Oh No! It's Another Thread About Circumcision.

[BearBoi]

Re: Circumcision DOES NOT Prevent HIV.

Preventative medicine does not, and has never, included amputating healthy and functional body parts.

If it did, than the tonsils and appendix would be removed long before foreskins.

Claims that circumcision of infants prevents health concerns later in life are not supported by any medical science. To date, infant circumcision remains listed as an elective/cosmetic procedure.

The only person who should decide if a penis should be circumcised is the owner of the penis.

 

[blushark]

Why is circumcision a mutilation?

In CA or specifically SF, baby circumcision is banned as it is considered a mutilation.
In moslem countries boys get circumcised at 8 yrs old with no anaesthetic, ouch.
I am glad I got cut, looks better than sausage

 

[lambdaboy]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

It always has amazed me that religous people talk about the perfect God who did not know how to make a dick.

Circumcision was possibly good back then because peopel did not always have facilities to bathe properly. It is mutilation and any religion that makes it a requirement can go to hell. Oh sorry there is no hell LOL

 

[AlmondMilk]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

Circumcision was possibly good back then because peopel did not always have facilities to bathe properly.

Yeah, I think that is the initial reason why circumcisions were performed. Traditions don't die as easily with religions I suppose.

 

[kallipolis]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

I can vividly recall a series of bitter, and acrimonious discussions on JUB on the topic of circumcision, with one very popular poster (Ryan - an American airline pilot - with model good looks) choosing to be circumcised at 27 years of age in response to his belief that circumcision reduced the risk of contracting HIV.

Ryan chose to cease posting as a result of the abuse that he received from a variety of posters.

There is no credible medical research that supports the premise that circumcision reduces the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections; and may even create a false sense of security.

The condom is the only sure way of reducing the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections.

 

[freefall]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

It is considered mutilation because it involves removal of body parts. But as Mitch said, I would rather consider it medical modification.

Whether it really lowers the risk of contracting STDs, especially HIV/AIDS, I'm not sure. Even though CDC said it does based on a study, I read the study and still there are no evidence that it prevented; it just happened that most of the people who are contracted with STDs are uncut, and no other explanations.

What matters more are sexual education, safe sex practice, and, what people often forget, good genital hygiene. With proper cleaning, a uncut man has the same small chance of getting STDs as one who is cut.

In moslem countries boys get circumcised at 8 yrs old with no anaesthetic, ouch.

I think you're referring to circumcisions performed by religious sages and witchdoctors. In modern Muslim countries, circumcisions are mostly done by doctors, so there is no difference with Western countries. Just sayin'.

The condom is the only sure way of reducing the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections.

Actually the sure way is celibacy, lol.

 

[kallipolis]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kallipolis
The condom is the only sure way of reducing the risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections.

Actually the sure way is celibacy, lol.

Celibacy eliminates the risk.

The condom reduces the risk.

A risk remains that the condom will break during coitus.

 

[bulge]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

It's downright castration. It is essential for a man to be able to slide his corona and glans in and out his foreskin. Depriving a man from it must be punished by law.

In case of phimosis simple preputioplasty is enough

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

Moreover phimosis often occurs when the boy is not learned to systematically activate his foreskin, which is any father's duty.

In my European boarding school our cocks had no secrets for each other. All cocks were uncut. We made bets about the guys who would be diagnosed with phimosis at next annual. We frightened those guys off with the most horrible stories and told them only permanent masturbation and due sliding (FR: coulisser) their glans in and out foreskin would help. Most guys managed to open their foreskin. They only bleeded a little bit (retract foreskin: FR décalotter). It was the best way ever to help those guys to get rid of phimosis. They could do without cicumcision in the end

Phimosis is the consequence of lack of regular cock play from young age. Most parents are too lazy to actually learn a boy to regularly play with his cock from young age, to systematically control whether he regularly plays and as cowards cut the boy to get rid of the "problem". That's the only explanation for circumcision next to stupid tradition. There is no reason whatsoever for such invasive operation as circumcision when you can do with preputioplasty.

 

[sixthson]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

Most parents are too lazy to actually learn a boy to regularly play with his cock from young age, to systematically control whether he regularly plays and as cowards cut the boy to get rid of the "problem".

Really?

I never knew a boy had to be taught how to play with his penis. I thought it came pretty naturally. The things you learn when you come to JUB, eh?

As to this tired topic, I suspect most guys, whether cut or uncut, get lots of pleasure from their equipment. Unless something is wrong with the penis, requiring medical attention or there has been a botched circumcision, guys are happy with their little soldiers. Try as hard as you want, there is no medical justification for circumcision. It is tradition and cultural and nothing more. Many have preferences for one or the other, but one preference is not superior to another. However, my preference is the right one.

 

[Nyk13]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

Mutilation, changes made without consent from the individual. I.E. having your hand chopped off for stealing, or having your leg forcibly removed by shrapnel during a car accident.

Body Modification, the willful alteration of the individual changing their appearance. I.E. Piercings, tattoos, scarification, shaving.

I.R.C. mutilation, because you were not given the choice on whether you wanted to get cut.

 

[roadtripboy]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

When my Dad joined the Navy during World War II, they perform circumcisions on everyone who didn't have one.

They said for it was for health reasons.

The only thing I could think was: imagine going through boot camp after just having that done!!!

 

[MyReply]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

I don't hold it against anyone whose parents decided to let them keep their anteater dick, but I'm glad I'm cut.

 

[MyReply]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

Such a child.


Not all uncut cocks have massive overhangs, mine doesn't have an overhang at all, and some guys don't even cover half the head of their cock.

Well then I wasn't talking to you then, was I?

If some of you can pretentiously throw out terms like "mutilated," then deal with "anteater."

Still glad I'm circumcised, but I'm happy for anyone who isn't and is ok with that...

 

[shainski]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

In many countries, children grew up to live the same lives as their parents. In the United States (as well as much of the West), our tradition is that we are all our own people. We may disagree with our parents about a lot of things.

So when our parents do something that is permanent, we lose that.

If putting tattoos on infants was hip in some culture, i would feel the same toward that. I don't particularly like piercings of babies in some cultures (although, i suppose, the earlobes may grow back)

Think of the chinese foot-binding - or the african tribal practices of extending the neck or lips.

If the child grows up to be the parent, then, the parent is working in the ultimate best interest of that child - he/she is doing what he/she would have wanted.

But, what if i didn't want my feet bound - or my neck made longer?

If it were nearly universal that men wanted to be circumcised - then so-be-it. But there seem to be enough men who resent it to justify revisiting the practice.

I don't know that i like making it illegal, but i do think education is essential.

Of course, as parents, there are all kinds of decisions that must be made in the best interest of the child. Some may be permanent and have consequences (like vaccinations or removal of tonsils). Parents need to be able to make those decisions in the best interest of their child.

circumcision doesn't have overwhelming medical support. While it does have religious origins, it is not done for religious reasons for most in the U.S. It is mainly cosmetic - but altering something that most will never see (including parents, once the child reaches maturity) - seems very personal.

I have boys. Since circumcision was the norm, i had to weigh the options. It was difficult to get objective information on either side - it was so political. After much contemplation, i came to the conclusion that it would be best to no circumcise my boys. They are too young to know if they will appreciate my decision or rue it. But - at least the option is up to them.

 

[bulge]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

In many countries, children grew up to live the same lives as their parents. In the United States (as well as much of the West), our tradition is that we are all our own people. We may disagree with our parents about a lot of things.

So when our parents do something that is permanent, we lose that.

If putting tattoos on infants was hip in some culture, i would feel the same toward that. I don't particularly like piercings of babies in some cultures (although, i suppose, the earlobes may grow back)

Think of the chinese foot-binding - or the african tribal practices of extending the neck or lips.

If the child grows up to be the parent, then, the parent is working in the ultimate best interest of that child - he/she is doing what he/she would have wanted.

But, what if i didn't want my feet bound - or my neck made longer?

If it were nearly universal that men wanted to be circumcised - then so-be-it. But there seem to be enough men who resent it to justify revisiting the practice.

I don't know that i like making it illegal, but i do think education is essential.

Of course, as parents, there are all kinds of decisions that must be made in the best interest of the child. Some may be permanent and have consequences (like vaccinations or removal of tonsils). Parents need to be able to make those decisions in the best interest of their child.

circumcision doesn't have overwhelming medical support. While it does have religious origins, it is not done for religious reasons for most in the U.S. It is mainly cosmetic - but altering something that most will never see (including parents, once the child reaches maturity) - seems very personal.

I have boys. Since circumcision was the norm, i had to weigh the options. It was difficult to get objective information on either side - it was so political. After much contemplation, i came to the conclusion that it would be best to no circumcise my boys. They are too young to know if they will appreciate my decision or rue it. But - at least the option is up to them.

Why circumcise when you can preputioplast? The intention clearly is to deprive a boy of a sensual possibility. Why deprive a boy from a sensual possibility? To convince him this is his punishment for having a penis.

Pearl Buck managed to stop stupid chinese footbinding. We need a Pearl Buck for curcumcision. Circumcision is as bad as foot binding. No difference.

http://amscoextra.blogspot.com/2011/03/pearl-buck-in-china.html

 

[paatreides]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

The intention clearly is to deprive a boy of a sensual possibility. Why deprive a boy from a sensual possibility? To convince him this is his punishment for having a penis.

That is so not true; hyperbole will never convince anyone of anything.

In CA or specifically SF, baby circumcision is banned as it is considered a mutilation.

I don't believe this has actually been banned (yet) in SF - Currently, it is only a Ballot Question made possible because a petition managed to gather the necessary signatures. Trust me, it'll never pass!!! And if it does, the courts will strike it down as unconstitutional; we have something in this country known as 'Freedom from Religion' - which basically means one cannot legislate religious beliefs. The Jewish and Muslim faiths will never be forced to alter thier tradition of circumcision; they'll win the court battle hands down!

 

[Telstra]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

For skin is like an eye lid.
Why remove it for no good reason. Damm man made god !!!

 

[WillMc88]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

I'm personally glad I was circumcised. I've never been fond of playing peek-a-boo during sex.

 

[BearBoi]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

In CA or specifically SF, baby circumcision is banned as it is considered a mutilation.
In moslem countries boys get circumcised at 8 yrs old with no anaesthetic, ouch.
I am glad I got cut, looks better than sausage

Because the only person who should decide whether or not a penis gets circumcised is the owner of that penis.

"My Body, My Choice."

 

[Telstra]

Re: Why is circumcision a mutilation?

I'm personally glad I was circumcised. I've never been fond of playing peek-a-boo during sex.

you would be glad too if your eye lid was circumcised as long as all other people around you got their eye lids removed.