What is no longer necessarily true about cirumcision?

Answer 1

That it is beneficial to health. Circumcision is largely a cultural and religious rite However the public, especially of the English speaking world were misled into believing that there were health reasons for this form of disfigurement.Here is an article largely by, Paul M. Fleiss, MD

Western countries have no tradition of circumcision. In antiquity, the expansion of the Greek and Roman Empires brought Westerners into contact with the peoples of the Middle East, some of whom marked their children with circumcision and other sexual mutilations. To protect these children, the Greeks and Romans passed laws forbidding circumcision.[1] Over the centuries, the Catholic Church has passed many similar laws.[2,3] The traditional Western response to circumcision has been revulsion and indignation.

Circumcision started in America during the masturbation hysteria of the Victorian Era, when American doctors followed the example of the British by circumcising boys in order to stop them from masturbating. Victorian doctors knew very well that circumcision denudes, desensitizes, and disables the penis. Nevertheless, they claimed that circumcision cured epilepsy, convulsions, paralysis, elephantiasis, tuberculosis, eczema, bed-wetting, hip-joint disease, faecal incontinence, rectal prolapse, wet dreams, hernia, headaches, nervousness, hysteria, poor eyesight, idiocy, mental retardation, and insanity.

In fact, no procedure in the history of medicine has been claimed to cure and prevent more diseases than circumcision. As late as the 1970s, leading American medical textbooks still advocated routine circumcision as a way to prevent masturbation. The anti sexual motivations behind an operation that entails cutting off part of the penis are obvious.

The radical practice of routinely circumcising babies did not begin until the Cold War era. This institutionalization of what amounted to compulsory circumcision was part of the same movement that pathologized and medicalized birth and actively discouraged breastfeeding. Private-sector, corporate-run hospitals institutionalized routine circumcision without ever consulting the American people. There was no public debate or referendum. It was only in the 1970s that a series of lawsuits forced hospitals to obtain parental consent to perform this contraindicated but highly profitable surgery. Circumcisers responded by inventing new "medical" reasons for circumcision in an attempt to scare parents into consenting.

Today the reasons given for circumcision have been updated to play on contemporary fears and anxieties; but one day they, too, will be considered irrational. Now that such current excuses as the claim that this procedure prevents cancer and sexually transmitted diseases have been thoroughly discredited, circumcisers will undoubtedly invent new ones. But if circumcisers were really motivated by purely medical considerations, the procedure would have died out long ago, along with leeching, skull-drilling, and castration. The fact that it has not suggests that the compulsion to circumcise came first, the "reasons," later.

Millions of years of evolution have fashioned the human body into a model of refinement, elegance, and efficiency, with every part having a function and purpose. Evolution has determined that mammals' genitals should be sheathed in a protective, responsive, multipurpose foreskin. Every normal human being is born with a foreskin. In females, it protects the glans of the clitoris; in males, it protects the glans of the penis. Thus, the foreskin is an essential part of human sexual anatomy.

Parents should enjoy the arrival of a new child with as few worries as possible. The birth of a son in the US, however, is often fraught with anxiety and confusion. Most parents are pressured to hand their baby sons over to a stranger, who, behind closed doors, straps babies down and cuts their foreskins off. The billion-dollar-a-year circumcision industry has bombarded Americans with confusing rhetoric and calculated scare tactics.

Information about the foreskin itself is almost always missing from discussions about circumcision. The mass circumcision campaigns of the past few decades have resulted in pandemic ignorance about this remarkable structure and its versatile role in human sexuality. Ignorance and false information about the foreskin are the rule in American medical literature, education, and practice. Most American medical textbooks depict the human penis, without explanation, as circumcised, as if it were so by nature.

Answer 2

There is nothing true about circumcision that was not true when it was first done. However> in the mid 1800 the British medical fraternity decided that circumcision was a necessary medical procedure that would stop illnesses ranging from syphilis to insanity because these were caused by boys masturbating. the public at large fell for it hook line and sinker and soon there a was culture of so called medically based circumcision in the English speaking country's of the world and to some extent in those country's colonised or invaded by English speaking people. most of them including the USA started to doubt the reasoning behind this form of mutilation and the practice became less popular. however in the US the whole sale circumcision of conscripts during WW! on the advice of the Americana medical fraternity who stood to make a lot of money from it. this lasted for nearly an other 80 years. Medical organisations will now no longer commit them selves to the advantages that were supposed to accompany circumcision. They still have too powerful a lobby though to outright claim that circumcision is in fact harmful.
Nothing has really changed in the reasoning for circumcision It was originally a cultural/religious rite it was never done for reasons of hygiene, the fact is that the connection between hygiene and disease was not even made during the Victorian era when circumcision became fashionable for non religious/medical reasons in the English speaking parts of the world. English doctors spread the idea that over a hundred different types of diseases ranging from syphilis to insanity were the result of masturbation, further to this they also claimed that circumcision would stop boys from masturbating. today the practice of circumcision is rapidly fading as it has proved to be harmful both physically and psychologically. any claim that circumcision is useful for reasons of hygiene are simply false as can be shown by the fact that more then 80% of the worlds men would no sooner mutilate their penis then chop of any other healthy body part.

Answer 3

Apex:

Without circumcision, men are more susceptible to infection