• Berlin Clinic Aims To Make Genital Cutting Survivors Feel Whole
    90 replies, posted
"Berlin Clinic Aims To Make Genital Cutting Survivors Feel Whole" 2nd page, flaming about feminism. Some people really need to learn to stay on topic.
In my opinion, any sort of circumsition should be banned in all countries. We've long passed the times when we thought it had any advantages or something to make it worth cutting a slice of the genitalia.
[QUOTE=katbug;43406723]Lmao (from a thread about an MMA fight) anyway, the only reason we think that male genital mutilation is "less damaging" is because we practice it in first world countries. If female circumcision was done the same way, we would probably have the same view. The only reason it's "more damaging" is because it's done in third world countries with fucking barbaric methods. But male circumcision doesn't only happen in first world countries: [url]http://www.voanews.com/content/thirty-more-south-african-boys-die-after-botched-circumcision-ritual/1697451.html[/url] This is an example of a male circumcision gone wrong, 30 have died, let alone all the massive damage to other parts of the penis- and this happens all across Africa, just as female circumcision does. Also, even when it is done right, look at how much sensitivity is lost: [img]http://i0.wp.com/www.avoiceformen.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2013/07/Circ.jpg?resize=508%2C334[/img] I'm not making it about me, I'm making it about all people who are circumcised. I'm not circumcised, and therefore I understand just what these people are losing.[/QUOTE] sensitivity=/=pleasure. Otherwise you'd have the same quality orgasm every time when that's obviously wrong because everybody's had a really exceptionally good one every once in a while. also there is no difference in sensitivity between the glans of men who are and are not circumcised and it's the most sensitive part anyway. also one more thing if you use that graph as evidence in any serious manner you're a fucking idiot because that graph is formatted in probably the worst way to convey information out of any type of graph and nobody reputable would put data that they didn't pull out of their ass in that format. Like holy shit male circumcision doesn't even remove any important parts, it's litterally just useless skin that you think makes you better than other people. You probably have some sort of complex, a need to feel superior, because saying that a circumcised dick is better in a conversation about women having the ability to experience any sort of sexual pleasure completely removed, which is utterly incomparable to male circumcision, I don't know it just seems like you aren't doing this because you actually genuinely think the points you're conveying. [editline]4th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Proj3ct_ZeRo;43412251]You people who all claim male circumcision isnt comparable to female are fucked in the head they are both abhorable practices involving genital mutilation for mostly religious reasons. The amount of damage done to males is at the behest of the practician and invloves the removal of thousands of fine touch receptors and kereatinzation of the rest of the tissues both practices are equally disgusting.[/QUOTE] They aren't equally disgusting. Good god. How dense are you? 1: Remove useless skin that doesn't affect the brain's perception of sexual pleasure (It may remove receptors, but there is no evidence that the messages from the remaining ones aren't increased, perceptually, or that circumcised individuals experience lessened sexual pleasure) 2: Removal of ability to feel sexual pleasure. Because they are women and not trusted to not be sluts. One is like ok, I wish it didn't happen but nothing I can do about it but not continue the practice with my children. Second is like I will never experience pleasure because I am a woman and I am impure. The psychological reasoning behind it fucks with those women so much too, imagine having your hands cut off because you were told that if you had them, you were going to become a murderer 100% just because people thought you were. No matter how much reason would tell you otherwise, at some point, you will begin to believe it. You will hate yourself. That's the psychological damage and it's just as bad as the physical damage. Tell me you have deep self-loathing and suicidal thoughts and depression because you had a bit of skin cut off your penis and I will call you a liar and an attention seeking ass. [editline]4th January 2014[/editline] And finally before I leave this thread I want to ask, why you thought it was appropriate to even bring it up in the first fucking place? You don't go into threads about children dying of cancer and spout out "Yeah but fuck them because AIDS still exists and it's a bigger problem" because they are different topics. Whether or not it's true you just don't fucking bring it up because it's not [I][B]relevant.[/B][/I]
[QUOTE=katbug;43395094]and male circumcision is a-ok[/QUOTE] holy shit turn off the MRA just for one day please
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43417936]holy shit turn off the MRA just for one day please[/QUOTE] I'm not MRA at all, if this forum was full of MRA's I would be arguing the other side. Just because I care about issues that you clearly don't doesn't mean that you have to be a shit about it.
If male circumcision was bad, it wouldn't happen. That's why we dont do female circumcision
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;43420545]If male circumcision was bad, it wouldn't happen. That's why we dont do female circumcision[/QUOTE] Thats some flawed reasoning there.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;43420545]If male circumcision was bad, it wouldn't happen. That's why we dont do female circumcision[/QUOTE] There is always a chance that a boy might die of consequences of circumcision. Every year about 120 babies die because of it in the USA alone. I would say this is pretty bad. [url]http://www.examiner.com/article/new-study-estimates-neonatal-circumcision-death-rate-higher-than-suffocation-and-auto-accidents[/url] There are tons of things that are bad and people still do it, be it inconsidered abuse of drugs, driving under influence, the congress of the United States, the shit that happens in Israel, russia, pollution in china, etc...
