• Circumcision
    662 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Gar~;35439347]I was circumcised at birth, I don't see anything wrong with it. In my opinion from what I've heard I would have opted to be circumcised later down the track anyways, it's just good that I don't have to go through the awkwardness of doing it now. I have no memory of it happening thankfully and to be honest the thought of just sitting there while the doctor snips away at your penis with scissors scares me, so I probably wouldn't go through it if I wanted it.[/QUOTE] What's wrong with it? It's like the doctor cutting off a toe or two when you're born. You don't necessarily need them, but you're cutting off part of someone's body, without anesthesia, without letting them make a choice, when cutting it off will have some negative effects down the road.
There are negative effects to both having AND not having your foreskin. Don't single out circumcised people based on the fact that it's "negative" to have had a circumcision.
Afaik there's no real threat to being circumcised or not. [editline]28th July 2012[/editline] But I don't usually google things about my dick.
[QUOTE=cwook;36976727]Afaik there's no real threat to being circumcised or not. [editline]28th July 2012[/editline] But I don't usually google things about my dick.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;36950272][url=http://robinhl.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/botched-circumcision.jpg]nothing[/url] [url=http://www.oocities.org/stopric/botchedcircum.jpg]can[/url] [url=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NeS7jvIDK-w/Tsh3wKVvjmI/AAAAAAAAABI/L3TrViKytuQ/s1600/Picture+009.jpg]go[/url] [url=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--MQMq1kJZnU/TslG8rWKo_I/AAAAAAAAAEw/2850SQjwPaM/s1600/Ripped+Stitch+3.jpg]wrong![/url][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=wertel;35450552]I believe that circumcision should be decided when they are born. It will hurt a lot less than when they are older. Plus when you are circumcised it is easier to clean your dick. I am not Jewish, but I am circumcised due to it being more hygienic.[/QUOTE] actually it hurts like, far, far more. Newborn babies are much more sensitive.
[QUOTE=Fetret;35440773]I think the problem lies with the fact that while it is (and should be) a personal choice, by the time you are mature enough to make such a choice it becomes much more painful/embarrassing. Having the foreskin removed when you are a baby or 5-6 years old is nothing compared to getting it removed when you are 18+, it must be hell. Another point to consider is the cultural aspect of it, apart from religion. In cultures where circumcision is normal and expected, it is a rite of passage and the families are expected to go through with it. It might seem odd, but if you are not part of the culture, who are you to judge it? And if you are part of the culture and have valid criticisms, you are allowed to not go through with the tradition and perhaps risk being gossiped about or shunned. I know this is not a fair choice, but that is the circumstance. Honestly I can't see what this debate is about. If you are uncircumcised and are from a non-circumcision background you basically have very little say in this since you cannot fully grasp the social and cultural aspects of the process. If you are uncircumcised and are from a circumcision background, your parents either decided you should have a choice or something else happened. You might have been ostracised for that decision, but again it has no bearing on the issue of circumcision anyway. If you are circumcised, regardless of background, it is too late anyway. If you feel very strongly about it, you are perfectly within your rights to not have your kids circumcised and leave the choice up to them, but that does not give you the right to be self-righteous about other cultures and beliefs.[/QUOTE] What the fuck gives their parents the right to cut off a normal part of their body (unless for medical reasons blah blah blah). [editline]29th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Reagent;36241161]i agree that it should be the choice of the child at 18 whether to get circumcised unless there is a health issue. But there is a problem with the government attempting to regulate religious choices. And if the government could pass it then there would be the trouble of parents attempting to do it without a trained doctor to "save their childrens souls" or some crap like that.[/QUOTE] We can't ban radical Islam terrorism because it violates their religion!
Anyone mention yet that circumcision reduces the chance of spreading aids to your partner? [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/health/29hiv[/url]. link dead for me [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/health/13cnd-hiv.html[/url] new link
[QUOTE=H8Entitlement;37030994]Anyone mention yet that circumcision reduces the chance of spreading aids to your partner? [URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/health/29hiv[/URL].[/QUOTE] Did you know that if you pull out all of your teeth you will never get tooth decay and mouth infections? Let's pull our teeth out. Did you know that if you cut off your hand you will never have Dupuytren's contracture? Let's cut off our hands. Did you know that if you cut off your foreskin you might reduce the chances of getting aids? Let's cut off our foreskins. Etc. Even if it does, you don't have the right to mutilate a baby's penis without his/her consent unless it's medically essential (disease, etc.)
