The thing about this discovery is that it doesn't justify [b]routine infant circumcision[/b] whatsoever. It might be absolutely and incontrovertibly beneficial to have a circumcision. That does not mean that all infants should have the procedure done without their consent.
[QUOTE=elfbarf;46621208]Maybe because they legitimately believe it does? Is there some gigantic circumcision lobby out there that I'm not aware of? Is AIPAC forcing the CDC to be pro-circumcision? Do you think anyone legitimately thinks it's a big enough deal for there to be a huge conspiracy surrounding the issue?
Just because the CDC disagrees with you doesn't mean they're wrong. The CDC is made up of a bunch of renown medical professionals, not a bunch of young guys arguing about how good sex feels for them.[/QUOTE]
After reading this thread it does seem like people think their is a hidden cabal of baby penis snippers trying to mutilate all newborns dicks.
[QUOTE=dai;46621111]11 posts in and we already had someone straight up call it [URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1439881&p=46620630&viewfull=1#post46620630"]genital mutilation[/URL]. There's a lot of people all over the board on the topic, but there's just no argument left when you turn it into an instance of extreme vs every other option[/QUOTE]
Hey guess what. It IS genital mutilation numbnuts.
Doesnt matter if you cut the tip of the head off or just the foreskin, at the end of the day you're still poking a newborn in the dick with a knife.
The only time i think it's acceptable are if you live in a country with poor hygiene and health standards, in a first world country there are absolutely no reason circumsize babies.
[QUOTE=Explosions;46621226]The thing about this discovery is that it doesn't justify [B]routine infant circumcision[/B] whatsoever. It might be absolutely and incontrovertibly beneficial to have a circumcision. That does not mean that all infants should have the procedure done without their consent.[/QUOTE]
This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby? You can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can.
Has anyone here even like had to deal with babies before? Or seen a circumcision live?
Like holy fuck some people here are crazy about this shit and it honestly is screaming ignorance more than anything.
[QUOTE=Coffee;46620854]It has a chance to go wrong.
It's a pointless procedure that doesn't accomplish anything noteworthy.[/QUOTE]
Everything has a chance to go wrong, welcome to life. On that note, it's obviously not pointless if there are benefits to it. The CDC comes out and says it has more benefits than risks, and everyone immediately just dismisses it. It's not like they created benefits out of thin air.
[editline]2nd December 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=.Lain;46620842]i would say forcing something on your child that has possible implications for their sexual organ's wellbeing and function is a pretty important topic[/QUOTE]
Right. I have possible implications for my sexual organ. Hm, nope, it seems to be functioning okay. Again, I can understand "forcing" something on your child, but the rest of the argument is just dumb. Unless it got fucked up, which is few and far between, your functioning and well-being is just fine, and you're just being dramatic.
Which just goes right back to what I said before, it honestly does not even matter. If your whole life depends on the fact that a piece of skin falling off, then you already had problems to begin with. The procedure does not affect functioning, and the only thing it does for well-being is less difficulty to clean. That's a proper procedure.
question are you supposed to be able to cover the top of your dick with your remnant foreskin or did they fuck up on my circumcision
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621277]This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby?[/QUOTE]
You're right! They can't! So don't perform unnecessary medical procedures on them.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;46621372]question are you supposed to be able to cover the top of your dick with your remnant foreskin or did they fuck up on my circumcision[/QUOTE]
You are normal, id be really surprised if not every guy circumcised has done what you have just said anyways.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621277]This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby? You can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can.
Has anyone here even like had to deal with babies before? Or seen a circumcision live?
Like holy fuck some people here are crazy about this shit and it honestly is screaming ignorance more than anything.[/QUOTE]
Doing something which is not blatantly beneficial or medically necessary to an infant is morally dubious. We're not asking for the baby's consent, we're just saying- let an adult [I]choose[/I] to do it. This isn't like vaccination or something, the pros and cons of being circumcised or not are basically minute unless you have a medical condition. It may be relatively unobtrusive, but it's the principle behind it which is concerning- why are we doing something unnecessary to a baby which might, very slightly, improve its life, when that procedure can still be done when that person is old enough to give consent?
