what do you think about circumcision?
People shouldn't do it at all
11.8% (207)
11.8% (207)
Parents shouldn't do it do their kids. Let them decide when they'er older.
52.9% (928)
52.9% (928)
It's the parents' choice.
17.3% (304)
17.3% (304)
I don't care.
17.2% (302)
17.2% (302)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: What do you think about circumcision?

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 . . . 24 NEXT
 

Kanlic:

3) Assuming you live in a 1st world nation, most penises are circumcised at birth. Chicks these days, especially with our society that is fixated on grooming, aren't used to seeing an uncircumcised penis. It looks weird, to them at least.

It's not common at al in Western Europe afaik

Naeras:

ravensheart18:
Incorrect. You can also have various forms of cosmetic surgery done. Breast enlargements, nose jobs, eye lifts, tats, piercings, colligen injections, botox, braces, etc.

An no, an infant has ZERO say in what medical procedures are performed on them.

What would you say if the norm somewhere was for parents to force kids to take painful plastic surgeries? If you'd condemn that, you're essentially a hypocrite, because that's essentially what circumcision is, plus the fact that it makes sex less pleasing.

I've held a baby for their circumcision. They cry just about as much as if they have a dirty diaper.

And I'm not a hypocrite if you read what I've repeatedly said in this thread. If there is a cultural/religious imparative and there is no conclusive scientific evidence of harm or benefit then its the parent's call and preserving tradition is probably a good thing.

If there is no real reason to do it and the procedure had uncertain science, then better to be safe and don't do it. (And no, your statement on sexual pleasure is not confirmed by the science at the moment)

If there is conclusive evidence of harm that outways any good, don't do it.

That set of steps applies equally to any form of medical procedure on a child (and for that matter, I'd apply that same standard to myself.)

Ultratwinkie:

ravensheart18:

Ultratwinkie:

Uncircumcised has 24,000 nerves. Circumcision only leaves you with 4,000 left. Females have 8,000. Circumcisions have proven to cause loss of sensitivity, callouses, and even sexual dysfunction. Any "benefit" has been medically disproven long ago. There is no evidence of "lasting longer" either.

You know your statement contains both errors and contradictions right?

Less sensitivity on a penis would mean less stimulation and thus longer lasting.

Sexual disfunction is almost unheard of.

The medical studies on sensitivity are usually weak scientifically and at best they have mixed messages.

Not necessarily. You assume that it creates a dead mass of flesh. That is not always the case, but it does reduce sensitivity. The level of sensitivity does not equal performance, that depends entirely on you.

http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/ <-- Has source material for sexual dysfunction. Hardly unheard of.

That's an anti-circumcision site. Hardly a surprise which research they choose to site. And to be fair, even on that site they point out that the stuff isn't proven, "some people believe" is a frequently used term.

I know this is getting off topic but I wanted to address this

Bento Box:

I don't believe in ritual animal sacrifice -- and I don't believe that just because your religion says so, you should be compelled to kill an animal for no tangible reason.

We kill animals for food clothing and for fun all the time. At that point does it really matter that one person kills a deer because he likes hunting and another person kills a deer because his god wants him to (assuming the deer is not made to suffer)?

Bento Box:

I don't believe in ritual self-flagellation -- and I don't believe that just because your religion says so, you should flagellate yourself for any reason other than self-gratification.

If it's an adult they should be able to hurt themselves for any reason they choose.

Circumcision on babies is plain wrong and violates basic human rights*. Somehow most healthy nations like Sweeden, Finalnd don't do it, somehow England stopped it years ago, somehow Australia woke up and rates dropped, rates seem to drop in Canada too, people in Germany, France, Italy, Greece don't do it unless it's the immigrants.

*) Source: common sense & logic

demoman_chaos:
What are the medical benefits?

it lowers the risk of some infections and STD's.

But the question is: why would anyone take extreme measure of dealing with a certain condition and use it as a prevention? Most things circumcision alledgedly prevents are prevented a lot better with condoms.

/omg, my first post is about circumcision :O

ravensheart18:

Naeras:

ravensheart18:
Incorrect. You can also have various forms of cosmetic surgery done. Breast enlargements, nose jobs, eye lifts, tats, piercings, colligen injections, botox, braces, etc.

An no, an infant has ZERO say in what medical procedures are performed on them.

What would you say if the norm somewhere was for parents to force kids to take painful plastic surgeries? If you'd condemn that, you're essentially a hypocrite, because that's essentially what circumcision is, plus the fact that it makes sex less pleasing.

I've held a baby for their circumcision. They cry just about as much as if they have a dirty diaper.

And I'm not a hypocrite if you read what I've repeatedly said in this thread. If there is a cultural/religious imparative and there is no conclusive scientific evidence of harm or benefit then its the parent's call and preserving tradition is probably a good thing.

If there is no real reason to do it and the procedure had uncertain science, then better to be safe and don't do it. (And no, your statement on sexual pleasure is not confirmed by the science at the moment)

If there is conclusive evidence of harm that outways any good, don't do it.

That set of steps applies equally to any form of medical procedure on a child (and for that matter, I'd apply that same standard to myself.)

First off, who is even talking about how much it hurts the baby? We all know it does, and crying is their ONLY form of language, it is how they tell you things, so it sounds the same whether it's due to hunger or pain, you just have to learn to read your child.
It was not long ago that we didn't give children anasthetics at the dentist because kids didn't feel pain because no one could remember feeling pain when they were that young. Well.. We now also know that it's almost impossible to remember anything from before the age of 5, the time when your brain starts developing that part of the memory. Hence why alot of 5 year olds has alot of fabricated memories because it goes a bit bonkers and they get things mixed up.

Second, it IS proven that circumsizion in fact reduces sexual sensation in the male and for the female during intercourse, mainly because of shafing since the natural construction called the foreskin that is supposed to prevent unecessary shafing is nonexistant. It's called friction. Just look it up, there's a billion unbiased articles about it.

Third, religious beliefs have caused murder, rape, molestation, mutilation, mass executions, pillaging, slavery, and almost every form of misery and pain you can possibly think of.
Why is it that we throughout history have let it happen? Because it was right at the time, and no one dared question it. It is time that we as a species drop these religious nonsensical archaic traditions and start evolving beyond the need for silly rituals and start appreciating the real beauty and rarity of our existance.

Sewora:

springheeljack298:
I got circumcised as a child and I was not of the Jewish faith
and I do not remember what it felt like to have it removed though my mom tells me I cried and cried (hey I was a baby get off my back)
And I know for damn sure that I have never had any "psychological issues" due to the supposed traumatic experience i do not even remember

Foreskin is gross/hilarious. Off with it

The psychological issues men can have is not due to the traumatic experience since no one has any real vivid memories from before the age of 3. The depression and psychological issues is due to the realization of the loss of a part of their bodies, and their parents decision to take the freedom of choice away from them.

Well I just do not see that happening I mean its not like you had a doctor cut off your hand at a young age or one of your ass cheeks now that would be traumatic
but the foreskin on your penis I don't think so
Now if we were discussing a topic such as feet binding then yeah I would say that it is such a cruel thing to do to a child and it will have long term negative effects

I've researched this subject quite a bit, so I'll just throw in my comments, for whatever they're worth. I'm not circumcised, so most of this is just anecdotal. Also, I didn't read all 12+ pages of the thread, so I don't know if my comments are just repetition. Anyway, these are the pros and cons as I see them:

I've always found it extremely easy to masturbate with a foreskin; possibly too easy as I always tended to do it a lot. So I could understand parents wanting to cut it off for that reason. I still enjoy intercourse with a partner, but I feel like I can get off faster and easier when it's just me and the foreskin.

During prolonged intercourse, the foreskin can get sore, as it can be a bit sensitive. Using a condom always seemed awkward to me, and can lead to a weird "tangled up" feeling that I found really uncomfortable. Also, the foreskin adds some extra thickness, meaning small or average sized condoms might not fit at all.

Some women seem to like a foreskin, some don't. My own girlfriend said it looks unattractive, yet she seems to really like the actual intercourse. So perhaps this is a matter of function being more important than form. ;)

I've never really understood the "hygiene" arguments. The foreskin creates a natural lubricant, which carries a slight odour with it. It has nothing to do with being "clean". As far as I'm concerned, cutting off a foreskin to keep a glans cleaner would be like cutting off my eyelids to keep my eyes cleaner.