[QUOTE=katbug;43419775]I'm not MRA at all, if this forum was full of MRA's I would be arguing the other side. Just because I care about issues that you clearly don't doesn't mean that you have to be a shit about it.[/QUOTE] You can't go into a thread with issues that women face and go "what about the men"
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43417936]holy shit turn off the MRA just for one day please[/QUOTE] I think everyone's overreacting here and thinking this dude is trying to push some agenda. To me it seemed he was merely raising the obvious double standard that cutting parts off of one sex is actually seen as a normal course of action in a lot of places in the world, but that doing it to the other sex is considered horrid by the same people. Don't get me wrong, it IS horrid. Hell, it's far more horrid than male circumcision by orders of magnitude, but male circumcision is ALSO wrong and there shouldn't be this weird double standard. Cutting anything off of anyone (a child at that) when it is NOT absolutely medically necessary should be completely illegal in all cases.
[QUOTE=sltungle;43420960]I think everyone's overreacting here and thinking this dude is trying to push some agenda.[/QUOTE] If it didn't happen in every damn thread about women I might agree with you.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43420955]You can't go into a thread with issues that women face and go "what about the men"[/QUOTE] That happens in every thread about anything. Threads about men become about women, threads about women become about men, the reason this happens is because one side of an argument is presented, and as long as people share a view that isn't exactly what the article is about, they're going to express it, because the other side is well represented. That's why we're a discussion board and not a circlejerk. Mostly. [editline]5th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=sltungle;43420960]I think everyone's overreacting here and thinking this dude is trying to push some agenda. To me it seemed he was merely raising the obvious double standard that cutting parts off of one sex is actually seen as a normal course of action in a lot of places in the world, but that doing it to the other sex is considered horrid by the same people. Don't get me wrong, it IS horrid. Hell, it's far more horrid than male circumcision by orders of magnitude, but male circumcision is ALSO wrong and there shouldn't be this weird double standard. Cutting anything off of anyone (a child at that) when it is NOT absolutely medically necessary should be completely illegal in all cases.[/QUOTE] Precisely.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;43420545]If male circumcision was bad, it wouldn't happen. That's why we dont do female circumcision[/QUOTE] it isn't really "bad" in any sense of the word, but it doesn't accomplish anything "good." this is also some very very slippery slope logic.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;43423076]it isn't really "bad" in any sense of the word, but it doesn't accomplish anything "good." this is also some very very slippery slope logic.[/QUOTE] Performing any medically unnecessary procedure on anyone, ESPECIALLY a child who is unable to consent, IS bad. It sets a terrible precedent. Cosmetic surgery (because that's what male circumcision effectively is, whereas female circumcision is mutilation plain and simple), except in extreme cases (say the kid has some huge growth on his face that is benign for example) should be illegal to perform on anyone without their express consent, and a minor cannot give consent. It is bad, and if you can't see that you're a fool.
[QUOTE=sltungle;43423130]Performing any medically unnecessary procedure on anyone, ESPECIALLY a child who is unable to consent, IS bad. It sets a terrible precedent. Cosmetic surgery (because that's what male circumcision effectively is, whereas female circumcision is mutilation plain and simple), except in extreme cases (say the kid has some huge growth on his face that is benign for example) should be illegal to perform on anyone without their express consent, and a minor cannot give consent. It is bad, and if you can't see that you're a fool.[/QUOTE] what? I'm saying the exact same fucking thing as you are
[QUOTE=Protocol7;43423138]what? I'm saying the exact same fucking thing as you are[/QUOTE] You said it's not 'bad'. I completely disagree. It is bad, plain and simple.
[QUOTE=sltungle;43423156]You said it's not 'bad'. I completely disagree. It is bad, plain and simple.[/QUOTE] he was talking about male circumcision. I was too. so when you say "Cosmetic surgery (because that's what male circumcision effectively is, whereas female circumcision is mutilation plain and simple)" that's exactly what I'm talking about. there's nothing harmful (i.e. "bad") about male circumcision, but it is made as a completely arbitrary choice with no medical reasoning in most situations (i.e. not "good"). you've misinterpreted what I wrote, plain and simple.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;43423178]he was talking about male circumcision. I was too. so when you say "Cosmetic surgery (because that's what male circumcision effectively is, whereas female circumcision is mutilation plain and simple)" that's exactly what I'm talking about. there's nothing harmful (i.e. "bad") about male circumcision, but it is made as a completely arbitrary choice with no medical reasoning in most situations (i.e. not "good"). you've misinterpreted what I wrote, plain and simple.[/QUOTE] And you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm saying that male circumcision IS bad. Are you honestly saying that unnecessary cosmetic surgery on a minor, "isn't really "bad""? That's what my issue is. It clearly is bad. Female circumcision is worse as far as I'm concerned, but I hardly think that male circumcision "isn't really "bad"".