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621277]This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby? You can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can.
Has anyone here even like had to deal with babies before? Or seen a circumcision live?
Like holy fuck some people here are crazy about this shit and it honestly is screaming ignorance more than anything.[/QUOTE]
Ah i see.
Since babies dont give consent we can do whatever we want with them :downs:
[QUOTE=Monkey san;46621273]Hey guess what. It IS genital mutilation numbnuts.
Doesnt matter if you cut the tip of the head off or just the foreskin, at the end of the day you're still poking a newborn in the dick with a knife.
The only time i think it's acceptable are if you live in a country with poor hygiene and health standards, in a first world country there are absolutely no reason circumsize babies.[/QUOTE]
the study was [B]not regarding body autonomy[/B]. Hygiene and disease related issues are a separate bag regardless of how you have your circ, and I'm not saying it's OK that it's a common practice to perform the surgeries on newborns. They laid a point people often bring up to rest by saying it's mildly better than not
the entire point of my prior posts on the mutilation bit is that this debate is going exactly the way it always does and you didn't prove anything wrong
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621277]This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby? You can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can.
Has anyone here even like had to deal with babies before? Or seen a circumcision live?
Like holy fuck some people here are crazy about this shit and it honestly is screaming ignorance more than anything.[/QUOTE]
As the procedure is non-reversible and carries an inherent risk (a highly unlikely but unnecessary risk is still a risk) then I would argue that it should not be carried out unless it is medically necessary. An extremity x-ray is very low dose (0.01 mSv or so, according to Clarks handbook) but I wouldn't take it without it being clinically indicated so I fail to see why a procedure which carries a real (but small) risk can be done for cosmetic reasons. Then there are the ethics of it being the kids body - you can't tattoo your kid, why are you allowed to chop part of it's dick off? You don't own the kid, you're not providing a huge benefit to it by circumcising it, it's not like vaccination or taking it to the doctor if it has a medical problem.
I've got no experience with circumcision or whatever, but I have x-rayed paeds as a student, and the importance of consent is drilled into you from pretty much the 3rd lecture or so, all the way through the first year.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621277]This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby? You can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can.
Has anyone here even like had to deal with babies before? Or seen a circumcision live?
Like holy fuck some people here are crazy about this shit and it honestly is screaming ignorance more than anything.[/QUOTE]
Or you could just avoid doing any permanent modifications to a baby's body unless it's a life or death situation.
It's like people who give their one month old toddler ear piercings. It's not an actual danger, it's not an actual necessity, it's just dumb to do it and serves no practical purpose so you should likely just wait for your kid to be old enough to make this sort of vanity decisions on their own.
[QUOTE=Monkey san;46621437]Ah i see.
Since babies dont give consent we can do whatever we want with them :downs:[/QUOTE]
I fucking called it in the post you quoted.
"you can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can."
Fuck off with your extreme and insane strawman.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621452]I fucking called it in the post you quoted.
"you can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can."
Fuck off with your extreme and insane strawman.[/QUOTE]
I cant even fathom how someone and you are able to think it's a okay thing to do with babies. Fuck me.
Foreskin is awful.
It feels better when getting a blowjob if it's pulled back. You don't sometimes randomly piss in 7 different directions. You avoid the inside of it stinging as a kid because you don't know that's not normal, and to top it off you can get some other awesome things such as frenelum breave.
Mines nowhere near a bad case and completey comfortable with my body but, I know multiple people who ripped theirs during sex. As far as im concerned it's matter of time for me.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621419]You are normal, id be really surprised if not every guy circumcised has done what you have just said anyways.[/QUOTE]
thank you, i've been wondering for a while but i've never wanted to take the time out of my day to look at pictures of circumcised dicks
I've been circumcised and threads like this make me feel awkward with the anti-circumcision hivemind on FP.
