JZ makes the best argument for circumcision, I must say.

ETA: Also, I want a manservant. Not necessarily to clean my penis, but just to have.

If their son isn't the messages are confusing: 'leave it alone', 'clean under it', 'pull it back sometimes', 'irrigate occasionally'!

Ah. And here we come to the heart of the matter. If the boy has to clean it, it actually interferes with the "Unclean! Unclean!" message that god-fearing parents ought to be instilling.

The other 40 years have been pretty simple too.

And pleasant, too, I hope.

I'm recalling a Kid's in the Hall skit where one of the guys pulls his turtle neck sweater up around his face, mourning his loss and giving some kind of statistical data about the loss of sensitivity.

This is one parenting issue I'm not gung-ho about. I'll save my breath for those parents who don't want to immunize their kids and then send them to school with mine.

Or the owner's manservant.

That's a story waiting to be written, about the servant whose job is to clean under the foreskin. "Excuse me, Your Majesty, I'm just here to check the cleanliness of your willy, I won't be a moment."

it collects under the foreskin until it's cleaned out by the owner.

Or the owner's manservant.

You can pick your friends, you can pick your nose....

Ah. And here we come to the heart of the matter. If the boy has to clean it, it actually interferes with the "Unclean! Unclean!" message that god-fearing parents ought to be instilling.

Being both a God-fearing parent, and a parent of boys, let me tell you, I have no desire to cripple my children emotionally over physical pleasure. It was never done to me, thank goodness, and I'll be happy to pass along that bit of health from my childhood. That said, little boys need to be socialized into understanding what are private acts, and what acts are acceptable in the presence of family members. So the "leave it alone" is usually unlikely to be the "leave it alone" of the people who'd think, "Unclean! Unclean."

Also, I really, really, really hate this board's attitude towards people of faith. In short, I think it sucks.

My last contribution to the circumcision discussion:

The oldest documentary evidence for circumcision comes from Egypt. Tomb artwork from the Sixth Dynasty (2345 - 2181 BC) shows men with circumcised penises, and one relief from this period shows the rite being performed on a standing adult male. The Egyptian hieroglyph for "penis" depicts either a circumcised or an erect organ. The examination of Egyptian mummies has found both circumcised and uncircumcised men.

That's a story waiting to be written, about the servant whose job is to clean under the foreskin. "Excuse me, Your Majesty, I'm just here to check the cleanliness of your willy, I won't be a moment."

I'm imagining the edited oysters/clams conversation in the bath scene from Spartacus.

Ah. And here we come to the heart of the matter. If the boy has to clean it, it actually interferes with the "Unclean! Unclean!" message that god-fearing parents ought to be instilling.

Cindy, I was about to come back and edit that post to make it clear that I was mocking the attitude in the passage quoted, not anyone here or people on any side of this question. I'm sorry I didn't think to do it in the first place.

I'm recalling a Kid's in the Hall skit where one of the guys pulls his turtle neck sweater up around his face, mourning his loss and giving some kind of statistical data about the loss of sensitivity.

I really wouldn't know, you only get to experience one way or the other. There's no comparative data for the user. I'm fairly certain my parents didn't have a lengthy debate about it. It just wasn't done when and where I was born. My point was, maintenance is not an issue, if you already care about cleanliness. HPV is a sexual practices issue. People are at HPV risk every time they are with someone new.