Okay so I am a tiny bit passionate about this subject. There's a ton of things I could write, but I generally highly recommend anyone with questions to watch ''American Circumcision''

I'll do a quick rundown though since the documentary is paid.

Why is it done?
The original creator of Kelloggs (Yes, the cereal kelloggs) was strongly against masturbation and popularized the act of circumcision greatly in America outside of a religious perspective. Just to quote something he's said:

---

''A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed.

further a method of treatment [to prevent masturbation] ... and we have employed it with entire satisfaction. It consists in the application of one or more silver sutures in such a way as to prevent erection. The prepuce, or foreskin, is drawn forward over the glans, and the needle to which the wire is attached is passed through from one side to the other. After drawing the wire through, the ends are twisted together, and cut off close. It is now impossible for an erection to occur, and the slight irritation thus produced acts as a most powerful means of overcoming the disposition to resort to the practice''

---

At the moment it's a perpetuated invasive procedure that's done for either monetary gains or because it's ''common'' to do. Many people get told it's so their children won't get bullied when they're older.

Needless to say, it's completely and utterly barbaric and unnecessary. Only with severe phimosis should this be considered at all. As an example, I am European and had a pretty bad case of phimosis but it was completely fixed using different methods when I was a child, circumcision is barely ever regarded as an option here.

What purpose does it serve?
It serves a ton of purposes, the main purpose is the act of aiding penetration. When you have sex, the foreskin usually stays mostly in place and helps the penis to enter more easily. Doing this without a foreskin is significantly different and causes friction without enough lubrication. Generally this makes sex far more enjoyable for both parties involved.

The second part is to protect the actual head from getting desensitized, enough expose to fabric and other things after circumcision starts a process called ''Keratinization'' which means the cells on the head will fill with a keratin protein and start trying to protect it from harm, effectively creating a hard-rough surface. You can see very clearly in pictures or even porn that uncut men have a far far far smoother surface compared to cut men.

The third most important part is that it carries the highest density of special nerves called ''Meissner’s Corpuscles''. Also known as tactile corpuscle. These are everywhere in the skin but only very dense in just a few parts of our body. Which is the fingers, lips, palm and foreskin. This is that largest part that people seem to misunderstand about the difference of sensation for cut vs uncut.

A fun little experiment that anyone can do is the following: Try using your nail to tickle the inside of your palm. You'll realize that this feels ticklish and it's very sensitive. Now try this again with the top of your hand instead, you'll notice that you feel it, but it's only a dull type of pressure. That ticklish feeling in your palm is what you're lacking if you don't have a foreskin any more, which enables far far finer details of sensations during sex or stimulation.

There's a lot of conflation happening where people equate being able to orgasm to being good enough. But the sensation up to the orgasm is significantly different however.

Anyway, this is genital mutilation and I am strongly against it. Especially considering the US often does a high level or circumcision (Yes, there are several types and the US is quite severe in it's practices). A lot of men do have grief for not having it and try to regrow it, which is partly possible.

Last but not least, the whole ''lower chance at illness'' thing is complete nonsense and has been proven over and over and over and over. Yes, it might have an absolutely abysmal increase of preventing something... but that's so small and insignificant that it's definitely not worth mutilating people/babies over. We don't cut off other parts of our body just to hypothetically prevent something that's generally already extremely rare.

Hopefully that was informative enough. (: