PDA

View Full Version : Male Circumcision



Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 12:44 PM
For-against-info-alternates....

Personally, I wonder why anyone would ever ever ever ever ever (x 1million) do this to their child. Or choose to have the procedure done when they are an adult.

I honestly can't even get behind doing it for religious reasons, but that's me.

MysticWicks opinions..... GO!

Pandy Fackler
May 16th, 2006, 12:50 PM
I say yes. It's just easier to keep clean.

Starlight*Rains
May 16th, 2006, 12:55 PM
I wanted to circumsise my son but daddy would not go for it! He absolutely refused! I believe it is much cleaner than not doing so.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 12:56 PM
I say yes. It's just easier to keep clean.
I think the hygenic benefits of circumcision have been widely disputed.

I would still say yes, however, as circumcision has become more socially acceptable.

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Get it done when your an adult! NOOOOOO way! I get nervous when someone drops a knife on the group b/c its too close to that region of my anatomy!! LOL


But seriously, I would have it done if I had a baby for health reasons. Even if, a guy bathes regularly, stuff can still build up there and you do NOT want something to build up there if you're a guy or anything to go wrong there, ESPECIALLY THERE! When somebody tells me they are getting cathaterized (sp?) I squirm. So anything that can prevent something from going wrong down there is much appreciated.

I was always curious about the Jewish religion's reasons for doing this, as to whether it was done for health reasons and became part of the faith or some unknown (to me) religious reasons.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 12:59 PM
I was always curious about the Jewish religion's reasons for doing this, as to whether it was done for health reasons and became part of the faith or some unknown (to me) religious reasons.
Religious reasons. It's in the Torah (Genesis). In context, it is very similar to a baptism.

phoenixblayze
May 16th, 2006, 01:08 PM
i said yes, we circumsized our son for a few reasons
-its easier to keep clean, and cuts down on infection
-is such a common thing, that i didnt want him to become insecure because he looks different later in life

Pagan Mantis
May 16th, 2006, 01:08 PM
I would have to say yes. Granted, it's extremely sensitive, though, to be completely honest, how many of us truly remember the pain? Hygenic reasons apply, as stated previously. Not to mention, in this day and age, there's some pretty ignorant chicks that say they wouldn't go near something like that. Just my opinion, but it may save some embarassment in future situations. That's still kind of a dumb reason to base anything off of, but true nonetheless.

Broken Babydoll
May 16th, 2006, 01:09 PM
Religious reasons. It's in the Torah (Genesis). In context, it is very similar to a baptism.
Yes, it's for Religious Reasons, but many of their traditions like kosher food and circumcission came from the sanitation and health benefits of the time. It was healthier back then. With advances some of their "rules" are no longer necessary, but are now followed because of blind following.

ETA: Oh and my answer is undecided, although if we have a boy my husband wants him to be circumcised, so I'll probably end up going with that.

Iris
May 16th, 2006, 01:11 PM
I've recently learned that this is a weirdly culture-specific thing. I'm British, and here in Britain it's relatively rare for a man to be circumcised...yet apparently it's very common in the states. Odd...

Personally I would not have this done to my child. In my opinion, it's not up to me to remove a part of someone else's body. If my child chooses to get circumcised later in life, that's his choice; I don't have the right to make that choice for him.

TWILIGHTSKY
May 16th, 2006, 01:13 PM
I had both of my sons circumcised, though I felt terrible for having caused them so much pain. After a couple of weeks they had both healed almost completely, although the head was a little sensitive for about a month or so afterwords. And now they are perfectly fine.

I work in a hospital, and have seen instances where the foreskin was pulled back and not pulled back down again- the head swells painfully and it's difficult to put back into place. I've seen infections because it wasn't cleaned properly- pull up the foreskin, then wash and dry, then pull the foreskin back down- VERY sore for the patient! NOTE: You should NEVER try to lift the foreskin on a baby or young child, it will loosen around two or three years of age, and to do so beforehand could result in a tear or an infection, and it will be fine until then.

That said, I have also seen many uncircumcised penises that are just fine, with no problems, it's just important to clean properly.

I guess both the reasons I listed above, and my own cultural and cosmetic feelings played a roll in my choice to have them circumcised.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 01:15 PM
Yes, it's for Religious Reasons, but many of their traditions like kosher food and circumcission came from the sanitation and health benefits of the time. It was healthier back then. With advances some of their "rules" are no longer necessary, but are now followed because of blind following.
Well that's certainly a prudent observation, but then you start drifting into the gray area of theological perception.

If you were to ask a Jew about the meaning of a bris, they would say it's to symbolize a covenant with God. That's what I was addressing. If there is some other reason the tradition began, it is not my place to say. :)

Marcasite
May 16th, 2006, 01:15 PM
I wouldn't circumsize my son if I had one. My SO isn't circ'd and a daily bath keeps things clean enough there. As for the social reasons, where I live I've heard it's about 50/50 so there wouldn't be a cause to worry about locker room woes. I don't see anything wrong with a parent doing it, and I would never interfere with a parent's decision to do what he/she thinks is best for their child, but personally I see it as unneccesary.
There's also a thread about this in health& beauty and family and parenting

LostSheep
May 16th, 2006, 01:15 PM
I've recently learned that this is a weirdly culture-specific thing. I'm British, and here in Britain it's relatively rare for a man to be circumcised...yet apparently it's very common in the states. Odd...

I found that out the other day too. You learn something every day don't you. _inabox_

phoenixblayze
May 16th, 2006, 01:24 PM
yeah, in the states almost everyone in circumsized from my understanding......so here if your not, i could see feeling weird once you get older.......

instinct
May 16th, 2006, 01:29 PM
I've recently learned that this is a weirdly culture-specific thing. I'm British, and here in Britain it's relatively rare for a man to be circumcised...yet apparently it's very common in the states. Odd...

Personally I would not have this done to my child. In my opinion, it's not up to me to remove a part of someone else's body. If my child chooses to get circumcised later in life, that's his choice; I don't have the right to make that choice for him.
I'm with Iris on all of the above.

The majority of men in New Zealand aren't circumcised either, and they do just fine.
I grew up in South Africa, and the majority of men (including my father and brother) are circumcised. So yes.. it seems very culture specific.

As far as I'm concerned the sanitation argument went out the window when soap and proper washing was invented. The foreskin also protects the tip of the penis from various things that desensitize it.. like fabric burn. So sex is apparently more pleasurable for the uncircumsized (I say apparently because I am not a man).

Every one of my sexual partners has been uncircumsized, except for my husband.. Incidently, he wants to have our son (when we have one) circumsized, and I don't. This should make for an interesting argument some day.

what a terrible thing to do to a baby

mtpathy
May 16th, 2006, 01:42 PM
alright ladies,how hard of a time have you had trying to get your husband
or boyfriend to clean under the toaster or microwave when you make him do
the dishes?
circumcision,womans way of making us clean under the toaster.
*not really,but it made me laugh*
:abanana:

Zoritsa_Nepenthe
May 16th, 2006, 01:42 PM
Neither of my son's are,and it started as my husband not wanting them to go through anything like that at such a young age.I researched it and since it wasn't all that big of a deal to keep clean,I decided against having it done.Neither have had any problems with infection or otherwise(locker room.Heck looking at another guy's penis will get you *other* problems then being picked on for looking differently in my sons school),so it hasn't been a big issue.

Sitalique
May 16th, 2006, 01:44 PM
I had my son circumcised mainly because it is easier to clean.

And if it is done withing a day or two after they're born (as was the case with my son) the boy doesn't even realize anything happened. Or at least I couldn't tell he thought anything was wrong :)

TWILIGHTSKY
May 16th, 2006, 01:46 PM
alright ladies,how hard of a time have you had trying to get your husband
or boyfriend to clean under the toaster or microwave when you make him do
the dishes?
circumcision,womans way of making us clean under the toaster.
*not really,but it made me laugh*
:abanana:


:rotfl: LOL

Karyan
May 16th, 2006, 01:51 PM
I'd have to say most definitely YES. In such a sexual generation circumcision is another means of safe sex. There a lot of studies that show that men who are uncirumcised are much more likely to contract certain STDs. Especially HIV.

"Circumcision reduces the rate of HIV infections among heterosexual men by around 60%."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4371384.stm

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/320/7249/1592

BeltaneSong
May 16th, 2006, 01:51 PM
First, let me start this by saying than I'm a male, and I'm NOT circumcised.

Circumcision is HORRIBLE, and WRONG. It is with out any doubt GENITAL MUTILATION.

I've hear many arguments for and against this heinous crime, and please allow me to debunk them here.

1)A Circumcised penis is easier to keep clean/healthier.
There is no conclusive evidence for either side, which tells us that it in fact, makes no difference. As far as being easier to clean a circumcised penis, how hard do you people think it is to pull a bit of forskin back??? If you can clean it at all, you can clean it with foreskin. I'm sure a vagina is much easier to clean without the pesky Labia getting in the way.

2)If you have a foreskin you're more likely to get an STD.
Again, there have been studies on both sides by respectable medical organizations, and the results cancel eachother out. If you want to prevent STD's, practice safe sex and teach your children to do so. Basic parenting.

3)It looks funny.
I'm sorry, what? People are willing to mutilate their child's (or their boyfriend/husband's) penis bacause it looks funny? If you really feel that looks are so important, don't have children, or sex for that matter. (Sex looks pretty damn stupid if you think about it)

Now, here are some things you probably just don't know about the POSITIVE aspects of having a NATURAL UNCIRCUMCISED penis. (NATURAL- Present in or produced by nature.)

There are thousands of nerve endings in the foreskin of the penis. These not only increase pleasure of the male (this is a good thing), but it also increases the width of the penis (also a good thing) and the "wrinkles" of the foreskin act as a "ribbed for her pleasure" condom (which was MODLED after the foreskin) and therefore GIVES WOMEN MORE PLEASURE as well (a VERY good thing).

The idea of circumcision as being a good thing comes from two places. The first is the bible. God said Abraham should cut off his foreskin to make a pact with god. Abraham was Jewish. When and why did the Christian church adopt this practice? Your guess is as good as mine.

The second comes from victorian times. People noticed that the foreskin was particularly sensitive and kept the head of the penis sensitive as well. In hopes of preventing little boys from the "evil of masturbation" they thought that cutting off the foreskin and decreasing the pleasurable sensation would discourage it. Yeah, that worked out well, didn't it?

So, in conclusion, please, DO NOT CIRCUMCISE YOUR CHILD OR HUSBAND. It really should be a crime, and you're robbing them of a lifetime of greater sexual pleasure for them AND their partners. Thank you

Ceres
May 16th, 2006, 01:52 PM
yeah, in the states almost everyone in circumsized from my understanding......so here if your not, i could see feeling weird once you get older.......

It depends where you are. Overall, its about 50/50 in baby boys being born now. In some areas of the country, its more common to circ, in other areas, more common not to circ.

As far as hygeine goes, its not rocket science; just soap and water. A regular soak in the tub with a swipe will keep it clean. Dont forget, women have a similar foreskin over their clitoris and I dont see guys shrinking from fear of anything being under it, nor women getting all freaked out about how to keep it clean.

Trying to overclean under the foreskin, or pull it back on a young child to clean causes the problems. Also, circumcision isnt without risk.

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 01:57 PM
I'm with Iris on all of the above.

The foreskin also protects the tip of the penis from various things that desensitize it.. like fabric burn. So sex is apparently more pleasurable for the uncircumsized (I say apparently because I am not a man).

what a terrible thing to do to a baby


Ok, I'm being serious here so dont take as a joke. Typically the "more" sensative it is the more likely he is to climax early, making for some very short sexual encounters. I can tell u, as a guy, that lasting for five minutes is NOT a good thing. As men become more experienced they are in a sense desensitizing themselves in order to last longer in bed. Pleasure is control inside the brain, all the penis does is basically say, "I'm ready", and the pleasure centers are kicked into overdrive. So I don't think the sexual aspect should be a consideration or a determining factor.

As for it being a terrible thing to do to a baby, how many remember what life was like when they were first born, I don't, no one I know of does. Which then leads to the question, would you have your child vaccinated against smallpox,etc. when they are babies as most often do (and I don't think this is a regional decision)? Getting vaccinated is a preventative measure also, there is no guarantee that your child would get those diseases, but isn't it better to be safe than sorry? A little inconvenience now, to prevent something horrible later?

