Poll: What do you think about circumcision?

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

My folks circumcised me when I was born and frankly I'm glad they did. The hygienic reasons aside, it's a redundant body part, like the appendix, an evolutionary vestige. I've never had 'erectile dysfunction' or problems masturbating, though I have heard plenty of hilarious stories about women turned off by creepy dog dorks, and none of them involve an appreciation for smegma buildup.

So, have fun cleaning it with a Q-tip, turtlenecks.

And there went the maturity of the thread it was a good run.

 

[Shodan1980]

Fun story: There was an outbreak of genital infections in Jewish infants in New York a few years ago and nobody could work out why. Turns out it was coming from a rabbi that was performing brises (sp. on the plural?) then sucking off the removed foreskin as is traditional, and when he did so he was passing on the delightful viruses and bacteria in his mouth and infecting the penises of toddlers and babies. Yay circumcision for no reason!

Its a procedure with a very high complication rate and no medical benefit whatsoever. If somebody was going round removing children's second kidney for no other reason than "its tradition" you'd think them crazy. Like others said, if you want to do it as an adult, feel free, all power to your elbow (as they say in the North of Scotland). But mutilating a child for no real reason is still mutilating a child for no real reason whether they notice at the time or not

 

[SnakeoilSage]

And there went the maturity of the thread it was a good run.

Don't pretend there was any to begin with.

 

[Pipotchi]

My folks circumcised me when I was born and frankly I'm glad they did. The hygienic reasons aside, it's a redundant body part, like the appendix, an evolutionary vestige. I've never had 'erectile dysfunction' or problems masturbating, though I have heard plenty of hilarious stories about women turned off by creepy dog dorks, and none of them involve an appreciation for smegma buildup.

So, have fun cleaning it with a Q-tip, turtlenecks.

If you have to clean your genitals with a Q-tip then you might have issues with the size, as an uncircumscised man I just wash it in the shower

 

[Seives-Sliver]

The parents should decide, because when one is circumcised, it is usually while the child is a baby, or toddler, and they wouldn't remember it. There are also medical reasons, mostly because it's a hygiene issue. Really, it's not like a circumcision will kill a child, and it really doesn't have any negative effects, since when the child grows up, they won't see any benefit to having a foreskin in the first place.

But the fact is that some men do regret having a circumscision done to them when they were children, indeed some men use various tools and procedure to 'regrow' their foreskins.

Sure its not the majority but how many people have to regret it for people to stop doing it, 1 in 10? 1 in 5?

Just seems like the percieved benefits are not worth the potential risks.

Well, not much can be done about that really, if someone is circumcised, it really doesn't change much. There is kind of an underlying message to be made really, that it'll take away how much control a parent has over their own child, we're already kind of seeing the starting of it, with people being called abusers for spanking their children.

Even this is kind of getting out of hand, circumcision isn't mutilation, it doesn't damage a child permenantly, and most people don't care about it when they get older, and if they do, then they won't circumcise their own child. This is much like any thread on the internet, a small thing most people blow up about, and it's odd how this is about circumcision, and yet people are raising banners to blow this thread up.

 

[Newby_Newb]

Its funny how Circumcision is still an issue.

It should have been banned decades ago.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

And there went the maturity of the thread it was a good run.

Don't pretend there was any to begin with.

Have you seen the other threads like this? This is like fucking mass in comparison.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

"They should let them decide when they are older."
Yeah, 5 words for that-
4 Weeks of unforgiving pain.

It's just foreskin. Not that big of a deal.
Also, this interferes with "Should you be allowed to teach your child religion" in ways.

 

[Soxafloppin]

My penis has a leg warmer on it, It'l stay that way.

Circumsicion has no real benifits or drawbacks but I'm sure its fair to have it forced on a child.

 

[thom_cat_]

My folks had me circumcised when I was an infant and frankly I'm glad they did. The hygienic reasons aside, it's a redundant body part, like the appendix, an evolutionary vestige. I've never had 'erectile dysfunction' or problems masturbating, though I have heard plenty of hilarious stories about women turned off by creepy dog dorks, and none of them involve an appreciation for smegma buildup.

So, have fun cleaning it with a Q-tip, turtlenecks.

I have never ever had this issue... at all... I don't think I've even seen a build up of smegma.
It has it's purpose, and it feels good. And no girl that I have ever met has said they'd rather any different.

 

[Rin Little]

This may be because I'm a chick, but I honestly don't really care. The baby doesn't remember it because it's done when they're only a few hours old, it's easier to clean and cuts down on bacteria. Why does this matter?

 

[thylasos]

Utterly pointless, except as one of a number of possible solutions to an over-tight foreskin.

At birth, in those few cases where it's obviously medically advisable? Pointless mutilation.

Hygiene? Fuck off. Clean your cock occasionally.

Cosmetic preferences apparently very according to what's prevalent in the area. Hence all the US people saying the natural penis looks intrinsically rubbish.

 

[Radeonx]

I think that having your child circumcised is incredibly wrong, and the religious reasons for it are incredibly nonsensical.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

And there went the maturity of the thread it was a good run.

Don't pretend there was any to begin with.

Have you seen the other threads like this? This is like fucking mass in comparison.

It's still a debate between "EW! Penis mutilation is gross!" and "EW! Foreskins are gross!"

With a few exceptions, this whole discussion isn't about religious freedom, hygiene, or the legality of the act, as much about men looking for a reason to overcompensate, i.e. "well at least my penis isn't __________."

 

[thom_cat_]

The parents should decide, because when one is circumcised, it is usually while the child is a baby, or toddler, and they wouldn't remember it. There are also medical reasons, mostly because it's a hygiene issue. Really, it's not like a circumcision will kill a child, and it really doesn't have any negative effects, since when the child grows up, they won't see any benefit to having a foreskin in the first place.

