Comments

bkdude, there no such thing as a medical condition called "excess of foreskin". Maybe you suffered from a "frenulum breve" or a plain phymosis. But circumcision is easy money for urologist and they don't care to explain anything or propose alternatives. Now, if you're happy with your circumcision, that's fine for me. But why should you "feel quite bad for the uncircumcised" ? Vezineth, I won't comment about religions requiring circumcision. But you have to know that actually no medical public agency recommends circumcision to prevent diseases. This is because, as the AAP says : "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision." Now, I think you refer to recent studies about AIDS transmission in Africa. According to these studies, circumcision may reduce transmission risks from female to male down to 60%. But it won't reduce transmission risks from male to female. Would you feel safe with any security device that would reduce lethal risks by only 40% ? Or would you replace that device with something much more effective reducing risks by almost 100% ? And, from my own experience, I know that the lack of a foreskin has long term consequences. And these are not potential. Feeling not much during sex from 35 yo on is the main "benefit" I got from that procedure.