Anyway, I just wanted to address those two issues.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 02:01 PM
First, let me start this by saying than I'm a male, and I'm NOT circumcised.

Circumcision is HORRIBLE, and WRONG. It is with out any doubt GENITAL MUTILATION.
I'm sure the 14 year old sub-saharan girl who was infibulated with a piece of glass and is now slowly dieing due to infection would take issue with your comparison.

Sothis*Crowfeather
May 16th, 2006, 02:14 PM
First, let me start this by saying than I'm a male, and I'm NOT circumcised.

Circumcision is HORRIBLE, and WRONG. It is with out any doubt GENITAL MUTILATION.

I've hear many arguments for and against this heinous crime, and please allow me to debunk them here.

1)A Circumcised penis is easier to keep clean/healthier.
There is no conclusive evidence for either side, which tells us that it in fact, makes no difference. As far as being easier to clean a circumcised penis, how hard do you people think it is to pull a bit of forskin back??? If you can clean it at all, you can clean it with foreskin. I'm sure a vagina is much easier to clean without the pesky Labia getting in the way.

2)If you have a foreskin you're more likely to get an STD.
Again, there have been studies on both sides by respectable medical organizations, and the results cancel eachother out. If you want to prevent STD's, practice safe sex and teach your children to do so. Basic parenting.

3)It looks funny.
I'm sorry, what? People are willing to mutilate their child's (or their boyfriend/husband's) penis bacause it looks funny? If you really feel that looks are so important, don't have children, or sex for that matter. (Sex looks pretty damn stupid if you think about it)

Now, here are some things you probably just don't know about the POSITIVE aspects of having a NATURAL UNCIRCUMCISED penis. (NATURAL- Present in or produced by nature.)

There are thousands of nerve endings in the foreskin of the penis. These not only increase pleasure of the male (this is a good thing), but it also increases the width of the penis (also a good thing) and the "wrinkles" of the foreskin act as a "ribbed for her pleasure" condom (which was MODLED after the foreskin) and therefore GIVES WOMEN MORE PLEASURE as well (a VERY good thing).

The idea of circumcision as being a good thing comes from two places. The first is the bible. God said Abraham should cut off his foreskin to make a pact with god. Abraham was Jewish. When and why did the Christian church adopt this practice? Your guess is as good as mine.

The second comes from victorian times. People noticed that the foreskin was particularly sensitive and kept the head of the penis sensitive as well. In hopes of preventing little boys from the "evil of masturbation" they thought that cutting off the foreskin and decreasing the pleasurable sensation would discourage it. Yeah, that worked out well, didn't it?

So, in conclusion, please, DO NOT CIRCUMCISE YOUR CHILD OR HUSBAND. It really should be a crime, and you're robbing them of a lifetime of greater sexual pleasure for them AND their partners. Thank you

What he said! You took the words right from me! :)

I am odd... a circ'ed penis looks odd to me...it's really sad to see the most sensative part of a mans body exposed to the elements and with a unsightly scar surronding it. :(

Hehe....there quite a few topics on this and I am damn outspoken in all of them. No! No! No!

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 02:28 PM
The first is the bible. God said Abraham should cut off his foreskin to make a pact with god. Abraham was Jewish. When and why did the Christian church adopt this practice? Your guess is as good as mine.
Yes, Abraham was a Jew. God, however is not. It was God's decree, not Abraham's. You are aware that the Torah is the Christian's old testament? And you should also be aware that the vast majority of Christians do not practice religious circumcision, mainly as the result of the Letters of Paul.

While your opinions are your own, let your facts be factual.

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 02:28 PM
I'd have to say most definitely YES. In such a sexual generation circumcision is another means of safe sex. There a lot of studies that show that men who are uncirumcised are much more likely to contract certain STDs. Especially HIV.

"Circumcision reduces the rate of HIV infections among heterosexual men by around 60%."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4371384.stm

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/320/7249/1592


Umm I'd like links to these studies since thats the first time I've ever heard anything of the like. Forgive my doubtfull ways but I don't see how HIV can be prevented by being cercumsised. Please provide me with links to these studies so I can work out for myself if this is true rather than going on someone unqualifieds opinion.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 02:32 PM
Umm I'd like links to these studies since thats the first time I've ever heard anything of the like. Forgive my doubtfull ways but I don't see how HIV can be prevented by being cercumsised. Please provide me with links to these studies so I can work out for myself if this is true rather than going on someone unqualifieds opinion.
It was a pretty hot-button issue in medical communities for awhile. Sources are prevalent.

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/vanhowe4/

I think this is a rebuttal, but it cites enough sources to make up your own mind.

keltickat
May 16th, 2006, 02:36 PM
Neither of my son's are,and it started as my husband not wanting them to go through anything like that at such a young age.I researched it and since it wasn't all that big of a deal to keep clean,I decided against having it done.Neither have had any problems with infection or otherwise(locker room.Heck looking at another guy's penis will get you *other* problems then being picked on for looking differently in my sons school),so it hasn't been a big issue.

I wish I had thought about it before my son was born. I didn't think of it untill they asked me in the hospital. His dad never thought about it either and said yes because he was.

Later I learned a few things that would have made me say no. Nature put it there for a reason, unless there is a problem, why should I change that.

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 02:43 PM
As for it being a terrible thing to do to a baby, how many remember what life was like when they were first born, I don't, no one I know of does. *snip*


So by that justification maybe we should advocate choping off peoples hands at birth since they might have to suffer such horrible things as severing fingers letter on in life. So a little bit of discomfort while they are young which they wont remember will stop lots of agony at a later date in life when they might not forget.

Ok I know its extream but really I don't think your argument was a good enough one to make me think I should have choped my sons forskin off.

America was mostly founded by Jews and as such it has become mainstream belief that all men should be cercumsised, that is the top and bottom of it. All arguments for it are pretty much obsolete these days since we have proper sanitation and medical health and we don't live in mud huts in the desart countries.

Try some other angle because the ones given so far haven't convinced me. If these arguments are to be believed then most UK men are dirty STD ridden pox whores. Now I'd like you to tell that to the guys I hang out with and get away with your bits intact LOL

Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 02:44 PM
First, let me start this by saying than I'm a male, and I'm NOT circumcised.

Circumcision is HORRIBLE, and WRONG. It is with out any doubt GENITAL MUTILATION.

I've hear many arguments for and against this heinous crime, and please allow me to debunk them here.

1)A Circumcised penis is easier to keep clean/healthier.
There is no conclusive evidence for either side, which tells us that it in fact, makes no difference. As far as being easier to clean a circumcised penis, how hard do you people think it is to pull a bit of forskin back??? If you can clean it at all, you can clean it with foreskin. I'm sure a vagina is much easier to clean without the pesky Labia getting in the way.

2)If you have a foreskin you're more likely to get an STD.
Again, there have been studies on both sides by respectable medical organizations, and the results cancel eachother out. If you want to prevent STD's, practice safe sex and teach your children to do so. Basic parenting.

3)It looks funny.
I'm sorry, what? People are willing to mutilate their child's (or their boyfriend/husband's) penis bacause it looks funny? If you really feel that looks are so important, don't have children, or sex for that matter. (Sex looks pretty damn stupid if you think about it)

Now, here are some things you probably just don't know about the POSITIVE aspects of having a NATURAL UNCIRCUMCISED penis. (NATURAL- Present in or produced by nature.)

There are thousands of nerve endings in the foreskin of the penis. These not only increase pleasure of the male (this is a good thing), but it also increases the width of the penis (also a good thing) and the "wrinkles" of the foreskin act as a "ribbed for her pleasure" condom (which was MODLED after the foreskin) and therefore GIVES WOMEN MORE PLEASURE as well (a VERY good thing).

The idea of circumcision as being a good thing comes from two places. The first is the bible. God said Abraham should cut off his foreskin to make a pact with god. Abraham was Jewish. When and why did the Christian church adopt this practice? Your guess is as good as mine.

The second comes from victorian times. People noticed that the foreskin was particularly sensitive and kept the head of the penis sensitive as well. In hopes of preventing little boys from the "evil of masturbation" they thought that cutting off the foreskin and decreasing the pleasurable sensation would discourage it. Yeah, that worked out well, didn't it?

So, in conclusion, please, DO NOT CIRCUMCISE YOUR CHILD OR HUSBAND. It really should be a crime, and you're robbing them of a lifetime of greater sexual pleasure for them AND their partners. Thank you

Go figure, that's exactly how I feel. I called yer mum, by the way, and thanked her for not having you circumcised.

Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 02:46 PM
America was mostly founded by Jews...

Qua? That's a new one to me. I thought they were puritans?

Kalika
May 16th, 2006, 02:50 PM
There is actually already at least one thread about this in the family and parenting forum. :)

http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=128967

Edited to add:

Which makes me wonder... what brought this up all of a sudden? Something in the news? Just wondering...

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 02:52 PM
Qua? That's a new one to me. I thought they were puritans?

I'm talking the power houses now not just the people who built on the land :D

keltickat
May 16th, 2006, 02:53 PM
Huh?

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 02:55 PM
I'm talking the power houses now not just the people who built on the land :D
I thought the only people who felt that way were paranoid anti-zionists...

I'm not precisely sure what any of this has to do with circumcision. We aren't discussing bris.

BeltaneSong
May 16th, 2006, 02:57 PM
I'm sure the 14 year old sub-saharan girl who was infibulated with a piece of glass and is now slowly dieing due to infection would take issue with your comparison.


Why? ALL genital mutilation is so very wrong. Would it be more justifyable to have that girl circumcised in a hospital here in America? (and yes, that happens here in America too.) Having the Clitoris removed as well as the Labia is horrible and wrong. But is that more wrong than what is done to the men? The Clitoris (a tight bundle of nerves that provide sexual gratafication) is removed, and the Labia (which protects and covers the most sensitive of areas) are removed as well.

With men the foreskin (a tight bundle of nerves that provide sexual gratafication, and protects and covers the most sensitive of areas) is removed.
I don't really see the difference. If this happened to a man out in the desert with a piece of glass, he would be in a life threatening situation as well.

As for Abrahams God not being Jewish, I thought he prayed to Yaweh the JEWISH god, however that has nothing to do with the topic of circumcision, but if you would care to debate it further somwhere else, I would be more than happy to.

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 02:59 PM
So by that justification maybe we should advocate choping off peoples hands at birth since they might have to suffer such horrible things as severing fingers letter on in life. So a little bit of discomfort while they are young which they wont remember will stop lots of agony at a later date in life when they might not forget.

Ok I know its extream but really I don't think your argument was a good enough one to make me think I should have choped my sons forskin off.



Hmm, the point I was making the point that they are typically done for medical preventative measures not for the hell of it. There is no reason or justification for cutting off limbs unless it has gangrene and the limb cannot be saved and is threatening they're life.

Have you ever clipped your nails, cut your hair, we are talking about a piece of skin here not whole limbs. Soap is not some miracle cure to disease, if it were people would not get the flu, or any other of these other diseases, etc. that still plague mankind. Or are you telling me disease has been wiped out where you're from.

I am not advocating either way, what you choose to do is up to you and I respect that. I was simply introducing a counterpoint to the other post within the realm of reason. What you proposed was not, it sounds like you are letting your personal prejudices against a particular religion dictate your actions. Never a good way to go, kind of the reason for all the terrorist bombings around the world.

Kalika
May 16th, 2006, 03:02 PM
Actually... more and more evidence supports that there aren't valid medical reasons for doing it, as most people claim. Not for the majority anyways.

Seriously, less than 2 weeks ago, in the Family and Parenting Forum here on MW, we all went around and around on the issue. In the link I posted above, there are a lot of great resources and information regarding the subject, and an almost identical debate. :)

For the record, I had my son circumsized, and would have any other male children circumsized as well. But, its a personal choice. Whether or not people agree with me... doesn't matter much. :)

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 03:02 PM
Would it be more justifyable to have that girl circumcised in a hospital here in America?
No of course not. The permanent effects of FGM are in sharp contrast to those of circumcision.

Karyan
May 16th, 2006, 03:02 PM
Umm I'd like links to these studies since thats the first time I've ever heard anything of the like. Forgive my doubtfull ways but I don't see how HIV can be prevented by being cercumsised. Please provide me with links to these studies so I can work out for myself if this is true rather than going on someone unqualifieds opinion.

I posted two links right under the quote about it affecting 60% of all males.

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 03:06 PM
I thought the only people who felt that way were paranoid anti-zionists...

I'm not precisely sure what any of this has to do with circumcision. We aren't discussing bris.

TIN foil hat at the ready :D but heya how do you know that the above statment isn't what you have been brainwashed into believing just like you're being told cercusision is the only right thing to do?

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 03:11 PM
I posted two links right under the quote about it affecting 60% of all males.

yeah it also said in SOME cases in that BBC report. I found a servay saying that in the Neatherlands tests showed cercumsised men where more likely to be promiscuous and have a higher risk of STD's than uncercumsised men. Just goes to show you can make a servay say whatever you like at the end of the day. You have to go with personal experiance because you can't believe what you read 100% all the time.

Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 03:12 PM
As to what brought this topic up....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsoqo1BLwCU&search=circumcised

This is only part one... I guess YouTube has a time limit? However, a search will get you all the pieces.

I want y'all to watch this. To see how much pain it's causing a baby. Yes, it's graphic.

@Aequitas: We're wondering if you're for or against, or just like debating.

Also, lets start with the presumpiton that FGM occurs in a sanitary environment (surgery!). Just for the sake of argument here. What are the negative permanant consequences as opposed to circumcision?

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 03:14 PM
TIN foil hat at the ready :D but heya how do you know that the above statment isn't what you have been brainwashed into believing just like you're being told cercusision is the only right thing to do?
ha.

Well first of all, I dont feel circumcision is the 'only right' thing to do. In fact, I was the first to say that the hygenic issues surrounding circumcision have been largely discredited.

I just dont see circumcision as a horrible thing. I was circumcized because, at that time, people very much believed that it was more hygenic. I still enjoy sex, very much. Perhaps there's something to all this sensitivity stuff, but I cant say I care. I've formed a very special bond with my penis and I wouldn't want him to be any different. :p

And frankly, to have some uncircumsized guy waltz in and tell me how horrible it is, and how I'll never derive any pleasure from sex (and neither will my partner) seems more than a little absurd.

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 03:15 PM
What you proposed was not, it sounds like you are letting your personal prejudices against a particular religion dictate your actions. Never a good way to go, kind of the reason for all the terrorist bombings around the world.

Hardly possible since I have no personal issues with the Jewish faith what so ever. If you look with care at my sig you will notice I am infact a teacher of the Qabalah, (a Jewish mystercisum) I hardly think it would be possible for me to reconsile a prejudice with that religion and teach a huge part of it now do you?

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 03:18 PM
ha.

Well first of all, I dont feel circumcision is the 'only right' thing to do. In fact, I was the first to say that the hygenic issues surrounding circumcision have been largely discredited.

I just dont see circumcision as a horrible thing. I was circumcized because, at that time, people very much believed that it was more hygenic. I still enjoy sex, very much. Perhaps there's something to all this sensitivity stuff, but I cant say I care. I've formed a very special bond with my penis and I wouldn't want him to be any different. :p

And frankly, to have some uncircumsized guy waltz in and tell me how horrible it is, and how I'll never derive any pleasure from sex (and neither will my partner) seems more than a little absurd.


Thats cool. I've experianced partners of both orientation with and without skin and I find the men without say they know no difference and the men with go cross eyed at the very mention. From personal experiance I prefure those with but heya thats just me. :D
you know it might help if you gendered yourself in your profile LOL. Curently I'm talking to someone who has no gender so I have no way of knowing if you are speeking from experiance or not LOL

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 03:22 PM
Also, lets start with the presumpiton that FGM occurs in a sanitary environment (surgery!). Just for the sake of argument here. What are the negative permanant consequences as opposed to circumcision?
Completely fair question.

FGM: Chronic urinary tract infections, stones in the bladder and urethra, kidney damage, reproductive tract infections resulting from obstructed menstrual flow, pelvic infections, infertility, excessive scar tissue, keloids (raised, irregularly shaped, progressively enlarging scars) and dermoid cysts. Not to mention that often times, after the woman is married off, the procedure has to be reversed (if she lucky) or simply tears open (if she is unlucky).

Circumcision: Decreased sexual enjoyment.

Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 03:23 PM
ha.

Well first of all, I dont feel circumcision is the 'only right' thing to do. In fact, I was the first to say that the hygenic issues surrounding circumcision have been largely discredited.

I just dont see circumcision as a horrible thing. I was circumcized because, at that time, people very much believed that it was more hygenic. I still enjoy sex, very much. Perhaps there's something to all this sensitivity stuff, but I cant say I care. I've formed a very special bond with my penis and I wouldn't want him to be any different. :p

And frankly, to have some uncircumsized guy waltz in and tell me how horrible it is, and how I'll never derive any pleasure from sex (and neither will my partner) seems more than a little absurd.

Anger at the issue =/= anger at the person behind the screen. So far as I can tell, no one's attacking anyone.

Here's my experience as a female. I've had an equal number of cut and un-cut partners. My personal experience has shown that the un-cut men derive more pleasure from the same sexual acts as those preformed on cut men. In additon, the un-cut have all been better lovers, in a strictly sexual sense.

What I'm NOT saying is "you're less of a man." I'm just tossing in my tuppence.

Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 03:24 PM
Completely fair question.

FGM: Chronic urinary tract infections, stones in the bladder and urethra, kidney damage, reproductive tract infections resulting from obstructed menstrual flow, pelvic infections, infertility, excessive scar tissue, keloids (raised, irregularly shaped, progressively enlarging scars) and dermoid cysts. Not to mention that often times, after the woman is married off, the procedure has to be reversed (if she lucky) or simply tears open (if she is unlucky).

Circumcision: Decreased sexual enjoyment.

This is me learning something new today! Thankyou.

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 03:25 PM
Hardly possible since I have no personal issues with the Jewish faith what so ever. If you look with care at my sig you will notice I am infact a teacher of the Qabalah, (a Jewish mystercisum) I hardly think it would be possible for me to reconsile a prejudice with that religion and teach a huge part of it now do you?

Not necessarily, its not like you can just erase them and all their works from history, although some have tried. A history teacher (a Jewish history teacher if you want), when talking about world war II, cannot omit the fact that the holocaust happened, regardless of how reprehensible he finds it personally. So, yes, all things are possible....

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 03:27 PM
you know it might help if you gendered yourself in your profile LOL. Curently I'm talking to someone who has no gender so I have no way of knowing if you are speeking from experiance or not LOL
I am male. I've made my profle ambiguous to protect myself from the droves of females helplessly lured by my machismo and stunning good looks.

Though it is hard to talk from experience, since I was circumsized as an infant. The only people who are really qualified to compare sensation as a male are those who have had adult circumcisions.

BeltaneSong
May 16th, 2006, 03:31 PM
Completely fair question.

FGM: Chronic urinary tract infections, stones in the bladder and urethra, kidney damage, reproductive tract infections resulting from obstructed menstrual flow, pelvic infections, infertility, excessive scar tissue, keloids (raised, irregularly shaped, progressively enlarging scars) and dermoid cysts. Not to mention that often times, after the woman is married off, the procedure has to be reversed (if she lucky) or simply tears open (if she is unlucky).

Circumcision: Decreased sexual enjoyment.


Thank you for making this very valid point. You are right that there are many more dangerous side effects from Female Circumcision. However, I don't feel this makes male Circumcision any less awful.

Your yourself have conceeded that the health argument (which in my oppinion was the only valid argument) is Moot. Therefore, what possible reason remains to perpetuate or even defend male circumcision at birth?

I appologise if my previous comments made you feel as if I was attacking the manhood/sexual prowess of the circumcised men in the world. I was simply stating that it has been shown that sensitivity is decreesed. Everyone I know (cut and uncut) loves sex, but I think it's a crime to deprive men of the POTENTIAL for greater sexual satisfaction.

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 03:34 PM
Not necessarily, its not like you can just erase them and all their works from history, although some have tried. A history teacher (a Jewish history teacher if you want), when talking about world war II, cannot omit the fact that the holocaust happened, regardless of how reprehensible he finds it personally. So, yes, all things are possible....

I take great offence that you could sujest I have a prejudice first check out my class and then tell me I have issue with the Jewish faith simply because I disagree with their cercumsision ideas. What I teach is not history it is centered around the faith so please untill you know me personaly keep your opinions on my prejudices to yourself :D I could with every right take your coment about me being prejudice as a huge personal attack which if you also look once more in my sig under the link MW Golden rule, you will find is against the rules TOTALY :D

LostSheep
May 16th, 2006, 03:38 PM
I just dont see circumcision as a horrible thing. I was circumcized because, at that time, people very much believed that it was more hygenic. I still enjoy sex, very much. Perhaps there's something to all this sensitivity stuff, but I cant say I care. I've formed a very special bond with my penis and I wouldn't want him to be any different.

...

And frankly, to have some uncircumsized guy waltz in and tell me how horrible it is, and how I'll never derive any pleasure from sex (and neither will my partner) seems more than a little absurd.The only people who are really qualified to compare sensation as a male are those who have had adult circumcisions.
agreed.

anyway, how do you measure pleasure? ("Pleasure you can't measure" - i think that was a chocolate bar slogan). Anyhow, surely the whole thing is very subjective, and one person is never going to know how it feels for another person, so how do people know that one gives less pleasure than the other? maybe it isn't that, it's how the person concerned does it.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 03:43 PM
Your yourself have conceeded that the health argument (which in my oppinion was the only valid argument) is Moot. Therefore, what possible reason remains to perpetuate or even defend male circumcision at birth?
I would say the only reason is purely aesthetic. (I'm of course leaving out religious reasons). Now that of course leaves the practice open to scrutiny, but since it has no lasting health affects, I cant find fault in it. Parents routinely pierce their child's ears, I find no fault with that either.

My manhood is not threatened, so no apology is warranted. The only thing that really irked me was the comparison to FGM, but now I see you didn't mean anything by it.

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 03:50 PM
I take great offence that you could sujest I have a prejudice first check out my class and then tell me I have issue with the Jewish faith simply because I disagree with their cercumsision ideas. What I teach is not history it is centered around the faith so please untill you know me personaly keep your opinions on my prejudices to yourself :D I could with every right take your coment about me being prejudice as a huge personal attack which if you also look once more in my sig under the link MW Golden rule, you will find is against the rules TOTALY :D

I was not accusing you of anything and was not the only one who thought you harbored some prejudice against a particular religion, it was your statements I was addressing not you, there is a difference, I thought we were having a polite conversation.

As to your other comment, I never said you were a history teacher. In your previous comment you stated: " I hardly think it would be possible for me to reconsile a prejudice with that religion and teach a huge part of it now do you?". That was your question. You asked a question, I gave you an example of how a prejudiced person could teach something they do not agree with that is all. If that was unclear, I apologize, but I don't make rush determinations to others statements as you have about me, which I take highly offensive. I never once attacked you, I simply offered a rebuttal to your statements and did not guess you would take it personally. Did you never debate in class when you were in school? I did, ALOT. "The hallmark of any great civilization is the free-flowing of ideas".

So please understand that we were just exchanging ideas, I did not think we elevated this to slings and arrows.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 03:58 PM
agreed.

anyway, how do you measure pleasure? ("Pleasure you can't measure" - i think that was a chocolate bar slogan). Anyhow, surely the whole thing is very subjective, and one person is never going to know how it feels for another person, so how do people know that one gives less pleasure than the other? maybe it isn't that, it's how the person concerned does it.
Well, I'm of the mind that sexual pleasure is directly related to the feelings and passions felt towards the partner, rather than the sensory receptors in the penis. Call me old fashioned. Like I said, I wouldn't know either way, but personally, I'm more than content with the way I am.

Pesha
May 16th, 2006, 04:06 PM
I am not responding to get into any philisophical discussions. Just to say that I am Jewish and practice the Craft. My son was circumsised. All the males in my family were circumsised. It was done at age 8 days according to the Jewish religious precepts. Not for any other reason really.

I have attended these Bris as they are called in Hebrew. It is done under the most sterile condtions, with a specially rabbi called a Moihle. It is quick and at that age the child feels nothing. Alot of controvesy surrounds this simple religious act nowdays. I really see no reason for that.

