Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.[W:301]

[Gina]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Moderator's Warning:

Reminder, stick to the topic which is not each other.

 

[quantumechanic]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Circumcision is child abuse, plain and simple. It's mandatory in Israel because Israel is a screwed up country, plain and simple.

Riiight, because, as you can clearly see from the opinions expressed in this thread, Israel is the only place in the world where people can hold such crazy and abusive thoughts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision
"Citing three different data sources, most recent rates for the U.S. were 56.9% in 2008 (NHDS), 56.3% in 2008 (NIS), and 54.7% in 2010 (CDM)."

Take a good, hard look at your own society before you judge others'.

 

[solletica]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Riiight, because, as you can clearly see from the opinions expressed in this thread, Israel is the only place in the world where people can hold such crazy and abusive thoughts.

Prevalence of circumcision - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Citing three different data sources, most recent rates for the U.S. were 56.9% in 2008 (NHDS), 56.3% in 2008 (NIS), and 54.7% in 2010 (CDM)."

Take a good, hard look at your own society before you judge others'.

Correct. The US is also a screwed up country. Countries where religion is prevalent or plays a significant role (i. e. US) in people's lives are the ones where barbaric practices like this take place.

 

[Mr.Nick]

So... Why? From what I can tell this should be borderline abuse. I mean, after doing my research I've discovered that circumcision doesn't offer any major boons to a person's health, while also lowering a person's ability to feel physical pleasure during intimacy, putting their child though surgery, as well as pain. That being said it's also disfiguring, and the equivalent of ritualistic disfigurement. People are doing this because they think it looks better, and or religious reasons. If lobbing off your arm was a show of religious devotion would your parents be allowed to do this? I know an arm is more important than foreskin, but regardless it's a part of your body. I'm under the impression that as a human I have a right to my body, and my parents shouldn't be allowed to mutilate it because they think it'll look nice, and GAWD wants it. Your not even giving the person the right to make the choice either. Your forcing it upon them, and they are people. Your doing a permanent change to a human being's body that's not needed and actually has lasting effects on them due to someone else's preferences. Explain to me why a person cannot wait until their older, then let their child make the choice? Why does someone's parents get to force this upon someone and literally rob them of intimate pleasure? Why are we allowing people to disfigure their children at birth?

I was and I obviously don't remember it...

That **** is evil...

"Welcome to our ****ed up world where everyone eles decides your fate but yourself."

 

[quantumechanic]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Considering that circumcision has been called a barbaric act here, and that it is part of the defining covenant of the Jews, arguably the most civilized people with the most enduring culture in all of human history, some vehemence is justified.

A) I don't see the relevance of this statement to the argument. How does this justify your vehemence? If anything, the fact that it is a defining feature of a major religion should justify more vehemence on the parts of those objecting to circumcision, not yours.
B) Try stating that "the Jews are arguably the most civilized people" in the ME forum. You'll get your head bitten off.

Again, I call on people who think that they have some positive roll in taking on crusades against imagined evils to find some morsel of courage in their souls and address actual evil, of which their is clearly no shortage.

People who are obsessed with this issue are like unto senile residents complaining about the neighbors choice of house paint while deliberately ignoring the many times those neighbors have been, and continue to be assaulted by thugs.

You've just restated everything I've objected to in the previous post.
Once again, I don't see what justifies your use of the words "crusades", "fixated" or "obssessed". People are rightly objecting to what they consider to be an act of immorality. This doesn't necessarily diminish, in their eyes, any other acts of immorality they may object to and you have yet to support and justify your claim that immoralities need to be addressed one at a time in descending orders of magnitude (again, setting aside the rather obvious problem of who gets to decide their magnitude).
What you're basically saying is that you mustn't complain about a streetlight not working if the economy is bad! How does this make sense to you?!

 

[quantumechanic]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Correct. The US is also a screwed up country. Countries where religion is prevalent or plays a significant role (i. e. US) in people's lives are the ones where barbaric practices like this take place.

That I can agree with.

 

[Oftencold]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

A) I don't see the relevance of this statement to the argument. How does this justify your vehemence? If anything, the fact that it is a defining feature of a major religion should justify more vehemence on the parts of those objecting to circumcision, not yours.
B) Try stating that "the Jews are arguably the most civilized people" in the ME forum. You'll get your head bitten off.

You see, do you not, the rich potential for amusement provided by people who would side with savages against the Jews would resort to "biting someone's head off," to make the point that the Jews are not are not more civilized than they?

 

[Higgins86]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Its funny my son was born in the US and the nurse looked at me like I had two heads when I told her I didn't want him cut.

 

[radcen]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

What do you feel about piercing girl's ears at 3 months? There is even less benefit to that than circumcision. At least with a circumcision you reduce the risk of infections and diseases. With piercing you actually initially increase the chance of infections until it is healed.