I genuinely get angry at people that think unnecessary circumcision is okay. Fuck everyone that still allows this to happen just because they won't admit that their own circumcision was unnecessary.
[QUOTE=FunnyStarRunner;46621501]I've been circumcised and threads like this make me feel awkward with the anti-circumcision hivemind on FP.[/QUOTE]
This is exactly the problem. You're allowing genital mutilation to happen just because you might feel a certain way.
For the people or saying they are no upsides to being less sensitive are you not counting lasting longer in bed as a plus?
[QUOTE=dai;46621111]11 posts in and we already had someone straight up call it [url=http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1439881&p=46620630&viewfull=1#post46620630]genital mutilation[/url]. There's a lot of people all over the board on the topic, but there's just no argument left when you turn it into an instance of extreme vs every other option[/QUOTE]
Well I mean, the procedure does involve cutting a part of genitals off. Calling it "genital mutilation" is pretty much as close to a dictionary definition as you can possibly be
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621277]This consent shit is kinda silly. When does a baby EVER give anyone consent for anything as a baby? You can make this shit sound as extreme as you want, anything involving a babies consent can.
Has anyone here even like had to deal with babies before? Or seen a circumcision live?
Like holy fuck some people here are crazy about this shit and it honestly is screaming ignorance more than anything.[/QUOTE]
This is an extremely weak argument. A baby being unable to give consent doesn't mean it's okay to do whatever, especially permanent modifications to their body. Your post screams ignorance to me more than most of the others I've seen on here. I mean there's some arguments for circumcision but how did you honestly think "babies don't give consent" was a good one?
[QUOTE=Terminutter;46621444]As the procedure is non-reversible and carries an inherent risk (a highly unlikely but unnecessary risk is still a risk) then I would argue that it should not be carried out unless it is medically necessary. An extremity x-ray is very low dose (0.01 mSv or so, according to Clarks handbook) but I wouldn't take it without it being clinically indicated so I fail to see why a procedure which carries a real (but small) risk can be done for cosmetic reasons. Then there are the ethics of it being the kids body - you can't tattoo your kid, why are you allowed to chop part of it's dick off? You don't own the kid, you're not providing a huge benefit to it.
I've got no experience with circumcision or whatever, but I have x-rayed paeds as a student.[/QUOTE]
This is what I mean.
You dont have experience with it and you make it sound SO extreme, like chopping off a piece of their dick.
First of all im gonna lay down some facts, ive had to sadly sit through stupid baby circumcision religious bullshit too many times to count. Babys dicks are the tiniest fucking things in the world, and the forskin is even smaller.
Secondly, babies have a good handle on pain, they WILL cry, but babies cry about A LOT of things, its essentially a response to not knowing what the fuck to do since they are just babies. They dont know how to comprehend shit so it just goes to the cry response.
Thirdly, going back to the tiny ass forskin, that shit is SO fucking tiny, AND SO fucking weak(babies skin is extremely malleable at the age you get circumcision, hence why its done then)
Theres like nothing to it, theres like 0 blood, the baby is sassy for a bit, and the pain doesnt bother it the next day and by the week is over its pretty much gone of any damage. Hell every single circumcision ive gone to the baby was nothing but laughs and giggles when we would go back to houses for like some food and shit.
Its not a chop, its not a cut, its a literal snip, its weaker than trying to rip a balloon in half, and its essentially like just knicking the VERY tippy top of said balloon. Its over in 1 second, thats how serious this procedure is, its over in 1 fucking second, the babies I saw hardly flinched.
Its fine if people think its morally wrong, but holy fuck some people are honestly thinking like someone comes in with a knife and just starts cutting at a babies dick or some shit. Its insanely clear just how uninformed and ignorant most people are in this subject by some of the stupid shit being spewed in this thread.
