The Bizarrely Profitable Business Of Baby Foreskins

“How lovely he appears! his little cheeks / In their pure incarnation, vying with / The rose leaves strewn beneath them.” —Lord Byron

In A Nutshell

There exists a Holy Grail in the cosmetic industry to create a cream that sheds years off your skin. Scientists have discovered such a ingredient, fibroblast cells. Fibroblasts cause the skin to regrow the elasticity and elegance of youth for whoever uses a fibroblast-based cream. What is the best source for these wonder cells? Baby foreskins.

The Whole Bushel

In the movie Fight Club, when Tyler Durden talks about his infamous soap made from human fat, he wasn’t making stuff up. While Tyler Durden is himself a fictional character, human fat soap is real. But making human blubber into soap isn’t where the cosmetic companies stop. No, there is a secret precursor to a lotion that guarantees youthful-looking skin. This Holy Grail for skin creams is one that recreates the smooth, wrinkle-free skin that so many lust after. And 50 percent of the population has what the cosmetic companies need. It’s not fat, but it’s another body part that some of us just want to get rid of right away: the foreskin. That’s right, the tip of the penis that is cut off in religious ceremonies throughout the world is really a fountain of youth, and actually one of the best sources of fibroblasts.

Fibroblasts are what cosmetic companies have been looking for all these years. They are the key to growing new skin and are therefore widely used for skin grafts, pasting skin transplants over sores, and other skin conditions, which makes them great for cosmetic applications. One baby foreskin can be stretched to grow almost $100,000 worth of fibroblasts.

Big names are coming out to get behind these products, including the biggest name of all, Oprah. Oprah famously endorsed one company’s lotion on her show and website as a miracle cream. The company, called SkinMedica, saw soaring profit and this prompted anti-circumcision groups to follow her around and protest her use and promotion of foreskin cream. Granted, SkinMedica’s lotion uses the cells from one original baby foreskin harvested years ago, but just think about it: With Oprah’s plug, millions of women around the world are smearing cream from the foreskin of one guy all over their faces.

SkinMedica isn’t the only company in the game. A company called Vavelta is selling fibroblast injections that help create “skin-firming protein called collagen, which becomes increasingly scarce with age.” Vavelta hopes to supersede the billion-dollar Botox industry by using a needle-based injection system of their own that involves getting 20 million fibroblast foreskin cells under the user’s skin. Even if the source of fibroblasts is a little odd, their competition is injecting toxin that can cause life-threatening botulism and makes its users look perpetually surprised, so take your pick.

Show Me The Proof

A Cut above the Rest?: Wrinkle Treatment Uses Babies’ Foreskins
Is Oprah Supporting the Harvest of Baby Foreskin?
Human Foreskins are Big Business for Cosmetics

  • everynowandthen

    Shit is fucked up.

  • cheeseontoast69

    So genital mutilation is now also big business. Sickening.

    • EdouardM

      Why? It’s not as if they’re harvesting babies solely for the foreskins, that would be sickening. Circumcision is practiced all over the world for many reasons, mostly religious. Their are hundreds of thousands of circumcisions done a year, they can either throw them out or re-purpose them.

      So what if they’re using foreskins? They were going to be cut off anyways, and besides I don’t know many people who’d frame it and hang it up.

      • Douglas Osirus

        It’s sickening because like Cheese said, it’s genital mutilation, and they are using baby foreskins specifically, meaning a baby boy was strapped down and subjected to a lot of pain for this.

        • EdouardM

          Tell me, were you circumcised at birth? If so, do you remember it?

          “Strapped down and subjected to a lot of pain”? Most of these are done in hospitals, that have proper procedures. Besides, how many mothers do you know would let anyone practice, what you pretty much described as medieval torture, on their newborn child?

          What would be genital mutilation would be, for example, how the Xhosa people practice circumcision, in which they wait until right before puberty and then circumcise with a sharp rock. Or the female genital mutilation, that goes on in Africa, mostly in Uganda, all done without anesthestics. There are many more examples of actual genital mutilations in the world.

          But it seems that you find the practice of circumcision sickening, which, whatever the reason may be, is someone’s choice and noone else’s business.

          • Douglas Osirus

            I’m guessing you’ve never seen a circumstraint, and whether you like it or not, circumcising a baby boy is genital mutilation, if an adult wants to do whatever with their genitals then so be it, you bring up choice, but does the baby boy have a choice when it comes to such an unnecessary procedure?


          • EdouardM

            I must not remember it due to the traumatic experience it was. You know, repressed memories of an infant. Glad they did though, or they might have cut it off completely, what with me that would have been “squirming around and crying” as that nurse in your video put it.

            When I say choice, it is the person who it concerns or the person (eg. The parents) who have the closest bond to the person. They are the ones are taking actions for their child, based on what they believe to be better for their child. And if they believe that circumcision is what is better for their child, then they have every right to get their child a circumcision and bitchslap whoever thinks has a say in the way they are bringing up their child.

            So the baby boy doesn’t have a choice. Why would a stranger get a say that would outweigh the parents choice?

            Seriously though, a male can either be circumcised at birth and never remember it, or have it later in life and do. What would be the best? Obviously, the one you don’t remember.

            As for the video, I still yet have to see a problem with male circumcision.

            And I think that if you want to get rid of the “unnecessary” circumcision, due to the fact the baby doesn’t have a choice, there are a host of issues concerning babies and kids that don’t have a choice that are subject to actual life-altering/ending situations that should get resolved, such as child labor, slavery, child armies, just to name a few.

            And, as far as calling it mutilation, this is what Wiki says, :”Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, sometimes causing death.” It does the contrary of degrading appearance, does not affect function, and other than the rare cases, does not cause death.

