Circumcision is not Norse
Circumcision is originally an Abrahamic ritual, common among Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths (to this day, DAESH/ISIS forcibly circumcises adult males as a policy). The practice does not have any connection with Norse culture. In the Anglophone world, circumcision became a standard in the 19th century as a deterrent to masturbation. In itself, an expression of extreme Christian sexual repression.
Science also overwhelmingly rejects circumcision.
Circumcision has no significant health benefits. The risk of Urinary Tract Infection in circumcised men is 1.27%. It is only 1.29% on intact males. A great contrast to the female risk standing at 9.22% (Harper M. and Fowlis G., 2007, Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Men. Trends in Urology, Gynecology, and Sexual Health, 12, 30-35). As a matter of fact, the prepuce is naturally equipped with several defenses against infection (Prakash S, Raghuram R, Venkatesan, et al. Sub-preputial wetness - Its nature. Ann Nat Med Sci (India) 1982; 18(3): 109-112. Fleiss PM, Hodges FM, Van Howe RS. Immunological functions of the human prepuce. Sex Transm Inf 1998;74:364-7. Cold CJ, Taylor JR. The prepuce. BJU International 1999; 83, Suppl. 1: 34-44).
The process is exceptionally painful. Even the best commonly available method of pain relief studied, the dorsal penile nerve block, does not block all the babies' pain (Lander, J. et al., Comparison of Ring Block, Dorsal Penile Nerve Block, and Topical Anesthesia for Neonatal Circumcision, JAMA 278 (1997): 2157-2162). Most newborns do not receive adequate anesthesia anyway (Stang, H. et al., Circumcision Practice Patterns in the United States, Pediatrics Vol. 101 No. 6 (1998): e5). The procedure can lead to various complications: Meatal stenosis (narrowing of the urethra which can interfere with urination and require surgery to fix), adhesions (where the foreskin remnants try to heal to the head of the penis in an area they are not supposed to grow on), buried penis (too much skin is removed, and so the penis is forced inside the body), and infection.
Circumcision leads to circumcised baby boys exhibiting symptoms of PTSD while undergoing routine vaccinations at 6 months of age, compared to uncircumcised boys who had much smaller pain and stress responses (Effect of neonatal circumcision on pain response During subsequent routine vaccination, Anna Taddio, Joel Katz, A Lane Ilersich, Gideon Koren, The Lancet, Volume 349, Number 9052: Pages 599-603, March 1, 1997). Psychoanalysis of grown men who experience PTSD 50 and 60 years after their circumcisions has also been duly documented (Neonatal Circumcision Reconsidered, John Rhinehart, Transactional Analysis Journal, Volume 29, Number 3, Pages 215-221, July 1999).
The prepuce is also profusely innervated especially near the tip in the ridged band area where the mucocutaneous boundary occurs. This junction is actually the most sensitive and erogenous part of the penis (Winkelmann RK. The cutaneous innervation of human newborn prepuce. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 1956 26(1) : 53-67. Winkelmann RK. The erogenous zones: Their nerve supply and significance. Proc Staff Mayo Clin 1959; 34(2): 39-47. Moldwin RM, Valderrama E. Immunochemical analysis of nerve distribution patterns within prepucial tissue. J Urol 1989;141(4) Part 2:499A. Milos M, Macris D. Circumcision: Effects upon human sexuality. Encyclopedia of Human Sexuality (New York: Garland Pub., 1994), p. 119-122. Warren JP, Bigelow J. The case against circumcision. British Journal of Sexual Medicine, Sept/Oct 1994. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: Specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. British Journal of Urology 1996; 77: 291-295. Fleiss PM, Hodges FM, Van Howe RS. Immunological functions of the human prepuce. Sex Transm Inf 1998;74:364-7. Cold CJ, Taylor JR. The prepuce. BJU International 1999; 83, Suppl. 1: 34-44). This means that circumcision greatly reduces sensations during sexual intercourse (let’s not forget circumcision in America was introduced to eliminate sexual gratification).
Circumcision is not more hygienic either. Actually, a female produces far more smegma than a male, intact or not. It would also take many days, or even weeks, for smegma to collect in an uncircumcised male to the point of visibility. Something that would be a non-issue even with only one or two weekly showers (decreasing showers below that frequency would lead to a wide arrays of other issues anyway). We should also remember that smegma is not a waste, and it has antibacterial properties that protect the genitals from infection.