Poll: What do you think about circumcision?
- Thread starter Lev The Red
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You still use lube.viking97 said:
Claiming to live the life of a "normal" penis owner when circumcised is unfortunate. It's only normal because you know no better. You don't have my scorn - you have my pity. I wish your parents hadn't been so narrow-minded. I wish they hadn't desired to harm their child for their own reasons. But what I wish means nothing, because you're the one living with the damage.
I don't see why people think that its MORE acceptable to inflict this pain on a baby than on an adult or young adult? Who cares if you don't remember it, what right does anyone have to hurt a baby? Especially seeings the general consensus is "it doesn't make much difference".
If it doesn't make much difference, then why is it necessary to mutilate a child's genitals?
If it doesn't make much difference, then why is it necessary to mutilate a child's genitals?
People do die from circumcision and sensitivity is a measurable value. You could read the citation people put in before calling everything people said is bullshit. There have been citations provided on both sides and not all arguments are hot air.xXGeckoXx said:
If we are going by your 'logic' then...this isnt my name said:
-"It hurts" is an opinion because people have different pain thresholds (P.S. I remember nothing of my circumcision)
- I bet if we did a poll... most women would actually like a man to be circumcised... seriously, who wants to see... that.
FACT- Yes, there is LESS risk of infection
I ask you though, what "issues" can be caused by a circumcision... because I guarantee that there are more issues that can be caused from NOT being circumcised that can come FROM being circumcised.
I think this thread has reached the medical equivalent of Godwin's Law. Are people seriously comparing the removal of a piece of skin to entire limb amputations and torture? Yet we allow tattoos and piercings, and not just ear piercings. Seriously of all the nasty things humans do to each other, all the various tortures like burning and flaying, is circumcision really comparable?
For reference circumcision is not the nastiest things men have done with their willies. In Mesoamerica Mexica and Maya priests and leaders would lacerate their penises with stingray spines.
For reference circumcision is not the nastiest things men have done with their willies. In Mesoamerica Mexica and Maya priests and leaders would lacerate their penises with stingray spines.
Right and wrong. I was being a bit harsh (while trying to avoid bias) to make a point. Yes people have died from circumcision. But people have died from not being circumcised as well (probably before the technology to do it cleanly arrived people would die because they never had the proceedure as a child).Glademaster said:
Pleasure is a measurable value but only subjectively. A person has his own scale and has no way of comparing it to somebody elses' scale so the top on my scale might be lower than yours but it makes not difference to me, I would never be able to distinguish. If I could take a pleasure o meter and measure it it still would not make a difference because I could not experience a greater level even if I knew it existed. A completely non objective factor here.
This. I am in 100% agreement.Celestialum said:
If i was a member of Jesus' Church of Transsexualism. and it was my whole-hearted religious belief that all male babies must undergo sex changes to female and vice versa, would i have the right to impose that on my children just because my god told me to do it?
Or for a less hyperbolic example, if rather than foreskin, i believed pinky fingers to be 'unclean'. Would i be allowed to tell the doctor to chop my infant sons fingers off? Neither one hugely impairs your ability to function mostly normally, (they both do slightly). They're both equally barbaric, but one is legal and the other isn't. Why?
I will repeat a point I made earlier most of the benefits/drawbacks are fairly minor on both sides, cleaniness, cancer rates and so on.
Plenty of guys are perfectly happy with their circumscised cocks and plenty of uncircumscised guys feel the same way.
However some guys regret it when they get older either because of a botched operation, or they feel wronged by their parents, or one of many other reasons. Not a high % granted, but those are the guys I feel sorry for. They were subjected to a medical procedure they didnt ask for and in later life they regret it.
Just doesnt seem right to me
Plenty of guys are perfectly happy with their circumscised cocks and plenty of uncircumscised guys feel the same way.
However some guys regret it when they get older either because of a botched operation, or they feel wronged by their parents, or one of many other reasons. Not a high % granted, but those are the guys I feel sorry for. They were subjected to a medical procedure they didnt ask for and in later life they regret it.
Just doesnt seem right to me
You should read the citations that people have posted but just in short I will say the cons of circumcision. It makes masturbation hard, penis is less sensitive, does not increase intercourse times, reduces FEMALE orgasms, erectile dysfunction rates increase and makes penetration harder. Like all surgery it does carry the risk of death and while it only 100 infants die a year in America it is still an unnecessary amount. There is a list of stuff for not circumcised ones as well but both have issues.ks1234 said:
- Mar 31, 2010
- 7,172
- 150
- 68
- Country
-
- Gender
-
That isn't a particularly good comparison, female circumcision usually leaves the child unable unable to enjoy sex when they are older and has a higher risk of infection and complications as it usually involves cutting off the clitoris as opposed to the foreskin. Male circumcision doesn't have nearly as many negative consequences and so can't be compared, though there is a valid debate that the child should make their own choice, I tend to lean more on the parent's side really since it isn't that disadvantageous to lose a foreskin.Celestialum said:
Circumcision IS an amputation - how can you cut off a body part and not call it so? And it IS mutilation - as it ruins the body's natural appearance and hampers its normal functions.
