Interesting because here is a more recent article that directly contradicts that exact single author “peer-reviewed” article you posted. This is the result of actual peer review.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2014/684706/

In fact:

“Male circumcision has long been considered to have a protective effect against acquisition of various sexually transmitted infections (STIs) [1–5]. This benefit is one of many that have led to recent affirmative evidence-based policy statements by medical bodies in support of the procedure [6, 7]. At the same time there is vigorous opposition to the procedure by fringe groups whose campaigning is based on a diversity of arguments [8]. To date these have been consistently exposed as fallacious (see, e.g., [9] and the references therein).”