But the fact is that some men do regret having a circumscision done to them when they were children, indeed some men use various tools and procedure to 'regrow' their foreskins.

Sure its not the majority but how many people have to regret it for people to stop doing it, 1 in 10? 1 in 5?

Just seems like the percieved benefits are not worth the potential risks.

Well, not much can be done about that really, if someone is circumcised, it really doesn't change much. There is kind of an underlying message to be made really, that it'll take away how much control a parent has over their own child, we're already kind of seeing the starting of it, with people being called abusers for spanking their children.

Even this is kind of getting out of hand, circumcision isn't mutilation, it doesn't damage a child permenantly, and most people don't care about it when they get older, and if they do, then they won't circumcise their own child. This is much like any thread on the internet, a small thing most people blow up about, and it's odd how this is about circumcision, and yet people are raising banners to blow this thread up.

We should start branding children.
It doesn't make a difference in the end, it's not mutilation because there is no permanent damage. Sounds pretty good to me.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

And there went the maturity of the thread it was a good run.

Don't pretend there was any to begin with.

Have you seen the other threads like this? This is like fucking mass in comparison.

It's still a debate between "EW! Penis mutilation is gross!" and "EW! Foreskins are gross!"

With a few exceptions, this whole discussion isn't about religious freedom, hygiene, or the legality of the act, as much about men looking for a reason to overcompensate, i.e. "well at least my penis isn't __________."

Not really. If you want the debate to be that then it is or you can actually look at genuine cons and pros about both situations which I have linked to many of them near the top of the page. All circumcision does is make hygiene easier unless it is necessary and creates other problems like more difficult penetration, more difficult masturbation, higher rates of erectile dysfunction, etc.

 

[Continuity]

Okay, how about this though. I'm circumcised, and I don't want to be. It's considered absolutely horrendous to circumcise a female, so why should it be any different to circumcise a male?

Yes, I understand physically, the two operations are very different. But my point is this: you are mutilating a child. Your child very well may not agree with your reasoning for that mutilation when it grows up. So don't cut your kid.

Is having a tooth pulled "mutilation"? have a care with your language as you are betraying your prejudices.

In fact there are a plethora of good medical reasons for virtually all male infants being circumcised as a matter of course.

http://www.circinfo.com/benefits/bmc.html

 

[Woodsey]

Eh, to be honest if you never had a foreskin then you never really care that you never had it. I mean, I don't really see the point except for medical or religious reasons, but it's not really the end of the world.

Irrelevant. Your body, you choose.

This may be because I'm a chick, but I honestly don't really care. The baby doesn't remember it because it's done when they're only a few hours old, it's easier to clean and cuts down on bacteria. Why does this matter?

So you wouldn't care if someone had cut off the ol' lips at birth? Or your clit?

And I see someone else has already given the rape example.

OT: People decide when they're at a suitable age, unless there's a proper medical reason when younger. Just because the parents want it done, or for 'religious reasons' are the worst fucking excuses I've ever heard.

Anyone arguing against people being able to choose what happens to their own freaking body is a fucking idiot as far as I'm concerned.

Hilariously, this whole fad is so big in the States because people wanted a way to stop guys jacking off.

 

[Seives-Sliver]

The parents should decide, because when one is circumcised, it is usually while the child is a baby, or toddler, and they wouldn't remember it. There are also medical reasons, mostly because it's a hygiene issue. Really, it's not like a circumcision will kill a child, and it really doesn't have any negative effects, since when the child grows up, they won't see any benefit to having a foreskin in the first place.

But the fact is that some men do regret having a circumscision done to them when they were children, indeed some men use various tools and procedure to 'regrow' their foreskins.

Sure its not the majority but how many people have to regret it for people to stop doing it, 1 in 10? 1 in 5?

Just seems like the percieved benefits are not worth the potential risks.

Well, not much can be done about that really, if someone is circumcised, it really doesn't change much. There is kind of an underlying message to be made really, that it'll take away how much control a parent has over their own child, we're already kind of seeing the starting of it, with people being called abusers for spanking their children.

Even this is kind of getting out of hand, circumcision isn't mutilation, it doesn't damage a child permenantly, and most people don't care about it when they get older, and if they do, then they won't circumcise their own child. This is much like any thread on the internet, a small thing most people blow up about, and it's odd how this is about circumcision, and yet people are raising banners to blow this thread up.

We should start branding children.
It doesn't make a difference in the end, it's not mutilation because there is no permanent damage. Sounds pretty good to me.

Ah, we hit that end of the spectrum then hm? Well, let's put it like this, there is a line between doing something that benefits a child, and simply doing it to harm a child, while there is not many problems with circumcision, I am circumcised, and would not want to sprout a foreskin any time soon, there is a problem with branding a baby. There are benefits to having the foreskin removed, and no benefits to being branded, unless you're Steve-O, and do it for money, in which he is an adult, and made the decision himself. Branding a child, giving it a permanent tatoo, or even piercing the ears of a child isn't beneficial, and shouldn't be done until the child can make the logical decision at an appropriate age themselves.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Okay, how about this though. I'm circumcised, and I don't want to be. It's considered absolutely horrendous to circumcise a female, so why should it be any different to circumcise a male?

Yes, I understand physically, the two operations are very different. But my point is this: you are mutilating a child. Your child very well may not agree with your reasoning for that mutilation when it grows up. So don't cut your kid.

Is having a tooth pulled "mutilation"? have a care with your language as you are betraying your prejudices.

In fact there are a plethora of good medical reasons for virtually all male infants being circumcised as a matter of course.

http://www.circinfo.com/benefits/bmc.html

A page back I have some studies that say a lot of those are quite the opposite.