What it boils down to, ultimately, is that circumcision will never get banned. People can find a way to disagree with everything and it can suit them just fine. And again, because while you believe a parent has no right to "mutilate" a baby, we believe that you have no right to say what should or shouldn't happen to somebody else's child. Besides the fact that you're degrading everything by calling us mutilated. Nice neutral word choice there, master debaters. (not that i'm really particularly offended by it, somebody else might be)
[QUOTE=FFStudios;37049159]What it boils down to, ultimately, is that circumcision will never get banned. People can find a way to disagree with everything and it can suit them just fine. And again, because while you believe a parent has no right to "mutilate" a baby, we believe that you have no right to say what should or shouldn't happen to somebody else's child. Besides the fact that you're degrading everything by calling us mutilated. Nice neutral word choice there, master debaters. (not that i'm really particularly offended by it, somebody else might be)[/QUOTE] It's about to be banned in Germany. And infants can't decide what they want to happen to their bodies at that age, so no parents should be allowed to butcher their babies without their consent. And for that, they have to be 18 years old. It's like chopping your infant's fingers off because it's your kid.
[QUOTE=sonerin;37031371]Did you know that if you pull out all of your teeth you will never get tooth decay and mouth infections? Let's pull our teeth out. Did you know that if you cut off your hand you will never have Dupuytren's contracture? Let's cut off our hands. Did you know that if you cut off your foreskin you might reduce the chances of getting aids? Let's cut off our foreskins. Etc. Even if it does, you don't have the right to mutilate a baby's penis without his/her consent unless it's medically essential (disease, etc.)[/QUOTE] Bad examples tbh. Tooth disease? not transmissible to others, and easy preventative measures Dupuytren's contracture? i have no idea what this is/ is it genetic? ie/ is it preventable at all? And its not "might reduce the chances"- if you had read the source- it does reduce the chance. Its prolly the safest, easiest, cheapest way to get that dramatic of result Not really the point though, you seem to be stuck on the "mutilation" aspect... Tbh i feel like your ignoring the worst forms of circumcision (commonly done to baby girls in third world countries) while railing against the safest, most benign form of circumcision... I have yet to meet anyone who had this done as a baby, who actually cared one way or the other latter in life (to be fair the reverse is also true) in short/ yes the most severe cases should be banned (in most countries it is). But i honestly dont care about the safe style that is religiously practiced. Why can they do this to their kid? Well for starters its their kid. Its also their religion. Combine the two and as long as theres no disability because of it- i dont see a problem.
[QUOTE=H8Entitlement;37051335]Bad examples tbh. Tooth disease? not transmissible to others, and easy preventative measures Dupuytren's contracture? i have no idea what this is/ is it genetic? ie/ is it preventable at all? And its not "might reduce the chances"- if you had read the source- it does reduce the chance. Its prolly the safest, easiest, cheapest way to get that dramatic of result Not really the point though, you seem to be stuck on the "mutilation" aspect... Tbh i feel like your ignoring the worst forms of circumcision (commonly done to baby girls in third world countries) while railing against the safest, most benign form of circumcision... I have yet to meet anyone who had this done as a baby, who actually cared one way or the other latter in life (to be fair the reverse is also true) in short/ yes the most severe cases should be banned (in most countries it is). But i honestly dont care about the safe style that is religiously practiced. Why can they do this to their kid? Well for starters its their kid. Its also their religion. Combine the two and as long as theres no disability because of it- i dont see a problem.[/QUOTE] There's no "it's their kid, I can do whatever I want with him" and "I want to apply my religious beliefs on someone who doesn't even know what 'hello' means" in our world and there shouldn't be. Just because circumcision might have one or two benefits doesn't make it okay for you to chop your child's skin off like that.
[QUOTE=sonerin;37053603]There's no "it's their kid, I can do whatever I want with him" and "I want to apply my religious beliefs on someone who doesn't even know what 'hello' means" in our world and there shouldn't be. Just because circumcision might have one or two benefits doesn't make it okay for you to chop your child's skin off like that.[/QUOTE] Of all the examples you provided, you listed taking out vital/extremely integral organs. How is foreskin integral to any action? At all? The parents can do what they want with their kid; that is freedom. They can also choose to give them shots. What if they didn't give the baby a tetanus shot? He would have a greater chance of getting tetanus. What if they didn't circumcise the baby? He would have a greater chance of getting infections/spreading AIDs.
Shots medically help the children. It's still unknown if circumcision provides any benefits.
I know one thing, if I ever have a boy, I'm NOT circumcising him. I will teach him how too clean what he has.
[QUOTE=Jookia;37081199]Shots medically help the children. It's still unknown if circumcision provides any benefits.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/health/13cnd-hiv.html?_r=1[/url]
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;37081795][url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/health/13cnd-hiv.html?_r=1[/url][/QUOTE] Interesting, but it lacks a source and they stopped the study before completion which makes me a little suspicious of the results.
