So if your dick is cut it's easier to keep clean but if it isn't cut sex feels better. Am I missing anything here? Is that all there is to this "debate"? Because from what I can tell there isn't enough content to justify an argument that will last for what I assume will be 10 pages.
This question also goes to the internet in general and not just this thread, I swear the internet always makes circumcision such a hot topic for what seems to be no reason.
[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]
Saying "they're babies so they can handle it better" isn't a good argument for performing an irreversible non life-saving body modification on an infant. It doesn't matter if it's a "cut", a "chop", or a "snip", the fact of the matter is that a part of the child is being permanently removed without their consent. I can understand if there is an actual medical need for it, but in most cases there isn't.
Honestly, how hard is it for parents to just let their child grow up and decide for themselves.
the only thing i personally hate about myself being circumcised was that i didnt get to stay in the hospital afterwards and when i got back home the painkillers wore off and somehow nobody in my family bought any extra soooooooo...
basically i kinda vaguely remember screaming my lungs out for hours and hours because of the pain i was in.
but aside from that im happy with my cut pp
[QUOTE=Xephio;46621749]the only thing i personally hate about myself being circumcised was that i didnt get to stay in the hospital afterwards and when i got back home the painkillers wore off and somehow nobody in my family bought any extra soooooooo...
basically i kinda vaguely remember screaming my lungs out for hours and hours because of the pain i was in.
but aside from that im happy with my cut pp[/QUOTE]
This sounds much more humane then a nearly painless snip.
why are people on facepunch talking about having sex
it's not like any of us get any on a regular basis
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46621657]So lets get this straight... Circumcision has known benefits,[/QUOTE]
that are extremely minor except in extreme cases
[QUOTE]but because it [I]might[/I] make sex less enjoyable[note: no evidence whatsoever],[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=nhs on circumcision downsides]Reduced sensitivity – an uncircumcised penis is more sensitive than a circumcised penis, meaning that circumcised men may experience less pleasure during sex.
Potential complications of circumcision – these include excessive bleeding, post-operative infection and, in rare cases, injury to the urethra. These complications are thought to outweigh any potential benefits.[/QUOTE]
Fuck off, it's a fact, deal with it.
[QUOTE]it's evil genital mutilation and everyone who has it and cannot be bothered by it, is some evil monster.[/QUOTE]
Strawman right to the top! Yes, it's genital mutilation. You are cutting genitals, no matter how small they are at the time or how non-threatening the procedure is. That doesn't necessarily make it evil but it's certainly unethical to perform it on someone who cannot consent.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
The problem is not that people are being forced to do it to their kids but rather that they are allowed to do it to their kids when the kid might grow up and be upset that it was done in the first place. There are documented cases of this, and there's nothing they can do.
[QUOTE]But wait, other parents are still getting their children [B][U]GENITALLY MUTILATED[/U][/B], and that's evil.[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily evil, but unethical, yes.
[QUOTE]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!"[/QUOTE]
Yes, and we have medical knowledge to provide that it has its downsides. There you go with the strawman again.
[QUOTE]cool. So where's the evidence for this? Remember, anecdotes do not count,[/QUOTE]
Medical science, health journals, and common sense all should be enough to tell you that removing a part of the body that provides sensation will reduce what you feel - but again, don't take my word for it, it's on the NHS website. Funnily enough you provided shit anecdotal evidence that you didn't notice the difference so you're literally pointing out the flaws in your own argument
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
What is your point here - that the person who was cut doesn't have sex as a baby before they're cut so they never know what they've missed? Good job, that's kinda the point
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
Vaccinations are a necessary procedure to save lives and if circumcision saved lives, that would be different, and in the case that it does, the ethics are of course different.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
Believe me there's plenty of other reasons to dumb this post, like... everything? This is some of the most poorly thought out nonsense rambling I've honestly ever read
[QUOTE]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. [/QUOTE]
It's not really the same deal because vaccinations are the only thing that's removed a number of dangerous diseases that if left unchecked could seriously threaten the lives of millions of people, whereas circumcision rarely is necessary in the slightest. So no, it's not the same deal although that should be obvious.
[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]
This is like saying we should remove people's armpits because they can smell bad if you don't wash them. A person's inability to perform basic hygiene does not make the case for forcing a permanent body modification on a child without their consent.
[QUOTE]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]
See above, they are not the same thing because of the severity and necessity of each.
Fact is, it's an unnecessary procedure if you're in a decent country with proper sanitation. Yes, if you don't clean it right, it'll get infected, but as long as you put even a modicum of thought into it, you'll be fine.
When you grow up, if you choose to have it done, go nuts! (heh).
Oh, and if you've had it done as a kid, your dick is fine. The only people who care about shit like that are REALLY superficial. Just don't do it to your kids please.
[QUOTE=GentlemanLexi;46621768]why are people on facepunch talking about having sex
it's not like any of us get any on a regular basis[/QUOTE]
I do actually. Many of us do.
It's a pretty immature thought from the 2000's that being on the internet disqualifies you from sex.
My mom regrets getting me circumcised. It was the normal thing to do where she grew up. Everyone she knew was circumcised. Her father, all of her uncles, even her brother. Then my mom was considering not doing it, but my father was adamant about it because "He wanted my dick to look like his."
I've never seen so many people so engrossed in the idea of other dudes dicks, this is unreal.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46621657]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]
The benefits of vaccination are much greater, while the downsides of vaccination are much lower.
You're comparing immunity from disease in exchange for a quick poke to minor increases in resistances in exchange for part of one of the most sensitive parts of your body. The latter, may I remind you, can also be easily replaced by a plastic cover, which has practically no downsides and is much more effective at preventing the diseases circumcision does, as well as many more that circumcision does not.
It's like saying we should cut off pinky toes because "hey, it'll reduce the chances of toe cancer and stubbing your toe! Plus, it will keep your foot cleaner! It's not like we use pinky toes much anyway. Shoes? What are those?"
Odd, Facepunch is usually all for the results of government studies and what we should do with them. Why should this one be any different, because it goes against their opinion?
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;46621987]I've never seen so many people so engrossed in the idea of other dudes dicks, this is unreal.[/QUOTE]
It's only natural when you're discussing a topic about people cutting other dudes' dicks.
[editline]2nd December 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;46622066]Odd, Facepunch is usually all for the results of government studies and what we should do with them. Why should this one be any different, because it goes against their opinion?[/QUOTE]
The study was done in Africa. If I remember correctly, many people are still making a huge effort to get condoms to have widespread use in Africa.
In Europe and America on the other hand, condoms are everywhere, and we (usually) have better sanitation and education.
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;46622066]Odd, Facepunch is usually all for the results of government studies and what we should do with them. Why should this one be any different, because it goes against their opinion?[/QUOTE]
Mostly because it's an entirely flawed study (like, circumcision reducing risk of STD infection? for real? how about using a condom) and other governments which are internationally recognized to have better health care say the opposite.
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;46622066]Odd, Facepunch is usually all for the results of government studies and what we should do with them. Why should this one be any different, because it goes against their opinion?[/QUOTE]
Because the benefits or detriments of a procedure don't always affect whether that procedure is morally acceptable
if ur foreskin is long enough you can tie it off and bam you have a free reusable condom
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;46622210]So it is all about morals?
What if my morals are against organ transplant? Would we reject it too? Even when someone is voluntarily a donor? You know , I didn't even count the ones they take bone marrows from newborn babies.[/QUOTE]
You kinda went off the deep end there. There are certain things that society has deemed unethical...such as murder.
Taking your organ donor thing to its conclusion, murdering someone with a healthy heart and stealing it for a transplant will certainly have benefits to me if I have a weak one. Is it acceptable to do so?
Circumcision is nowhere near as severe, but it brings up the question of how much should you be able to do to someone without their consent. Do we just rely purely on medical benefit to detriment?
Say a corporation agrees to pay you a large sum of money to advertise on your child with a tattoo. The money will be able to pay for a lot of that child's welfare, which would be very beneficial to their development. Does this make it acceptable practice?
I dont understand why it really matters. I dont know of anyone who has said "Man, I wish I didnt get my dick cut" or "Dude, I want to get my dick cut". Its just people arguing what they have is better, and how the other is wrong. I dont see why it matters in the slightest. No adult is going to have so much dis joy when having sex because they got their willy chopped that they wish it never happened. Its not like you lose all your sensitivity or anything either.
Thanks CDC, but I think I'll stick with taking showers and using condoms
[QUOTE=Zakkin;46620749]I have phimosis. I might need to get this done. :([/QUOTE]
Sorry for your loss, but if it does happen, bate before and after and tell us which is better?
[QUOTE=Shirky;46622677]I dont understand why it really matters. I dont know of anyone who has said "Man, I wish I didnt get my dick cut" or "Dude, I want to get my dick cut". Its just people arguing what they have is better, and how the other is wrong. I dont see why it matters in the slightest. No adult is going to have so much dis joy when having sex because they got their willy chopped that they wish it never happened. Its not like you lose all your sensitivity or anything either.[/QUOTE]
That's a rather ignorant thing to say, there are people who are extremely upset that it has happened to them and even resent their parents completely for it. A quick google search could have revealed that, if you tried. It's not a non-issue
example for the lazy:
[thumb]http://media.thestate.com/smedia/2014/12/02/09/13/332-XjeWA.AuSt.55.jpeg[/thumb]
I'd imagine the only way someone would be that adamant is if the doctor actually cut his entire dick off instead. I feel like this argument is very similar to the vaccination arguments.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;46622705]I am not saying people should get it. It doesn't fucking matter. People argue as if it is really evil or something. I hate exaggeratements personally, I always try to argue against exaggeratements, it is a personal thing.