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 04:12 PM
I am not responding to get into any philisophical discussions. Just to say that I am Jewish and practice the Craft. My son was circumsised. All the males in my family were circumsised. It was done at age 8 days according to the Jewish religious precepts. Not for any other reason really.

I have attended these Bris as they are called in Hebrew. It is done under the most sterile condtions, with a specially rabbi called a Moihle. It is quick and at that age the child feels nothing. Alot of controvesy surrounds this simple religious act nowdays. I really see no reason for that.


Nor do I Dragonsinger, nor do I. Well said!

Bethra
May 16th, 2006, 04:39 PM
I was not accusing you of anything and was not the only one who thought you harbored some prejudice against a particular religion, it was your statements I was addressing not you, there is a difference, I thought we were having a polite conversation.

As to your other comment, I never said you were a history teacher. In your previous comment you stated: " I hardly think it would be possible for me to reconsile a prejudice with that religion and teach a huge part of it now do you?". That was your question. You asked a question, I gave you an example of how a prejudiced person could teach something they do not agree with that is all. If that was unclear, I apologize, but I don't make rush determinations to others statements as you have about me, which I take highly offensive. I never once attacked you, I simply offered a rebuttal to your statements and did not guess you would take it personally. Did you never debate in class when you were in school? I did, ALOT. "The hallmark of any great civilization is the free-flowing of ideas".

So please understand that we were just exchanging ideas, I did not think we elevated this to slings and arrows.



it sounds like you are letting your personal prejudices against a particular religion dictate your actions. Never a good way to go, kind of the reason for all the terrorist bombings around the world.
Sorry but that looks kinda like a personal attack to me.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 04:42 PM
I think Cheshire has dropped it. You might as well reciprocate, Beth. Compounding misunderstandings make my eyeballs itch.

Zoritsa_Nepenthe
May 16th, 2006, 04:43 PM
Completely fair question.

FGM: Chronic urinary tract infections, stones in the bladder and urethra, kidney damage, reproductive tract infections resulting from obstructed menstrual flow, pelvic infections, infertility, excessive scar tissue, keloids (raised, irregularly shaped, progressively enlarging scars) and dermoid cysts. Not to mention that often times, after the woman is married off, the procedure has to be reversed (if she lucky) or simply tears open (if she is unlucky).

Circumcision: Decreased sexual enjoyment.

Unfortunately decreased sexual enjoyment is not the only side effect of circumcision.Infection can also be one,and if the circumcision is not done correctly,painful erections can result.So,while the list may be smaller then female,there can and are risks involved with male circumcision as well.

Aequitas
May 16th, 2006, 04:48 PM
Unfortunately decreased sexual enjoyment is not the only side effect of circumcision.Infection can also be one,and if the circumcision is not done correctly,painful erections can result.So,while the list may be smaller then female,there can and are risks involved with male circumcision as well.
A very good point as well.

However, I left out side-effects from 'botched procedures' to make it simpler. Obviously complications from the procedure itself could be added to either column. I instead listed problems inherent to 'successful' procedures in order to contrast the differences.

Dalia
May 16th, 2006, 05:00 PM
I voted yes because it is easier for the boy on the long run. If he is not circumscized, he'll have to pull the skin back to clean himself when taking a shower. If not, he can have health problems. But, if the father does not have it, the kid shouldnt either. You dont want your kid asking why does daddy's looks like that and mine like this. I have to male nephews. One has it, the other one doesnt.

Rudas Starblaze
May 16th, 2006, 05:20 PM
"i take your little thing, and put it into my little machine, and nip the tip!" (Rabbi Tuckman- "Robinhood, Men In Tights")

i see nothing wrong with them. i had one, my son had one when he was 1 day old, healed in like 2 days, he was fine. i just dont see the point in waiting any longer then 1 day to do it. or why make a party out of it for that matter. that would be kinda like inviting family and friends over to watch your daughters first period.:sick:

Ceres
May 16th, 2006, 07:14 PM
. But, if the father does not have it, the kid shouldnt either. You dont want your kid asking why does daddy's looks like that and mine like this. I have to male nephews. One has it, the other one doesnt.

I dont understand what the big deal is about the dad being different from the sons? After all, its not as if it looks even remotely the same until the kid is an adult anyway. What is so difficult about just saying that dad looks different because he was circumcised and that some people get that done as infants that we have to avoid having the discussion altogether by hacking off part of the kid's body? Its prolly best their parents discuss it with boys anyway against the day when they DO see one thats different they know why.

Mouse
May 16th, 2006, 08:21 PM
I didn't read through the entire thread, so if I repeat something I'm sorry.

I voted No.

All animals have a foreskin, for millions of years men have been born with one. What makes us think we know better than a million years of evolution?

It's not cleaner if parents teach their kids to wash properly.
I'd post a link, but it's not pg 13.

There are other benifits to having a foreskin that are pushed aside because "that stuff isn't spoken about" or wasn't at the time circumsision became popular.

For a start the head of the penis is ment to be kept moist and protected, which a lot of the time it isn't in cut men. A lot of cut men develop problems such as an extra thickness of skin because the penis tries to protect itself, and because of this they have a lot of trouble during intercousre because there isn't enough stimulation. At the other end of the scale some men develop pre-mature ejeculation problems because of too much sensitory input. Even during sex the foreskin has a role to play, which affects both men and women. A lot of women with cut men experience a lot of soreness due to the lack of lubrication because the head of the penis isn't ment to be dried out, there is also a lot more friction for the woman, because the foreskin offers as a cushion to reduce friction.

A lot of men are now restoring their foreskins for a number of reasons.

I can add more to this later, but I'm out of time this morning!
Have a good day :)

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 08:29 PM
A lot of men are now restoring their foreskins for a number of reasons.

I can add more to this later, but I'm out of time this morning!
Have a good day :)

How do you "restore" a foreskin?

Kalika
May 16th, 2006, 08:41 PM
How do you "restore" a foreskin?

That is a very good question.

I've heard of surgeries where doctors can repair a poorly done circumcision... to a point. But not a full restoration.

New branch of cosmetic surgery? :)

CheshireEyes
May 16th, 2006, 08:50 PM
That is a very good question.

I've heard of surgeries where doctors can repair a poorly done circumcision... to a point. But not a full restoration.

New branch of cosmetic surgery? :)

So right now ur saying its just corrective surgery? Where do they get the skin, as that skin is kind of unique to the body, eg.softer, highly elastic etc.
Just never heard of this b4, find it intriguing.

Zoritsa_Nepenthe
May 16th, 2006, 08:58 PM
There are actually a few ways to restore the foreskin,from surgery to weighting down the skin already there.My husband was looking into different sites,so he'd know more about it,but I will say some looked rather barbaric and not something I would want my husband trying.Google it some time...there are many many sites,from personal sites where men have gone through it,to the more medical sites where they go into more detail.

Kalika
May 16th, 2006, 08:59 PM
So right now ur saying its just corrective surgery? Where do they get the skin, as that skin is kind of unique to the body, eg.softer, highly elastic etc.
Just never heard of this b4, find it intriguing.

Mouse will have to explain the foreskin replacement surgery, as I haven't heard of it either.

As for restorative surgery due to damage done during the circumcision:

http://www.emedicine.com/plastic/topic528.htm

This website gives information on various types of repairs that can be done. (Not all due to circumcision... but it was the most informative I found.)

Findarto
May 16th, 2006, 10:59 PM
Nope.
Because I'm not, and neither is my dad. It's common for a lot of the men in the cultures I'm from to be uncut.

And, I don't want my sons penis chopped with. ;).

Psycmoe
May 16th, 2006, 11:27 PM
How do you "restore" a foreskin?

It's not cosmetic surgery. Ya'll didn't watch the suggested links, did you? That's ok ;D

The methods I saw involved "tugging" the skin of the penis in such a way that it promotes new growth. It's a skin foreskin, which eventually begins to act like a foreskin.

zede
May 17th, 2006, 12:56 AM
i voted yes because when my brother was born he was two months premature. he was in the hospital for the first two months of his life. he went through so much pain that she just couldn't bare the thought of causeing him any more pain. when he was 14 he asked to have it done. she told him to think about it for awhile and if he really wanted it she would have it done. he said he couldn't stand it he felt very embarrased in front of people in gym and in the bathroom and he couldn't imagane what it would be like when he started to have sex. at any rate he had it done so i would do it if i had a baby because i feel he would want it done when he got older.

Fire's Shadow
May 17th, 2006, 01:00 AM
What he said! You took the words right from me! :)

I am odd... a circ'ed penis looks odd to me...it's really sad to see the most sensative part of a mans body exposed to the elements and with a unsightly scar surronding it. :(

Hehe....there quite a few topics on this and I am damn outspoken in all of them. No! No! No!


You make me feel bad. :(

I'd like to think my circumcized penis isn't unsightly. :(

Little Billy
May 17th, 2006, 01:03 AM
One benefit of circumcision:

In 1992, a kid was born without eyelids(!!!) in Newark, NJ.

So - you guessed it - they used his foreskin to construct eyelids for him. The surgery was considered a success, with one exception:

The kid's a little cockeyed.

amakaliani
May 17th, 2006, 01:08 AM
let's see -

*reduces sensitivity by 90%
*removes a very important enzyme that protects and cleans the glans
*IS PAINFUL to baby
*potential long term social issues
*is comparable to femal circumcision


I have a boy child. he is uncut, my hubby is cut. we both decided after research and seeing far to many "goofs" that if he wanted to be cut, we would support the ADULT choice that it would be.

(besides since then I have seen two baby boys that will not so proudly bear half circumscions, due to dr negligence....or from having it done by an intern. Both childern will suffer now....)

Marcasite
May 17th, 2006, 01:20 AM
I don't think it's comparable to female circumcision (which usually involves cutting off the whole clitoris and not just the hood...euuugh) but I do wonder why it evolved if it was utterly unimportant and possibly harmful. I don't think hygiene is a good reason, an uncut penis is not dirty by nature, it just requires a little cleaning now and again, much like teeth need brushing. And a greater risk of contracting STDs is negated by use of a condom which sexually active men should be using anyhow.
So I think the only reasons it continues are for aesthetic, religious or societal reasons. But I don't disagree with a parent's decision to do it for those reasons, I just think people should think about it and read up on the procedure before making a decision.

Fire's Shadow
May 17th, 2006, 01:26 AM
In additon, the un-cut have all been better lovers, in a strictly sexual sense.

I fail to see how being a better lover and being un-cut are related. Last I checked, it doesn't effect the way I move, or how well I please other people.

Little Billy
May 17th, 2006, 01:29 AM
I fail to see how being a better lover and being un-cut are related. Last I checked, it doesn't effect the way I move, or how well I please other people.

Inflammatory crap, to "wound" the "other side".

This subject always makes me laugh.

169% better than the abortion threads, even.

LB,
Lives for teh hyperbole.

Fire's Shadow
May 17th, 2006, 01:39 AM
Inflammatory crap, to "wound" the "other side".

This subject always makes me laugh.

169% better than the abortion threads, even.

LB,
Lives for teh hyperbole.

I don't care if they get their children cut or uncut. I'm just a little chapped at what some people freaking said.

"Uncircumcized people look weird."
"Circumcized people aren't good lovers."

:eyebrow: Am I the only one here who thinks this is presumptuous?

Little Billy
May 17th, 2006, 01:43 AM
I don't care if they get their children cut or uncut. I'm just a little chapped at what some people freaking said.

"Uncircumcized people look weird."
"Circumcized people aren't good lovers."

:eyebrow: Am I the only one here who thinks this is presumptuous?

No.

That's what makes it funny.

LB,
Thinks it's HILARIOUS when people post nasty crap like that over such a non-issue.

The Lady
May 17th, 2006, 01:48 AM
I voted Yes. My husband at the time wanted his son to be circumsized because he was and it was part of his culture. I decided I would have the procedure done to my son after much research and talking to professionals. I was assured that pain relief would be provided and I stressed that I wanted to be there to watch the procedure and to make sure the pain relief was provided to my satisfaction. I need to add quickly, that my child was going to be born in a very private hospital and delivered by the doctor who was on the board of directors. This was 16 years ago; when I had excellent medical benefits.

Fortunately, my daughter was born instead.

I am a well informed woman, and I have seen and been with both kinds of men. I found nothing different other than the individual himself. ANd the men themselves didn't complain either. I never buy into 'old wives tales', I find out for myself.

Would I circumsize my son today? It all depends on the father and of course my thoughts at the time but since I don't plan on having any more children I won't know for sure.

I say if the parents want to circumsize their son then do it and if they don't, then don't.

Male circumcision is very different from female circumcision. Men don't lose their complete ability to give and receive pleasure during sex. And it wasn't done to control the male either. But female circumcision does both.

Do we really need to continue with the procedure of circumcision? I don't believe we do but there are many people who believe in the procedure for personal reasons and I will respect that.

The medical community has changed their position and take a more hands off approach, and leave it up to the parents.

Just saying my piece.

Rudas Starblaze
May 17th, 2006, 01:48 AM
for goodness sakes kids! who cares if some one is cut or uncut. its the size that matters! its us fellows who got the short end of the stick who should be getting all pissy!:rollingla


im suprised this thread hasnt been moved to health and beauty yet. or MWAD!

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 01:48 AM
I fail to see how being a better lover and being un-cut are related. Last I checked, it doesn't effect the way I move, or how well I please other people.

Like I said, just my personal experience... I actually counted 'em all up just for you people. I do put some thought into my thread. Hee.

The Lady
May 17th, 2006, 01:49 AM
I don't care if they get their children cut or uncut. I'm just a little chapped at what some people freaking said.

"Uncircumcized people look weird."
"Circumcized people aren't good lovers."

:eyebrow: Am I the only one here who thinks this is presumptuous?
Thank you!!! You said it better than me, I was too verbose.

Fire's Shadow
May 17th, 2006, 01:54 AM
Like I said, just my personal experience... I actually counted 'em all up just for you people. I do put some thought into my thread. Hee.

Call me crazy, but I'm sure it wasn't because they were cut, which is why I don't see the reason you posted that bit.

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 01:56 AM
Call me crazy, but I'm sure it wasn't because they were cut, which is why I don't see the reason you posted that bit.

Because it was a fun coincidence.

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 01:58 AM
One more thing... a close family member is an RN. Her being the only medical professional I'm on regular speaking terms with, I called her up and asked her informed opinion on circumcision. She said it was barbaric and unessesary.

The Lady
May 17th, 2006, 02:00 AM
Because it was a fun coincidence.
Hmmmmm, 'spoon' comes to my mind more than anything!

Little Billy
May 17th, 2006, 02:27 AM
One more thing... a close family member is an RN. Her being the only medical professional I'm on regular speaking terms with, I called her up and asked her informed opinion on circumcision. She said it was barbaric and unessesary.

A close friend of mine is a Moil. I called him up and asked him for his informed opinion on that nurse's opinion. He said she's a heathen.

LB,
Loves the unprovable anecdotes.

Little Billy
May 17th, 2006, 02:27 AM
Because it was a fun coincidence.

Or a nasty shot.

One or the other.

Mouse
May 17th, 2006, 02:42 AM
This quote is from a man who restored his forskin:


There's a very big difference between cut and intact sex. It's almost impossible to describe it to someone who hasn't experienced both. Yes, the parts you have now are more sensitive (the head, maybe the fren and some inner skin) but actual functional foreskin is a whole ADDED part, and the sensation of skin gliding up and down the shaft is so good... and you don't realize how much you miss it until you have it back. The loose skin makes the whole pubic area sensitive... not just the tip of the penis... because caresses to the scrotum, the lower stomach, body movements, make the loose skin shift and elicit very nice, subly feelings of pleasure. To have coverage you're going to have to add about three linear inches of shaft skin to your penis, and that skin has nerves, and that means orgasms are going to be hugely improved. The best way I can describe it is this: after restoring, masturbation alone will feel as good as the best sex you ever had in your life... and actual good sex after restoring is in a whole new realm altogether. You won't believe it until you experience it for yourself. You won't believe how much was robbed from you.

....The loose, mobile skin will help her stay wet during sex, and she won't feel sore afterwards anymore... and that means more sex for you. My wife's biggest revelation from me restoring is that SEX WASN'T MEANT TO BE PAINFUL. She keeps saying that, as a big man "down there" (whether I believed her or not about that) she always felt sore afterwards and thought that was a good and normal thing that she just had to "live with". Now she realizes how big a rip-off circumcision is for women, too, and claims that if anything ever happened to me, lack of foreskin would be a deal-breaker in another mate.

I've chopped a little bit out, because the guy is pretty blunt with his description, but you get the idea.

I don't have a penis and my guy is uncut, so I'm not speaking from experience. The whole argument facinated me though so I did some research.

Restoring is done very slowly over a period of years to strech the skin that's already on the penis, manually and by useing weights and O-rings. If people want links or whatever PM me, I'm not comfortable posting this on an open forum. Google is your friend too.

The option of surgery is there too for men who don't want to spend years trying to acheve their goal, but I don't know enough about it to explane it.

LostSheep
May 17th, 2006, 03:31 AM
I was going to say something else, but i've decided this whole thing is just getting too silly. Tha arguments for ("I wanted him to look like his dad" - like who the heck is going to know???!!) and against - "yeah, they're rubbish lovers" ...

:fpeace: is all i can say.

Rudas Starblaze
May 17th, 2006, 03:35 AM
I was going to say something else, but i've decided this whole thing is just getting too silly. Tha arguments for ("I wanted him to look like his dad" - like who the heck is going to know???!!) and against - "yeah, they're rubbish lovers" ...

:fpeace: is all i can say.


ROTFLMFAO!!!!!

couldnt agree more!

CheshireEyes
May 17th, 2006, 03:37 AM
I was going to say something else, but i've decided this whole thing is just getting too silly. Tha arguments for ("I wanted him to look like his dad" - like who the heck is going to know???!!) and against - "yeah, they're rubbish lovers" ...

:fpeace: is all i can say.

CheshireEyes just standing here whistling, saying nothing.

Pagan Mantis
May 17th, 2006, 03:51 AM
I'd have to say most definitely YES. In such a sexual generation circumcision is another means of safe sex. There a lot of studies that show that men who are uncirumcised are much more likely to contract certain STDs. Especially HIV.

"Circumcision reduces the rate of HIV infections among heterosexual men by around 60%."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4371384.stm

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/320/7249/1592

I'm sorry, but that is BS! The HIV virus is contracted in a way that something as large as foreskin would be insignificant to such a small virus. Not to mention that STDs are contracted through fluid to fluid, fluid to skin, etc. contact, which, I'm pretty sure all of us know that there's an enormous amount of fluids from both parties being excreted during the act of intercourse, regardless of the type. Unless you're trying to convince us that an uncircumsized genital is the same as a foolproof condom, that's actually ridiculous to even try to prove! Also, I might add that not even sheepskin condoms are able to prevent the transmission of STDs, as they are smaller than the microscopic pores of the condom, which are only able to prevent the passage of sperm. Notice that these are made of skin, and the box actually states that STDs are not prevented, only pregnancy.

The Lady
May 17th, 2006, 04:20 AM
I was going to say something else, but i've decided this whole thing is just getting too silly. Tha arguments for ("I wanted him to look like his dad" - like who the heck is going to know???!!) and against - "yeah, they're rubbish lovers" ...

:fpeace: is all i can say.

Couldn't agree with you more!!!

ap Dafydd
May 17th, 2006, 08:01 AM
Horrified to see that half the responses were in favour of this nasty and obsolete piece of barbarism!

I don't approve of cosmetic surgery, and particularly not genital cosmetic surgery.

Stick with what the Goddess gives you, folks.

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

Maverynthia
May 17th, 2006, 08:20 AM
I feel that it's up to the person being circumcised to decide. YOu may say that a baby can't make that decsion, but what makes you a better decsion maker?
I feel it's a person's choice and if you get it done when they are a child, then you take an important choice away from them.

Aequitas
May 17th, 2006, 09:15 AM
11 pages and not one person regretting being uncircumcized or circumcized. Just alot of peanut gallery.

I suppose that sums it up.

LostSheep
May 17th, 2006, 10:00 AM
Not one person regretting it? So everyone must be pretty much happy with what they have?

case closed then, i'd think.

Aequitas
May 17th, 2006, 10:04 AM
So everyone must be pretty much happy with what they have?

case closed then, i'd think.
I believe that is the consensus, yes. Whew.. now I can sleep at night. ;)

CajunLady
May 17th, 2006, 12:34 PM
My older son is circumcised and so will the one on the way. Sorry, but I don't believe in the whole sexual thing and that it makes it worse. But that's my opinion, feel free to disagree but I won't argue with you on it. Why do I do it? For cleanliness reasons and because every other male that I know is circumcised. Kids go through enough when growing up...why cause any more problems by him thinking he's different? Yes it may cause pain to the baby, but it's something they won't remember. Any more than the pain that a woman who's just given birth remembers. And don't throw FGM into it...a woman's CLITORIS is cut off. With a circumcision, it's SKIN being cut off, not the head of the penis. There's a HUGE difference between FGM and a circumcision. ANd I jsut saw soemthing about sensitivity by 90%? If that were the case, then how in the world are there so many pregnant women around? And why are there so many sexually transmitted diseases going around? I'm not a guy, but my feelings were reduced by 90%, I think I would give up after a while!

anyways...these are MY opinions. As I said before, disagree with me all you want. I'm not going to argue any points.

Findarto
May 17th, 2006, 12:59 PM
Let's ask the APA (American Pediatric Association):
"
The benefits are not sufficent..
To reccommend all infant (boys) be circumcised."

Karyan
May 17th, 2006, 01:15 PM
I'm sorry, but that is BS! The HIV virus is contracted in a way that something as large as foreskin would be insignificant to such a small virus. Not to mention that STDs are contracted through fluid to fluid, fluid to skin, etc. contact, which, I'm pretty sure all of us know that there's an enormous amount of fluids from both parties being excreted during the act of intercourse, regardless of the type. Unless you're trying to convince us that an uncircumsized genital is the same as a foolproof condom, that's actually ridiculous to even try to prove! Also, I might add that not even sheepskin condoms are able to prevent the transmission of STDs, as they are smaller than the microscopic pores of the condom, which are only able to prevent the passage of sperm. Notice that these are made of skin, and the box actually states that STDs are not prevented, only pregnancy.


"The uncircumcised penis consists of the penile shaft, glans, urethral meatus, inner and outer surface of the foreskin, and the frenulum, the thin band connecting the inner foreskin to the ventral aspect of the glans. A keratinised, stratified squamous epithelium covers the penile shaft and outer surface of the foreskin. This provides a protective barrier against HIV infection. In contrast, the inner mucosal surface of the foreskin is not keratinised15 and is rich in Langerhans' cells,10 making it particularly susceptible to the virus. This is particularly important because during heterosexual intercourse the foreskin is pulled back down the shaft of the penis, and the whole inner surface of the foreskin is exposed to vaginal secretions, providing a large area where HIV transmission could take place."


"Ulcerative or inflammatory lesions of the penile urethra, foreskin, frenulum, or glans that are caused by other sexually transmitted infections may provide additional potential routes for HIV transmission. In uncircumcised males, the highly vascular frenulum is particularly susceptible to trauma during intercourse, and lesions produced by other sexually transmitted infections commonly occur there. Thus, male circumcision further reduces the risk of infection by reducing the synergy that normally exists between HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.5"

Makes sense to me...

Also, most STDs are contracted through skin to skin contact. For instance, the bacteria from syphilis is usually spread through contact with sores or chancres caused by the infection. Then there are your viral skin STDs:Human Papilloma Virus, Herpes Simplex Virus, and Molluscum Contagiosum. Perpetuation of these viruses is enforced through skin to skin contact. Scabies and pubic lice: Skin to skin contact. No bodily fluids required.

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 01:45 PM
Or a nasty shot.

One or the other.

I try not to take pot shot, and I think I'm pretty good about recognizing when I do and apologising. I know nothing about Fire Sage's sexual prowress, and neither do I want to know. (No offense.) If someone sees an attack in my experience, that's their issue.

BTW, you're hilarious. Thanks for lightening up the thread for a bit.

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 01:52 PM
I think the reason that FGM keeps getting tossed in with circumcision is because they are both unneccesary, social-based surgeries.

@Findarto: *thumbs up*

CheshireEyes
May 17th, 2006, 01:53 PM
Wow, this thread has taken on a life of its own and the poll results are very illuminating...:abanana:

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 01:58 PM
Wow, this thread has taken on a life of its own and the poll results are very illuminating...:abanana:

It is interesting to see... and it sort of makes me want to ask bar patrons, just for shits & giggles.

The biggest reasons I'm seeing why parents choose or would choose to cut their kids are these:

"His dad/all my family members/everyone I know is cut." Conformity.

"It's easier to clean." :gagged:

"Dad wanted it." I just don't think it's one of those decisions where one parent should have more power.

CheshireEyes
May 17th, 2006, 02:11 PM
It is interesting to see... and it sort of makes me want to ask bar patrons, just for shits & giggles.

The biggest reasons I'm seeing why parents choose or would choose to cut their kids are these:

"His dad/all my family members/everyone I know is cut." Conformity.

"It's easier to clean." :gagged:

"Dad wanted it." I just don't think it's one of those decisions where one parent should have more power.

Yeah, was thinkin' the same thing, its one of those things u normally don't think about, but the answers are surprising. I'm glad we have an equal representation from both sides here, it increases our understanding of one another and by that ourselves...

I'll let you ask the people in the bar though..... LOL tehehe

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 02:27 PM
Yeah, was thinkin' the same thing, its one of those things u normally don't think about, but the answers are surprising. I'm glad we have an equal representation from both sides here, it increases our understanding of one another and by that ourselves...

I'll let you ask the people in the bar though..... LOL tehehe

Heh. It's fun to ask drunk people somewhat unacceptable questions about penises. Especially when they're strangers.

David19
May 17th, 2006, 02:39 PM
I'm for it if people want to be circumcised, i'm not sure if it's cleaner or not, my female friends say that circumcised males are more hygenic, but i don't know (hopefully i'll get to experience both 'sides' of the arguement inimately!,lol).

I don't think it's a 'bad' thing because Jews have been doing it for thousands of years, and they don't seem affected by it. I do have a problem with female circumcision, like all my friends do, as that is kind of like 'branding' a woman, also i've heard that they can't enjoy sex, because it isn't pleasurable.

Kalika
May 17th, 2006, 02:40 PM
Heh. It's fun to ask drunk people somewhat unacceptable questions about penises. Especially when they're strangers.

Probably a lot less dangerous than asking them if they drink to compensate for (or maybe forget about the fact...).... (insert various jokes here).

I say you go to a bar, take a poll... and post the results. ;)

CheshireEyes
May 17th, 2006, 02:46 PM
Heh. It's fun to ask drunk people somewhat unacceptable questions about penises. Especially when they're strangers.


LMAO!!!
ROTFL!!!!:T

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 03:39 PM
Probably a lot less dangerous than asking them if they drink to compensate for (or maybe forget about the fact...).... (insert various jokes here).

I say you go to a bar, take a poll... and post the results. ;)


OOooo! A challenge!

*salutes smartly* Will do! (My poor boyfriend...)

Kalika
May 17th, 2006, 03:40 PM
OOooo! A challenge!

*salutes smartly* Will do! (My poor boyfriend...)

:T

I knew you wouldn't be able to resist!

Though, if they try to show you... run. :lol:

Psycmoe
May 17th, 2006, 04:14 PM
:T

I knew you wouldn't be able to resist!

Though, if they try to show you... run. :lol:

Not actually something I'm worried about in this city. They're wussies anyway.

Kalika
May 17th, 2006, 04:17 PM
Not actually something I'm worried about in this city. They're wussies anyway.

:cutie:

What fun is that?!

Psycmoe
May 18th, 2006, 02:57 AM
It may be a little bit before I'll be able to do the bar poll, but I'll get around to it. I promise :D

LostSheep
May 18th, 2006, 03:47 AM
I think the reason that FGM keeps getting tossed in with circumcision is because they are both unneccesary, social-based surgeries.

@Findarto: *thumbs up*
I realise this thread isn't serious any more, but really... come on, there's no comparison.

mutilation? it works fine, believe me.

:rolleyes:

Invidosa
May 18th, 2006, 04:05 AM
gotta go with no, i don't see any really compelling reason to have an unnecessary procedure performed on a baby.

Cheetah
May 25th, 2006, 10:21 AM
My son will deff be Circumcised. For health reasons, bacteria can linger in the skin part. I will do it at a very early age of course.
ON the travel channel they have that show going tribal. For religous reasons they do it when the son is like 5yrs old. Ouch.

_Banbha_
May 26th, 2006, 10:32 PM
Why is it any less painful for an infant? Because they can't look you in the eye and tell you how much it hurts?

The Hygeine issue has been disproven. There is no medical reason to circumcise a healthy baby boy. It is not reccomended by any Medical association. It is a social issue.

Cheetah
May 26th, 2006, 11:16 PM
Why is it any less painful for an infant? Because they can't look you in the eye and tell you how much it hurts?

The Hygeine issue has been disproven. There is no medical reason to circumcise a healthy baby boy. It is not reccomended by any Medical association. It is a social issue.
I have read many health issue articles as to why to circumcise a boy.

Psycmoe
May 27th, 2006, 12:52 AM
I have read many health issue articles as to why to circumcise a boy.

Then please, quote them, or link to ones you can find online.

Little Billy
May 27th, 2006, 01:48 AM
Why is it any less painful for an infant? Because they can't look you in the eye and tell you how much it hurts?


Oddly enough, I don't remember a thing.

maphdet
May 27th, 2006, 01:52 AM
We circumsized our son.
Why...*shruggs* mainly I've heard it's cleaner, and well his father is too.
I was just thining it would be easier for the kid if he was the same as his dad.

Little Billy
May 27th, 2006, 01:54 AM
We circumsized our son.
Why...*shruggs* mainly I've heard it's cleaner, and well his father is too.
I was just thining it would be easier for the kid if he was the same as his dad.


Yep. Same here.

And what do you know? It didn't traumatize him for life.

Isn't that amazing?

angelmikayla
May 27th, 2006, 03:34 AM
I can give pros and cons for this arguement. My oldest son is circumcised and my youngest is not. With my oldest, we had problems when the wound got infected. He was in so much pain for a couple of weeks after the surgery, it was really heartbreaking. After he healed, there hasn't been any problems. As for my youngest son, there have been just as many, if not more, problems with this. At about 4 weeks old, we ended up in the hospital with a severe infection; I was told that I over cleaned him (if that's possible). About a month later, we were back in the doctor's office with the same problem, they said that I wasn't cleaning him enough. Finally, I found a happy medium and we haven't had any more emergency room visits, but his foreskin does flaire up every now and again (he's 27 months old now). I have seriously thought about having him circumcised, my only problem with it is the fact that he is almost 3 and the procedure may be worse on him now.

BrightEyed
June 2nd, 2006, 08:34 PM
Personally I wouldn't do it. It's that way naturally why mess with it?

Silverfire Darkmoon
August 1st, 2006, 11:54 AM
Um.....okay, first off:
WHY the hell would you cut off something that the Gods put there, obviously for a reason? Why the HELL would you want to inflict NEEDLESS pain on your beautiful, perfect newborn baby boy? I am profoundly grateful that my father just couldn't deal with the idea of the doctor hurting me. I would NOT be able to inflict pain of any sort on my son, if/when I have one.
Now, from a hygenic point of view, I've never had any trouble keeping myself clean. When I was living with my sister and her baby son, I never had any trouble keeping HIM clean when changing his diapers.
Great. So a circumcised penis gets keratinized. Know what that means? You've got a callus on the end of your dick. Hooray!
I've actually had more people interested in my because I'm intact. And from a performance point of view, well, I've never had vaginal sex, but I can say right now that oral sex was so ridiculously, sheerly intense I couldn't take it, and there was no unexpectedly short performance. That idea's BS.
Additionally, when practicing onanism, shall we say, uncut guys don't have to use lube, so things are less messy (and noisy).

KylalaKitty
August 1st, 2006, 12:06 PM
I say, no, I wouldnt do that to my child and all that "easier to keep clean" I heard is nothing more than a myth. Besides, I'm not a Jew and I seriously doubt my son would become one. If he wants that done when he grows up, fine, but I'm not going to have any of that when hes born.

equinox2
August 4th, 2006, 03:59 PM
Maphdet wrote:


We circumsized our son.
Why...*shruggs* mainly I've heard it's cleaner, and well his father is too.
I was just thining it would be easier for the kid if he was the same as his dad.

When I was 19, we found out that I had a brain tumor the size of a ping-pong ball. They had carve open my head like a pumpkin to get it out. I’m fine now, except that I’m deaf in one ear and half of my face is paralyzed. Those are pretty minor – I hardly notice the ear thing, and the face isn’t that noticeable – after all, most people have uneven smiles too. :hahugh:

When our son was born, we definitely wanted him to be the same as his dad. After all, otherwise wouldn’t he grow up thinking he was somehow not right if he differed from his dad in obvious ways? So we had his facial nerve severed, paralyzing half his face. We also broke his eardrum on one side so he’d be half deaf like me.

Yes, of course I’m kidding. Did your stomach churn when reading that as much as mine did when writing it? That would simply be child abuse. The only difference between that and the “circumcise to be like daddy” argument is that one is culturally common and the other isn’t.

There may be real reasons for circumcision, but I haven’t heard one yet that stands up to scrutiny, and the “be like his dad” one is simply pathetic.

Silverfire Darkmoon wrote:

Now, from a hygenic point of view, I've never had any trouble keeping myself clean.

Neither have we with our two sons. However, anecdotal evidence is worthless. Stories of “my son is intact and it’s been fine” or “my son was circumcised and they messed up and cut most of the penis off” aren’t useful unless as part of controlled studies. So we should rely on controlled studies and medical literature. So let’s look at those:

The professional group responsible for this area is the American Academy of Pediatrics. They have concluded that:


Circumcision is not essential to a child’s well-being at birth, even though it does have some potential medical benefits. These benefits are not compelling enough to warrant the AAP to recommend routine newborn circumcision.

So, the “benefits”:


The risk of getting a urinary tract infection in the first year of life is 1 in 100 for an intact baby, 1 in 1000 for a circumcised baby. So either way you are unlikely to get a UTI, and even if you do, a few days of antibiotics cures them. That’s like suggesting we cut off one’s nose to prevent colds.

Your odds of penile cancer are 1 in a million for circumcised men, 3 in a million for intact men. Either way, you are better than 99.9996% likely not to get penile cancer. You can also cut your chance of lung cancer by surgically embedding a facemask onto your mouth.

Complications during the surgery are uncommon – only happening around 1 or 2 times per 500 circumcisions.


That’s about it. I don’t see them as justification for cutting off a functional part of the body that significantly enhances life’s pleasures. I certainly wouldn’t make that decision for my child – it’s his body.


uncut guys don't have to use lube, so things are less messy

Wow, I didn’t know that. It would be nice if my foreskin hadn’t gone out with the trash just after I was born. Looks like I had good reasons to cry then, in addition to the pain.

One other thing that is important to realize is that there is significant opposition to leaving boys intact here in the US due to conservative Christians. This seems very odd to me, since in the new testament in Gal it says that being uncircumcised is fine. In 2003 a pediatrician examining our son was alarmed that he was uncircumcised, and started talking about all the dangers of being uncircumcised. He even started to convince us to schedule our toddler for a circumcision. We looked into the data again, and found that the medical case against circumcision hadn’t weakened, but had only gotten stronger. We decided not to have him circumcised. Then we found out that that pediatrician is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS who tries to get parents to circumcise their kids. We almost sued him, but no harm had happened, so we couldn’t. So if you have kept your son intact, be aware that there are people out there who will tell you all kinds of lies to get you to circumcise or to think that ballooning is bad, or that you have to do a lot of extra stuff with an intact son, or whatever. Check with the AAP or others before doing anything other than leaving it alone

Blessings all-

Sage Rainsong
August 4th, 2006, 04:18 PM
I don't think that I would. I myself am not circumcised and have no problems with hygene. So to me there seems to be little use for it. I even heard some locker room arguement which I found funny. Some people feel that the may get made fun of in a locker room. Frankly if someone was looking at my son that closely in a locker room then it's time to talk to the teachers lol.

Fire's Shadow
August 4th, 2006, 04:58 PM
I try not to take pot shot, and I think I'm pretty good about recognizing when I do and apologising. I know nothing about Fire Sage's sexual prowress, and neither do I want to know. (No offense.)

It's ok, I didn't want to know about your sexual prowress either. :hahugh: (No offense.)

Psycmoe
August 4th, 2006, 09:19 PM
It's ok, I didn't want to know about your sexual prowress either. :hahugh: (No offense.)

Lolacaust. Fair enough. :D

@equinox2: thank you so much for hunting down all that information! It's exactly what I've been waiting for.

@everyone else: The bar didn't fly. Turns out my better half is uncomfortable with me asking drunk strangers about penises. Sorry!

LIAL
August 4th, 2006, 10:31 PM
For-against-info-alternates....

Personally, I wonder why anyone would ever ever ever ever ever (x 1million) do this to their child. Or choose to have the procedure done when they are an adult.

I honestly can't even get behind doing it for religious reasons, but that's me.

MysticWicks opinions..... GO!

You may have already explained this but why do you carry that opinion?

Shanti
August 4th, 2006, 10:47 PM
No. Why? Its normal.
Should we do that to the girls? There is a form female circumcision like males. Its considered mutilation here.
In both sexes the prepuce is removed.
The Prepuse is a retractable piece of skin which covers part of the genitals.

On a male, this covers and protects the head of the penis.
On a female, it surrounds and protects the clitoris.

So again why would I?

Findarto
August 4th, 2006, 10:49 PM
No. Why? Its normal.
Should we do that to the girls? There is a form female circumcision like males. Its considered mutilation here.
In both sexes the prepuce is removed.
The Prepuse is a retractable piece of skin which covers part of the genitals.

On a male, this covers and protects the head of the penis.
On a female, it surrounds and protects the clitoris.

So again why would I?
A better reaosn would be like,
"Oh, we don't do that to our boys. Why? Because Findarto isn't either, DUH!"

:p

Shanti
August 4th, 2006, 11:03 PM
A better reaosn would be like,
"Oh, we don't do that to our boys. Why? Because Findarto isn't either, DUH!"

:pLOL dads is!! Who cares. Different is our families specialty!!
My son is glad he isnt, he likes it the way it is. Although no boys have been cut since the dads were. Its a stopped tradition. My grandsons are not cut either.

David19
August 5th, 2006, 05:03 PM
Can i ask just ask, is it common for U.S. boys to be circumcised, i only thought you'd be circumcised if you were Jewish or Muslim, which i could understand (for religious reasons, maybe cultural too), but the majority of American's, as far as i know, aren't Jewish (or Muslim) so it's something that i've always wondered about as it's not the first time i've heard a lot of U.S. boys are circumcised.

But as for me, i'm not sure if i would get a kid circumcised or not. I'm not circumcized, despite half my family being Jewish (but my mum, who's Jewish by birth i guess, isn't religious, and in fact doesn't really like most religions, didn't want me to have any religious background, although my dad, being Catholic, may have liked me to be baptised, but my mum wouldn't let me :)).

I think it'd depend, maybe i was feeling like i wanted to honour my Jewish ancestors, or if my partner was Jewish or something.

I don't know really, i guess i'd have to wait and see. Although, as i'm gay, i doubt it's something i'd have to decide.

Arion
August 5th, 2006, 05:49 PM
I don't know. Circumsized ones are supposed to be easier to keep clean and less likely to be infected by the HIV virus if exposed to it, but it seems kinda cruel. I'm circumsized, and I don't remember the pain of it at all, so it isn't like it traumatizes the boy for his whole life. Still, I wouldn't want to put my child through any unnecessary pain. I'd have to ask somebody who isn't circumsized what it's like, and if they don't mind the extra skin, then I probably wouldn't bother to get my son circumsized:lol:

Findarto
August 5th, 2006, 06:28 PM
I don't know. Circumsized ones are supposed to be easier to keep clean and less likely to be infected by the HIV virus if exposed to it, but it seems kinda cruel. I'm circumsized, and I don't remember the pain of it at all, so it isn't like it traumatizes the boy for his whole life. Still, I wouldn't want to put my child through any unnecessary pain. I'd have to ask somebody who isn't circumsized what it's like, and if they don't mind the extra skin, then I probably wouldn't bother to get my son circumsized:lol:
The extra skin is cool,
it's all skin like.

I don't know, try going up to a person with one arm and being like "Hey! What's it like without the other one, I'm thinking of cutting my baby's off or not, what do you prefer?"

Okay, bad example, but it's similar ;.

Marcasite
August 5th, 2006, 10:36 PM
The hygiene barely factors in. All you gotta do is pull the skin back and wash it daily. It's not that complicated :P

Findarto
August 5th, 2006, 11:09 PM
The hygiene barely factors in. All you gotta do is pull the skin back and wash it daily. It's not that complicated :P
Sometimes,
like on weekends, I don't like to take a shower.
Too busy sleeping.

I don't shower, unless I haven't in a while or I'm going somewhere (School, the gas station, etc...)(

dragoncrone
August 6th, 2006, 12:00 AM
My son was born in 1970, and at that time it was largely automatic that all boy babies be circumcized. And, yes, this does seem to be a cultural thing here in the US.


When his son was born 7 years ago he personally objected, sort of on pagan principle, to circumcision but, again, the hospital routinely did it.

Makes 'em easier to keep clean. However I have also heard that un-C'd males are aroused more easily, since the tip of the penis is protected and more sensitive.

Marcasite
August 6th, 2006, 12:31 AM
My SO showers daily but that's cause he sweats a lot. I'd imagine you wouldn't need to wash it every day unless you were getting that much action :P I think there's some misconception that the foreskin gets really disgusting in no time at all and if you don't wash it every 6 hours it'll stink and ooze. It's really nothing like that. It starts smelling a little cheezy if it's not washed in a few days. It doesn't ooze or smell like dead things. It's really not that high maintenance.
ETA: as for the HIV thing, I don't think that should factor in either. Using a condom is far more effective protection. There's absolutely no reason not to use one if a man is unsure of his partner's history.

Findarto
August 6th, 2006, 05:34 AM
My SO showers daily but that's cause he sweats a lot. I'd imagine you wouldn't need to wash it every day unless you were getting that much action :P I think there's some misconception that the foreskin gets really disgusting in no time at all and if you don't wash it every 6 hours it'll stink and ooze. It's really nothing like that. It starts smelling a little cheezy if it's not washed in a few days. It doesn't ooze or smell like dead things. It's really not that high maintenance.
ETA: as for the HIV thing, I don't think that should factor in either. Using a condom is far more effective protection. There's absolutely no reason not to use one if a man is unsure of his partner's history.
Hehe, I wish my foreskin had magic STD fighting powers,
I'd get a LOT of action hehe ;).

I don't sweat much, when I'm inside that is, so I usually let it be.
I've found that my foreskin doesn't get dirty at all though, unless I did something and then didn't wash for like two weeks it would probably get rank in there or something...

CheshireEyes
August 15th, 2006, 03:22 AM
I was wonderin' when this thread was gonna resurface after that other thread popped up...._inabox_ :viking:

Findarto
August 15th, 2006, 10:30 PM
I was wonderin' when this thread was gonna resurface after that other thread popped up...._inabox_ :viking:
Which thread?
There are many ;).

CheshireEyes
August 26th, 2006, 09:17 PM
Which thread?
There are many ;).

Wow, sorry I didn't answer you sooner, I just saw this. That thread about circumcised men are less likely to get the AIDS virus that those circumcised. If I can find it, I post that link.

Findarto
August 26th, 2006, 10:27 PM
Wow, sorry I didn't answer you sooner, I just saw this. That thread about circumcised men are less likely to get the AIDS virus that those circumcised. If I can find it, I post that link.
You do realize, in the time it took you to reply,
I could have gotten AIDS because I'm uncircumcised?

I'm mad at you know, :p.

Ron
August 26th, 2006, 10:48 PM
Well as I gay man... circumcision is a joy of my life.

I'm not sure about the situation for females.

Findarto
August 26th, 2006, 11:40 PM
Well as I gay man... circumcision is a joy of my life.

I'm not sure about the situation for females.
You're sixteen,
I call you a gay boy :p.

Ron
August 27th, 2006, 10:40 AM
You're sixteen,
I call you a gay boy :p.

Okay! lol. I would never make that distinction, since "gay boy" sounds like something Caligula would say! (the depraved Roman Emperor... look him up!)

Nasty Caligula!

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 02:03 PM
Okay! lol. I would never make that distinction, since "gay boy" sounds like something Caligula would say! (the depraved Roman Emperor... look him up!)

Nasty Caligula!
Everyone knows Caligula,
and everyone who knows Caligula slept with him... :P

So, why do you like the Circumcised mens better?

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 02:08 PM
You do realize, in the time it took you to reply,
I could have gotten AIDS because I'm uncircumcised?

I'm mad at you know, :p.

Great, now I have to live with that guilt for the rest of my life!! :lol:

EDIT: Here's that other thread I was talkin' about:
http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=136484

Ron
August 27th, 2006, 02:14 PM
So, why do you like the Circumcised mens better?

I don't know. I like the sex more? 8O

Psycmoe
August 27th, 2006, 05:33 PM
Well as I gay man... circumcision is a joy of my life.


Why?

Seriously, I don't know.

David19
August 27th, 2006, 06:00 PM
I don't know. I like the sex more? 8O

Just to cut in here, i want sex, now it's back on my brain again (i was free for about 2 minutes, ; LOL!).

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 06:30 PM
I don't know. I like the sex more? 8O
Thanks CheshireEyes, even though you're late!

Well, Ron lol, you'll just have to learn to live with the extra skin :p.

WiccanGoddess
August 27th, 2006, 07:03 PM
My kid won't be forced into circumcision, though I will promote it for cleanliness. If the father disagrees, so be it. If we are at a standstill, the child will be at the whim of the doctor.

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 07:20 PM
Just to cut in here, i want sex, now it's back on my brain again (i was free for about 2 minutes, ; LOL!).

no pun intended?:lol:

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 08:23 PM
My kid won't be forced into circumcision, though I will promote it for cleanliness. If the father disagrees, so be it. If we are at a standstill, the child will be at the whim of the doctor.
Were did you get misinformed that just because you're uncut means you're unclean?

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 08:25 PM
Were did you get misinformed that just because you're uncut means you're unclean?

you're EXs have been talking..... jk :lol: _inabox_

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 08:28 PM
you're EXs have been talking..... jk :lol: _inabox_
Damn them!

I'll have to go over to their houses with the chainsaw again... :p

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 08:32 PM
Damn them!

I'll have to go over to their houses with the chainsaw again... :p

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i253/CheshireEyes/lol-bee.jpg

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 08:35 PM
It is harder to keep the tip of the penis clean if you are uncircumsized. Bacteria can form under the foreskin, and for younger men (little boys), they may have more difficulty keeping it clean...as they forget to pull back the foreskin while bathing.

My little boy is circumsized...and I wish I had never done it. The skin partially grew back twice...and it had to be redone.

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 08:38 PM
It is harder to keep the tip of the penis clean if you are uncircumsized. Bacteria can form under the foreskin, and for younger men (little boys), they may have more difficulty keeping it clean...as they forget to pull back the foreskin while bathing.

My little boy is circumsized...and I wish I had never done it. The skin partially grew back twice...and it had to be redone.

Why do you wish you had never done it? Because it was done wrong?

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 08:39 PM
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i253/CheshireEyes/lol-bee.jpg
Wow! What a Rotflercopter :p.
Nice Karma pic though, those horny Jamaicans :lol:.

Twinkle, huh uh. I never had a problem, neither has my dad, or people I know from school.

Findarto,
wonders who will ask how he knows whether the guys from school's penises are clean or not.

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 08:41 PM
Wow! What a Rotflercopter :p.
Nice Karma pic though, those horny Jamaicans :lol:.
I love that pic, its hilarious!! LOL




Findarto,
wonders who will ask how he knows whether the guys from school's penises are clean or not.

Uh, that would be me....

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 08:46 PM
I love that pic, its hilarious!! LOL




Uh, that would be me....
Hey!
What happens on the football team's bus, stays on the bus ;).

Where does one find such pictures, *in a Tibetan monk voice*?

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 08:51 PM
Hey!
What happens on the football team's bus, stays on the bus ;).
I don't even wanna know.... ok, yes i do!!!:lol:





Where does one find such pictures, *in a Tibetan monk voice*?

