A personal account of witnessing a circumcision, including the specific details of what occurs during the procedure. It’s one of the more vivid descriptions I’ve read of the infant’s reaction, and there’s also some good info on why the procedure is not truly necessary. If you’re unfamiliar with the risks of circumcision, give this a read!

(Thanks for sending me this, saiyajinlegacy!)

mastera6 submitted:

This might give you a chuckle.



Ha, this is awesome! I’m really glad the owner was found. That particular device (the DTR, same one I have) costs about $100. Not something I would want to lose!

For anyone who’s interested, the owner wound up doing an AMA (ask me anything). And apparently the original thread made it onto the front page of Reddit. It’s great to see restoration reaching such a wide audience!

See this page for more information on circumcision damage.

See this page for more information on circumcision damage.

Note that this doesn’t include circumcisions performed outside of the hospital (i.e. by a pediatrician, or as part of the Jewish bris ceremony), so the overall circumcision rates are a little higher than what’s shown here. But it still paints a pretty accurate portrait of how common (or in a few states, uncommon) circumcision is in the US. You’ll also notice that the states where it’s no longer Medicaid funded are also the ones where the procedure is less common.

I’m ashamed that it’s 80% in my state.

I have a quick question if you don't mind. Awhile ago I found a link somewhere on tumblr that brought me to a gallery of botched circumcisions that had taken place in some third-world nation. They were very graphic but they were a good source to use in pointing out what could go wrong with the practice. I wish I had saved that link but stupid me forgot and now I can't find it. I think it may have been this blog that posted it? Was it? If so, do you still have it somewhere? I could really use it.

Hmm, I’m not sure if I remember that one. Here’s one gallery of botched circumcisions, and here’s a similar page on identifying circumcision damage, but neither of them mention any countries.

Does anyone have the link to the gallery in question?

Anytime that I hear a girl mention circumcision as a positive thing I kindly remind them that the vagina also has a protective hood which covers part of the genitalia. Is it a positive thing to remove that protective hood as well.

That’s always a great point. More people need to realize that the clitoral hood is the direct equivalent to the foreskin (hell, there’s even a sex-neutral term for both of them, “prepuce”), yet we have the common sense not to cut that off.

The foreskin is not the candy wrapper— it’s the candy.
Martin Novoa, Bioethics Advisor, Doctors Opposing Circumcision
Hello again. I was just wondering. Why do you think circumcision is so popular in the US? Up until about 2 years ago, I didn't even know circumcision was done for any reason that wasn't religious and thought it was a very much a minority thing, but clearly I was wrong! I live in the UK and I don't think I know anybody who is circumcised at all. I hope it doesn't become popular over here!

It originally caught on in the US in the 1800s as a practice to stop boys from masturbating (we see that didn’t work!), and then later on it was promoted as having health benefits. Which it doesn’t, of course, but it’s a medical myth that has yet to die out. Originally it was touted as being a cure for all sorts of unrelated diseases; these days it’s touted as cutting down on HIV rates (which it doesn’t; studies that have claimed that have been debunked) and being overall more hygienic… as if it’s difficult to simply clean it in the shower for 5 seconds.

It also persists because a) It’s very profitable, so the medical industry doesn’t want it to end, and b) Not many fathers want to take the step to say “Okay, this shouldn’t have happened to me, so I won’t let it happen to my son.”

It actually used to be popular in the UK in the early 1900s (due to the medical/hygienic myths), but the rates there declined starting in the 1940s once the NHS decided to no longer cover it.

Entry from The New Zealand Medical Journal

cyrus-theedishman submitted:

I was told that circumcision became so prevalent in the United States because the United States Army circumcised servicemen, so to stop infections of the foreskin, particularly by sand, to gain an edge over the Axis in North Africa during WWII. Naturally, I am skeptical of any claim of the human foreskin being anything but a deleterious organ and that the fear of losing soldiers to the specter of foreskin infections sounds pretty absurd, anyway. So, I decided to do some research, and, while I was researching, I found this page from The New Zealand Medical Journal:

The riddle of the sands: circumcision, history, and myth


I thought that it would be a great idea to share this to your blog.


Thanks! This was a really interesting read. Just further goes to show how ridiculous it is to think of circumcision as beneficial to health.

Two submissions regarding a man with two penises!

mollymcflyyy submitted:

Super interesting AMA yesterday on Reddit with a guy who has TWO (intact) penises, aka diphallia! You’d love it. Here you go:



Sorry if someone has already sent this to you, but you HAVE to see it!



Thanks to both of you for sending me these! This is really fascinating. And it’s great to see how comfortable he is with himself.