How do you feel about circumcision?

[Matt-Sama]

It seems to be barbaric.
Should be illegal unless you need it for medical reasons. Some people have foreskins that are too tight and need it removed.
Some people say it is better for hygeine but obviously not, we're born with it for a reason. And if you're not a complete fucking retard then you know to pull it back and wash if you really need it. Only sick fucks let it get dirty anyways.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Well from what has been written maybe people who have been circumcised don't have sex as much as the average person, It removes a large portion of pleasure as it was used to discourage masturbation and such.
After I discovered that it decreased pleasure my opinion changed from on the fence to fallen in the pro choice pile.

It's not the lack of sexual activity that supposedly decreases HIV infection rates in circumcised males, it's the removal of the foreskin itself. The foreskin has a large concentration of Langerhan's cells which are immature dendritic cells that are thought to be the "main target" of the HIV virus according to a study made way back in 03 that I can't be bothered to look up right now. It is thought that by removing the foreskin you are essentially removing a large point of entry for the virus. Plus, without the foreskin the glands of the penis become hard and are more resistant to tears during intercourse. A peer reviewed medical journal published a letter in 2007 stating that Langerin serves as a barrier between the infection of Langerhan's cells with the HIV virus and even though the glands are more resistant to tears that does not mean they won't happen. Like I've said before, the only proper way to prevent HIV is to use a condom.

 

[weker]

Woops sorry this quote turned bad
um think of something to say to avoid warnings and such XD

This is turning out to be a really big debate topic it's a pity there is so much conflicting evidence. But in the end its better to let the kid decide as its his body.

 

[Palademon]

My feelings are very much to the tone of "WHY?". If its part of your religion, fine, whatever.

I'm definately not the only person thinking "When did the idea of cutting off parts of us become something we defend for health reasons?".

"I just permanently reduced your sexual sensation, having cut off quite a lot of nerves. BUT IT LOOKS NICE."

Out of curiousity, do people get surgery to remove the appendix when there's nothing wrong with it? Because that makes sense. It doesn't do anything, but randomly try to kill you.

I don't think you should feel free to decide something that permanently changes your child's body, or their life. If you want to do it as an adult or have a medical reaosn to, fine. I'm not going to jump in and go "YOU'RE SHALLOW AND STUPID!" if there's a medical reason other than "Well, it's easier to clean, and causes less spread of infections".

I'll probalby get quoted with people saying I'm wrong, but since I've waited this long into the thread, they'll have probably given up.

 

[weker]

the only proper way to prevent HIV is to use a condom.

Yep and it's one reason why I feel any sensible parent who has brought up their child correctly has no reason for the operation as a child.

It puts their child at risk.
It steals the child's decision.
All the health benefits are common sense or can be prevented my a condom.
Reduces pleasure by a considerable amount judging by biology references that others have posted.

 

[AngloDoom]

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.

That's a whole lot of opinions. Anyway, who cares if a baby's penis supposedly isn't 'pretty' if it's not circumcised. Is it that important? If it's such a simple, safe procedure then let the adult figure it out for themselves around the time they actually want to start using it.

Female circumcision is a more dire mutilation, but who says women need all those folds of labia? They're probably hard to keep clean anyway, so they may as well go.

Right?

You seem to be completely ignoring everything people have been talking about in this thread. Since you're apparently too lazy to look: A baby heals much faster than an adult, the baby has a quick operation that he'll never be able to remember, the adult has an operation that takes a long and grueling time to heal that he will remember for the rest of his life.

So, I can scalp my baby so it never grows hair, 'cus that's the best point to do it at?

Coolio.

Also, I find it very funny how you say a 'uncircumcised penis is disgusting' - that's a matter of opinion and differs in cultures. Most of the women I know in England find a circumcised penis to look disgusting. You know why? "It looks it's it's been mutilated..." was one response.

You know if my opinion of people on the internet was higher, I'd assume you were trolling. Sadly I do not think so highly, and thus I am to believe that you aren't trolling, but are actually stupid. Congratulations.

That's a fantastic way of completely avoiding the point.

I'd assume you were avoiding the subject because you don't have a point to make, but that would be stupid, correct?

Unnecessary surgery that results in bodily mutilation for cosmetic reasons. Both fit into this category. Don't dismiss my opinion because you can't back up your pathetic subjective arguments.

 

[ExileNZ]

Strongly against it as it can't be undone (to my knowledge) and it is the child's body not the parents'. However if an adult wants it done then that's their decision. I don't believe you can argue the better appearance case without complete hypocrisy if you are against the circumcision of females as it is one of the reasons for it. It is mutilation any way you look at it and should be illegal to perform it on male children, however we live in a strange society where to stand up for equality for males is sexist. The sins of our fathers is more literal then ever. I think I'm done ranting now, wait one more; cultural arguments for it are also hypocritical as female mutilation is a part of other cultures. Okay I think I'm done now.

I wouldn't be so blithe about the female mutilation part, it's much worse for women than it is for men, as it removes almost all pleasure from sex, not just a bit, and is done explicitly to do so. If you want to make it illegal, do so for both sexes.

That aside, while it's technically reversible (for men), it's much more complicated and much more expensive than the initial process. It's also somewhat like ring-barking a tree, which is not really a mental image I want associated with my parts. Keep that knife away from me!

Personally, I don't think it should be illegal, but then I don't think it should be done by people without a very good reason, either. And of course, "It looks pretty and he won't remember" is not a very good reason.