*in asian laudramat's owner's voice* ancient chinese secret, hehehehe


I don't remember where I got the soup one, but they have a bunch that i use, here:
http://www.funnypicturesworld.com/

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 09:01 PM
Why do you wish you had never done it? Because it was done wrong?


Yeah.....

If it had been done correctly the first time I would have been fine. The pediatrician told me that 50% of all circumcisions grow back.

They've changed the way they're done, apparently. They used to place a ring around the base of the penis to insure that the skin did not grow back. They don't do that anymore....I'm not sure why.

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 09:04 PM
Yeah.....

If it had been done correctly the first time I would have been fine. The pediatrician told me that 50% of all circumcisions grow back.

They've changed the way they're done, apparently. They used to place a ring around the base of the penis to insure that the skin did not grow back. They don't do that anymore....I'm not sure why.

hmm, interesting. How fast did it grow back? Was it like a few months or years?

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 09:31 PM
It was a matter of months....we put the creme on it and did everything we were supposed to...but part of it grew back.

The Dr. manually pulled it back down and it hurt him badly....He got over it quickly....we did the medicine and the pulling manually ourselves...and now it's still partially grown back.

He doesn't look deformed or anything...and I would never had noticed if my husband hadn't said something.

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 09:46 PM
I don't even wanna know.... ok, yes i do!!!:lol:




*in asian laudramat's owner's voice* ancient chinese secret, hehehehe


I don't remember where I got the soup one, but they have a bunch that i use, here:
http://www.funnypicturesworld.com/
Nah, you don't wanna know.
Although, I did hear a semi-offensive joke once that ties in with the chinese secret thing:

White Man: Hey, how do Asians have so many kids if they're so small?
Asian Man: Ancient chinese secret.

Told to me by an asian kid that sat next to me in class :lol:.


What was so bad about your son having some skin Twinkle?

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 09:49 PM
Nothing, really. My husband and I discussed it...and we felt that it would be better for him socially to have it done.....the vast majority of males have it done...and my husband is circumsized....

We just followed the status quo....

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 09:52 PM
Nothing, really. My husband and I discussed it...and we felt that it would be better for him socially to have it done.....the vast majority of males have it done...and my husband is circumsized....

We just followed the status quo....

well, good for you, I agree with your decision. But the board is pretty evenly divided, pro and con._inabox_

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:01 PM
Nothing, really. My husband and I discussed it...and we felt that it would be better for him socially to have it done.....the vast majority of males have it done...and my husband is circumsized....

We just followed the status quo....
Actually, I think the vast majority of males in the world are uncut...

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 10:19 PM
I don't know the statistics...but every male I've ummm.....come into contact with has had it done.

I did have one boyfriend many years ago that was uncut. I didn't find it all that appealing, frankly.

I should have specified that in my experience that vast majority of males have had it done...

Geesh.

WiccanGoddess
August 27th, 2006, 10:25 PM
Were did you get misinformed that just because you're uncut means you're unclean?

I never said that. Though, I have heard men who were uncut speak of friends who were cut, and that the cut ones were cleaner.

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:27 PM
I don't know the statistics...but every male I've ummm.....come into contact with has had it done.

I did have one boyfriend many years ago that was uncut. I didn't find it all that appealing, frankly.

I should have specified that in my experience that vast majority of males have had it done...

Geesh.
Only 1/6 to 1/3 of the world is circumcised.

Uncut countries( Majority):



Australia[1], Austria[2], Belgium[2], Botswana, Canada[1], China[2], Denmark[2], Finland[2], France[2], Germany[2], Iceland[2], Ireland[2], Japan[2], Namibia[3], Netherlands[2], New Zealand[1], Norway[2], Swaziland[3], Sweden[2], Switzerland[2], United Kingdom[2], Zambia[3], and Zimbabwe[3]

Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo (Brazzaville), Congo (Kinshasa), Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Fiji, Gabon, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Italy, Jamaica, Kiribati, Laos, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malawi, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco Mozambique, Myanmar (Burma), Nauru, Nepal, Nicaragua, North Korea, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Serbia and Montenegro, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname,Taiwan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Uganda, Uruguay, Vatican City, Vietnam and Venezuela

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_worldwide

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:28 PM
Actually, I think the vast majority of males in the world are uncut...

That reminds me of a bald joke, I'll just adapt it.

There are only a few perfect penii, the rest he covered with a foreskin.

:lol:

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:31 PM
I never said that. Though, I have heard men who were uncut speak of friends who were cut, and that the cut ones were cleaner.

^My view on that.


But, that leads me to ask, how do your uncut male friends know that the cut guys are cleaner? Are they sleeping with these guys, or they just penis watchers? :lol:

I mean, having a foreskin has nothing to do with cleanliness. I've met some people who were frigging nasty, and that didn't make me say, "Oh, they must be uncut!"

So, are circumcised women cleaner than ones who are not?

:viking:

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:33 PM
^My view on that.


But, that leads me to ask, how do your uncut male friends know that the cut guys are cleaner? Are they sleeping with these guys, or they just penis watchers? :lol:

I mean, having a foreskin has nothing to do with cleanliness. I've met some people who were frigging nasty, and that didn't make me say, "Oh, they must be uncut!"

So, are circumcised women cleaner than ones who are not?

:viking:

Findarto, I believe this calls for a test. Ok, ladies, Findarto and I will need a female volunteer.....:deviltail

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:34 PM
That reminds me of a bald joke, I'll just adapt it.

There are only a few perfect penii, the rest he covered with a foreskin.

:lol:
Haha lol.

I don't know, I imagine penises are bold guys and the uncut ones are wearing hats :p.

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:35 PM
Findarto, I believe this calls for a test. Ok, ladies, Findarto and I will need a female volunteer.....:deviltail
Very long test in my case,
oooh burn! :p.

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:35 PM
Haha lol.

I don't know, I imagine penises are bold guys and the uncut ones are wearing hats :p.

:yayah:

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:36 PM
Very long test in my case,
oooh burn! :p.

hey, if i went first, i don't see them wantin' to continue the test..... cause, WE HAVE A WINNAH!!!:viking:

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:37 PM
:yayah:
You laugh now,
but not later...

I need some guy Shakesphere quotes at this time lol.

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 10:39 PM
I volunteer!! I volunteer!!!:boing:

Oh darn....I posted too slow.

Findarto
August 27th, 2006, 10:40 PM
hey, if i went first, i don't see them wantin' to continue the test..... cause, WE HAVE A WINNAH!!!:viking:
In David Carradine from Kung Fu voice:
Two inches of...

:lol:

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:41 PM
I volunteer!! I volunteer!!!:boing:

Well step right up, young lady. I want you to know, this is PURELY for scientific research. Will it be *drumroll* Product A (me) or Product B (Findarto) first? :p

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:42 PM
In David Carradine from Kung Fu voice:
Two inches of...

:lol:

yeah.....across!!!

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 10:47 PM
Thickness definitely has a place in all of this....hehehe.

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 10:54 PM
Thickness definitely has a place in all of this....hehehe.

then I'm your *ahem* man....:hahugh: _inabox_

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 10:56 PM
I knew I liked you!!!:cheers:

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 11:00 PM
I knew I liked you!!!:cheers:

C'mere little lady, I need ta wrangle me a pretty little texan....:lol:

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 11:06 PM
LOL!!!

Why sir! I's a lady....:hehehehe:

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 11:08 PM
Twinkle, twinkle little star
How I wonder, how you are
Drive into the parking lot
To let me know if i'm good or not....


....at uh, parallel parking i mean... :p

Ron
August 27th, 2006, 11:11 PM
Thanks CheshireEyes, even though you're late!

Well, Ron lol, you'll just have to learn to live with the extra skin :p.

I like it more... I dunno! Probably because I identify with the archetype of an exposed guy all out in the big scary cold world.

lol. :spaceman:

Twinkle
August 27th, 2006, 11:14 PM
Twinkle, twinkle little star
How I wonder, how you are
Drive into the parking lot
To let me know if i'm good or not....


....at uh, parallel parking i mean... :p



ROFLMAO!!!

We'll have to see if I'm any good at driving stick.:hahugh:

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 11:20 PM
ROFLMAO!!!

We'll have to see if I'm any good at driving stick.:hahugh:

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i253/CheshireEyes/lol-bee.jpg

Oh, touche' my dear woman, touche'

Little Billy
August 27th, 2006, 11:33 PM
For-against-info-alternates....

Personally, I wonder why anyone would ever ever ever ever ever (x 1million) do this to their child. Or choose to have the procedure done when they are an adult.

I honestly can't even get behind doing it for religious reasons, but that's me.

MysticWicks opinions..... GO!


http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

CheshireEyes
August 27th, 2006, 11:37 PM
http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

yup, unfortunately... ugh

Tentasticle
August 28th, 2006, 11:57 AM
As with abortion, gay marriage, marmite, dogs vs cats and several flavours of astrology debate, I have the TRUE answer.

The answer is YES.

23rd person from either the pro or anti camp that gets in and claims it gets it.

David19
August 28th, 2006, 03:19 PM
^My view on that.


But, that leads me to ask, how do your uncut male friends know that the cut guys are cleaner? Are they sleeping with these guys, or they just penis watchers? :lol:

I mean, having a foreskin has nothing to do with cleanliness. I've met some people who were frigging nasty, and that didn't make me say, "Oh, they must be uncut!"

So, are circumcised women cleaner than ones who are not?

:viking:


I never said that. Though, I have heard men who were uncut speak of friends who were cut, and that the cut ones were cleaner.

My female friends have told me circumcized guys are cleaner for some reason, generally speaking, i think 'cause it's easier to clean, and they did say, and i agree with them, female circumcision is a lot different than for males, it ruins sex for females, men aren't affected (i think female circumcision is basically a way of 'branding' women, like cattle).

Tadrith
October 1st, 2006, 12:06 PM
men aren't affected

WHAT?!

Are you kidding me man? The foreskin is some of the most sensitive parts of a man's penis. Of course it affects things! It affects them something serious!

Argh!

When I have a kid, no snippy snippy for him. I got it when I was young, and I'm not sure the reasons why (might ask my folks). But nowadays, the "keep clean" part isn't necessary with the invention of hot showers and soap and an obsessive "cleanliness" that's positioned itself in social stigma. I want my boys all natural.

Tad

David19
October 1st, 2006, 01:23 PM
When I have a kid, no snippy snippy for him. I got it when I was young, and I'm not sure the reasons why (might ask my folks). But nowadays, the "keep clean" part isn't necessary with the invention of hot showers and soap and an obsessive "cleanliness" that's positioned itself in social stigma. I want my boys all natural.

Not unless you marry into a Jewish or Muslim family.....

Findarto
October 1st, 2006, 03:47 PM
Not unless you marry into a Jewish or Muslim family.....
Some muslims are uncicrumcised too, and so are some Jewish guys. I watched a documentary of how they were trying to go re-invent the rules of the religions and some kind of political change or something...

Psycmoe
October 2nd, 2006, 01:07 AM
http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

THHHHHPPPPPPPPPPPPPPT.

innocent
October 2nd, 2006, 02:22 AM
I would say No to infant circumcision for the following reasons:

1.) its HARDER to keep clean! When a boy is born the foreskin is attached to the glands, nothing extra to wash or take care of yet!

2.) It is much more painful for a baby boy to be circed than an older boy because it involves first tearing the foreskin back before removing it. Also a baby can't say I need an advil this really hurts!

3.) Bridges, Skin tags, and the occasional OOPS! When your cutting something that small, its not possible to see everything your doing. Boys who are circ'd after they turn four and the skin has naturally loosened these problems dont occur. These can create minor to major loss of function or feeling and also make it harder for a guy to keep clean.

4.) Fournier's gangrene. Look it up on a google image search seriously not for the feint of heart. I've seen a boy who had to have most of the skin from his stomach and thighs removed because of it.

5.) Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are more common that circumcized male children then uncircumcized male children.

IMHO there are no benifits to outweigh the risk until after age four.

Reasons why I float either way on adult circumcision.

1.) Adults who are uncircumcized need less "fluid assistance" then circumcized men do during intercourse. The extra skin helps with movement.

2.) Adult males should be careful to clean before intercourse if they are uncircumcized because sometimes the dead skin cells that build up can help create infections for there partner.


My overall conclusion: HIS body HIS choice. We don't allow female genital mutilation without medical cause why should we allow it in boys without? I see it as cosmetic surgery.