The first part of your argument is flawed and the second part is terrifically bad science.
So you've got the option of being 99% safe, or you can have a non-consensual surgery on your reproductive organs and be 0.6% more safe from HIV which can already slow the progress of HIV dramatically by anti-retroviral regimens.
Do the math. It's not worth it. If for some reason you do think it's worth it, at the very least it has to be YOUR choice.
There is a reason why the CDC, AMA, Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation, UNAIDS, AAP, and a dozen and a half African health ministries advocate, fund, and/or support circumcision as a viable method for HIV and other disease prevention.
"Parents and guardians should be informed about the medical benefits and risks of neonatal male circumcision. Other considerations, such as religion, societal norms and social customs, hygiene, aesthetic preference, and ethical considerations also influence decisions about male circumcision.
"Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns, the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns."
it's doesn't even have a negative impact on sexual pleasure or function.
I have a penis. I also have retarded ejaculation as a result of bad masturbatory habits. It's called "death grip syndrome" around here, maybe you've heard of it.
Don't believe my personal anecdote? Google "Keratinization" if you want medically supported facts on what happens on the cellular level after exposure of the glans.
I hope you're proud of yourself: http://i.imgur.com/gGRGuy3.png