I hope some of these people dont have kids if they cant grasp a handle on simple baby shit. Like I understand this whole consent argument, but some of the reasoning for it is so stupid and extreme. People just looking at it as "babys dick gets cutoff, most evil and disgusting thing ever"
Id never see the day id see armchair circumcision professionals.
If it's a choice between cutting off a part of my penis and cleaning it sometimes, I think I'd rather clean it.
[sp]too bad it's 24 years to late for me to have a say in the matter[/sp]
[QUOTE=layla;46621505]I genuinely get angry at people that think unnecessary circumcision is okay. Fuck everyone that still allows this to happen just because they won't admit that their own circumcision was unnecessary.[/QUOTE]
I genuinely get a good laugh out of people saying everyone who's been circumcised is "Mutilated".
Mine was a medical procedure and that bias of circumcision being mutilation makes people call every variety of it mutilation needlessly.
I got circumcised 2 (3?) years ago, I have started masturbating long before the operation. I don't remember any difference between the before and the after. So I think I'm gonna need some sources about the "circumcised people have worse sex".
[QUOTE=layla;46621505]I genuinely get angry at people that think unnecessary circumcision is okay. Fuck everyone that still allows this to happen just because they won't admit that their own circumcision was unnecessary.
This is exactly the problem. You're allowing genital mutilation to happen just because you might feel a certain way.[/QUOTE]
Theres that word again, "Genital mutilation"
How about we save words like that for actual genital mutilation? Would you call a little cut on your dick maybe from getting stuck in zipper or some shit "genital mutilation", no you would look at it and be like "Man fuck this cut on my dick it hurts" not "Oh man this genital mutilation is too much"
Genital mutilation is shit like Pain Olympics, not a tiny piece of cm sized skin.
Would you call a little paper cut "Skin mutilation", not it would be silly, just like you are being right now.
My personal opinion is this:
If you want it, go ahead- nobody should judge you for that, there are pros and cons as with most kinds of optional surgery.
If it's medically necessary, then yes, it should be done to an infant just like any other important medical procedure- their health takes priority over a small piece of skin.
If it's not necessary, then don't do it to anyone who hasn't said they would like that procedure. This includes religious reasons- I don't think we should be cutting off bits of children's genitalia just because a book says so.
I personally don't call it 'genital mutilation' because then it sounds like I'm comparing it with female genital mutilation, which is [I]far[/I] more unacceptable and a disgusting thing that nobody should ever have done to them, since it confers nothing even vaguely positive whatsoever other than taking away sexual pleasure for women and causing pain- which certainly isn't positive for the affected, even if it is for the sick fucks who actually do it. Circumcision is literally genital mutilation, but it can be medically important, and therefore I think calling routine circumcision an unnecessary medical procedure is probably good enough.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46621524]This is what I mean.
You dont have experience with it and you make it sound SO extreme, like chopping off a piece of their dick.
First of all im gonna lay down some facts, ive had to sadly sit through stupid baby circumcision religious bullshit too many times to count. Babys dicks are the tiniest fucking things in the world, and the forskin is even smaller.
Secondly, babies have a good handle on pain, they WILL cry, but babies cry about A LOT of things, its essentially a response to not knowing what the fuck to do since they are just babies. They dont know how to comprehend shit so it just goes to the cry response.
Thirdly, going back to the tiny ass forskin, that shit is SO fucking tiny, AND SO fucking weak(babies skin is extremely malleable at the age you get circumcision, hence why its done then)
Theres like nothing to it, theres like 0 blood, the baby is sassy for a bit, and the pain doesnt bother it the next day and by the week is over its pretty much gone of any damage. Hell every single circumcision ive gone to the baby was nothing but laughs and giggles when we would go back to houses for like some food and shit.
Its not a chop, its not a cut, its a literal snip, its weaker than trying to rip a balloon in half, and its essentially like just knicking the VERY tippy top of said balloon. Its over in 1 second, thats how serious this procedure is, its over in 1 fucking second, the babies I saw hardly flinched.
Its fine if people think its morally wrong, but holy fuck some people are honestly thinking like someone comes in with a knife and just starts cutting at a babies dick or some shit. Its insanely clear just how uninformed and ignorant most people are in this subject by some of the stupid shit being spewed in this thread.
I hope some of these people dont have kids if they cant grasp a handle on simple baby shit. Like I understand this whole consent argument, but some of the reasoning for it is so stupid and extreme. People just looking at it as "babys dick gets cutoff, most evil and disgusting thing ever"
Id never see the day id see armchair circumcision professionals.[/QUOTE]
The ethics are the sole point I am arguing. That is all that needs to matter. I am not making claims about the procedure as I have little to no interest in it, the only statement I am making regarding it is that there is a risk associated - it is incredibly rare I agree, but it is present and thus must be counted and I am most certainly not making claims to be a professional on the topic, indeed I stated I am not.
What I am interested in are the medical ethics and process of obtaining consent, which I do understand. The procedure could be a 1mm dot tattooed on the babies arm and I would argue the exact same points in that you are performing a permanent or near irreversible procedure for largely cosmetic reasons, when it is entirely possible to wait until it is old enough to give consent for it if it wants it later in life. Yes it may have benefits, I do not dispute that, and the risks of complication are significantly greater later in life, but it is more ethical to allow for patient autonomy. Even if it was totally painless and carried no associated risk at all, I would still argue against it on this basis.
So lets get this straight... Circumcision has known benefits, but because it [I]might[/I] make sex less enjoyable[note: no evidence whatsoever], it's evil genital mutilation and everyone who has it and cannot be bothered by it, is some evil monster.
I don't know why you guys get up in arms always, but here's the thing. You don't want your son being circed? Don't get em' circed. Doctors are legally required to ask you about it when your child is born. Boom. Solve all the problems you have with evil genital mutilation.
But wait, other parents are still getting their children [B][U]GENITALLY MUTILATED[/U][/B], and that's evil. Yet, we do have medical knowledge to provide that yes, circumcision does have it's benefits compared to being uncircumcised. "B-but Joey! Circumcision is evul! It makes having sex less interesting!" cool. So where's the evidence for this? Remember, anecdotes do not count, and because most of this is done in early life, no one really has a measure of how much it effected their sex life. The very few people who have had circumcisions later in life do to complications with the foreskin, rarely come forward and give a damn it seems. So one other thing out the window.
The only other arguement is the one regarding the right of the person to choose, and I'd actually like to make a comparison because it's quiet sound in these circumstances. I'll compare circumcision to getting a vaccination. It has proven medical benefits, it's usually done at an early age, and is done without the voice of the person it's being done on.
Now I can already see people decrying/dumbing this post because, "VACCINATION ISN'T LIKE CIRCUMCISION! OTHER PEOPLE CAN GET ILL/SICK FROM SOMEONE NOT BEING VACCINATED" which is absolutely true. The point still remains though. Why should someone be forced to have vaccinations at an early age? Why are they not allowed to choose these vaccinations when they say turn sixteen? Similar medical complications exist for this type of dealio mind you, if a child gets to the point where an illness might kill them, you give them a vaccination. Same deal with circumcision.
The only difference is the medical procedure. One is in order to vaccinate a child from the possibility of them getting sick with a certain virus[such as HIV, pox, measles, polio, ect], and the other is about removing a small flap of skin that lubricates the shaft of your penis when it's not in use... In otherwords has the possibility for being a cesspool for viruses, bacteria, and stuff that could otherwise be harmful to your body.
We do things like vaccinations because theirs a proven medical benefit and it's optional. Same thing with circumcision. The problem is though is that they are forced onto children within a month of their birth or later, and they have no choice in the procedure. If we stop one procedure, you should stop the other from being performed, because it's the same breach of individual rights.
[QUOTE=bravehat;46620735]The most impressive part of this statement, is that you see no issue with that.[/QUOTE]
Oh quit, its bad to do it on unconsenting children but the folks here are acting like its the end of the world.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.