonymous Feb 14, 2011

    There are countries where men won’t sleep with a woman unless she’s had part of her genitals cut off. That doesn’t make it right to cut off parts of girls.

  13. Darren Feb 14, 2011

    No, un-circumcised penis can be very welcomed sight – depends on shape and size of it. Some men just don’t keep it clean inside foreskin which is definitely a stop-sign in bedroom.

Skip to content