            This is only valid for male circumcision. Any female circumcision, whatever the reason, is barbaric and disgusting. Unless it’s her choice, in which case, although I don’t understand the motivations, it is not my place to stop her. She does what she wants.

            And the fact that you’ve avoided answering the question about you being circumcised would mean that you aren’t, in which case, you can’t say what the baby feels or remembers. You are just a man who reflects on what it would be like getting his foreskin cut off today, and that makes him squeamish. Let me just remind you that babies are less squeamish than you.

            And if you think that this is sickening, I advise you to not do research what has happened to children around the world through the last couple centuries, whether they were medical procedures or just what they had to endure.

          • coip

            How frustrating that you provide a definition for mutiliation that perfectly describes circumcision only to inexplicably argue the converse. Let’s try this again: “Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, sometimes causing death.” Circumcision leads to the removal of the prepuce, ridged band, and frenulum. All of them, completely gone, leaving a scar (physical injury) and their purpose of protecting the glans (loss of function). Finally, there are many instances where botched circumcisions led to deaths. That is, circumcision perfectly matches the definition of mutilation that you provided.
            As for the rest of your arguments, they’re all equally illogical. Why should parents have the legal right to mutilate their son’s penis? That’s absurd. His penis doesn’t affect them at all. It’s his. Not theirs. We protect baby girls from genital mutilation; why not boys? Double standard. Misandry.
            Your argument that the baby doesn’t remember it is irrelevant (and also inconclusive): the consequences of circumcision are PERMANENT. Whether he remembers being strapped down to a board, tied up, being raped (they induce an erection on him), having his prepuce, which is fused to his glans, ripped off, sliced, and then cutt off, resulting in bleeding and increased risk of infection is beside the point because even if he doesn’t remember it, his penis was still permanently alterered without his consent. That’s wrong.

          • sisi

            I’m sorry but you are wrong in a few aspects. They do not induce an erection on him ( I was present at the circumcision of my youngest grandson). Both grandsons procedure healed in less than a week, they cried very little and my 17 year old grandson doesn’t even remember it. Also there are no scars left, the circumcision on one of the boys was religion related but the other one wasn’t. And I regret not having the circumcision done on my disabled son for reasons that I will not go into right now (besides they are none of your concern).
            You should put your energy into more important issues like children being sexualy abused. Two of my daughters and my son were abused by their own father, my husband for twenty years, and he had the girls so afraid that something would happened to me that it took a lot of years for me to find out and take my kids the hell out of the house. I’m sorry if I sounded harsh in my comment, but people should worry about more important issues with children than circumcision.

          • coip

            If you read medical guideline books about performing infant male circumcision you’ll see that they do induce an erection, either via manual stimulation or via an injection. This is rape in any other context. How you could stand by and watch other people cut your grandson’s penis without his consent is incomprehensible to me. The reason he didn’t cry very much was because his body was in a state of shock. If you think that circumcision does not leave a scar, I don’t know what to tell you other than to go to Bing image search and type “circumcision scar”. You are cutting off flesh. It leaves a scar. I never inquired about your disabled son so there is no need to bring him up and then tell me it’s not my concern. I am putting my energy into an important issue of sexual abuse: circumcision without consent is sexual abuse. It’s the permanent mutilation of a helpless child’s genitals. That’s sexual abuse. You calling this an unimportant issue is evidence of naivete or misandry.

          • Jill Burns

            Was there for hundreds of them. Never saw an erection induced as part of the procedure. In fact that would make it difficult because there wouldn’t be enough skin to pull into the clamp for excision. That’s ludicrous.

          • coip

            Most medical books instructing on how to conduct a routine infant circumcision say the opposite of that: that an erection is preferred because it makes the circumcision easier to do. It is necessary to do so to correctly locate the corona. From a medical book: “Palpating the baby’s penis induces an erection making it easier to locate the corona before circumcision.” This is also known as rape.

          • MKK

            natural penises (intact) still have some slack skin when erect. Circumcised penises have no slack left after erection. You don’t even know what a NATURAL NORMAL human penis looks like. Pity.

          • Esmae

            So true.

          • Lukman Jahja

            Like a sea cucumber

          • John Smith

            Its a lack of empathy, men are utilities, their feelings don’t matter. It screams from the commenters that defend the barbarism.

          • Jill Burns

            Circ is NOT some little cut that you can compare say to trimming a cuticle…it is a big deal, it’s permanent and unnecessary. Foreskin serves a purpose and it’s not YOUR decision to make. Period. Parents are being duped into this because it’s a cash cow for doctors. Some states are legislating to ban it. It’s illegal on girls. Boys deserve the same protection. Research it, you’ll cry as I did (after seeing hundreds of them as an RN) and now knowing it IS a big deal and it’s wrong.

          • PithHelmut

            Well no. We should protect all children. Sometime circumcision is recommended for adults but that doesn’t mean everyone should be circumcised. And just because the wound heals quickly is no reason to inflict this torture on a baby. Would you stick a pin in a baby’s hand? It wouldn’t remember that either but why would anyone torture a baby? I’m sorry about your husband. And yes, sexual abuse is the most important thing we never talk about. Child trafficking is a horror. But our society is sick from the ground up. Since we base everything on money, what else can we expect?

          • Proud2bfromtheUSA

            Genital mutilation is a form of sexual abuse and the fact that women spread the skin on thier faces is vampiric and canabalistic in a way. but what ever helps you sleep at night.

