Anonymous asked
this isn't exactly my favorite topic, but doesn't circumcision provide: Protection against local infection in the penis , Protection against cancer of the penis , Protection from Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)., and Protection of wives against cervical cancer ?? (Researchers have noted that the wives of circumcised men have less risk of getting cervical cancer than the wives of uncircumcised men. ) ... studies agree that cancer of the penis is almost non-existent among circumcised men. :/
Doesn’t preventative mastectomy provide protection against breast cancer? I’m all for circumcision being available to people who are actually at risk for the diseases that it purportedly helps prevent, as long as informed consent is obtained. This blog argues against the non-therapeutic circumcision of minors.
-
dubsideofthemind likes this
-
uncutting likes this
-
life-intact said:
One fails to take into account that creating an open wound on the penis in the environment of the diaper sounds terribly like the exact opposite of “protection against local infection.”
-
blackoutpoetryhollow said:
Cancer of the penis is almost non-existent. Period. And amputation of healthy tissue is ALWAYS a last resort in *good* medicine, amputation should never be used as preventative care, especially on a person who cannot consent.
-
legalizeforeskin posted this
Blog comments powered by Disqus