It is possible for a circumcision to go wrong, and that's not a risk I would be willing to take if I had a son of my own. Certainly it is rare, but it has happened. Imagine having to go through life with a mangled penis! Also, while it may be considered minor surgery for a baby, having a circumcision as an adult is apparently much more complicated, and much riskier.

One thing I've never understood: I'm under the impression that cutting off the foreskin would make my penis thinner/smaller, since the foreskin seems to add some extra bulk to it. And most men seem to want their penis as large as possible, so why would any man be in favour of trimming part of it off?

Im probelry not going to like the awnser to this,...

But how can you circumsise a female?

imnotparanoid:
Im probelry not going to like the awnser to this,...

But how can you circumsise a female?

Google it and feel the horror.
It's pretty gruesome.

I'm not a fan of it, personally, but I see no reason at all why someone shouldn't be allowed to choose that for themselves.

As for parents choosing for them, well... no. That's just plain unfair.

Colour-Scientist:

imnotparanoid:
Im probelry not going to like the awnser to this,...

But how can you circumsise a female?

Google it and feel the horror.
It's pretty gruesome.

Don't google it for the love of God don't google it.

Google pulls no punches. Ask someone who is not likely to show you pictures.

Colour-Scientist:

imnotparanoid:
Im probelry not going to like the awnser to this,...

But how can you circumsise a female?

Google it and feel the horror.
It's pretty gruesome.

The only reason I asked here was because I was scared google would give me pics!
Seriously my inability to not click links has led me to more than enough pictures of genetalia today!

imnotparanoid:

The only reason I asked here was because I was scared google would give me pics!
Seriously my inability to not click links has led me to more than enough pictures of genetalia today!

As far as I remember, the first few pictures are diagrams as opposed to actual photos. If not though, I'm sorry.

imnotparanoid:
Im probelry not going to like the awnser to this,...

But how can you circumsise a female?

Well, women also have foreskin so if I had no idea I'd assume that's what they'd remove. (Also known as the clitoral hood. It serves a similar purpose but has remained intact throughout history, lucky for women.)

But female circumsizion ranges from cutting off the labia minora to the clitoris and even sewing the vagina shut.
It's horrible, and it's often performed on girls who are old enough to realize what's going on, who are struggling against it and suffering.
Boys would do that to, if they were held down and cut into, especially a very special part of their body that they've gotten used to.

Food for thought: female genital cutting was once legal and relatively common in the USA and UK.

CountryMike:

Kanlic:

3) Assuming you live in a 1st world nation, most penises are circumcised at birth. Chicks these days, especially with our society that is fixated on grooming, aren't used to seeing an uncircumcised penis. It looks weird, to them at least.

It's not common at al in Western Europe afaik

You're correct, outside of the religous communities its pretty rare in UK, Germany France etc and very rare in the Scandinavian countries.

I assume the original poster believes the term first world nation ends at the USA's borders

There's an interesting fact to take into consideration: Gender equality. The fact that men are forced into being circumsized whilst women are not. That by itself is wrong by human rights standards.
And yes, forced, since they never have the option not to be if their parents have the power to have it done to you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_and_law

Bit of a good read.

Pipotchi:
I assume the original poster believes the term first world nation ends at the USA's borders

Yet many of us in Scandinavia considers the US to be the third world.

Father Time:
I know this is getting off topic but I wanted to address this

Bento Box:

I don't believe in ritual animal sacrifice -- and I don't believe that just because your religion says so, you should be compelled to kill an animal for no tangible reason.

We kill animals for food clothing and for fun all the time. At that point does it really matter that one person kills a deer because he likes hunting and another person kills a deer because his god wants him to (assuming the deer is not made to suffer)?

Bento Box:

I don't believe in ritual self-flagellation -- and I don't believe that just because your religion says so, you should flagellate yourself for any reason other than self-gratification.

If it's an adult they should be able to hurt themselves for any reason they choose.

1: the difference is precisely between the hunter who kills the animal for sport, and the hunter who kills the animal for food. One person is killing with purpose; the other is being a wasteful, murdering, sadistic cunt.

2: I agree whole-heartedly, and I can see few instances of an adult choosing to flagellate himself aside from purposes of self-gratification. That's not what ritual self-flagellation is, though. Ritual self-flagellation is saying, "I'm sorry for being a worthless, pitiful sinner, unworthy of your love, Sky-Daddy. Here, let me punish myself for being an insignificant worm before you."