Kind of OT: I strongly disagree with piercing girl's (and boys, now) ears as babies. Not for any health or consent reasons, but because it is selfish of the parents to do so. It is stripping away one of the "rights of passage" of growing up away from the kid purely for the indulgence of the parent. When I was a kid virtually all girls dreamed of the day when they could get their ears pierced. It was a big day. It was a day that signified for them a growing up.

That being said, I wouldn't ban the practice, I just think it's selfish and poor sense to do so.

 

[radcen]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

According to Dr Dean Edell, men who were circumcised as adults overwhelmingly state that the pleasure is better uncircumcised than circumcised.

People who are uncircumcised, and those who were circumcised as babies, have nothing to compare to... hence their opinions on levels of pleasure are irrelevant.

Most women that I have discussed this with, and who have experienced men of both options, overwhelmingly prefer circumcised men. Only a few didn't care, and none outright preferred uncircumcised. It's cleaner, and yes, more attractive to them. A couple have even told me that they would not sleep with an uncircumcised man for that reason. (Very unscientific "research", of course.)

 

[Captain Adverse]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

People who are uncircumcised, and those who were circumcised as babies, have nothing to compare to... hence their opinions on levels of pleasure are irrelevant.

Not true. Unless you are into "tantric sex" the greatest pleasure a male feels is at the moment of orgasm. I seriously doubt there is any major difference between circumcized and uncircumsized males when evaluating an orgasm. I could care less if some men who "were circumcized as adults" think they had more pleasure before. An orgasm is an orgasm.

I also am glad that my little head is not as sensitive as an uncircumsized penis is. It helps me to maintain an erection longer without a struggle, and thereby increases my ability to satisfy my partner and help her reach her peak.

Most women that I have discussed this with, and who have experienced men of both options, overwhelmingly prefer circumcised men. Only a few didn't care, and none outright preferred uncircumcised. It's cleaner, and yes, more attractive to them. A couple have even told me that they would not sleep with an uncircumcised man for that reason. (Very unscientific "research", of course.)

This is true, even of women overseas (of whom I have experienced quite a few). I find this a nice bonus to being circumcized too.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Not true. Unless you are into "tantric sex" the greatest pleasure a male feels is at the moment of orgasm. I seriously doubt there is any major difference between circumcized and uncircumsized males when evaluating an orgasm. I could care less if some men who "were circumcized as adults" think they had more pleasure before. An orgasm is an orgasm.

Pleasure during =/= orgasm. Fail. How many times do you need corrected on this obvious mistake?

I also am glad that my little head is not as sensitive as an uncircumsized penis is. It helps me to maintain an erection longer without a struggle, and thereby increases my ability to satisfy my partner and help her reach her peak.

Jesus, you are so ignorant on this topic it's unbelievable. Do you honestly believe this argument makes any sense? I love how you guys are making up this story to somehow make loss of sensation a good thing. It simple blows my mind you can't see how stupid it is. Not only is it not true, but it's screams of desperation.

This is true, even of women overseas (of whom I have experienced quite a few). I find this a nice bonus to being circumcized too.

Yes, the beauty argument. Always, always convincing and worthy of note. Lets remove body parts because it looks better that way. Stupid as ****ing hell of course.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Btw, I have to say it's amazing this "it's cleaner" argument is still going even after I explained that the circumcised penis is exposed to far more harmful bacteria due to the elimination of good bacteria that would of prevented them from moving in if the foreskin was not removed.

If you are just going with hygiene then frankly you have no argument as that is just a personal affair of people.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

What do you feel about piercing girl's ears at 3 months? There is even less benefit to that than circumcision. At least with a circumcision you reduce the risk of infections and diseases. With piercing you actually initially increase the chance of infections until it is healed.

Actually, the wound caused from circumcision can easily become infected. This is extremely dangerous while in the hospital due to the prevalence of drug resistant bacteria. In fact, until the wound is completely healed there is a serious risk of infection. There is also plenty more risks to circumcision such as adhesions, buried penis, meatal stenosis, curving of the shaft, and death. Ear pieces are not comparable in any regard, sorry.

As for infections after it is healed, again, not even close. In fact, due to the introduction of bad bacteria the urethra is open to infection along with the rest of the penis.

I'm getting a bit sick of all the myths and bad science being parroted here in this thread. :sigh:

 

[shanners]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Yes, the beauty argument. Always, always convincing and worthy of note. Lets remove body parts because it looks better that way. Stupid as ****ing hell of course.

Of course.

35 Good Reasons Not to Circumcise:

Who knows that...

most men in the world and the great majority of men in Europe, Scandinavia, Central and South America and Asia are not circumcised?
"medical" infant circumcision was introduced to prevent masturbation?
until a few decades ago, female genital cutting was promoted in the western world for many of the same reasons as male circumcision?
infant circumcision was fashionable in the English-speaking world 50 years ago but is now rare (except in the US)?
babies are strapped down to be circumcised?
circumcision with a PlastiBell™ does involve cutting?
before an infant's foreskin can be cut (or crushed) off, it must be torn away from the glans?
circumcision removes 50% of the skin of the penis?
circumcision removes the most sensitive part of the penis?
no national medical association anywhere in the world supports non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision (male or female) on medical grounds?
the claim that circumcision protects against HIV is based on 5,400 circumcisions protecting (perhaps) just 73 men?
even if the claim is true,
it would take hundreds of circumcisions to prevent one case in the US?
circumcision offers no protection at all to women?
circumcision offers no protection at all to gay men?


The American Academy of Pediatrics policy on male genital cutting is culturally biased and seriously flawed. It should be withdrawn. The AAP Policy is rejected by
the Paediatric Associations of Austria, Britain*, Denmark, England*, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands
and by senior paediatricians in Canada, the Czech Republic, France and Poland.

The Intactivism Pages

 

[shanners]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Manu Bennett with Jennifer Campagnolo of the Canadian Foreskin Awareness Project (CAN-FAP)

 

[DiAnna]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Actually, after giving birth to my son the doctor made an off-handed comment about circumcising him after he was through examining me. I looked him straight in the eye and said, "If you do that to my son, I will do that to you." My son was not circumcised.

Actually, circumcision in the US has been declining for decades, down to 54% in 2009. The hygiene angle is exaggerated hype, as many objective studies have shown no significant difference between circumcised and non-circumcised males when it comes to diseases, and some studies indicate that there is considerably more sexual sensitivity in non-circumcised males. Yes, I know, one can google dozens of studies that say just the opposite, as I can google dozens of studies to refute it.

Bottom line, circumcision is a parental choice. It should certainly never be made illegal, but it should never go back to the days when it was as routine as tying off the umbilical cord. Since I am not bound by religious dogma, I decided that I would not have a procedure I view basically as a mutilation done on my child. When he was old enough, if he wished the procedure done he could make that choice for himself. I refused to make it for him. He has never regretted it, and neither have I. :shrug:

 

[Henrin]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

These parental choice arguments for circumcision puzzle me and I have been in more than a few of these threads. You have people that basically say it causes harm and then they finish up with "it is a parents choice" as if that actually follows. What? The more time I spend in these threads and the more times I hear that puzzling logic the more lost I get. :/

 

[radcen]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Actually, after giving birth to my son the doctor made an off-handed comment about circumcising him after he was through examining me. I looked him straight in the eye and said, "If you do that to my son, I will do that to you." My son was not circumcised.

Actually, circumcision in the US has been declining for decades, down to 54% in 2009. The hygiene angle is exaggerated hype, as many objective studies have shown no significant difference between circumcised and non-circumcised males when it comes to diseases, and some studies indicate that there is considerably more sexual sensitivity in non-circumcised males. Yes, I know, one can google dozens of studies that say just the opposite, as I can google dozens of studies to refute it.

Bottom line, circumcision is a parental choice. It should certainly never be made illegal, but it should never go back to the days when it was as routine as tying off the umbilical cord. Since I am not bound by religious dogma, I decided that I would not have a procedure I view basically as a mutilation done on my child. When he was old enough, if he wished the procedure done he could make that choice for himself. I refused to make it for him. He has never regretted it, and neither have I. :shrug:

Yes, and no. Hygiene used to be a serious issue. Education and overall better cleanliness have since narrowed the gap to where today the difference is negligible. Old habits die hard, however. Not unlike the origins of why some religions still don't eat pork.

Be that as it may, new parents of uncircumcised boys get more detailed cleaning instruction from their doctors than do new parents of circumcised boys.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Yes, and no. Hygiene used to be a serious issue. Education and overall better cleanliness have since narrowed the gap to where today the difference is negligible. Old habits die hard, however.

What do you mean by serious issue? There is no serious issue. To clean and uncut penis you basically just pull back the skin, rinse off the head and that's it. Jesus Christ people, get new arguments. I haven't seen a good argument yet for this practice and we are on page 32.

 

[radcen]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

What do you mean by serious issue? There is no serious issue. To clean and uncut penis you basically just pull back the skin, rinse off the head and that's it. Jesus Christ people, get new arguments. I haven't seen a good argument yet for this practice and we are on page 32.

Your willful ignorance on the history of the practice is just making you look like a buffoon. You'd do better to just quit now and pretend you never saw this thread.

 

[Henrin]

Re: Should parent's be allowed to Circumcise their children.

Your willful ignorance on the history of the practice is just making you look like a buffoon. You'd do better to just quit now and pretend you never saw this thread.

Why didn't you answer my question? It seems straight forward enough. :/ Why not just offer up your myths so I can debunk them like I have with everyone else's myths in this thread.