I am circumvised, I wish I wasn't, I can't do anything about it so I don't whine. Because it doesn't fucking matter after all. People don't understand this.[/QUOTE]
This is how I feel, people argue about it yet havent experienced it or seen it first hand. The ones that did always seem to just not give a fuck at the end of the day. And then some people seem to think this is what a circumcision is like for a baby. Honestly just seems like people are ignorant and just arguing with feelings really hard. Ive never seen people so ferocious over this when my entire life its always been a non issue in general.
Its fine if you dont agree with it, but holy shit you are not taking a fucking moral high ground when you do, so people acting like that just stop. Its nothing at the end of the day regardless, all this shit about sensitivity is so played up and exaggerated(and personally backwards, less sensitive means more time in bed), this fucking mutilation shit is fucking absurd.
It seems like the people most sassed are the ones uncut or completely foreign to the idea.
Please, do you hear people dying of circumcisions or having insane complications with them? The worst that happens is a sloppy job or an infection, and the infection is very very rare if you arent an idiot and have common sense.
Its like some of you painted a picture in your head of some doctor or pastor coming in with a big pair of hedge clippers to slice of a babys dick while it bleeds all over the place while its screaming and crying in pain for days.
You arent better or worse for wanting to have a baby cut/uncut, thats the issue here, the issue isnt that people are disagreeing.
Oh sorry I guess that's a complication too. Dick removal surgery. Add that to the list.
[QUOTE=Elspin;46622786]That's a rather ignorant thing to say, there are people who are extremely upset that it has happened to them and even resent their parents completely for it. A quick google search could have revealed that, if you tried. It's not a non-issue
example for the lazy:
[thumb]http://media.thestate.com/smedia/2014/12/02/09/13/332-XjeWA.AuSt.55.jpeg[/thumb][/QUOTE]
Im gonna go and assume these people are a big minority, I mean that rally is looking a bit weak, im sure some people are upset, doesnt mean the world revolves around them and validates anyone.
This is a picture of what looks like 2 guys holding a sign, thats not really telling of how serious this issue is.
itt: butthurt circumcised guys
seriously, who would want their dick cut for them? people only argue for it because it is either part of their religion or because the choice is already made for them? who would consent to it in later life not for religious reasons?
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46622857]Please, do you hear people dying of circumcisions or having insane complications with them? The worst that happens is a sloppy job or an infection, and the infection is very very rare if you arent an idiot and have common sense.[/QUOTE]
This is a real good point. I want to hear a case where circumcision ruined someone. Because I've never heard of one before. The risk for it seems to be almost zero. There are tons more things that are risky for babies.
[QUOTE=Zareox7;46622855]I'd imagine the only way someone would be that adamant is if the doctor actually cut his entire dick off instead. I feel like this argument is very similar to the vaccination arguments.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;46622868]Im gonna go and assume these people are a big minority, I mean that rally is looking a bit weak, im sure some people are upset, doesnt mean the world revolves around them and validates anyone.
This is a picture of what looks like 2 guys holding a sign, thats not really telling of how serious this issue is.[/QUOTE]
I love how you've gone from "nobody cares" to "the people who care don't matter". Whether they're a minority or not they've been forced into something they can never undo, and you not caring about them doesn't make them any less valid. There's scientifically proven downsides to being circumcised and you have no right to tell them how they should feel about it being forced on them
[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;46622891]itt: butthurt circumcised guys
seriously, who would want their dick cut for them? people only argue for it because it is either part of their religion or because the choice is already made for them? who would consent to it in later life not for religious reasons?[/QUOTE]
Why are you speaking for me? I actually like being circumcised and think it looks better than uncut.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;46622934]Why don't you list the scientifically proven downsides instead, and be informative for all of us?[/QUOTE]
already did
[QUOTE=NHS]Reduced sensitivity – an uncircumcised penis is more sensitive than a circumcised penis, meaning that circumcised men may experience less pleasure during sex.
Potential complications of circumcision – these include excessive bleeding, post-operative infection and, in rare cases, injury to the urethra. These complications are thought to outweigh any potential benefits.[/QUOTE]
but anyhow either way, the only thing in the study that makes any sense at all is that
[QUOTE]—Lower the risk of urinary tract infections during infancy, and cancer of the penis in adulthood.[/QUOTE]
and I'm not convinced that that justifies a permanent modification to a child's body without consent. Maybe if they listed by how much it decreases risk and it was a very significant amount, that was saving a high per capita amount of lives, but I'm not really seeing that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.