I'll just add something funny.

When I was in early teens and watched stupid US comedy movies about teenagers, school and whatnot, there were often scenes about masturbation, and always the guy held lube in his hands, always lube and paper towels. I understood paper towels ;p but I tell you, I never knew what lube is for :) I kinds thought it's some kind of cleaning measure to use after lol. Seems like circumcied men tend to need some extra help to make it natural, as I have everyting at hand.

There is no way in hell that mother nature/God/evolution made a mistake, if it's there, it's there for a reason it's pretty much as simple as that.

Blablahb:
Nonsense. That only flies if you were to never take a shower. Besides, how about we just cut off all our limbs then? Those can also infect after all.

And considering you likely used arms and fingers to type your post, all limbs that can infect, you don't even follow your own line of reasoning.

I'm sorry, but that's retarded logic right there. I understand going to the extreme is the point of arguing, but you are essentially arguing that there should never be stairs because Mt. Everest is hard to climb.Circumcising a penis near birth literally does nothing but prevent the possibility of future infection. Chopping off your arm can lead to phantom limb pain, not to mention inhibit your ability to interact with the world.

I know you can clean it, I'm not stupid. My question is why risk it. You could go camping for two weeks, or hell, he's a boy. I know lots off guys who just go days without realizing they needed to take a shower. It's damage control.

Also, why is it that doctors immediately circumcise the penis if the parents don't say anything? Please tell me because I'd like to know why a physician with 15 years of training would do something so "harmful."

Blablahb:
All the more reason not to practise genital mutilation at all eh? Besides, it's totally immoral to mutilate a child that has no choice in the matter. It's even immoral to mutilate a child that has seen no other ideas except religious dogma, and pretend it was a free choice.

I'm an Atheist and am glad my parents, who are also not religious, decided to give me the snip. Guess what, I haven't felt pain or any kind of discomfort my entire life, and I'm walking around feeling pretty good about myself. Besides, its as benign as getting your ears pierced, or if you want a more intense comparison, getting your appendix removed. There is no harm, I don't get why you are getting so uppity about this.

Blablahb:
Sorry, what? I can see such a thing happening in Israel, but outside of that, needless genital mutilation is not practised at all. Heck, female genital mutilation is even a crime in just about any country. Circumcise a girl here and you're going away for 10-15 years in prison.

Female circumcision is harmful, that's why we don't do it. Male circumcision is beneficial, that's why we do it. Also, I apologize, I can't speak for the rest of the world, but that's how it is in the U.S.

Blablahb:
Again I wonder where you're from that you say that. Such a thing is completely unknown to me. It even sounds outlandish. Why would any woman approve of genital mutilation unless they've been indoctrinated with the religious dogma that pretends it to be a good thing.

Have you seen an uncircumcised penis? It's awkward to look at and kinda gross. I have literally asked all five of the women nearby me just now what they thought, and they all told me they prefer circumcised. They tell its easier to work with, and by golly I agree.

Blablahb:
Earlier you said that even wearing underwear was painfull, so you're contradicting yourself here.

I said once you're older it is. When your a baby you don't feel a thing, or more so you can't mentally process any potential pain. Besides what the hell does a kid do with his penis besides pee anyways. What I'm confused by is why anybody would actually be angry about being circumcised or the practice of circumcision in general. It's a non-problem.

--------------------------

Sewora:

1) The foreskin helps keep it clean and avoid infections, do some research. Following your logic we'd have to remove the armpits too or stitch the labia majora and minora to the thighs on women to expose the vagina and make it dry. The glans is supposed to be somewhat moist to keep a good pH balance. Please name one gland on the human body that's supposed to be dry and sandy.

2) Why would you do it at all if it serves no purpose? No one is doing it at adult age, it's just stupid.

3) One of the very few first world countries that still has circumsizion as a standard procedure is the US. And even there it's becomming less and less common.

Sure it helps keep the penis clean and avoid infections, that is if we are running around naked like we used to as a species. We now have clothes that serve this function, so the argument that we need it to keep clean has literally been evolved out of our system. Doing that other stuff you just mentioned is dangerous, and the risk of danger from a circumcision is minuscule.

When I said it makes no difference, I mean it makes no difference to the person growing up with either a circumcised or uncircumcised penis. When adult men get circumcisions for either religious or hygienic reasons. That is an issue because there are many sensitivity issues involved with adapting to a penis that is newly exposed to the world.