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;37073359]Of all the examples you provided, you listed taking out vital/extremely integral organs. How is foreskin integral to any action? At all? The parents can do what they want with their kid; that is freedom. They can also choose to give them shots. What if they didn't give the baby a tetanus shot? He would have a greater chance of getting tetanus. What if they didn't circumcise the baby? He would have a greater chance of getting infections/spreading AIDs.[/QUOTE] Foreskin protects the glans, it protects the penis, it keeps the nerves alive, it helps penis grow longer, et cetera. And a tetanus shot doesn't give someone a permanent mutilation, it's just medicine for fuck's sake. That example was retarded. And no, parents can't do whatever they want with their children.
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;37073359]Of all the examples you provided, you listed taking out vital/extremely integral organs. How is foreskin integral to any action? At all? The parents can do what they want with their kid; that is freedom. They can also choose to give them shots. What if they didn't give the baby a tetanus shot? He would have a greater chance of getting tetanus. What if they didn't circumcise the baby? He would have a greater chance of getting infections/spreading AIDs.[/QUOTE] The foreskin evolved to help keep the penis free from infection and to stop it from getting damaged, why would you want to remove something which is important to the penis? Most people don't realize that and just assume it's some useless flap of skin which has no function. Even if you think it's unimportant, it's still a piece of the child's body and they should decide what they want to do with it, even if there are no side effects from removing it. Any surgery or medical procedure that isn't beneficial to the child's life or well-being should not be performed without the child's consent, they can make their own mind up later.
Being circumcised hasn't caused me any issues, (born during an era where it was a common to prevent some of the possible complications caused by a foreskin). I don't think there is a reason it should be practiced but it's not a terrible outrageous thing. However it shouldn't be preformed unless necessary, in my opinion.
^^I agree with your circumspect and uncircumcised idea of leaving the circumcision to necessity.
I'm going to have to get a circumcision at some point due to a Phimotic ring on my penis. ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preputioplasty[/url]) I would not have to have this surgery if I had been circumcised as a child. I cherish the 22 years I've had with my foreskin and all the soapy baths and hot showers. I'm glad it is my choice, even though the problems I have are a direct result of owning a foreskin. I would not circumcise any of my future male children because body mutilation as a form of preventative medicine is not right.
[QUOTE=Flyingman356;36993951]actually it hurts like, far, far more. Newborn babies are much more sensitive.[/QUOTE] except that they´re unconsious (didnt spell that right but im damn tired) when they do it, so they wont feel shit [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=JethroTheCunt;37114646]I'm going to have to get a circumcision at some point due to a Phimotic ring on my penis. ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preputioplasty[/url]) I would not have to have this surgery if I had been circumcised as a child. I cherish the 22 years I've had with my foreskin and all the soapy baths and hot showers. I'm glad it is my choice, even though the problems I have are a direct result of owning a foreskin. I would not circumcise any of my future male children because body mutilation as a form of preventative medicine is not right.[/QUOTE] Believe me, youll love your new dick. Hot showers and soapy baths are only outlawed for 1.5ish months
-snip-
[QUOTE=H8Entitlement;37030994]Anyone mention yet that circumcision reduces the chance of spreading aids to your partner? [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/health/29hiv[/url]. link dead for me [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/health/13cnd-hiv.html[/url] new link[/QUOTE] Maybe not have sex with someone that has aids?
[QUOTE=Aerkhan;37124104]except that they´re unconsious (didnt spell that right but im damn tired) when they do it, so they wont feel shit [/QUOTE] [video=youtube;bXVFFI76ff0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXVFFI76ff0[/video] Yeah wow that baby sure is asleep. Look at him, all peaceful.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that circumcision reduces the likelihood of spreading Aids. Studies have been done that show it makes almost no difference, and anyway, why the fuck would it? Just think about it.
I only hate being circumcised due to discomfort when exercising. [sp]Dem briefs[/sp]
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;37133973][video=youtube;bXVFFI76ff0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXVFFI76ff0[/video] Yeah wow that baby sure is asleep. Look at him, all peaceful.[/QUOTE] What nation is that performed in? In The Netherlands (and i'm sure all of [West] Europe as well) they knock em out. 1 nation =/= the whole world. [editline]11th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Adam Giamboner;37180941]I only hate being circumcised due to discomfort when exercising. [sp]Dem briefs[/sp][/QUOTE] Unless you twist your dick, you should have no problems. I excercise and I have no discomfort whatsoever. [editline]11th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Flyingman356;37180864]There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that circumcision reduces the likelihood of spreading Aids. Studies have been done that show it makes almost no difference, and anyway, why the fuck would it? Just think about it.[/QUOTE] Because it doesn't.
had sex with my girlfriend for the first time last month, I'm uncut. She's been with circumsized guys before, and she didn't mind a bit. The topic of circumcision came up a couple of weeks later and she said if we had kids she would be against circumcising them. oh and I lasted an ~40 minutes the first couple of times and then about ~20 after a few more. Can't say I felt mega sensitive with a condom so for me that's not a disadvantage at all
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.