          • MKK

            “You should put your energy into more important issues like children being sexualy abused” YOU DIMWIT, strapping down babies and cutting off parts of their genitals IS sexual abuse.
            You are very gullible, you PAID someone to knife rape the boys in your family (that’s what circumcision is), and you also somehow didn’t know your husband was molesting all your kids. You have no maternal instinct. Gullible women like you who trust men without questioning, to the point of allowing them to touch, cut up, and make money off the genitals of kids unfortunate enough to be born in your family, are a child’s worst nightmare and a pedophile’s and knife rapist (circumciser)’s dream come true. Do you really think someone making $300 for a few minutes of their time is going to TELL you that circumcision is harmful and unnecessary, but it’s paying for their vacation home? Do you really think men are going to TELL you that they find your kids attractive? NO you have to use your intuition and knowledge as a GROWN ADULT to protect your kids from people trying to get in their pants to satisfy their greed or lust. Plus your spelling and grammar are poor. Ignorant, stupid, unethical, yet opinionated and defensive. You’d fit perfectly in some illiterate tribe in Africa cutting up your niece’s genitals with a tin can before you sell her into marriage at 10. And you’d celebrate the occasion.

          • Miracle River

            Well said. Child sex-abusers all of them.

          • Miracle River

            “… like children being sexualy abused”

            Well you are a child sex-abuser, let’s start with you.

          • SlyNine

            The crying does not matter. We know objectively that babies feel the same pain adults do. This is research at the university of oxford. This is an important issue. It leads to 120 boys dying a year, sexual dysfunction in a great many man (including myself) for something that should have been my choice and no one else’.

          • Ismail

            fuck OFF with that you were wrong u piece of shit

          • Jill Burns

            EXACTLY!!! BRAVO!!!

          • Proud2bfromtheUSA

            Excellent points.

          • PithHelmut

            That’s correct. Parents should be the sole source of deciding what a child is to undergo. Otherwise someone else is and that just cannot be allowed to happen. We will just have to suck it up. Like we have to suck it up that fetuses will be terminated if the mother so decides. Those who believe in god give him a pass when he aborts a fetus. Discrimination.

          • SlyNine

            I was circumcised at birth. Fuck you for pushing your religious beliefs on me before I had a choice and now suffer sexual dysfunction because of it.

          • Daniel Gontar

            Is this comment about circumcision you make actually serious?
            You seem to combine psychopathy with stupidity in the most interesting and unbelievable way.

          • EdouardM

            No argument to defend your position other than an insult. Of course you’re right (/sarc). You combine illiteracy with being pathetic in the most boring way, accurately portraying your inferiority complex to those that can use an argument.

            Also, go complete your thesis on Dummet’s philosophy logic and mathematics, you need as much logic as you can.

          • Daniel Gontar

            Should I spend my time arguing with a person that’s obviously clinically insane? I could present a million arguments against that clear double standard you hold against the male sex regarding circumcision, but you would never learn.

            When I look at what you say though I have to ask myself the question, and perhaps you should as well, what is the motive of these comments which you make? I think it’s a waste of time criticizing what you say in a conventional way. What would be the motive which defends psychopathic behavior? And btw, maybe you should study philosophy as you might finally realize you actually have no valid argument.

          • EdouardM

            Once again, no argument but insults. Why did I pick that position? I enjoy debating, even if it doesn’t represent my opinion. Makes one versed in both sides of the issue as you are forced to research. And from what I know it is those that insult without formulating an argument that are mentally unstable; and have also lost the debate. (This is like Rule #3 in debating: When your opponent uses insults, it means they have no arguments to defend their position).

            The only thing I absolutely defend in this is that it’s either the parents’ choice at the child’s birth, or the child’s decision once he gets older to get circumcised. You choose whether or not you want it for your child, yet you have no right to dictate to others their choices.

          • SlyNine

            Okay, I choose my child will only have one arm. Fuck that’s a stupid argument.

          • Daniel Gontar

            you’re mildly retarded

          • EdouardM

            Being retarded is more useful than majoring in philosophy.

          • Daniel Gontar

            In this entry every single point you make is incorrect, every single one. It’s really quite something. I don’t think you’re operating with a full deck.

            Trauma does not have to work at a conscious level in that the trauma can arise from an experience is not conscious, but can still effect detrimentally the conscious mind. Infants can experience trauma which is life lasting. And it is clear to any psychologist that the infant in these circumcision videos is experiencing trauma. That is self-evident and there is no point in debating that.

            Secondly, what a parent believes is best for their child does not necessarily validate their choice. A parent can believe that applying leeches to an infant is good, but this does not mean it is good necessarily.

            Your third point is idiotic, clearly. First of all, inactivists believe that the infant does have a choice and that should be defended and that the parent making the decision is obviously a violation of that. Secondly, the fact that I am a stranger and my opinion may be in disagreement with the parent does not invalidate my opinion. I may be a stranger and say that murdering your child is wrong, and the parent may disagree and believe it is ok. Does the fact that he or she is the parent and that this is “his business” make his belief or practice correct, necessarily? Absolutely not.

            Your next argument insinuates that circumcision is medically necessary and then you claim that for this reason the parent must agree to it. There is no substantial evidence to support this. What they claim is that circumcision lowers the rates of STDs. It may slightly lower the transmission of STDs, but in general the transmission of STDs is minimal if one is careful so this fact holds little water when taking that into consideration.

            The next point about mutilation is incorrect. There is a function of the foreskin and if you knew anything about this subject you would have acknowledged that. It protects the glans and the upper part of the shaft’s skin from dehydration, lesions, and soreness. This is almost universally acknowledged by men who have had their foreskins removed as adults. And it does degrade the penis in terms of appearance as it makes it smaller, making it less impressive and, hence, attractive. Additionally, the sensation of pleasure is reduced as the nerves in the foreskin are lost, another fact which recipients of circumcision as adults can attest to.

            I have already remarked about your point about male vs. female circumcision. There simply is no coherent argument in what you say. It is utterly dogmatic. You are, in effect, saying that the fact that the potential female circumcision recipient is a woman makes her exempt and that the man, simply because he is a man, is not exempt. Pure dogma.

            The next point about the baby’s memory was already addressed. Trauma can have a conscious effect, even if the traumatic experience is not recollected consciously. If you want evidence for this look at psych studies on children and infants who were abused when very young. There is a plethora of information on it.

            And I beg to differ on the last claim which just shows that you haven’t watched circumcision videos, or that you have some delusional psychological disorder. But assuming you do acknowledge the suffering here (as your position seems a little ambivalent) anyone would find it difficult to find other examples such physical suffering in children. Certainly it would not be an example of something regularly practiced, and this is in distinction from circumcision which is a religious and a medical practice which has become accepted in society, at some level. I say at some level because in actuality it is not and will not really ever be accepted in public society. The medical community, and the religious community have been able to perpetrate this psychopathic, even diabolical crime, because they have (1) kept it secret and (2) they are victims of the traditions of Christian Germanic stupidity which essentially views the male as inferior to the female, and that the male’s role is sacrificial in relation to the opposite sex.
            But now circumcision is being exposed to everyone everywhere (thanks to the internet) for what it is, which is a psychopathic crime of the highest order, on the level of abortion, or ritualistic infant or child sacrifice. It should be made illegal as it is a human rights violation. Here law will triumph over medicine and religion.

          • You imply that STD is lower in circumcised than intact men. Empirical evidence denies this: STD is lower in countries where male genital mutilation is almost unknown than in countries which have high rates of mutilation.

            As a man who had his foreskin removed as an adult, after starting to be sexually active, I support all you say about the difference. My organ works well enough, so I understand those circumcised men who don’t understand what they miss, but there is a huge difference and as I get older, I miss that extra sensitivity and pleasure more and more.

            MGM is not as bad as child sacrifice. Being harmed is not as bad as being killed. Being circumcised definitely is harm, clearly the harm is sexual in nature, and so is sexual assault when done on someone who has not given informed consent, such as done on a young child.

            ‘Circumcision’ is an undefined term that simply means ‘having some part of genitals removed or cut’ and includes some horrific practices. To anyone who thinks the practice is fine to perform on those who have NOT given consent, l ask you to imagine some of the activities going on in Africa as a result of the United Nations: being held down by a group of women and having your foreskin removed .. REMOVED, right down your organ and onto your balls. Is this wrong? Why is that wrong if it is not wrong to do to a baby? Would it matter if you were younger? Would it matter if you were under anasthetic and never felt pain? Would it matter if it happened in a fully hygenic environment? Would it really matter if less foreskin was removed? I suspect you think that none of these things really matter.

          • Esmae

            The parents have NO right to decide for the child many are ruined, you’re really dense.

          • EdouardM

            Nice ad hominem there. So if you make a decision for your child that others disagree on, then society should take away your parenting and decide in your stead? Good job on the tolerance for other cultures there.

            I did change my mind, however a parent should always have the right over their children. The State should have none; or we are setting a dangerous precedent (Because a parent wouldn’t agree with the State’s decision, their children would be taken away).

            It’s like that quote: “First they came for the Jews, but I was not Jewish so I didn’t say anything, then they came for the blacks but I was not black so I did not say anything. And then they came for me, but no one was left to speak for me” As much as I disagree with the action of the parent, they are the only ones to have the power of decision over their child until their 18th birthday. No ifs, ands, or buts. Not your child, not your business, and certainly not your decision.

            You say I’m dense, but understand this: You will make NO decision concerning my children; only my wife and I will make those decisions. Back Off. We may be talking about circumcision, but it is a slippery slope, and before you know it, the State will regulate every aspect of child raising. They will no longer be your children, but children of the State (cf. Communist indoctrination of children) If not, then you might as well be a Nazi with their Aryan baby producing centers (Lebensborn) that birthed and educated the children in the way of the State. If I remember well, the Nazi state isn’t one to emulate; and if you

            Now, if you read my latest comments, you’d see that I favor the reduction of circumcision through the education of the parents. It will ween down and disappear over time, while at the same time not giving too much power for the State to oppress us. Knowledge is the only thing that will balance the scales.

            Education of the parents in order to reduce to prevalence of circumcision is the only sensible approach. However, as you state, these are mostly done in a religious setting, and we all know what would happen if you spoke out against those religions today.

          • Jeepers

            Wonder how many support “choice” for surgical procedures of this useless procedure vs. kids having abortions and gender “changes.” Seems the ones arguing to mutilate kids are the same ones who fight parental notification laws?

          • EdouardM

            Read the rest of my comments. I changed my mind going on years now. I’m just leaving the comments up, so that others can see the thought process behind that position, so that it can be stopped.

          • coip

            Yes, I was circumcised at birth and yes, I remember it every time I look down and see my scarred penis and keratinized glans. No one here is arguing against circumcision done by consenting adults to their own bodies; we are arguing against the routine infant circumcision done to babies without their consent. That’s a human rights violation, plain and simple.

          • DarthPoot

            *enhanced look, and hygiene. I wouldn’t even want to play with my own junk let alone subject a nice female to it while un cut. Eww.

          • coip

            If you want your penis to be circumicised that it totally fine: it’s your penis; it’s your choice. And that’s the problem with Routine Infant Circumcision (RIC): the baby doesn’t have a choice over his own genitalia. That’s a human rights violation. Also, your disgust with the natural male body shouts of misandry possibly rooted in psychological trauma caused by forced circumcision. It’s not your fault, but please join the fight in giving humans the right to control what happens to their bodies.