Finally, the U.S. is leading the world in medical innovation. Don't say we are doing it wrong if everyone else is playing catch up.

--------------------------------

CountryMike:

It's not common at al in Western Europe afaik

Apparently neither is proper grammar or spelling. I guess I should have been more specific because I am speaking from an anecdotal perspective. From what I have read and heard, what I said is probably true, at least in the U.S. I can't speak for places like Spain or France.

Sewora:

imnotparanoid:
Im probelry not going to like the awnser to this,...

But how can you circumsise a female?

Well, women also have foreskin so if I had no idea I'd assume that's what they'd remove. (Also known as the clitoral hood. It serves a similar purpose but has remained intact throughout history, lucky for women.)

But female circumsizion ranges from cutting off the labia minora to the clitoris and even sewing the vagina shut.
It's horrible, and it's often performed on girls who are old enough to realize what's going on, who are struggling against it and suffering.
Boys would do that to, if they were held down and cut into, especially a very special part of their body that they've gotten used to.

D: Why would you, what, I..., wat?

this isnt my name:

JaredXE:
It's perfectly fine, and has positive medical benefits to it. People complaining about male circumcision being abuse are just whining for the sake of being whiney. Why does it matter to you? If you don't want to circumcise your boys, that's fine. But telling lies such as saying it lowers sensitivity (something you can't really measure), is just going too far.

Yes infclicting harm on new born babies for no reason is whining for the sake of it.

Actually its true because your cutting of lots of nerves. Say doctors remove nerves in your rm, its going to be less sensitive. You cant measure that, but there is difference becuase the nerves are absent.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to log in and post here for the first time in months to interject.

Now I was circumcised when i was a child due to medical reasons, and without going into graphic detail, I have had no problems making do with this 'lack of sensitivity', just ask my girlfriend.

So please don't just assume that because someone is circumcised, they are somehow disadvantaged or 'broken' when it comes to using it, as it's quite offensive. Besides, by that logic if you're involved with someone else, it's only going to benefit your partner, so win-win!

Here's a hypothetical question for those that are pro circumcision on health grounds. I have daughter who is just beginning to go through puberty. My grandmother died of breast cancer and my mother had a mastectomy because of breast cancer.

My daughter may therefore have a higher risk of developing the disease when she is older, particularly if she has inherited a genetic mutation that renders her more susceptible.

There are some adult women who take the very drastic step of undergoing a preventative double mastectomy when they find themselves in the unfortunate position of being at a very high risk.

If you accept that it is permissible to circumcise to (supposedly) prevent infections/STD's and penis cancer (very rare indeed), do you think it is also ok to perform a double mastectomy on a child to prevent breast cancer?

Standby:

this isnt my name:

JaredXE:
It's perfectly fine, and has positive medical benefits to it. People complaining about male circumcision being abuse are just whining for the sake of being whiney. Why does it matter to you? If you don't want to circumcise your boys, that's fine. But telling lies such as saying it lowers sensitivity (something you can't really measure), is just going too far.

Yes infclicting harm on new born babies for no reason is whining for the sake of it.

Actually its true because your cutting of lots of nerves. Say doctors remove nerves in your rm, its going to be less sensitive. You cant measure that, but there is difference becuase the nerves are absent.

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to log in and post here for the first time in months to interject.

Now I was circumcised when i was a child due to medical reasons, and without going into graphic detail, I have had no problems making do with this 'lack of sensitivity', just ask my girlfriend.

So please don't just assume that because someone is circumcised, they are somehow disadvantaged or 'broken' when it comes to using it, as it's quite offensive. Besides, by that logic if you're involved with someone else, it's only going to benefit your partner, so win-win!

By that logic, you're just being a dildo with only 50% of the pleasure, and even LESS of your original capacity.

Justifying removal of nerves "to benefit your partner" is ultimately flawed. You might as well replace your genitals with a dildo.

There is a difference between thinking of your partner, and not thinking at all.

Making it illegal seems a bit harsh at this point but I don't think the parents should be allowed to do it. The kids should be allowed to decide their own religion and take on it at which point they can decide for themselves if they want to be circumcised (when they are older that is, I wouldn't let an impressionable little idiot kid make the choice for himself).

The difference is there, studies show circumcised men more often report erectile problems.
http://news.menshealth.com/is-your-circumcision-making-you-soft/

And it's a no brainer, foreskin has tons of fine touch nerve endings, it's a part of erection mechanism. Of course when you're young and heathy it's not a problem but when older those problems start to show.
It's all in the brain, when it's harder to get that erection the lack of those nerve endings doesn't help I'd say, that means the brain doesn't get all the info about what is going on down there.

Kanlic:

Blablahb:
Nonsense. That only flies if you were to never take a shower. Besides, how about we just cut off all our limbs then? Those can also infect after all.

And considering you likely used arms and fingers to type your post, all limbs that can infect, you don't even follow your own line of reasoning.

I'm sorry, but that's retarded logic right there. I understand going to the extreme is the point of arguing, but you are essentially arguing that there should never be stairs because Mt. Everest is hard to climb.Circumcising a penis near birth literally does nothing but prevent the possibility of future infection. Chopping off your arm can lead to phantom limb pain, not to mention inhibit your ability to interact with the world.

I know you can clean it, I'm not stupid. My question is why risk it. You could go camping for two weeks, or hell, he's a boy. I know lots off guys who just go days without realizing they needed to take a shower. It's damage control.

Also, why is it that doctors immediately circumcise the penis if the parents don't say anything? Please tell me because I'd like to know why a physician with 15 years of training would do something so "harmful."

Blablahb:
All the more reason not to practise genital mutilation at all eh? Besides, it's totally immoral to mutilate a child that has no choice in the matter. It's even immoral to mutilate a child that has seen no other ideas except religious dogma, and pretend it was a free choice.

I'm an Atheist and am glad my parents, who are also not religious, decided to give me the snip. Guess what, I haven't felt pain or any kind of discomfort my entire life, and I'm walking around feeling pretty good about myself. Besides, its as benign as getting your ears pierced, or if you want a more intense comparison, getting your appendix removed. There is no harm, I don't get why you are getting so uppity about this.

Blablahb:
Sorry, what? I can see such a thing happening in Israel, but outside of that, needless genital mutilation is not practised at all. Heck, female genital mutilation is even a crime in just about any country. Circumcise a girl here and you're going away for 10-15 years in prison.

Female circumcision is harmful, that's why we don't do it. Male circumcision is beneficial, that's why we do it. Also, I apologize, I can't speak for the rest of the world, but that's how it is in the U.S.

Blablahb:
Again I wonder where you're from that you say that. Such a thing is completely unknown to me. It even sounds outlandish. Why would any woman approve of genital mutilation unless they've been indoctrinated with the religious dogma that pretends it to be a good thing.

Have you seen an uncircumcised penis? It's awkward to look at and kinda gross. I have literally asked all five of the women nearby me just now what they thought, and they all told me they prefer circumcised. They tell its easier to work with, and by golly I agree.

Blablahb:
Earlier you said that even wearing underwear was painfull, so you're contradicting yourself here.

I said once you're older it is. When your a baby you don't feel a thing, or more so you can't mentally process any potential pain. Besides what the hell does a kid do with his penis besides pee anyways. What I'm confused by is why anybody would actually be angry about being circumcised or the practice of circumcision in general. It's a non-problem.

--------------------------

Sewora:

1) The foreskin helps keep it clean and avoid infections, do some research. Following your logic we'd have to remove the armpits too or stitch the labia majora and minora to the thighs on women to expose the vagina and make it dry. The glans is supposed to be somewhat moist to keep a good pH balance. Please name one gland on the human body that's supposed to be dry and sandy.

2) Why would you do it at all if it serves no purpose? No one is doing it at adult age, it's just stupid.

3) One of the very few first world countries that still has circumsizion as a standard procedure is the US. And even there it's becomming less and less common.

Sure it helps keep the penis clean and avoid infections, that is if we are running around naked like we used to as a species. We now have clothes that serve this function, so the argument that we need it to keep clean has literally been evolved out of our system. Doing that other stuff you just mentioned is dangerous, and the risk of danger from a circumcision is minuscule.

When I said it makes no difference, I mean it makes no difference to the person growing up with either a circumcised or uncircumcised penis. When adult men get circumcisions for either religious or hygienic reasons. That is an issue because there are many sensitivity issues involved with adapting to a penis that is newly exposed to the world.

Finally, the U.S. is leading the world in medical innovation. Don't say we are doing it wrong if everyone else is playing catch up.

--------------------------------

CountryMike:

It's not common at al in Western Europe afaik

Apparently neither is proper grammar or spelling. I guess I should have been more specific because I am speaking from an anecdotal perspective. From what I have read and heard, what I said is probably true, at least in the U.S. I can't speak for places like Spain or France.

1: circumcision is a religious invention in the US, started by puritan preachers scaring everyone about masturbation. This is not up for debate, this is fact. The most prominent was Dr. Kellog, who also performed female circumcision using acid to burn off her genitalia. It was never for hygiene. That is historical myth started by people who don't know history.

2:

3:

4: Lack of memory is not an excuse to cause pain. Babies have a hyper sensitive nervous system, and feel pain in a way that is far worse than an adult.

5: Foreskin has more functions than simply protection. To say clothing negates foreskin is medically retarded.

6. Argument by tradition and anecdotal evidence. Who you asked what they like makes no difference.

7. The risks of having a foreskin is low. The only people who are scared of foreskins are the same people who are scared of Muslims and non Christians. The same people who are scared of every fucking thing.

8. Circumcision has no clear benefits. At all. No benefits have every been scientifically proven.

Bento Box:
I don't believe in ritual animal sacrifice -- and I don't believe that just because your religion says so, you should be compelled to kill an animal for no tangible reason.

Which religions do you think call for animl sacrifice "for no tangible reason"?

I don't believe in flying passenger jets into skyscrapers -- and I don't believe that just because your religion says so, you should fly a passenger jet into a skyscraper.

Which religion do you think calls for this?

Fun fact about traditional Talmudic circumcision: The moil uses his fingernails to slice the baby's dick

Citation please. A specialized and extremely sharp knife is used.

and then he uses his mouth to suck the blood from the baby's sliced dick.

In Talmudic times that was the only way believed reliable to clean a wound. Sucking the wound (not the dick)was the way that any doctor would have dealt with a cut they wished clean at the time. No one teaching this anymore, the religion adapts based on new information. Yes, one or two fruitloops may use a 1000+ year old technique, but that is not the standard procedure in modern imes.

Claptrap:

R3dF41c0n:
*snip* lol

Alright then, To put this to rest, As someone who was uncircumcised and then circumcised, Have you noticed any difference in pleasure? ( If you don't mind me asking of course)

No, I don't mind at all. I had Phimosis (that's were the foreskin doesn't retract the way it should), so my sex experience pre-circumcised wasn't all that great. I didn't get a lot of stimulation because of the foreskin. Two weeks after the surgery I had sex and I felt A LOT more pleasure.

Granted, I'm not the best example because I had a medical condition and I couldn't really feel anything prior. I've had to change the way I masturbate but other than that it's been great.

Btw, if anyone is thinking about doing the surgery for cosmedic reasons my advice is don't do it! Those needles really hurt and you're soar and tender for at least two weeks.

Standby:

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to log in and post here for the first time in months to interject.

Now I was circumcised when i was a child due to medical reasons, and without going into graphic detail, I have had no problems making do with this 'lack of sensitivity', just ask my girlfriend.

So please don't just assume that because someone is circumcised, they are somehow disadvantaged or 'broken' when it comes to using it, as it's quite offensive. Besides, by that logic if you're involved with someone else, it's only going to benefit your partner, so win-win!

People aren't saying circumcised children have worse sex when they are older, we are saying you don't feel as much - and without the nerve-endings in the foreskin this would make sense, no? This is not to say a circumcised adult feels no pleasure from sex, but less.

In the end, if you have circumcision pushed on you before you can make a decision about it, without decent medical reason, something has been taken from you without your permission that you cannot get back. A man with an uncircumcised penis can always find ways to make himself last longer in bed, but still feel the same amount of pleasure. A man with a circumcised penis, some suggest, will never feel the same pleasure as someone with who didn't have a large amount of nerves cut from them.

In all honesty, I'd say that, yes, you are disadvantaged to most uncircumcised men when it comes to sex, since they can always take steps to last just as long as you in bed but will still feel more pleasure.