I'm using a different definition of "bad" you idiot, I'm saying it isn't technically medically harmful but still completely stupid in any case that doesn't have any medical reasoning. And guess what, [I]we're saying the exact same fucking thing.[/I]
i thought this was about strap-ons for castrated males judging from the title
[QUOTE=katbug;43419775]I'm not MRA at all, if this forum was full of MRA's I would be arguing the other side. Just because I care about issues that you clearly don't doesn't mean that you have to be a shit about it.[/QUOTE] you can care about it without posting an irrelevant fucking thing. Can you just leave? Like seriously, just stop replying because I'm pretty sure anybody who is actually familiar with your posts thinks you're an idiot and wants you to stop. [editline]6th January 2014[/editline] Since I have a nice big and obvious post I guess I'll just request this thread be locked since we haven't even talked about the article since, and this is pretty fucking sad, the second post in the thread.
[QUOTE=Cockslap;43432933]you can care about it without posting an irrelevant fucking thing. Can you just leave? Like seriously, just stop replying because I'm pretty sure anybody who is actually familiar with your posts thinks you're an idiot and wants you to stop. [editline]6th January 2014[/editline] Since I have a nice big and obvious post I guess I'll just request this thread be locked since we haven't even talked about the article since, and this is pretty fucking sad, the second post in the thread.[/QUOTE] Go ahead then, nothing's stopping you, go talk about "what the article is about" Ooh wait, there's nothing to discuss that directly relates to the article. Nobody thinks that FGM is a good thing outside of Africa, nobody thinks that steps to help people feel better about their bodies is a bad thing. The article covered everything, front line and center that would have emerged from a thread about FGM. The only thing left for the thread to do is either talk about related issues (which, if you look at ANY sh article, you would know happens, but you're like a week old and probably don't know this), or the thread would die. The only exception to this would be if a thread posed a direct question, or was somehow directly relatable to the readers (I.E. weather, sports, etc) which really isn't going to happen with FGM; it's bad, and everyone knows it's bad. The reason I mentioned male circumcision is because it's bad, and not enough people think it's bad, and it's directly related to the issue that the article is tackling.
In the spirit of settling the [I]whole[/I] circumcision debate, I present to you a flowchart which can be used to determine whether or not the procedure should take place: [img] http://filesmelt.com/dl/fhvd.png[/img] Note: [u]Necessary[/u] refers to a situation in which the child's physical or mental wellbeing would be in some way jeopardised by not carrying out the procedure.
I remember going out of the mall with my mother and brother a few years back and some dipshit dude with a thick African accent was trying to fill a petition to legalize female circumcision in France. Let me get this real straight. The guy tried to fill a petition to legalize non-consensual, permanent mutilation of the female body, and asked for the signature [I]of a woman and mother of two.[/I]
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;43435293]I remember going out of the mall with my mother and brother a few years back and some dipshit dude with a thick African accent was trying to fill a petition to legalize female circumcision in France. Let me get this real straight. The guy tried to fill a petition to legalize non-consensual, permanent mutilation of the female body, and asked for the signature [I]of a woman and mother of two.[/I][/QUOTE] Hey, if you don't ask, you don't get! That's what I always say.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;43435293]I remember going out of the mall with my mother and brother a few years back and some dipshit dude with a thick African accent was trying to fill a petition to legalize female circumcision in France. Let me get this real straight. The guy tried to fill a petition to legalize non-consensual, permanent mutilation of the female body, and asked for the signature [I]of a woman and mother of two.[/I][/QUOTE] I wonder if he thought he'd get any signatures at all. He probably didn't understand the magnitude of the culture difference, for the hardcore dudes that are for this, they think it purifies the women it's done to.
oh look you're discussing the actual topic of the article how hard was that to do The whole thing that everybody is upset with is that you even think of putting fgm and male circumcision into the same class of bad when, clearly, fgm is many times worse while circumcision doesn't even affect quality of life in any noticeable way. It's wrong; make a thread for L4D2 if you want to talk about it, don't start a discussion about it in the TF2 thread. That's the beauty of a forum system: everybody can create threads.
[QUOTE=Cockslap;43438393]oh look you're discussing the actual topic of the article how hard was that to do The whole thing that everybody is upset with is that you even think of putting fgm and male circumcision into the same class of bad when, clearly, fgm is many times worse while circumcision doesn't even affect quality of life in any noticeable way. It's wrong; make a thread for L4D2 if you want to talk about it, don't start a discussion about it in the TF2 thread. That's the beauty of a forum system: everybody can create threads.[/QUOTE] And now what are you doing
First post. First fucking post. [editline]6th January 2014[/editline] You don't talk about circumcision on facepunch. You just don't.
So why exactly are we having an ENTIRELY unrelated argument about an ENTIRELY unrelated thing instead of praising the clinic for the magnificent work they're doing? I don't get the people on this forum sometimes, I just fucking don't.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.