How do you feel about circumcision?

[photog212]

Female circumcision is a barbaric activity usually performed on fully conscious teen girls with anything from a knife, to glass, to even a sharp rock. It usually ends in mutilation and disfigurement. (so help me God do not say male circumcision is mutilation or disfigurement, I can send you photos of what happens during female circumcision if it will make you see the difference and shut you up)

Not to denigrate female circumcision in any manner I agree it's a barbaric practice. But if western society decided overnight that it was acceptible, it would be performed aseptically with appropriate anaesthetic and a minimum of trauma. Likewise if a male circumcision was done with glass in unsanitory condition the result would likely be traumatic and disfiguring also.

Than my opinion of it would change.

 

[Biosophilogical]

I have no idea if I am circumsised myself for I have no idea what the diffrence is and honestly, I'm a little scared to look it up.

The short answer is that if the head of your penis has a skin-cover, then you are uncircumcised, and if it doesn't or you are 'unsure what a skin cover is meant to be' then you are circumcised (it's one of things where if you are uncircumcised, you'll know exactly what I mean).

OT: I'm uncircumcised and grateful. Not because it looks better (looks are subjective), or because it will allow me to enjoy sex more (I am a virgin so I don't really know, and even if I wasn't, how am I to compare that sort of thing?), but because my parents left it like it was. If I want to get circumcised later in life, I have that option, and I should have that option because it is my body. My parents did the right thing by not violating that right (my dad was for circumcision, but my mum is a very stubborn and strong-willed person, and for that I am grateful).

 

[Odysseous2]

I'm seeing a theme here. Everyone who's been circumcised approves of circumcision (including myself). Most people who haven't been circumcised are irrationally opposed to it. It's funny how the people who know the least about the topic at hand are the most strongly opinionated on it.

That proves my theory. Humans are afraid of the unknown.

 

[Kennetic]

Female genital mutilation is done to remove a woman's ability to feel sexual pleasure - it isn't merely decorative. The male version would be smashing the testicles to create a eunuch.

How is slicing off part of the nerve system and exposing the rest to get numb, and doing so at an age where the child is unable to make the decision himself or defend himself? You're mutilating the child's genitalia to reduce sexual pleasure for religious reasons. There is no difference.

They really aren't comparable. FGM's equivalent for males would be castration, not circumcision.

They're still able to procreate, the purpose is to reduce sexual pleasure to reduce the likelihood of adultery, just as with males.

<Now the other post un-disappeared, please delete this one mods>

This is a legitimate thread and all you have to do is post your opinion. If you disagree, that's fine, but no sense in overreacting.

Nono, you don't understand, I reposted my first one because it didn't appear in the thread. I assumed the escapist had eaten it but then it appeared along with my new one.

Oh ok I see it now lol. Sorry about that, I completely misunderstood and got all defensive and shit.

 

[Kennetic]

I'm seeing a theme here. Everyone who's been circumcised approves of circumcision (including myself). Most people who haven't been circumcised are irrationally opposed to it. It's funny how the people who know the least about the topic at hand are the most strongly opinionated on it.

That proves my theory. Humans are afraid of the unknown.

You may be onto something here....

 

[WolfThomas]

Than my opinion of it would change.

Well that's essentially the point of those who compare the two. They feel that just because a medical practitioner does something safely doesn't make it right.

 

[Sentox6]

maybe my boys won't be jewish, but i'm sure they'll thank my disgusting religious upbringing when their risk for contracting and transmitting much more disgusting STDs to their sexual partners is sharply decreased.

Good news! You can reduce their STD risk even further by having them castrated.

 

[Mathak]

Just glad I live in Europe, where such barbaric practises aren't a common thing.

 

[NoeL]

You are an idiot.

It's ironic how you could completely miss my point then call me an idiot. How is an earlobe biopsy or a tattoo any different to a circumcision? You think people should be allowed to cut off part of their child's penis, so on what grounds do you oppose parents that want to "change" their children in other ways?

If you want to make an argument stick to facts: "mutilation" is a loaded word with an inherent judgment. No one who has said they are for circumcision has agreed that it is a mutilation, just the opposite, so you can't simply state that as your argument.

Whether or not you call it "mutilation" is inconsequential. Semantics. Let's call voluntary surgical biopsies "fun cuts". Happy now?

The "it's my kid" argument DOES NOT EXTEND TO PERMANENT "fun cuts"! So no, I'm not going to leave the rest of you alone - you're permanently "fun cutting" innocent children without their consent, and that is badong.

Also be so kind as to not force your own petty world view on others.

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise personal liberty and the right to one's body was a petty world view. Forgive me. -_-!

As much as I am sure you want to put your underwear on over top of your other clothes and run around "righting wrongs" it really isn't any of your damn business. If someone asks for help then by all means get involved, otherwise keep your opinions to yourself.

I am part of a society that allows male circumcision. I think male infant circumcision is wrong. I am entitled to voice my opinion on the matter, as are you. Don't tell me I can't.

 

[photog212]

Than my opinion of it would change.

Well that's essentially the point of those who compare the two. They feel that just because a medical practitioner does something safely doesn't make it right.

You lost me...but I'm too tired to play this game anymore. Lets just agree to disagree.

 

[NoeL]

I'm seeing a theme here. Everyone who's been circumcised approves of circumcision (including myself). Most people who haven't been circumcised are irrationally opposed to it. It's funny how the people who know the least about the topic at hand are the most strongly opinionated on it.

That proves my theory. Humans are afraid of the unknown.

Way to beg the question. A circumcised male can't be opposed to circumcision without being "irrational"? Please.

 

[Keepeas]

Don't have a penis, not planning on doing it to my future sons either. The whole concept of it as just weirded me right the hell out...

Yeah, that was pretty much my reaction when I heard what it meant...
I mean cut off part of a baby? Who thought that was a good idea?...

I still take a neutral stance though...if others want to chop parts of their children off, go right ahead
.........that came out really REALLY wrong....oh well

 

[General_Potatoes]

I've been circumcised, and you know what.... I don't really care. Although it does look better

 

[Pandabearparade]

If you don't care for it, that's fine, but why so... passionate about this topic?

Because cutting something off of a defenseless infant is kinda fucked up. I know people don't do it with malicious intent, but that doesn't make it right.

 

[Quietus Legion]

Personally I would never get once unless it became absolutely necessary for some reason.

In general I do not oppose it since it does have some medical points to it. For example my youngest son is about to get one due to actual medical reasons (eg. his foreskin is too tight and he gets infections constantly).

However what I DO object is doing it automatically to a baby. Either wait until the person is old enough to decide themselves or if there is an actual reason for it (meaning it makes life more easy/healthy or something like that).

But that's for male circumcision, I don't approve the female version at all (granted I know rather little about it but based on what I do now I oppose it)

 

[TSED]

I'm seeing a theme here. Everyone who's been circumcised approves of circumcision (including myself). Most people who haven't been circumcised are irrationally opposed to it. It's funny how the people who know the least about the topic at hand are the most strongly opinionated on it.

That proves my theory. Humans are afraid of the unknown.

...


I can't help but notice the word "irrationally" slipped in there, in order to dismiss the opposite side.

I read every comment and noticed something different. The most vocal pro-circumcision group seems to be women... who have never slept with an uncircumcized man. There are a number of quick "it's cool with me" comments from circumcized men, but for the most part... Yeah.

Secondly, the most vocal opponents of circumcision are the ones BRINGING OUTSIDE QUOTABLE SOURCES. So, no, thank you very much. We are not "irrationally afraid," we go "YOU ARE PERFORMING INVASIVE SURGERY FOR NO BENEFIT AND TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE BABY! YOU ARE FRIGGING NUTS!" There have also been a number of women who said they prefer their phalluses uncircumcized, but I do believe that no female has come forwards and said "I have tried both of them out and prefer them without the foreskin."

But no, seriously, YOU ARE FRIGGING NUTS. Being able to cope with a mutilated body part is doable, but I'd personally rather be unmutilated and I imagine the majority of the population is with me on that point. I could survive and function in this society if I had a leg and arm cut off, but I'd much rather keep all of my limbs. Hypothetically, if I lost my arm and my leg while I was 3 months old, I couldn't be certain that not having lost them would improve my life... but I can still be reasonably certain that it would.

And to people who are all "why are you so passionate?" That's simple. I believe that the reduction of suffering (long term or short term) is the moral choice. Circumcision adds suffering to the world, net, and this is morally unacceptable to me. To me, pro-circumcizers sound like pro-rapists. "Aww, they don't remember it, how does it hurt them?" "It makes no difference in their sex life." These arguments are absurd, because, as pointed out, they're wrong. WRONG!

TL;DR: NO. STI decrease in circumcision is a myth, you are making awful arguments, YOU ARE WRONG.

 

[Willinium]

It is tradition of the church and as a tradition I will follow it.

 

[AmosMoses]

If it's just about looks then that can be a choice one makes when one is older surely? Later in life you can still cut it off, but you damn sure can't grow it back.

If it's for religious reasons, big no-no, child mutilation for an imaginary sky pixie is even less of a valid excuse that looks.

Health concerns? Well maybe, but I don't think being circumcised or not should change your personal policy on sexual health anyway. Simply cleanliness? Well, I manage to wash my old chap just fine.

I don't think there are any grounds for uniformly performing circumcision at birth.

 

[kazork]

I am against is for the following rules:

Because the top of the penis is no longer protected circumcised man can suffer from:

1. Sexual dysfunction because of lack of feeling.
2. A bend penis because of constant irritation.
3. Erosive eczema(do not now the English word for this one in dutch it is "contact eczeem") because of constant irritation of the head of the penis.


So If the only reason to circumcise is that you do not have to wash your penis that well i rather not circumcise. Also there a lot of country in which a uncircumcised penis is considered pretty.


And the whole mutilating you're child before it can give a opinion.

 

[ecoho]

There is absolutely no reason to.
And fucking aesthetics is NOT a valid reason to chop part of their dick off. Why don't you let them grow up a little and then decide if they want a "better-looking penis".

Though really, I think it should be illegal.

2. I don't remember the pain.
rebuttal: If someone was raped using a roofie, does it matter? Even if they don't remember?

Your logic is equally flawed.

rebuttal: An infant lacks the ability to convert short-term memory into long-term memory. They also heal faster (because they are still growing rapidly) than an adult would. That means that their pain passes more quickly, and is forgotten without becoming a part of their personality.

Whereas rape, even while unconscious, is a terrible and scarring experience due to the feeling of violation. Just knowing you have been raped is terrible, even if an individual can't remember it. Also, even while asleep, an adult brain still records data - it still transfers that data to long-term memory. So even if you're raped in your sleep, part of that experience is retained.

So an infant will truly forget, whereas an adult cannot truly forget. Hence your point is not valid.

See? It still matters. You seem to lack many facts about circumcision by your post above.


Watch that video, it even has sources to back it up.

There is absolutely no reason to.

I'm going to have to disagree with you. There are plenty of medical reasons to have a male circumcised:

http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/infopack_en_3.pdf

http://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/infopack_en_4.pdf

These are info packets from the World Health Organization, which I think we can agree upon is a reliable source for this kind of information. I'll tell you to read the links if you want a list of all the health benefits of male circumcision but some of the highlights are:

-Decreases the chance of urinary tract infections of babies/children
-Decreased instances of cervical cancer in female sexual partners
-Ease of penile hygiene leading to fewer infections
-Lower rate of sexually transmitted infections
-Lower rate of penile cancer
-Helps prevent the spread of HIV

Now, I will agree that it is a choice, but I don't think that it should be either illegal or mandatory. I personally am very happy my parents had me circumcised.

Look up. If you actually look into it, there are studies that disprove your assumptions and some of those benefits are not actually benefits at all.

ok im sorry i have to call bull shit on you and who ever made that video. at age 25 my grandfather had to be circumcised he was in the hospital for a month and had to have a catheter for another four he said it was the most painful experience in his life(this coming from a man who landed at Normandy on D-day and was shot) the reason you get this done is because the foreskin has a nasty habit of becoming infected and when it does you have two choices
A.take antibiotics and hope to god it doesnt spread or
B. have a circumcision which will be extremely painful for an adult (but is painless as an infant.)
but hey if you dont like circumcision dont do it but please leave the rest of us the FUCK out of you opinion