Circumcision Decreases Sexual Pleasure:

Circumcision Removes the Most Sensitive Parts of the Penis:

Here's an image related to the different regions of the human penis and their sensitivity:

Oskamunda:
Now, in actual response; You people, YEESH. How can you pontificate so vociferously without actually reading anything? I don't justify it, I don't necessarily endorse it, as I have made very clear. I'm just pointing out the fallacy of logic in making it a human rights issue.

Human rights issue or not, what do you propose be done about it? Because the way I see it, a parent inflicting near-irreversible(Restoration doesn't grow the nerves back, ever) damage to their children for the sake of conformity or easy hygiene is absolutely moronic. None of the above are even valid excuses, and the first person to think otherwise should be forced to watch 50 hours of slideshows involving uncircumcised penises.
I'm not advocating laws against people making choices for their children, I'm advocating stronger education regarding the need(well, lack of need) for circumcision.

(The next paragraph is directed at no one in particular)
Instead of lopping off your son's foreskin for fear of him being *horror* an outcast, you could teach him that there's nothing wrong with being different, and that conforming isn't necessarily a good thing. You know, a simple life lesson(or being a good parent) as opposed to a completely unnecessary medical procedure.

Circumcision is, for the most part, unnecessary and stupid. I'm not going to go around knocking people out and throwing them in rivers because they want to circumcise their sons, but you can be sure as hell I'm going to treat them the same way I treat other ignorant twits I run into.

If you did it on account of medical issues that could not be resolved otherwise, I couldn't care less. If you're for circumcision on account of conformity, aesthetics, 'hygiene' and other such fluff, you're a terrible parent.

Standby:
So please don't just assume that because someone is circumcised, they are somehow disadvantaged or 'broken' when it comes to using it, as it's quite offensive. Besides, by that logic if you're involved with someone else, it's only going to benefit your partner, so win-win!

No one's saying you're disadvantaged or anything of the sort. But you can't really argue with the logic that fewer nerves will mean less sensitivity. Finally, lasting longer doesn't really mean much because it has practically nothing to do with the clitoris, unless you're the kind of person that has never heard of orally(which is probably far more fun for her) or manually stimulating a woman.

By the way, "They found that the circumcised men in the study took on average 6.7 minutes to ejaculate, compared with 6.0 minutes for the uncircumcised men. This difference was not statistically significant."

Kanlic:
Have you seen an uncircumcised penis? It's awkward to look at and kinda gross. I have literally asked all five of the women nearby me just now what they thought, and they all told me they prefer circumcised. They tell its easier to work with, and by golly I agree.

If you(and the women around you) are so hung up(unintentional pun, I guarantee you) on the way an uncircumcised penis looks, far more women(and probably men) elsewhere in the world would cringe at the sight of a wrinkly, dry, flaccid, circumcised penis.
If your partner takes offense(only a crazy person would) to its aesthetics, you can *GASP* simply retract the foreskin on an intact penis for happy fun time

Either way, watch the video below.

dead.juice:
Circumcision? Why hasn't this caught on yet?
Who wouldn't want to cut off a part of their dick? I can't wait to try this to myself!
The kids at the mall would see me and be like "dude, you cut off your own dick? Wow!", and I'd be like "Nah man, just the tip", and they'd be like "That's the most bad-ass thing I've heard all day, rock on.", and then I'd punch a security guard off a Segway and everyone would cheer because I'm so wicked awesome.

I love you.

My parents refused to circumcise me, stating that it was my decision to make. And hell, I like that. I don't want to have the skin on my lil' john torn off...Just the thought of how much AGONY it would be to have Lil' john's head rubbing against clothing? Ugh! It stays much more sensitive when it's protected from...Abrasive elements.

:/. It's the child's choice when they grow up.

In my view it should only ever be an individual's choice, made when the individual is an adult. It just seems wrong to me that it is okay for a parent to force a decision on a child in this manner. Something that is going to change their body which they wont be able to reverse later in life.

The fact that the child might regret it or resent it later in life is not worth the supposed benefits, which are marginal at best. Leave it up to the individual to decide when they are old enough, I doubt anyone over the age of 18 is going to volunteer though.

I think it's not right that parents get to do it to their children without any consent, but there's no harm in getting circumcised, nor are there any benefits, so it doesn't really matter to me. I'm not and I'm fine with that. I honestly find the fascination with the topic kind of weird. Most people are not circumcised.

There's actually a very good documentary about this.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 . . . 24 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked