Lets talk about circumcision shall we?

[Defrag]

i seriously dont understand all the sudden hate against people who decide to circumcise their boys.. ffs let it go.. also, there's a thin line with being against circumcision and offending circumcised people's parents. why not respect it? if you feel like bettering the world so much, why not spend your energy on taking care of poverty? :S

Needlessly chopping off part of someone's dick qualifies as pointless mutilation -- it's pretty obvious why it raises people's hackles -- you cannot defend it with any kind of logic, so why do it? We live in an age of supposed enlightenment, but people are still persisting with this totally archaic practice due to ignorance and the fact that, "everyone else has it done". You ask why opponents don't respect the views of those who advocate it? It's obvious really; it's a needless procedure carried out on someone who is too young to choose of their own free will. I'm not going to respect a parent's choice to needlessly chop off part of their child's anatomy "just because" it's apparently the done thing. If it offends them, too bad. Circumcision offends me.

[⌐■_■]

but you would approve the removal of vagina lips?

i see what point youre trying to make. but ill serve you with my answer anyway

no, i dont approve of that. and i dont think comparing those two circumcisions with eachother is fair either. look, the circumcision of woman is a barbaric muslim custom. its dangerous and it shows the disrespect for women. the reason behind this gruesome act is so that the woman may have no pleasure while having sex so that she won't be tempted to sleep with another partner. i am possibly even more horrified by this phenomena then you.. (have you read books by Waris Dirie? these explain in painful detail the barbarisms she had to undergo in relation to this topic).

i seriously dont understand all the sudden hate against people who decide to circumcise their boys.. ffs let it go.. also, there's a thin line with being against circumcision and offending circumcised people's parents. why not respect it? if you feel like bettering the world so much, why not spend your energy on taking care of poverty? :S

Needlessly chopping off part of someone's dick qualifies as pointless mutilation -- it's pretty obvious why it raises people's hackles -- you cannot defend it with any kind of logic, so why do it? We live in an age of supposed enlightenment, but people are still persisting with this totally archaic practice due to ignorance and the fact that, "everyone else has it done". You ask why opponents don't respect the views of those who advocate it? It's obvious really; it's a needless procedure carried out on someone who is too young to choose of their own free will. I'm not going to respect a parent's choice to needlessly chop off part of their child's anatomy "just because" it's apparently the done thing. If it offends them, too bad. Circumcision offends me.

im sorry you cant seem to live with it. seeing this already forms such a big problem for you, i hope you see to live with all other small anoyances hat are not logicly explainable.. altho, seeing how much circumcised people DONT have any problem with it, i dont quite get your point..? i dont feel abused or something so why dont you fight for something the victims actually think it's worth your energy?

[Rick_D]

removing the foreskin makes the penis less sensitive.

it's a fair comparison, it's all about context

[Psy]

So much dick in a non-EoT thread.

[Thrik]

Circumcision is an archaic practice that survives simply due to misconceptions and tradition. There is no logical reason to do it beyond fitting in. Fortunately this 'fitting in' only applies to the US; you guys can chop off a part of your kids' dicks all you like. Ah Yeah

Wikipedia:Circumcision is most prevalent in Muslim countries, Israel, the United States, the Philippines and South Korea and is commonly practised in the Jewish and Muslim faiths.

?

and RD...not feel pleasure? I dunno when I have sex it's fantastic

I was loosely talking about western countries, but more specifically comparing Europe and America. I'm fully aware countries that have an almost 100% Jewish population and various others practice circumcision. ¬¬

But moving on, regarding the comparison to vagina cutting:

1. Cutting off part of a female's genitals

2. Cutting off part of a male's genitals

Yes, it's really hard to see how people are drawing up correlations between the two.

As for the vagina circumcision being so much worse due to its pleasure-discouraging intent, it might interest you to know that in the 19th century doctors were widely known to propose circumcision as a way of discouraging masturbation, as well as the now-disproved hygiene benefits.

I don't think any of us uncircumcised people really care if you have a circumcised dick or if you have good sex. I, for one, am simply saying that the practice of circumcision is grounded in a completely outdated mindset, and that cutting off part of someone's cock should be a decision the person who has the cock makes.

But as I also said earlier, if you guys in the US want to do that then fine. I'll rest happy knowing that nobody in my family (or indeed the other 96% of the country) will be circumcised. If nothing else, I just pity the children of the US; it's very nice having an extremely soft and sensitive penis head, and a culture that supports it.

[⌐■_■]

uhm

im not going to defend circumcision any longer. lol what was i thinking.

well just have to agree to disagree on this im afraid

[Duff-e]

As for the vagina circumcision being so much worse due to its pleasure-discouraging intent, it might interest you to know that in the 19th century doctors were widely known to propose circumcision as a way of discouraging masturbation, as well as the now-disproved hygiene benefits.

1. anti-masturbation is a religious thing. I don't know about you but my parents talked to me about masturbating when I was a kid and told me theres nothing wrong with it. any reasonable and rational person will understand masturbation is the safest form of sex possible.

2. So you're comparing tribal shaman to modern licensed medical doctors? hmm...that seems like a reasonable comparison

But as I also said earlier, if you guys in the US want to do that then fine. I'll rest happy knowing that nobody in my family (or indeed the other 96% of the country) will be circumcised. If nothing else, I just pity the children of the US; it's very nice having an extremely soft and sensitive penis head, and a culture that supports it. Very Happy

your anti-us sentiment comes through so strongly above anything else that it completely discredits almost everything you say. I'm not sure how you can say only jewish countries perform circumcisions when it clearly says in the paragraph that you quoted countries like south korea and the Philippines. Why exactly should we be focusing on the western countries? South Korea and the Philippines are both very modern countries. Unless maybe you know something I don't about the jewish populations of those countries.

Being a reasonable person I'm not about to deny that there are people out there with legitimate issues towards circumcision from the emotional consequences and even the physical ones of surgery so soon after birth. I once had to watch a documentary and write a paper on the issue of female genital modification and Comparing female genital modification and male circumcision is absolutely ludicrous.

Maybe you should actually read the wikipedia page on circumcision instead of blindly supporting your argument with bias. Scientific studies clearly outline many of the pros of circumcision such as:

Three randomised control trials published since 2005 confirm that adult male circumcision results in a 50-60% reduction in risk of HIV transmission from female to male

To list one of many.

You're almost as bad as George Bush with your inability to acknowledge that there are two sides to every argument.

[Ginger Lord]

Comparing male circumcision to female circumcision is ridiculous.

With a guy he loses a bit of sensitivity which doesnt really effect anything in the long run and you never know might be more beneficial allowing you to go longer. I read somewhere the average climax time for guys is 3-5 minutes and for females more like 10-15 minutes.

Female circumcision however is truly barbaric, at "best" removing the clitoris, at worst removing everything and sewing her up so she has a hole as bag as a matchstick head to pee out of. I don't think its on the same level as male circumcision somehow....

As for the health benefits etc, I hate using wikipedia as my main source but does anyone have any links to these studies that show it has no health/hygeine benefits etc as wikipedia sits in the middle, but has more pros than cons.

[Duff-e]

The only possible real con that I can see in the matter is choice and thats what this topic is completely about, not circumcision. And while choice is a very serious matter the choice that is made for these children is based on many clinical studies from various accredited sources.

If a child was to reserve the right of choice until he was of age to make a choice there would be probably millions of children around the world that would die before their 10th birthday. Everything from naming a child, to inoculation with vaccines to things as simple as diet which can detrimentally effect the growth of a child infinitely more times than the scientifically certified removal of a small piece of otherwise trivial skin.

When does a child have the right of choice? Should a person be withheld from all the choices listed above until their 16th or perhaps 18th birthday?

You might find yourself with quite a bit of chaos and many lives that could have otherwise been saved.

[Thrik]

I just want to clarify that I wasn't personally comparing the two forms of circumcision; I was just pointing out why it's very easy for people to draw parallels. While they are on different levels, they are still fundamentally the same thing no matter how many clinical studies and justifications are used. They aren't the same thing when you look at the whole picture though, obviously.

I've seen the HIV thing brought up before, and I have to say that it sounds like a very poor argument.

Okay, sure, perhaps having no foreskin does somehow lessen the HIV transmission. But considering the risk level of being sexually active with a HIV-positive person is 'massive' and the risk level of using protection like the vast majority of people do nowadays is 'tiny', what is the point of the argument?

It's like saying having no fingers reduces the chances of your arm being ripped off because you're sticking your hand out the train window. It's a big risk you shouldn't be taking in the first place, so using variables in an argument that adjust the level of that risk but still leave the risk very much there is a bit crazy. The simple answer to that one is 'don't fuck a HIV-positive person', not 'chop off their foreskin'.

I agree with you though, there may be no particular cons to taking off the end of childrens' penises. But if the only pro for it is to fit in amongst your peers, does it make removing that part of the body right? I guess I'll never change your mind on that one. I'm just personally glad nobody in my family will have that choice made for them. And if you're glad those in your family will have the choice made for them, I'm OK with that.

... Although I could just throw in another analogy such as a country that traditionally chops the tops of their childrens' ears off because it prevents wax building up in the outer parts which they believe is good for hygiene (Wrong!), and the parts they chop off aren't really useful anyway.

[Duff-e]

yes for an ignorant person it is very easy to draw parallels on two completely independent issues.

It isn't an HIV "thing" it's scientific fact. What about in a country like Africa, with a HIV population of up to 50% in some areas? Or should we not introduce such an American ideal from your perspective to another country?

Perhaps if you do glance at the wikipedia page which I have no doubt you haven't, you would realize that HIV is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of circumcision for disease prevention.

For some reason you have the need to skip over the numerous points I make besides the ones that you can easily dismiss with flawed logic, hyperbole and ridiculous analogies.

I mentioned one very significant con with circumcision but again you just decided to jump to demonizing the practice as a "way to fit in with peers." If you're circumcised as a child please explain to me how this is some "hip new thing" all the kids are doing to fit in? If uncircumcised people feel they are superior to circumcised ones then why does it seem like only the uncircumcised ones are complaining and belittling others?

This discussion has become pointless now that you've started making ridiculous terrible analogies, such as suggesting to cut an ear off to prevent wax. Maybe you also need to spend some time understanding the anatomy of the ear too.

[Thrik]

I've already conceded and agreed that there're no particular cons to the practice, just that there're no particular benefits either.

I'm fully aware of what you're saying about HIV, but I still don't see it as a valid argument for advocating circumcision in a developed country. In Africa perhaps it would help, but that's what I'd define as an extreme solution; a route taken because they can't afford the alternative that is the norm in Europe.

The page also gives three examples of how being uncircumcised could cause infections: not washing, over-washing, and pulling the foreskin back too hard. Erm, common sense perhaps? Again, more nonsense reasons.

And of course there's the big area above all that which goes into circumcision surgery complications generally being catastrophic. Might be okay in the US where it's a mature practice, but I sure as hell wouldn't like to imagine how often it could go wrong in an undeveloped country, which is what the whole HIV thing would seem to advocate.

I continue to stand by my position and I assume you're going to stand by yours. I don't agree with its practice, I wouldn't ever consider making the choice for my own children, and I'm glad this is what the majority of my country is doing. You most probably see it as fine, so as I said earlier, I'm OK with that.

Are you going to make me repeat this again?

[Duff-e]

I stand by rational opinion. Clearly you don't share this same opinion since you and every one of your posts demeaning the practice of circumcision by belittling those who choose to do it.

Until you acknowledge that circumcised vs uncircumcised both have their own different benefits and failings then your opinion is not rational or objective and therefore not valid.

[Thrik]

I'm not (intentionally) belittling anyone.

I've stated my opinion, stated why I don't think your arguments for circumcision have any credit, and stated that you're free to continue advocating circumcision within your own community all you like.

What I'm avoiding is getting into a big argument about the medical side to it, where we both spend hours throwing (biased) articles backing up our own opinions at each other and ultimately end up precisely where we started. I don't have the time or the desire.

I'm sorry if I came across as belittling.

[Duff-e]

It doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what I think. What matters is that if something is deemed medically and scientifically safe then there should be no reason for disrespect or prejudice towards EITHER side of the argument. There should be no argument and this thread shouldn't exist because it only invites opinionated people who feel that their side is right while scoffing at the other side in private. Thats a fantastic way to breed animosity and hatred.

Just by saying "YOUR community", implies prejudice because it creates a divide. You might as well say "YOUR ideals" and "MY" ideals. I have no ideals, I am respectful of anyones decision that, like I said, is supported by medical science, whether natural or otherwise.

You fail to realize I'm not arguing for circumcision. I'm arguing for tolerance and understanding of other peoples choices when they have no bearing on your own....ESPECIALLY when there is science behind it.

I already tried once to steer this argument in a more constructive direction by saying that this has to do with choice, it has nothing to do with circumcision. No one in the western world, aside from religion, is obligated to be circumcised. If you want to take issue with jews, please, be my guest, I said already I do not support religion for children in any setting.

I already told you that if I have a child and should the mood strike me to not have him/her circumcised I wont. You know why? Because there are more important things to take into account in the development in a child than to live with a bias that one way or the other is "right."