 

[LoorTheDarkElf]

Honestly, I'm a woman here so I don't really feel I've got the right to say yay or nay, but then I'm reminded that someday I'm going to be a mom and I'm going to have to make this decision if I have any sons... and it's a tough one. If I choose circumcision then my son will have an easier time cleaning himself, and I won't have to explain it to him. Since I myself have never seen an un-circumcised penis I would consider myself not even qualified to try if asked, and my man was circumcised as a baby because of his religion... I don't think he would be able to explain it either.

But I don't want a simple fear like that to push me into making a big decision like that down the road. Most likely, when I get to that cross-roads, I'll talk to several doctors and see what the un-biased facts are by cross-referencing many sources. What they all agree on I'll hold as the truth, where deviations will be considered conjecture. If it medically makes sense, and I mean a LOT of sense, then I'll make that decision for my child. If not, I'll let him make it himself down the line.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

the only proper way to prevent HIV is to use a condom.

Yep and it's one reason why I feel any sensible parent who has brought up their child correctly has no reason for the operation as a child.

It puts their child at risk.
It steals the child's decision.
All the health benefits are common sense or can be prevented my a condom.
Reduces pleasure by a considerable amount judging by biology references that others have posted.

Pretty much. If adults want to be circumcised then that's their right as adults. Otherwise, unless it's medically necessary, there is no reason to remove the foreskin.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

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.

Um... why?

A newborn can't remember the pain and heals in days - whereas an adult must go through several weeks of painful recovery.

Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?

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

It isn't any different, but you wouldn't give a baby a tattoo or a piercing, would you? The person should be allowed to choose if they want part of their cock cut off, that's literally just common sense and cutting off a childs foreskin to please your God is just downright barbaric.

 

[Not Lord Atkin]

I was circumcised at the age of 6 due to some medical condition.... the peehole growing over or something... peeing hurt slightly for a few days afterwardsd but otherwise, it was not that horrible as most people think.
I can't say whether I agree with the statement that it looks better without the foreskin, but it sure does look smaller.
Can't say I've really had any problems with it. It was a necessary medical procedure in my case and I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything. As long as my penis is intact, I couldn't care less about a piece of skin atop of it.

 

[WhySoElitist]

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.

so it is okay to chop off part of a males body but not a females?

 

[Jjkaybomb]

Its a useless procedure based on outdated medical knowledge. When I have kids, I'm not going to let them be circumcised, but thats just my choice. Its, for the most part, harmless, so I dont care if other parents decide to choose differently.

 

[WhySoElitist]

This is what you got wrong, above. You seem to not understand what is actually done in the procedure and what is actually effected to liken it to a simple tattoo or piercing.

**facepalm** Of course I know what it is. It is minor cosmetic surgery.

And on the comparison of rape and circumcision, you said it did matter. That was my entire point of that comparison.

Actually, I said that rape matters and that circumcision does NOT matter. And I gave a scientific explanation as to why. The infant cannot be affected by the experience - an adult can be. I don't know how you construed any form of agreement from that.

Well, I did agree with you that rape is bad, even if the victim is unconscious. But that's the only thing we've agreed upon. In fact, I used that example to demonstrate why you were incorrect - long term memory formation.

As far as my "false" cultural notions - which I find rather ironic coming from an American - just because you don't agree with them doesn't make them false.

first are you male or female because it seems that women seem to think circumcision doesn't matter when men think it does. second why would not remembering the events make it disappear. obviously they would think about when they saw their penis.
(ps i dont care about your opinion because from your name the odds are that you are a weaboo.)

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Circumcision is the surgical removal of the foreskin of the penis. It is most commonly performed on newborn males (obviously).
I personally approve of it it (but don't disagree if parents or whatever opt not to) for the simple reason that it is a better-looking penis. Seriously, uncircumcised penises look like a worm trying to escape from mud.
Yes it is painful for the baby, possibly more painful than an adult would experience. However, I don't remember any pain from when I was circumcised because I can't remember anything before age 5. I'm grateful that my mother wanted me to have a good-looking penis.
I don't care about the health advantages/disadvantages or any religious practice of it but I personally approve. What about my fellow Escapees?

[HEADING=2]THEY BOTH LOOK THE FUCKING SAME ERECT PLEASE GET OVER YOURSELVES WITH IT BEING BETTER CIRCUMCISED AND I DON'T CARE IF I GET A WARNING FOR THIS IT NEEDS TO BE SAID AGAIN FOR THE THIRD OR FOURTH TIME.[/HEADING]

The Escapist shows time and time again it is not mature enough to deal with a thread on circumcision. Honestly unless there a problem like the foreskin is too tight it gives no advantage. Importantly whether or not it makes a better looking one is subjective for fuck sake it is not set in stone.

If you pull it back and clean hygiene covered. Now I don't have these articles but in the last thread a guy posted a load of research article saying circumcision makes it harder to masturbate, sex less pleasurable for both parties, penetration harder to achieve, no decrease in cancer and increase in erectile dysfunction.

 

[Raideh]

Cleaned.

 

[GLo Jones]

It's a choice between amputating a part of the body, or simply washing it, and when that choice is made by your parents before you're young enough to decide for yourself... Ugh, it's a horrible practice.

I'm just glad the US is one of the only places where this is so common.

 

[zehydra]

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.

Though if there is really no negative side to it, why does one need a valid reason to?