Reply
Fri 13 Jul, 2007 12:16 pm
Is it still very widely done in the States amongst newborns? Rumours are that its been cut (sic) down quite drastically.
In the UK its only about 7% of baby boys that have it done apparently.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Male_circumcision#Circumcision_since_1950
Estimates of the proportion of males that are circumcised worldwide vary from one sixth (12.5%) to one third (33.3%). According to one author, the practice is "a falling trend internationally", although another notes indications of increasing demand in Southern Africa.
Country Year Neonatal Circumcisions (%)
United States 2003 55.9%
Canada 2005 < 14%
Australia 2004 10%-20%
New Zealand 1995 10%-20%
Re: circumcision...
serenity m wrote:Is it still very widely done in the States amongst newborns? Rumours are that its been cut (sic) down quite drastically.
In the UK its only about 7% of baby boys that have it done apparently.
I wish I wasn't circumcised.....such a barbaric procedure. It's religious history is enough to make me sick.
In most non English speaking countries circumcision is practiced only in very religious circles, otherwise very rarely.
Rhe population of the United States is 260 Million. The entire world population is 5 Billion, 700 Million. Out of those, 2 Billion, 647 Million are males currently living. 18% of them are circumcised.
Of the world's male population, the breakdown of the circumcised and intact are:
79 million American infant circs
9 million American child or adult circs
13 million Canada, UK, New Zealand & Australia infant circs
27 million rest of world infant circs
44 million child or adult circs other parts of world
315 million Muslim child/adolescent circumcisions
487 million = TOTAL MEN CIRCUMCISED WORLDWIDE (18%)
2 billion 160 million = TOTAL MEN INTACT WORLDWIDE (82%)
2 billion 647 million = Total Men Living Worldwide
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Out of the Worldwide Total of 487 Million Circumcised Men:
65% occur as Muslim cultural circumcisions
15% occur in other countries
3% occur in other English speaking countries
17% occur in the U.S.
**Above statistics complied by Demographics International
Pardon this correction's nitpickyness:
Current world population is 6.6 billion and climbing.
The population for USA is now 300 million, so all those figures are a bit dated. The circumcision trend in US is declining.
A bit less nitpicky is the fact that nothing was listed about the world's Jewish tradition of circumcision.
Well Ragman, since your statistics only included the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, I wouldn't start nitpicking yet.
maporsche is a man?!?!? hnh.
My sister contemplated this issue when she was pregnant with her son. She did not have the circumcision, the decision was easy even though circumcision is traditional in our family.
Good for her, littlek! I was present when my Jewish godchild was circumcised and it was barbaric and for me terribly painful to watch.
Any genital mutilation, no matter what you call it, should be prohibited!
CalamityJane wrote:Well Ragman, since your statistics only included the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, I wouldn't start nitpicking yet.
CJ: I meant no offense with my correction of your reply. My first note with those few countries wasn't meant to be an all-inclusive report. If you notice the link that I attached had much more inclusive info with more nations. I saw no need to include more in my text when the link provided the info.
For persons with a high possibility of HIV, it is said, circumcision can be helpful. Aside from that, it is an unnecessary practice.
What about the results of studies over years that indicated a marked reduction in cervical cancer to partners that have had male circumcision?
http://www.cfpc.ca/cfp/2003/sep/vol49-sep-critical-1.asp
"Female partners of circumcised men had a moderate but nonsignificant decrease in risk of cervical cancer."
However, this indicates some contradiction:
"In men with low-risk sexual behaviour and monogamous female partners, circumcision makes no difference to the risk of cervical cancer."
my nephew had circumcision due to medical reasons- infections of the foreskin when he was still a baby. My ex had voluntary circumcision at the age of 19 - he preferred it that way. He said it wasn't a big deal, healed in a few days completely.
Strictly selfishly speaking, I always preferred circumscised men, but that's just me.
Ragman wrote:What about the results of studies over years that indicated a marked reduction in cervical cancer to partners that have had male circumcision?
http://www.cfpc.ca/cfp/2003/sep/vol49-sep-critical-1.asp
"Female partners of circumcised men had a moderate but nonsignificant decrease in risk of cervical cancer."
However, this indicates some contradiction:
"In men with low-risk sexual behaviour and monogamous female partners, circumcision makes no difference to the risk of cervical cancer."
Ragman, if that were the case, ca. 80 % of the female population around the world would have a greater risk of contracting cervical cancer over the
ca. 20 % who stuck to circumcised partners.
What about the "cross players"
like dagmar and I, who had the
pleasure of both?
eh, we have to die of something. i'll take my chances with whoever comes, circumcised or not!
CalamityJane wrote:Ragman wrote:What about the results of studies over years that indicated a marked reduction in cervical cancer to partners that have had male circumcision?
http://www.cfpc.ca/cfp/2003/sep/vol49-sep-critical-1.asp
"Female partners of circumcised men had a moderate but nonsignificant decrease in risk of cervical cancer."
However, this indicates some contradiction:
"In men with low-risk sexual behaviour and monogamous female partners, circumcision makes no difference to the risk of cervical cancer."
Ragman, if that were the case, ca. 80 % of the female population around the world would have a greater risk of contracting cervical cancer over the ca. 20 % who stuck to circumcised partners.
What about the "cross players"
like dagmar and I, who had the
pleasure of both?
I'm not clear as to how you figure that? I don't see it.
Besides, I'm not here to defend the stats -- just reporting what I found though some short term research. Also I don't want to divert the thread from too far from the topic -- about rate of circumcision, not cervical cancer.
Why anybody actually cares whether that little bit of skin is there is beyond me.
ahem, sometimes it does matter... some people hate for example pieces of chicken skin in their chicken soup, others... well, it's almost the same thing really. 'nough said...
Is circumcision widely practiced by white South Africans?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace