How do you feel about circumcision?

[NoeL]

FTR, I am in total agreement with you. But when you're faced with someone who is feeling like you're calling their manhood defective, emotionally-laden responses like this are liable to occur. So, yeah. Be a bit forgiving here is I guess what I'm trying to say.

I can understand someone not wanting to feel "defective", but even if they disagree on the physical effects of circumcision they should still see the practice for what it is - a permanent, painful, usually voluntary, unnecessarily risky surgical removal of the flesh of a non-consenting individual. People should be opposed to others permanently altering another's body against their will on principle alone.

 

[Cgull]

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.

I'm sure this has been quoted many times already with a variety of similarish responses but I thought I may as well have my go as well.

Circumcising babies is a grey area for me, it really is, I'm not going to say that something is wrong because I don't believe in it, I may disapprove but my opinion matters as much to those that choose to do it as much as theirs matters to me - not at all.

To say there's no reason at all is a little close-minded though, there are numerous medical reasons that a child, or adult, would need to undergo the procedure, something I would happen to know about seeing as I am one of those ever so lucky adults. In the interest of keeping this relatively unbiased it wasn't a pleasant experience by any means BUT without it certain elements of my life would be a whole lot worse.

Oh, and any adult that chooses to have it done for aesthetic reasons is, in my eyes at least, a bit of a tool.

 

[WolfThomas]

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

That's fair enough, I wasn't trying to argue simply trying to explain how someone might compare male and female circumcision without it being exaggeration.

 

[ninetails593]

I think what you're all forgetting is just how horrifying an uncircumcised penis looks like. Circumcision isn't "chopping off body parts", it's just a simple, safe procedure, that the baby will never remember. Hell, it makes him more normal.

 

[Dimitriov]

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?

The idiot part was because your argument seemed to be "I think this is wrong, therefore it is wrong for everyone."

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.

I didn't miss your point by the way, I just didn't agree: I don't oppose the other things you listed. If you want to tattoo your child or re-shape their earlobes go nuts.

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

Well they are petty, but I guess I can forgive you.

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.

I may have worded that poorly, I for one am more than glad for you to have the freedom to voice your opinion. My issue was that you seemed to want to treat your opinion as if others had to accept it. If you want to say that you think circumcision is wrong, then more power to you.

If on the other hand you want to say it should be made illegal, and want to actively go out and interfere in other people's lives, then I have an issue with it.

 

[Yopaz]

I'm against it for several reasons.
The religious reason, that Jews should be circumcised no matter what. OK, I don't know why this is a part of their religion when according to the bible body mutilation or altering god's creation is considered a sin. Which means circumcision and plastic surgery is a sin.
The baby gets no say in the matter and there are a few adults there who really wish they had never been circumcised.

It is under debate if being circumcised has any perks or downsides which is why I think it shouldn't be done. From what I've heard it will cause pain in the days or even weeks following, but nothing serious. Still, would you cut of your kid's fingertip if it made it look normal or better? Causing pain to a baby who doesn't have a say in the matter is wrong.

To summarize: there are risks, there is one non-confirmed benefit. Though the risk is small the benefit is protection against urinary tract infection which is rare in boys because of the lenght of the urinary tract.

 

[sukotsuto]

Any circumcised folk here regret getting a circumcision? Personally, I feel this is being made too much of a big deal of, since you generally live a normal life whether you go through with it or not. I got circumcised in my early teens (so I know how it feels before and after), and I don't regret it at all. Some procedures don't even completely remove the foreskin.

As for circumcising an infant, I wouldn't do that. At least that's not how it's traditionally done from where I am, since we get it done during their teens (sort of a "coming of age" thing). I just find all this fuss about the whole thing hilarious. So much talk about one's junk compressed in a single thread.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

All I know is that in Britain we generally don't surgically remove useless cock ends, we elect them.

Seriously tho, I'm against it, as from what I've read, all the advantages of removing it when a baby can be achieved by washing it, you dirty bastards.

Most guys wouldn't choose to go bald just to save on shampoo, so I don't know why parents are thinking they'd prefer to have a bit cut off their child's penis just to save on shower gel.

Besides, the moment they hit puberty, they're gonna be in that shower at least daily, 'washing' it very thoroughly.

There just seems to be so much more on the side of not doing it over doing it.

 

[weker]

but hey if you dont like circumcision dont do it but please leave the rest of us the FUCK out of you opinion

The sad things is their opinion can't do so. They are trying to protect children from what they consider as mutilation. Again this is a topic with one group of opinions see this as a harmless procedure, while others as breaking human rights.
I am a bit on the fence learning towards rights of the child as it can be done at a later date, and furthermore most people against are women, Jewish or the types of people who you see commonly on american talk shows (The ones shouting its my kinds MY BUSINESS RAA )

OT: Jesus I remember when I was watching the atheist experience and a man implied he has a given right to abuse his kids, sadly the host was sort like "eeerrrr I think ill end your call here" laughed my head of at that XD

 

[photog212]

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

That's fair enough, I wasn't trying to argue simply trying to explain how someone might compare male and female circumcision without it being exaggeration.

No worries, I just get upset/bothered when people act like the two like are the same. Not because I'm pro-male circumcision but because it tends to lessen the horror of female circumcision. I've seen first hand what circumcision can do to a young girl (worked with an NGO) and I don't think people really get how utterly fucked up it is.

 

[WolfThomas]

No worries, I just get upset/bothered when people act like the two like are the same. Not because I'm pro-male circumcision but because it tends to lessen the horror of female circumcision. I've seen first hand what circumcision can do to a young girl (worked with an NGO) and I don't think people really get how utterly fucked up it is.

Oh indeed, it's powerfully messed up.

 

[Kenny Kondom]

I think it's a terrible thing to do to an infant. It should never be performed unless medically necessary.

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.

Well, do you have a beanie or a helmet?

Wow... stop, please xD... This is a serious topic, dont make me laugh like that!
OT, it should be a personal choice. Wether it is benificial or not, it is a persons human right to choose what happens to their body, if it isnt, then its a form of violation.
Give the information to people straight too. Not BS that doctors can spin. If it can make them money, why would they play it down?

 

[sukotsuto]

With the "infant's rights" clause being brought up, I'm surprised abortion haven't been brought up yet. Oh wait I just did lol.

 

[Zarmi]

Oh I love how society works today! First of all it's completely acceptable to cut off your dick, apparently. Secondly, everyone knows everything! The most remarkable trademark of this generation, that everyone thinks they know shit. Look up the shit regarding circumcision. I'm personally much against it being done to children, as it should be a choice for the individual.

And really, since when is foreskin bad? You know, if the looks is disliked, hey! It can be pulled back! PROGRESS! Sigh. I don't see the point, why even debate it? If we have to be all for circumcision, we might as well just start mutilating kids more to make up for it! Let's cut off a leg here and there!

For those who can't use their brain, I'm being sarcastic. At least with the last part here. But on a serious note... Why not just... you know... Let the penis stay the way its supposed to be? Just saying.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

WHY DOES THIS THREAD EVEN EXIST OH WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Yeah, that's my opinyuns. I'm also against the whole business of circumcision.

WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

 

[Dimitriov]

With the "infant's rights" clause being brought up, I'm surprised abortion haven't been brought up yet. Oh wait I just did lol.

You've just activated my trap card! >

 

[Adanos]

Circumcision is mutilation. And the foreskin is not useless. Uncircumcised people actualy feel more sensation. And there are more parts removed than foreskin. Here is a complete list

http://www.thewholenetwork.org/7/post/2011/1/what-is-removed-during-circumcision.html

 

[sukotsuto]

You all do know that "completely removing the foreskin" is not the only circumcision method, right? There are circumcision methods where they actually keep the foreskin (and simply exposes that "head" more), which seems to be the non-Jewish method. Most of these studies seem to apply to the removal of the foreskin.

 

[The Lugz]

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

it is nothing alike, you are comparing sensation with the ability to reproduce women can also have their tubes cut or 'smashed' ....

the point of this is males with removed foreskin DO have reduced pleasure during intercourse due to the 2 million nerve endings you cut in half

the skin is a loop, you've taken the middle bit and cut it out as you would slice a coiled piece of string, there is nowhere for the nerve ending to report to any-more they will eventually die or simply become inert
and that's a best case scenario..

worst case scenario is scarring, deformity and reduced sexual health
these are the documented problems with it :

http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm

http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality.html#men

http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality.html#poster


to anyone that thinks it looks better, i tell you i have one and i don't see how removing the skin would improve it the only thing i can see happening is chafing in clothing and dry skin conditions
causing irritation

you realize in use that skin rolls up anyway? and as for cleanliness you can clean it in about 2 seconds with ease.. there is no real difference

i only ask because women do say the damnedest things about male organs
once a girl told me she only liked guys with tight balls not loose ones
and i had to explain that is a healthy reaction when they get hot / cold to protect the sperm
sexual education is sorely lacking these days..

i'm sure guys make equally elementary mistakes too.

I will say again - a clitoris is NOT just skin. It is in no way related to foreskin. It is not a valid comparison. Stop making it. It's offensive.

you're making the same misinformed argument, foreskin conducts over 2 million nerves to the end of the penis, whilst it is not the only sensitive area on the penis by any means it is nice to have it

if you'd really like to see a demonstration,
and you have the stomach for that kind of thing
you can look up 'cbt' and watch men use clothes-pegs and other things to cut off the sensitivity to the tip of their penis, and make themselves orgasm instantly when they take them off because the rush of blood to the nerves is overwhelming

#edit#
I don't recommend trying it, by the way it can't be good for you...

 

[Questalace]

I didn't use extremes, just pointing out that circumcision applied to other areas suddenly doesn't make sense.
If cutting skin off a baby is ok why then limit it to penises, if it's really ok we should do as we please.

And to what extent would you really thank your parents for piercings, the entire ear, nose, lips, nipples, clit,... where is the limit? Is there any limit?

You ARE using extremes.

Foreskin is useless. It serves no practical purpose - it has no effect on sexual stimulation or pleasure.

The body parts you've mentioned are all important. Nipple and clitoral damage is NOT something to joke about. I assume you mean piercing the clitoris or nipple (not cutting it off, which is what I initially got from your post) and my reply to that is that those are not safe to pierce in an infant.

The ear? Sure, why not? I'm not sure what you mean by "the entire ear" - like, cartilage piercings?

The nose - that would likely be a problem for snot reasons.

Again, foreskin removal has no medical downside. Removal or piercing anything but the earlobe would cause permanent, awful damage to a person. It is NOT the same. It is an extreme exaggeration. None of those locations are just skin.

The closest you might be able to get is trimming the ear lobe. It's just empty skin with no purpose. If I had freakishly long earlobes as a baby, and my parents chose to trim them to look more normal, I would be fine with that. It's a little skin that does nothing. No big deal.

I will say again - a clitoris is NOT just skin. It is in no way related to foreskin. It is not a valid comparison. Stop making it. It's offensive.

"Taylor et al. (1996) described the foreskin in detail, documenting a ridged band of mucosal tissue. They stated: "This ridged band contains more Meissner's corpuscles than does the smooth mucosa and exhibits features of specialized sensory mucosa."[2] In 1999, Cold and Taylor stated: "The prepuce is primary, erogenous tissue necessary for normal sexual function."[18] Boyle et al. (2002) state that "the complex innervation of the foreskin and frenulum has been well documented, and the genitally intact male has thousands of fine touch receptors and other highly erogenous nerve endings?many of which are lost to circumcision, with an inevitable reduction in sexual sensation experienced by circumcised males."[19] The AAP noted that the work of Taylor et al. (1996) "suggests that there may be a concentration of specialized sensory cells in specific ridged areas of the foreskin."[20]"

Kinda' states some men are attached to their foreskin, literally, for sexual pleasure as well as it has a higher number of touch receptors. Oh and one more thing:

"It is also described as the prepuce, a technically broader term that also includes the clitoral hood in women, to which the foreskin is embryonically homologous."

Comparing them is offensive? what's wrong with a bit of unity and love where sex is concerned. I find you very offensive.