Oh No! It's Another Thread About Circumcision.

[vulgar_newcomer]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Now I know why my parents insist me to become a doctor.

Yes but you will be up to your nipples in foreskins to pay off those bills (student loans) if you are not lucky enough for grants and scholarship.

 

[vulgar_newcomer]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

I had my circumcision done when I was 15. I do not care what anyone says but what a relief! I constantly had irritation and burning sensation under the skin due to sweating or pre cumming after getting excited during the day. I was constantly cleaning but it did not matter, as soon as I was either in class, or school bus trips (when due to the movement and shaking of the bus I would have a hard on) I would have more to clean. I could not pee without getting burning sensation there and eventually in urinary tract. Being circumcised was the most helpful steps my parents took when I was 15. Praise God for that.

I am neutral on the subject but as you point out nature does make some mistakes in design because you are not unique or rare in having problems. Many vocally express them and I am sure countless thousands have them but are to embarrassed to share about this.
Maybe as humans evolve the foreskin would go the way of the wisdom teeth? Maybe thats the way the bone went int he penis, that all mammals have other than man?

 

[yummylongsword]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Ahh. Well, some adults need to have their appendix taken out due to not just a medical condition, but a medical emergency. Nobody thinks it would be reasonable to do appendectomies on babies just in case they might need it later. The "just in case" argument doesn't make any sense because there are billions of men with foreskins that are enjoying them trouble-free every day. They don't wake up and think "oh why didn't my parents get rid of this when i was a baby" because they're happy with everything and it works just fine.

Guys who want to be circumcised can get what they want.
Guys who want to be uncircumcised can get what they want, if their parents respect their bodies.
Only guys who have the choice taken from them by their parents are at risk. Some are happy because their parents got lucky and guessed the right choice to make. Others are unhappy because they would have made a different choice or would at least have wanted the choice, even if they are okay with being cut.

It is ridiculous to say it is just a piece of skin that makes no difference in your life. If that was true then there should be no problem just leaving it there, because by your own argument it doesn't matter. But it does matter. And the fact that people get so worked up about having the right to slice it off somebody else's body is the real problem. Nobody has that right except the person himself, unless there is a serious medical reason that forces the doctors to act. It is the parents who need to stop behaving like they are all-knowing and almighty owners of their son's foreskins as though they have the right to do what they feel like with it. It's not theirs.

Oh, so we should just let children grow up before we make ANY decisions about them and their life?

"Oh, let's not name him, we'll let him choose his own name when he's an adult. It's only fair."

"Oh, let's not immunize him, he might grow up to be against immunizations, we'll let him decide then."

"Oh, let's not treat these fresh scars, he might grow up to decide they make him unique."

"Oh, let's not teach him any morals or ethics, he might grow up and really have wanted to be raised with a different set of moral beliefs."

"Oh, let's not teach him to play piano, he might become an adult and decide he shouldn't have wasted his time learning."

Parents have a responsibility to do what they believe is best for their child; they can't just wait until their kid is an adult to make any decisions... this is such a silly argument, I don't know why it's still around. Circumcision is unquestionably a procedure that is much better done at a young age than an older one, and if you believe it will be better for your child, you'd do it when they're young. You can debate the pros and cons of infant circumcision, but saying it should be left up to them as an adult and that's FINAL is just silly.

 

[bankside]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

It is a silly argument. It has nothing to do with the argument I'm making though.

And that is that parents do have to act, but they don't have free choice in what they choose to do. Naming a child is something that can be changed entirely and permanently if the child so desires. I'll show you a Legal Change of Name Certificate and you show me a Legal Restoration of Foreskin Certificate. Of course that isn't possible. They aren't remotely the same thing, so your analogy doesn't count.

The immune system is a bit of a better example. But there too it's not acceptable for the parents to make a random decision. After centuries of children dying of polio and smallpox and so on, immunization brought that to an end. Some parents don't get that, and some adults who were immunized as parents don't get that. But that doesn't change history, and it doesn't change the responsibility of parents to take their kids for immunization.

I'm not saying parents can't make decisions. They have to make decisions. But the truly silly argument is that a decision is magically correct just because a parent makes it. That's not reality. What I am saying is that parents have to make decisions, but some of those decisions are right, and others are wrong.

Parents make wrong decisions all the time, and often the law allows them to when it shouldn't. Cutting off parts of a healthy penis is one of those wrong decisions.

 

[yummylongsword]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

It is a silly argument. It has nothing to do with the argument I'm making though.

And that is that parents do have to act, but they don't have free choice in what they choose to do. Naming a child is something that can be changed entirely and permanently if the child so desires. I'll show you a Legal Change of Name Certificate and you show me a Legal Restoration of Foreskin Certificate. Of course that isn't possible. They aren't remotely the same thing, so your analogy doesn't count.

Of course there is such a thing as foreskin restoration, both older methods and new ones that literally regrow your foreskin (although those aren't widespread as of yet). But of course that fact wasn't helpful to your argument, so you chose to ignore it.

The immune system is a bit of a better example. But there too it's not acceptable for the parents to make a random decision. After centuries of children dying of polio and smallpox and so on, immunization brought that to an end. Some parents don't get that, and some adults who were immunized as parents don't get that. But that doesn't change history, and it doesn't change the responsibility of parents to take their kids for immunization.

Yeah, and for years men would get infections under their foreskins or develop medical complications. Circumcision solves these problems. "Some parents don't get that, and some adults who were circumcised by parents don't get that. But that doesn't change history, and it doesn't change the responsibility of parents to take their kids for circumcision." As you put it.

Of course there are sometimes complications with circumcision, as there are sometimes complications with immunizations. And of course uncircumcised men sometimes don't have complications later in life, as sometimes unvaccinated adults never contract the disease. So what's the difference again? The fact you don't like the cosmetic aspect, because that's the only difference I see.

I'm not saying parents can't make decisions. They have to make decisions. But the truly silly argument is that a decision is magically correct just because a parent makes it. That's not reality. What I am saying is that parents have to make decisions, but some of those decisions are right, and others are wrong.

Parents make wrong decisions all the time, and often the law allows them to when it shouldn't. Cutting off parts of a healthy penis is one of those wrong decisions.

In your opinion. It's not a black and white area, and the general population does not necessarily agree with you. Generally, in these morally ambiguous situations, we leave the decision up to the parents.

 

[Nomenclature]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

That is an absolutely CRAZY price for it. I've usually heard that it costs about $300 for a neonatal circumcision, and is not covered by insurance in most places, which makes it an out-of-pocket expense. The infamous website Circlist, which is a pro-circumcision website that fetishizes adult, elective circumcision, promotes urologists in Atlanta and Miami who will circumcise men for a total of $2,500-$3,000. I've spoken to a few people who got circumcised at a hospital due to an advanced case of phimosis, and their insurance was billed about $6,000, while they co-paid something like $750 of that.


Twenty-three THOUSAND dollars. . .that's just absolutely insane. Get a second opinion.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Of course there is such a thing as foreskin restoration, both older methods and new ones that literally regrow your foreskin (although those aren't widespread as of yet). But of course that fact wasn't helpful to your argument, so you chose to ignore it.

Wow! You've just showed such extraordinary ignorance, I'm stunned. There is no way to "regrow" your foreskin after it has been removed. The only thing you can possibly do is to stretch your shaft skin to poorly mimic (not replace) the original foreskin. Sorry pal, but there is no way to restore the 25% of nerve tissue that is removed from the penis, nor the preputial orifice smooth muscle tissue. Stunning ignorance!

 

[MoltenRock III]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Wait... I meant to see keeping it clean is easier when you ARE circumcised. When you're uncut, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah......

Riiiight. You, someone who's never had a foreskin is now an expert on how to keep it clean? Good grief!

Either way, I didn't understand your argument MoltenRock. How does pubes have anything to do with it?

Why am I not surprised.

Have you never been curious why circumcisions became popular in the USA vs. the rest of the world? Aren't you the least bit troubled that bible beating cultists used specious claims to install the practice on you? The only reason why was to get you to stop masturbating. How'd that work out?

 

[yummylongsword]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Wow! You've just showed such extraordinary ignorance, I'm stunned. There is no way to "regrow" your foreskin after it has been removed. The only thing you can possibly do is to stretch your shaft skin to poorly mimic (not replace) the original foreskin. Sorry pal, but there is no way to restore the 25% of nerve tissue that is removed from the penis, nor the preputial orifice smooth muscle tissue. Stunning ignorance!

http://www.foregen.org/projects/clinical-regen-trial/

http://www.foregen.org/category/blog/news/

Sorry about your stunning, hypocritical ignorance. You might want to actually know what you're talking about next time. Like I said, the procedure is not yet available everywhere, but it does exist.

Also, stretching is hardly the "only thing you can possibly do." There are many other surgical procedures to increase the skin around the glans.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

http://www.foregen.org/projects/clinical-regen-trial/

http://www.foregen.org/category/blog/news/

Sorry about your stunning, hypocritical ignorance. You might want to actually know what you're talking about next time. Like I said, the procedure is not yet available everywhere, but it does exist.

From your own silly cites:

"However, foreskin regeneration has not yet been tried, despite our knowledge that foreskin fibroblasts respond extremely well to regenerative technologies which create new skin. Foregen believes that it is time such a trial was undertaken."

Even more hilarious is you using Dr. Friedman as an example of being for circumcision, when he himself states:

"I travel a lot to the United States and when I found out that most of the American men are circumcised as newborns, I am talking of at least 120 million newborns, the first reaction I had was: “These people are crazy.”

But let me explain our point of view. Circumcision is a surgery, surgeries must be performed only when there is a valid medical reason, this means that all the circumcisions performed on newborns were not necessary. The United States is the only country in the world that circumcises many of its male infants for non-religious reasons and this is crazy."

 

[yummylongsword]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

From your own silly cites:

"However, foreskin regeneration has not yet been tried, despite our knowledge that foreskin fibroblasts respond extremely well to regenerative technologies which create new skin. Foregen believes that it is time such a trial was undertaken."

I didn't say that you could go in and get it. I'm saying the procedure exists. It has been researched and conceptualized and efforts are being put in place to get it available to the general public. In theory, if you had enough money and were willing to bypass the law, you could regrow your foreskin.

Even more hilarious is you using Dr. Friedman as an example of being for circumcision, when he himself states:

"I travel a lot to the United States and when I found out that most of the American men are circumcised as newborns, I am talking of at least 120 million newborns, the first reaction I had was: “These people are crazy.”

But let me explain our point of view. Circumcision is a surgery, surgeries must be performed only when there is a valid medical reason, this means that all the circumcisions performed on newborns were not necessary. The United States is the only country in the world that circumcises many of its male infants for non-religious reasons and this is crazy."

What does that have to do with anything? I never said "Dr.Friedman on this site agrees with me!!" I just cited the site to show that a procedure exists. Of course the website advocating the regrowth of foreskins is going to be against circumcision. Don't be an idiot, you're just pissed that I called you out on your blatant ignorance with facts.

 

[Rex]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Riiiight. You, someone who's never had a foreskin is now an expert on how to keep it clean? Good grief!

Damn you're full of yourself and arrogant as shit. I'm uncut, and I'm telling you from experience, it's harder to keep hygienic than being circumcised. I guarantee you'll spend more time and effort keeping it fresh.

Have you never been curious why circumcisions became popular in the USA vs. the rest of the world? Aren't you the least bit troubled that bible beating cultists used specious claims to install the practice on you? The only reason why was to get you to stop masturbating. How'd that work out?

Yeah I've heard all that shit before, but the fact remains that there are pros and cons to both being circumcised and not being. So get the fuck off your high horse and calm your ass down. Jesus, you anti circumcision nitwits sure are devoted to this horseshit. I still don't see how people care so much about what people do with babies that aren't theirs.

 

[belamyi]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

I've been saying for like 20 years - that it's all about the FEES !!!
even tho the AMA published some paper about it being "unnecessary" in the late 90's (I believe).

It's the same with booster shots for your dog the Vet tells you the dog needs boosters EVERY year.. There is more than 20 years of research that prooves that they do not -- after ONE booster - a year after the last puppy shot - they are most likely protected for life !! Only Rabbies needs to be re-done every 3 years ! yet the vets charge you $28.00 for a booster that costs them $3.00 - and they say they can't give it without an "exam" so they listen to the dogs heart, check his teeth and gums, and charge you another $48.00 for a wellness exam...
You see how it works?

That's how America "works". We got some imports of that over here too.

They may do whatever they want with their cock-caps, but some justifications given for it are totally insane, they don't make any sense at all: like the one claiming hygiene reasons, relating it to the hard conditions of American soldiers during WWII... so when they got back to America, their kids, living in peace under the highest standard of living in the world back then, would necessarily need to treat their bodies as if they had no clean water and soap and what not.

 

[Rex]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Hygiene reasons are a reasonable thing to consider.

When you're uncut, the head of your dick isn't exposed to air, so naturally it's going to build more moisture and will get funky faster.

It's the same as someone who's wearing a sweater and wool pants in the heat. They're going to sweat and stink compared to someone who's in a tank top and shorts. This is especially true for uncut guys who jerk off or after they urinate, because some semen/urine is still going to be lingering on the dick, under the skin and bacteria will grow faster. .

 

[Corny]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

The "hygiene" thing is the most idiotic argument ever.

And if you really bring that argument you are a dirty slob. Nobody* wants to suck your unwashed cock or lick your sweaty balls. Whether you are cut or uncut doesn't matter.


*yeah right, there are people with a fetish for that, but there are people with a fetish for everything. probably some even like the looks of a botched circumcision

 

[Rex]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

The "hygiene" thing is the most idiotic argument ever.

And if you really bring that argument you are a dirty slob. Nobody* wants to suck your unwashed cock or lick your sweaty balls. Whether you are cut or uncut doesn't matter.


*yeah right, there are people with a fetish for that, but there are people with a fetish for everything. probably some even like the looks of a botched circumcision

Agreed, but fact is that an uncut dick gets dirtier faster and easier than a cut dick.

It's just like a hairy armpit gets stinkier faster than a shaved one.


and yes, there is fetishes for every sick thing...

like this smegma dick that was on an uncircumcised penis


Uncut dicks naturally produce "smegma" to lubricate the head of the penis under the skin. That, combined with sweat and trickles of urine or semen that get stuck under the skin, start to stink badly. Lint can also get caught around the foreskin, so I can defenitely understand why someone would want the prodedure for hygenic reasons.

Anyway, like I said, there are pros and cons to both sides. You can't say one is better than the other and you can't call circumcision a pointless procedure, because it does have some benefits. In the end, people will do what they want regardless if you or I, or anyone else has a problem with it. When you have your own kids, it's your decision to make.

 

[rareboy]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

And all this thread was about was the high cost of getting snipped at Mass General.

I love a good foreskin fight though.

 

[belamyi]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Hygiene reasons are a reasonable thing to consider.

When they are real reasons, not excuses. There are three main reasons to justify ANYTHING and EVERTYTHING: public safety, hygiene and protecting the children. Use any of those labels and you can be allowed to do ANYTHING ANYTIME.

 

[belamyi]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Agreed, but fact is that an uncut dick gets dirtier faster and easier than a cut dick.

Slobs get dirtier faster and easier.

It's just like a hairy armpit gets stinkier faster than a shaved one.

Yeah, like mouths and assholes that eat and expel certain diets instead of other ones.

Uncut dicks naturally produce "smegma" to lubricate the head of the penis under the skin. That, combined with sweat and trickles of urine or semen that get stuck under the skin, start to stink badly. Lint can also get caught around the foreskin, so I can defenitely understand why someone would want the prodedure for hygenic reasons.

Anyway, like I said, there are pros and cons to both sides. You can't say one is better than the other and you can't call circumcision a pointless procedure, because it does have some benefits. In the end, people will do what they want regardless if you or I, or anyone else has a problem with it. When you have your own kids, it's your decision to make.

That's the sort of statement that reminds me there are four parallel universes, with their own universe laws, sharing the same Earth: China, America, the Islamic countries and the Rest of the World.

 

[Sam Blum]

Re: The High Cost of Circumcision

Ha ha ha.

It wasn't about the rightness or wrongness of circumcision.

It is about exposing that the US healthcare system is just rapacious....

Of course, we recognize that costs don't only speak to finances.

I have to say that it is a relief to read the sensible contributions of MoltenRock, Corny, Bankside, Hooded Rat et al. Sometimes it just does my head in to read the absolute tripe that gets vomited all over the net.

And what is this strange argument that says when you have your own kids, you can choose whether to unnecessarily cut them or not, too? WTF? Is this obtuseness or confusion about the fundamentals of the anti-circumcision argument? I wonder if the same people also advocate parental abuse in any other presentation. I mean, generally, circumcision is carried out because 'dad' has a circumcised penis, not because there are health benefits to a child with an obviously malformed foreskin. So the argument employed is that we should have the right to abuse/inflict pain/damage a child's sexual organ because his grandparents did the same to their child/his father...