Experts have been unable to understand the origin of the practice of routine male circumcision. Most of the literature shows no awareness of phimosis - its frequency - or the sexual and erectile problems which can be cured by circumcision. If routine circumcision had been introduced for this most obvious reason of eliminating difficult foreskins; then the importance of an alternative modern method, suitable to our culture's attitudes in this day and age, would be clear.

updates and supporting education on new site : Phimosis.cloud

THE CHINESE CONNECTION

"the operation may be said to be almost worldwide, with the exception of Europe and non-Semitic Asia." (54).

Why the ancient Chinese civilisation and Doctors had not recorded anything about circumcision? Their traditional literature on sexual health is far more thorough than much modern literature.

Oriental men have shorter foreskins (25) The Chinese have "obviously been equipped with a relatively short foreskin, as a result, the naked head often peeps out, even when the penis is flaccid" (55).

If the Chinese are already equivalent to being half circumcised, this would mean that they experienced less individual necessity for the operation. If circumcision was only rarely necessary in China, there would be little point introducing it as a routine practice.

In fact, whatever the origins for routine circumcision, if the Chinese are already equivalent to being half circumcised, there would be considerably less reason for them to adopt the practice.

This opens up a new question.

Routine circumcision dates from probably around 40,000 years ago. To those cultures who performed circumcision, cutting the human body was an available concept, and a socially acceptable thing to do.

Traditional Chinese Medicine has it's roots around 6,000 years ago and T.C.M. has never developed surgery as a medical possibility.

Is the reason that Chinese Medicine never developed surgery as a form of treatment, because the Chinese as a race didn't have any routine operation, which became an understood and accepted part of their cultural practice?

These genital conditions are present on many mammals and thus they predate any human culture.
To what extent have cultures and their practices been influenced by this frequent occurrance? (see here for anthropological relevant statistics)