No it is not considered more healthy, and being more “aesthetically pleasing” may be the general consensus among religious nuts and other men who were multilated and have trouble dealing with that reality, but it is not based in fact when assessing the topic on a global scale.

If you want to talk about healthy I hear that if you remove the penis entirely you can no longer get an STD. Maybe we should start doing that, since obviously it’s more healthy.

An umbilical cord falls off naturally, it is not meant to stay with your body forever. Your foreskin however is the most sensitive part of your penis and is a permanent part of your body, so your comparison against an umbilical cord is unintelligent.

I’ll still use the opportunity to voice my opinion clearly on this: Yes, forced circumcision on infants is only a very small step above the also still common practice of female genetic mutilations at birth/infancy. It does not matter what reasons you claim, only medical necessity should matter. Society should protect its infants from any religion or tradition demanding body modifications of infants.

Leave people’s bodies alone until they can decide on their own what to do when there is zero proven medical benefit to doing it before without their informed consent.

The common “improved hygiene” argument is nonsensical. You know what improves hygiene? Washing, and teaching kids how to wash themselves.

Otherwise you could cut off ears using the same logic. No ears, no need to wash behind the ears.

We see doctors regularly and are trying to manage the problem without circumcision. You may have had problems when you were a kid too and just don’t remember it, it’s fairly common.

Pediatricians have timelines for these sort of things. And it can get infected under there.

cleanliness?

You ever eat the gunk under your fingernails? I’m guessing not.