See, I tend to agree with this nice fella named Hadrian [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian], who had some political sway once, and thought it was a bit of a bad thing. (By "some political sway" I mean he was the friggin' emperor of Rome, and by "a bit of a bad thing", I mean he made it a capital crime.)
See, I tend to agree with this nice fella named Hadrian [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadrian], who had some political sway once, and thought it was a bit of a bad thing. (By "some political sway" I mean he was the friggin' emperor of Rome, and by "a bit of a bad thing", I mean he made it a capital crime.)
Long story short... I can jerk off just fine without my foreskin.Glademaster said:
I have absolutely ZERO problems getting a boner, penetrating a woman isn't hard either (unless she is super tight... but that's an entirely different issue), as for 'reducing female orgasms'... MOST women don't orgasm from penetration anyway... but when I have gotten the ones that do, well... there's no issue there either.
So, your argument sucks. lol
If we say no circumcision we're basically saying it's illegal to observe religious tradition and that's a slippery slope, I mean it could easily turn into making it illegal to build mosques or own a bible
I didn't say pleasure I said sensitivity they are different. Pleasure and pain are relative how sensitive something is however, is not subjective. What happens is the penis head is no longer lubricated and the skin becomes slightly thinker and there is some nerve damage all reducing sensitivity along with reports from adults who have been circumcised. It is less sensitive because it is less reactive than it would have been or was otherwise.xXGeckoXx said:
Unfortunately semantics can get in the way with words that are used interchangeably in general use so yes while stuff like pain and pleasure are relative how sensitive a spot is depends on nerve endings which is something can be quantified. Say for example you could take a punch to the lower/centre stomach but I couldn't as I had a lower threshold of pain. However, we would both still take a punch to that area over a knuckle punch to the solar plexus as it would be a more sensitive area to a strike like that. Not the best example but at 01:20 it is all I have.
It should be the kids choice.
I'm circumcised. Sometimes I'm happy for it, sometimes not.
I was circumcised while I was 2 years old. I had some medical problems and they had to do it. But even if there where not those problems, my parents would have done it because of religious reasons.
I'm circumcised. Sometimes I'm happy for it, sometimes not.
I was circumcised while I was 2 years old. I had some medical problems and they had to do it. But even if there where not those problems, my parents would have done it because of religious reasons.
I'm circumcised and I've never had any problems with any of those. From what I've seen here, the uncircumcised group is disgusted with the concept of circumcision and finding whatever online survey, Fox News report, or urban legend they can dig up to prove their case, while the circumcised group seems to have no complaints at all and are perfectly comfortable with it.Glademaster said:
To my perspective, that says one group is confident with itself, and the other is fear-mongering.
Well, speaking as a person who's had circumcision (circumcision-ee?), I can say that indeed, it is better in terms of hygine (and only that, really). How do I know? Well, I had mine when I was about second grade, and thank fuck I didn't get it because of simplicistic religious reasons. I had a... Well, let's call it a skin condition, I won't get into it, but circumcision was my only way out of it. Yeah, it was painful as hell, and I still remember it, for all the suffering it brought me, and continued to bring me until my wound healed-up. But, in the end, was it worth it? Considering that there are less virtues to it, then vices, I'd say no. Yes, it's more hygenic, but on the other hand it's a pretty fucked-up expirience, and it really brands you for life. And from what I've heard, people with circumcision tend to feel less pleasure from sex, due to having the upper skin of their penis removed, and that's where most of the receptors are - so, to hell with that! Plus, people who do it for a religious reason, are idiotic mongrols in my opinion, because submiting your child to the horror, especially if he's old enough to remember it, is on the same level as actually scarring him for life, and I don't believe in that whole 'whatever doesn't kill you blah blah' bullshit - it's true, but whatever doesn't kill you, has gotten pretty close to that, and that's never good! And even if it isn't self-aware enough to know why his pee-pee is missing a topl layer, it's still pretty emberassing, and once they find out... Let's just say it'll closely resemble the feeling of finding out that you're adopted (not that I know what that feeling is, but shut-up, made my point).