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.

brenda, I was coming back to admit I'd overreacted. It's all good, and I'm sorry I was a baby about it.

My point was, maintenance is not an issue, if you already care about cleanliness.

Although in my ex-escort friend's experience, the uncut guys who already cared about cleanliness were still less delicious to her than not only the cleanly cut, but the merely averagely hygeinic cut.

She also took into account the difficulty of getting small boys to keep any part of themselves reasonably clean, and the HPV and HIV transmission studies, but she admits that it definitely crossed her mind, when making the decision, that when her son is grown she wants to increase his chances that the women in his life will regard him as a nummy treat.

(eta: She also NEVER EVER wants to hear the details; despite her bawdy past, she's a prude about her baby boy. She wants him to be happy and adored as long as she never knows exactly how.)

brenda, I was coming back to admit I'd overreacted. It's all good, and I'm sorry I was a baby about it.

I can see getting a bit ruffled over it--it's a stereotype that is used a lot and it's easy for a lot of people to make the association between "religious" and "the body's dirty" kinf of folks. It's important to remember that there are plenty of religious parents teaching their children to love and respect their bodies. I know plenty of extremely uptight parents who aren't even religious and can't seem to reconcile themselves to body issues. Since I'm not religious, I don't immediately associate that uptightness with religion. My mother in law still can't say "vagina" and she's not a church goer at all.

JZ, you make a sound argument. Also, I love the use of the word "delicious" as a descriptor.

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

I know it often seems like the group-think is anti-religion, but at least for me I am impressed with people who have not become too cynical to still maintain faith. I do, however, have a huge problem with those who follow an "unexamined" faith and then try to make me do the same. No one on this board falls into that category, to the best of my knowledge.

Anyway, sorry if I've ever said anything that offended you - I respect you quite a bit and wouldn't want to offend you. I've just had a lifetime of poor treatment at the hands of religion.

Not sure I want to keep the circumcision conversation going, but I second what JZ's friend said (although my sample size is smaller than hers). In the interest of gender equality, however, there are quite a few women who need a little stricter cleaning regimen in their privates too.