          • DarthPoot

            I’m glad my parents did it for me. Not something I would want to remember.

          • coip

            So you acknowledge that it is a terribly painful, traumatizing experience yet you advocate that it be done to helpless babies without their consent? That’s messed up, man. This is something grown men should choose to do to their own bodies, not have be done to them by others. There is no justifiable reason to amputate part of a baby’s genitalia.

          • Proud2bfromtheUSA

            so you acknowledge that it is a traumatic event that you are happy you do not remember but you are content to let it happen to sbecause you hate the natural male penis.

          • Jill Burns

            Oh you would wish you had that nerve rich skin back!! It should be the choice of the adult male.

          • SlyNine

            You never needed it. I hate that it was done to me. But now I suffer from an entirely unneeded surgery.

          • Jill Burns

            Do you think that “nice female’s” labia are gross? It’s the same tissue!!! It’s not gross it serves a purpose. Research it!!!

          • DarthPoot

            I disagree. But I’m a male.

          • Proud2bfromtheUSA

            well at least you wont reproduce that is a small comfort.

          • Jill Burns

            Not the same situation at all.

          • SlyNine

            Than you’re not paying attention.

          • John Smith

            If it had not been cut, you wouldn’t think that way, it would be just the way it always was, normal.

          • Jill Burns

            Darth…women have the same effect as folds of skin. Do you think womens parts are disgusting? Why would you think intact men are? Bathing for either gender is all that’s needed. Not cutting off beneficial sensual parts.

          • sisi

            The problem with your circumcision is that most probably was done by a doctor without experience. My daughters were very careful to investigate the doctors before making a decision. It is not your parents fault, for some reason we sometimes think that doctors know what they are doing. I learned the hard way not to trust doctors blindly, my son would not be as disabled as he is now.

          • coip

            No, the problem with my circumcision is that it was done without my permission. It should’ve been my choice. Whether my penis has foreskin or not is not a concern for anyone but me: not my parents, not the doctor, not anyone. But they made it about them by making the decision for me, just as many parents still do every day. This unjustness needs to stop. We don’t tolerate it for baby girls; we shouldn’t tolerate it for baby boys. His penis, his choice. I don’t understand how anyone could argue against that logic.

          • Jill Burns

            Perfect! Thank you!!

          • Ross Kelly

            Thanks for your great comments coip. I’m always amazed at how people fail to see the practice of circumcision as anything less than mutilation and an abuse of human rights. As another user has pointed out, if we were routinely chopping off parts of the vagina’s of baby girls there would be outrage.
            I have no issue with circumcision as a choice. But without consent it’s a violent crime. I’m shocked by the origins and the history of circumcision but also how it was practiced and encouraged to avoid “masturbatory insanity”.
            I remember reading how Rabbi’s in Jewish cultures used to bite the skin off. Many young boys died as a result of infections from the Rabbi’s rotting teeth. Utterly disgusting.
            I was circumcised at birth and have suffered much from this barbaric physical abuse. As I grew up I became more aware of what had been done: the most private, sensual and sensitive part of my body had been cut off! And it was done to me without my consent or knowledge. Some of the negative impacts include a horrible scar, tightness of the skin when erect because they cut too much off, karatinisation of the glans which evolution gave us a protective hood to keep moist, loss of sensation and feeling, and the inability to masturbate properly and without pain.
            I’ve managed to restore some of my foreskin, but I will never get back anything close to what was taken away.
            Why is there not a movement in the US gathering a few hundred thousand signatures to force this issue to the ballot? Are there really still so many people that support this abusive practice? I know that its big business now for skin creams, so big Pharma have a vested interest, but it’s hard to believe that it’s still legal to circumcise without consent.

          • SlyNine

            Same here, and I also suffer sexual dysfunction. So thanks to the bigots that don’t give a fuck.

          • Jill Burns


          • John Smith

            The approximately 100 babies per year who die from circumcision would likely argue with you.. if they could. Do you think that your first experience in life should be genital torture? You completely lack empathy for those children and just want to justify your barbaric belief that its somehow acceptable.

          • PithHelmut

            No no no. You think you don’t remember it but everything that happens goes into our sub-conscious. For the baby to see its mother around while she stands there and allows him to be in pain and do nothing, the baby gets it don’t worry. Thoughts will be planted in that impressionable mind that send the message that mother wants to castrate him. This may haunt him the rest of his life. If you punched a baby similar thing. They wouldn’t remember it. Only the trauma of it would linger.

          • AJ Basso

            “If you don’t remember it it doesn’t matter.”

            Right, because if you don’t remember being molested, or raped, it doesn’t matter!

            Woo, cool. Let’s go inform all the rape and child molestation victims that they have nothing to worry about!

          • SlyNine

            It’ doesn’t matter if you remember it. If a woman is passed out drunk and raped does her not remembering it make it not rape?

            I suppose you use the same argument to justify female genital mutilation.

          • EdouardM

            I actually changed my mind on this (male circumcision) months ago. Researched it, but there’s a lack of studies on this matter, mainly blocked by religious groups.

            I still believe that it should be only the decision of the parents though. I think the State forcing this would set a dangerous precedent. I do think that the studies that were stopped from being published should be, so that people can be properly educated. That should phase it out as it worked for vaccines (disregarding the recent anti-vaxxer movement).

            I was always against female genital mutilation and as a matter of fact am quite angry that a “compromise” about FGM has been approved in the US in a show of cultural tolerance. (I don’t want to put the link in case it thinks it’s spam, but google it). FGM and what’s currently happening with it is backwards. Instead of reducing it in the countries where it’s being practiced, we’re compromising and doing it surgically in the West for the sake of being tolerant.

            I don’t like the rape analogy. In no way do I excuse the rapist, but she’s a grown woman, she should be drinking responsibly & moderately; she’s not a helpless 1 week old baby that can’t even feed itself.

          • Ismail

            fuck u piece of shit… I didn’t get any say in my circumcision.. and some sick fuck probably used it or they made it into anti aging skin cream.. or some bullshit,,

          • EdouardM

            Dude, if you read the rest of the conversation, you’ll realize I posted 25 days ago saying I changed my mind on this topic several months ago. I didn’t think I should edit each post saying so.

            I just think it’s better to leave the original comments up for posterity.

          • This concept that harming someone cannot matter if they do not remember the details of it is extraordinary.

            Is it OK to break someone’s nose, so long as they never have a chance to feel the pain?

            Is it OK to rape someone, so long as they are unconcious and don’t remember it?

            Let us stop with this nonsense, please. It doesn’t matter if someone remembers being harmed. If they were harmed, such as having a large proportion of their sexual pleasure permanently reduced, it makes no difference whether they remember it or not. As many an unconcious victim of rape will attest, not even being able to remember what was done to them, let alone having the choice of what was done, can make the trauma even worse for them in some ways.

          • EdouardM

            Your examples are quite puerile and have no relation to the discussion at hand. Having said that, read the rest of my comments. I changed my mind going on years now. I’m
            just leaving the comments up, so that others can see the thought process
            behind that position, so that it can be stopped.

          • There was something deliberately puerile about the first example I gave, the second was definitely mature and serious. Both examples are directly related to the discussion at hand: the issue of whether harming someone matters even if they have no (direct/concious) memory of it.

      • cheeseontoast69

        Why should they be cut off to start with? Religious reasons? Ha, that’s rich. For the religious, why are they correcting ‘god’s work’. If we were meant not to have a foreskin, we would be born without one, and this is true from a evolution point of view as well as to those who subscribe to the ‘grand designer’ idea. It’s child abuse. If a person is at reasoning age and is given the choice of ‘do you want the top end of your dick sliced off or not?’ and agrees, then fair enough, add another one to the pile.

        • EdouardM

          If someone has religious motivations, they are based on faith, and everyone is entitled to believe in whichever religion they choose to or not adhere to one. Faith only means to believe in something, yet having/needing no proof.

          As for “correcting God’s work”, who said God “created” man to be perfect? All that is said that man was created in His image, and then never said anything about evolution. I’m also pretty certain that for the faithful, God dictates the rules. He ordered Abraham to kill his son, and the guy complied.

          As for evolution, it takes a very long time and as nature will show you, it’s not always for the best, it’s a lot of trial and error. As for, if we don’t need it, why would we be born with it, I ask you the same question with appendice/tonsils/wisdom teeth. And that’s just humans, I could also ask about flightless birds.

          • cheeseontoast69

            Appendix and wisdom teeth are probably evolving away. We don’t need them anymore, and they are removed if they become a problem otherwise they are left alone. Foreskins are not evolving away. They are far from useless. If you don’t have one, then you may not know. All people should be given freedom of choice over their own bodies and minds. Whilst I am not religious, my parents are, and now that I have children, I bring them up to have enquiring minds without brainwashing them into any belief or non-belief. If they choose to follow a religion, then that will be their choice, not mine. Babies are not born religious so should not have relgious practices enforced on them when they are defenseless. Freedom of choice.

            Anyway, having said that, yeah, why not make something out of those bits of skin that would be otherwise thrown away. Hope the cosmetic company pay out dividends to those who have contributed!

          • Jill Burns

            Appendix tonsils and wisdom teeth all have a purpose. You can’t compare them to foreskin tho which ALSO has a purpose. Research it. Please.

      • Rene Clarke

        so is female circumcision, but preforming one in most western nations is a felony

      • PithHelmut

        But companies want to hang us for copying a song. Corporations have a total lack of respect for humanity. Sure it’s going to be thrown away but the hospital should at least tell the patient that their foreskin is going to be used for commercial purposes. They’re always trying to hoodwink or scam the public. They take our data and now our foreskins!

      • Robert Kohler

        Its cutting off a part of a mans anatomy that doesn’t grow back against his will.

      • Kwang Pak

        Ok I bet since this was 2 years ago, you didn’t know what Planned Parenthood does to babies body parts after they murder them.

        • EdouardM

          Nope, I had no idea about Planned Parenthood. I find what that organization has done to be despicable. (But it’s different than the issue of circumsision)

          I couldn’t care less about the abortions, since I’m not the pregnant one (nor the impregnator), my opinion doesn’t/shouldn’t matter. However, pushing people towards an abortion because you’re going to make a profit off the aborted baby is just wrong, but goes perfectly well with the Hypocritic Oath.

          What I can’t believe about this story is that people are defending them,
          saying that asking for money was to cover shipping charges, without even mentionning
          the fact that she asks “What are you used to paying?”. If it was just
          to cover shiping charges, that question would never have been asked, as
          shipping prices would be a fixed cost. And even so, anyone who has ever
          done any business whatsoever would know that shipping costs would not be paid
          out-of -pocket by the seller.

      • PithHelmut

        But once money is being made on the tissue, payment to the provider of the raw material must surely be given. That is only decent. However money doesn’t work. It absolves users of any need for decency. This is a big subject, the theory of money, but I urge everyone to look into it.

        The rights of corporations are conferred to them by people. People have rights, corporations have privileges. Notice this has turned completely opposite? Corporations can have offshore accounts and nothing is done about it but a pee-on is harassed for all they are worth for avoiding taxes. The taxpayer funds research but if taxpayers develop new technologies, (such as the internet) no royalties are due to the them. If a corporation had invented and developed the internet, we would be paying royalties to them but we taxpayers only pay, we never receive. And to add insult, we silly old taxpayers feel gratified that we are getting the internet for free and feel we have to tolerate being advertised to incessantly. And it seems that our own ilk defend the right of corporations to do whatever they will to us, so blinded by a one-way view of money that we are. True, we have been trained to think like this – the media spends gazillions on molding public opinion.

        Of one thing we can be sure – we are being used as livestock by government and corporations but it is done without it being blatant so that people can be fooled. Why are they fooling us you might ask? Well to take our money, silly! We wouldn’t be giving it over so easily if we realized we’re being scammed!

        There are only two types of people – the masses and the elite. Though we may dream of getting into Club Elite, that rarely if ever happens. Better for us to err on the side of not giving corporations (and government) a pass. Know that in everything they do, it is to further themselves even at the expense of the likes of you and me. We are nothing. They take our foreskins without permission, who knows what else they would take!

      • Esmae

        Yea right, here’s an idea don’t mutilate babies the foreskin is meant to be there
        and not cut off for any reason, religious or otherwise. It was done initially to separate Jews from Greeks that is not religious. But if your cut what do you know you can’t miss when you haven’t a clue.

        • EdouardM

          Read my other comments. I changed my mind about this months ago. I didn’t delete the comments for posterity (so that others can follow the convo)

      • Rev. Analbumcover

        The problem is that it gives a financial incentive for poor parents and unscrupulous doctors to opt for circumcision when they otherwise might not have. This is unethical because there’s always a chance of infection and other complications with any surgery, and performing cosmetic surgery on an infant with no defect is highly questionable at best.

    • Helena_Handbasket

      Not now.. for a VERY LONG TIME. This is the REAL reason why this is the only country where it’s the norm for people to get circumcised even when there is no religious motivation. It’s medical excuses were disproven decades ago.

    • Esmae

      Always has been

  • Exiled Phoenix

    I don’t know what to say, that’s about as odd as when I heard women that use creams made from jizz. The price of beauty may be high, but someone somewhere will pay.

  • aussieshepherd

    Did you hear about the surgeon that didn’t charge for circumcisions? He just took tips! :-))

  • efewewrerggeg



    HEIL HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • shayshay

    If I had a son I would deff.get him circumcised because as a teenager I want him to get his share of

    • DarthPoot

      Great choice.

  • albinoseamonkey

    “Vavelta” is just way too close to “velveta” for me to take it seriously.

  • Mike

    I would like to thank the racist feces eater for making the world a better place, and I quote:

    I would like to inlighten some of you rednecks – I actually disagree with circumcision, but the Jewish law dictates that the foreskin be buried in the ground asap. so sorry for all you haters.

    • coip

      There are many religions that have unethical traditions that are no longer tolerated (female circumcision in Africa and Indonesia, forced sexual servitude, etc.). Religions should be able to practice their beliefs freely, EXCEPT when doing so violates the rights of babies, who are unable to give consent.

  • Mohammed Ahmed M Muniser-saleh

    poor boy, to bad he a boy or else this would be a bigger deal

  • Medusa00

    To those who attempt to equate circumcision with female genital mutilation, the two are most certainly NOT equivalent. Even if FGM were performed in a sterile environment, using appropriate standards of care, the intended result is to eliminate sexual function. Circumcision is certainly NOT performed for that purpose!

    • mwahahahaha

      It doesn’t matter if the purpose of the act is different, they are both forms of mutilation. Maybe you need to look up the word mutilation, “Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body”. Last I checked foreskin serves numerous functions and it’s removal degrades both the appearance and function of a man’s penis. So technically by definition circumcision does fall under mutilation. (unless of course it is done for medical reasons in extreme cases to prevent harm or suffering to the individual)

  • Medusa00

    When our first son was born, I left the decision up to my husband. Without hesitation, he opted for circumcision, because as a man, he wanted his son’s penis to look “normal,” like his. I was happy with his choice, for the same reason, but also concerns of cleanliness.

    I have also assisted in surgery to loosen a foreskin which could not be retracted on a toddler left intact. It had begun to tighten and was causing pain and infection. Rather than a short, briefly painful event in infancy, this boy required general anesthesia, an overnight hospital stay, and prescription pain medications. Much higher risk for complications there. In addition, men who decide as adults to have themselves circumcised face greater pain and longer recovery time than those who were circumcised as infants. My source for this is the urologist who performed the toddler’s foreskin removal.

    For those families who choose to circumcise their sons, for religious, cosmetic, or other reasons, I see minimal risk to the child.

    I find it absolutely amazing that these little bits of skin could grow new skin for burn victims, etc. And hey…I could use a face cream that really works!

    To those who attempt to equate circumcision with female genital mutilation, the two are most certainly NOT equivalent. Even if FGM were performed in a sterile environment, using appropriate standards of care, the intended result is to eliminate sexual function. Circumcision is certainly NOT performed for that purpose!

    Those parents who choose not to circumcise their sons have every right to make that choice. Just realize that should your son desire later to have himself circumcised, the risks for scarring, altered sensation and/or function, infection, and even death are much greater for him.

    • Robert Bruce

      “To those who attempt to equate circumcision with female genital mutilation, the two are most certainly NOT equivalent. Even if FGM were performed in a sterile environment, using appropriate standards of care, the intended result is to eliminate sexual function. Circumcision is certainly NOT performed for that purpose!”

      Nope. Its exactly the same. There is zero reason to circumcise a baby and its the same as female mutilation. It does nothing by rob the child of thousands of pleasure seeking nerves and deadening the nerves of the penis head.

      “I find it absolutely amazing that these little bits of skin could grow new skin for burn victims, etc. And hey…I could use a face cream that really works!”

      Disgusting attitude to mutilation of young males. They can do the same with baby females skin. what if they just remove the labia? That’s what some cultures do.

      “For those families who choose to circumcise their sons, for religious, cosmetic, or other reasons, I see minimal risk to the child.”

      100 babies die every year. many more are scarred and their privates are ruined. The skin is scarred.

      “Much higher risk for complications there. In addition, men who decide as adults to have themselves circumcised face greater pain and longer recovery time than those who were circumcised as infants. My source for this is the urologist who performed the toddler’s foreskin removal.”

      VS having a botched circumcision that permanently ruins a babies penis?

      Who also turned around and profited from the foreskin. real nice guy. Most doctors now advise against it. Your toddlers dick is not normal. Most people in the world do not mutilate their sons penis. All you did was scar their penis, and ensure your son will never feel the same pleasure of sex a normal penis would.

      or is it that the foreskin would be uselessto the doctors who make billions selling them without compensating the family nor child? Hilarious, you get charged to mutilate your son and the foreskin is turned around and sold.

      I love how you justify mutilating your son and not comparing it to FGM because in your words it “intended result is to eliminate sexual function.”

      it does the same to a man. Vastly higher rates of sexual dysfunction. removes 20k pleasure nerve endings in the foreskin itself, and deadens the nerves of the penis head. Which only means your son will never enjoy sex as nature intended. A normal penis head is so sensitive, if you pulled the foreskin back and let the penis head rub against fabric (like a mutilated penis does) it would be painful. That’s how sensitive the penis head is supposed to be.

      Most of the world doesn’t mutilate their boys. So your sons penis is not normal, its mutilated. Its hard to recognize as a parent you made such a massive mistake being ignorant. Like this article says, its big business. That’s why all those dis-proven studies are made talking about the non-existent benefits of MGM. Billions of dollars. Luckily, more and more doctors are against this barbaric practice.

      bottom line is this. The penis though evolution has a natural protective covering for the penis head. The foreskin itself is one of the most sensitive parts. The penis head is kept sensitive by this protection. removing it robs the child of sexual pleasure he will experience later in life. Many mutilated dicks have a problem staying erect in a women without massive amounts of stimulation, and with a condom… Some men cannot function with a condom. This get worse with age. normal dicks don’t suffer the same ED rates as mutilated dicks.

      The practice is dying and thank God for it. The only hurdle in the sheep who want their children to be “normal.” Most of the world they are mutilated, unless you like Africa, middle east.

      • Medusa00

        I love how you choose an insulting and derisive tone to make your point. Since I’m obviously a moron, I won’t waste your precious time with a response.

        • Daniel Gontar

          Yes, but you are a moron and you should be treated in the most derisive way possible.

    • Doug Lefelhocz

      “To those who attempt to equate circumcision with female genital
      mutilation, the two are most certainly NOT equivalent. Even if FGM were
      performed in a sterile environment, using appropriate standards of care,
      the intended result is to eliminate sexual function. Circumcision is
      certainly NOT performed for that purpose!”

      FGM doesn’t come as intended to eliminate sexual function in women. Women in those cultures still enjoy sex and have babies.

      Also, circumcision does have the purpose of reducing sexual functions. Maimonides, and John Harvey Kellogg have both made statements to this effect.

  • Brandi Helveston

    Probably a bunch of bullshit made up by a bunch of crunchy moms who have nothing better to do but try to change other moms opinions because they have nothing better to do with their time.

  • mindy

    I can only imagine what would happen if cells from the clitoral hood of a genitally mutilated baby girl from Africa were used in skin creams, feminist lunatics would be so outraged there would be riots in the streets. I guess male genital mutilation is okay if the end result is a few less wrinkles for the elite gender.

  • Robert Kohler

    So we’re slicing off part of a man’s body that can’t grow back or be put back, without his consent, often without anesthesia, and selling it to cosmetic companies.
    Why America?

    This is genital mutilation, plain and simple.

  • 1Forced_Registration

    Not only is male genital mutilation big business; you now know why doctors push so hard to get it done to your kid. If everything goes right,he gets a lifetime of reduced sensation. If something goes wrong he gets everything from the head of his penis partially or completely removed, the loss of his entire penis, to potentially the loss of his life.

  • V Tight Gel is a natural vaginal tightening cream. It will tighten your vagina within minutes.

  • AntiMisandry

    Just as an observation, if this had been about baby girls’ privates being hacked up for profit – you’d have had their sex/gender in the headline. But as it’s only baby boys… well, we’ll just ignore the sex of the mutilated for profit babies.

  • CJ Gatley

    I can’t believe ppl will say “fight against child sex abuse” and defend circumcision all on the same post….*head desk*. Did you know there are MANY MANY men who *do* complain, who wish *theyd* had the choice? That 116+ baby boys die from it for no med benefit whatsoever? (Those are myths you’re thinking of, 80% of the intact world proves it)
    If a MAN wants to get circumcised, fine, but there’s no need to do it to babies without pain relief. How can it NOT be torture? They are basically ripping fingernails off (separating the glans from the fused foreskin), crushing and cutting 20,000 nerve endings, and removing them. Leaving a bloody, injured sex organ in a pee filled and feces filled diaper for a week of healing.
    What’s ok about that? Other first world countries think we’re barbarians!

  • genital mutilation = big business ???

  • muteprophet 87

    I was circumcised, I don’t believe my parents did it for any religious reasons because we were never a religious family. I think they reasoned it was “easier to keep clean”, in the long run knowing how much was made off my foreskin I would think it would be reasonable that they comped the entire cost of my delivery.