Poll: What do you think about circumcision?
- Thread starter Lev The Red
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's genital mutilation. Don't try and sugarcoat it as anything else other than what it is. A throwback to the sort of ignorant and barbaric thinking that is still responsible for modern day atrocities and violations of basic human rights. We should have progressed beyond doing this sort of shit still.
Thanks to sites like isanyoneup.com (nsfw) i've seen hundreds of circumcised cocks. Some look like they've suffered 3rd degree fucking burns. Not to mention the issue of loss of sensitivity in the head and the fact that it's done to a fucking BABY that has no say in an irreversible mutilation that will affect it for the rest of it's life.
Fuck you if you voted it was the parents choice.
Thanks to sites like isanyoneup.com (nsfw) i've seen hundreds of circumcised cocks. Some look like they've suffered 3rd degree fucking burns. Not to mention the issue of loss of sensitivity in the head and the fact that it's done to a fucking BABY that has no say in an irreversible mutilation that will affect it for the rest of it's life.
Fuck you if you voted it was the parents choice.
If you believe that it has anything to do with cleanliness then you're just as stupid and ignorant as your parents.overpuce said:
I would leave it to my child to decide, but my mother did it, and I couldn't really care less. It's a tiny piece of skin on your penis, and seriously doesn't affect my day to day living whatsoever. People only start caring when people tell them it's bad.
It even has it's benefits, but this is not that place to discuss that.
It even has it's benefits, but this is not that place to discuss that.
In Australia they do not let you have circumcision if you are doing it for such a reason.overpuce said:
It's like cutting off fingertips so they don't have to clean under their nails, it's just not a wise move from a medical standpoint, nevermind the ethics.
As misguided and foolish as that reason is (no offence) it is at least better than doing it for cosmetic reasons.
Doesn't that argument strike you as a little creapy? It's ok since they won't remember what you did to them?Sectan said:
I was circumcised when I was 13. It was completely painless on account of my being anesthetized throughout.
I had it done for medical reasons. At the time I wasn't entirely sure what the problem was, but I'm now quite sure it was phimosis as the general issue seemed to be that it was too tight. Retracting my foreskin to wash under it was both dificult and painful, which led to a build up of bacteria. I was given creams to apply to help remove it, but repeatedly forcing the retraction of the foreskin eventually led to a large blood blister on the inside. In short, it was causing me a great deal of discomfort. I gave my full consent to the operation, and 5 years on I haven't suffered any negative effects. I didn't masturbate when I was 13 so I've not had the opportunity to compare pre-circumsicion and post-circumsicion masturbating, but I can safely say that I've never had any trouble with it. I've not had sex, so I can't really pass comment on that.
I can't really be expected to say that circumcision is wrong, then. I had it done for the right reasons and I've had nothing but benefits from it. I'm not sure I'd agree with having it done at birth though. I would say that any operation resulting in a permanant change to the body, however small, should always be done with the consent of the person whose body it is unless absolutely necessary (an operation to save a newborn's life shouldn't be postponed several years until they're old enough to say 'yes'). It should be done for right reasons as well, and I don't think religion/tradition qualifies.
I had it done for medical reasons. At the time I wasn't entirely sure what the problem was, but I'm now quite sure it was phimosis as the general issue seemed to be that it was too tight. Retracting my foreskin to wash under it was both dificult and painful, which led to a build up of bacteria. I was given creams to apply to help remove it, but repeatedly forcing the retraction of the foreskin eventually led to a large blood blister on the inside. In short, it was causing me a great deal of discomfort. I gave my full consent to the operation, and 5 years on I haven't suffered any negative effects. I didn't masturbate when I was 13 so I've not had the opportunity to compare pre-circumsicion and post-circumsicion masturbating, but I can safely say that I've never had any trouble with it. I've not had sex, so I can't really pass comment on that.
I can't really be expected to say that circumcision is wrong, then. I had it done for the right reasons and I've had nothing but benefits from it. I'm not sure I'd agree with having it done at birth though. I would say that any operation resulting in a permanant change to the body, however small, should always be done with the consent of the person whose body it is unless absolutely necessary (an operation to save a newborn's life shouldn't be postponed several years until they're old enough to say 'yes'). It should be done for right reasons as well, and I don't think religion/tradition qualifies.
I was always under the impression circumcision was mainly due to germs that easily collect within the skinflap, not because of religious reasons.
Well, that and I am VERY glad I was done as a child because, lemme tell you. The first time I was what a non-circumcised penis looked like, I felt like throwing up. Seems strange, I suppose, but yeah.
..oh, to sum it up, this:
Well, that and I am VERY glad I was done as a child because, lemme tell you. The first time I was what a non-circumcised penis looked like, I felt like throwing up. Seems strange, I suppose, but yeah.
..oh, to sum it up, this:
Zaverexus said:
suppose these parents had a child, and those parents raised that child on road trips with few to no bathroom stops. now suppose that child developed bladder issues as a result of not being permitted to go to the bath room on very very long trips. now suppose they find a crackpot doctor that figures the way to cure a bladder issue is to lop off foreskin. the parents say hey hes a doctor he knows what hes talking about. at the age of 12 the kid is circumcised (badly) turns out the doc was either cross eyed or drunk off his ass and managed to screw up a circumcision. oh and by the way that child still had bladder issues afterward.
thats me with the fucked up dick and the messed up bladder, thanks maw and paw ya really showed ya knew best....
thats me with the fucked up dick and the messed up bladder, thanks maw and paw ya really showed ya knew best....
I think we're a pretty sick race overall when we justify hacking off parts of a baby's penis and with such childish reasons as well. The religious reasons I find the funniest. God made you but hey, if you wanna be bro with God, hack off some of your baby's junk.
And no matter what some people tell you, uncut is DEFAULT and there is nothing wrong with it. The americans here should google the history of circumcision in the US and prepare to facepalm massively.
Just like only the US and 2-3 other countries hold off going metric while everybody else is doing it, US is in "select" company when it comes to circumcision:
And I'll just leave this here:
The AMA states that "virtually all current policy statements from specialty societies and medical organizations do not recommend routine neonatal circumcision, and support the provision of accurate and unbiased information to parents to inform their choice.".Specifically, major medical societies in the USA,Britain,Canada,Australia and New Zealand do not recommend routine non-therapeutic infant circumcision.
BTW, I live in Europe and have beem circumcised because of phimosis.
And no matter what some people tell you, uncut is DEFAULT and there is nothing wrong with it. The americans here should google the history of circumcision in the US and prepare to facepalm massively.
Just like only the US and 2-3 other countries hold off going metric while everybody else is doing it, US is in "select" company when it comes to circumcision:
And I'll just leave this here:
The AMA states that "virtually all current policy statements from specialty societies and medical organizations do not recommend routine neonatal circumcision, and support the provision of accurate and unbiased information to parents to inform their choice.".Specifically, major medical societies in the USA,Britain,Canada,Australia and New Zealand do not recommend routine non-therapeutic infant circumcision.
BTW, I live in Europe and have beem circumcised because of phimosis.
I don't care, it doesn't really phase me all that much. I'm circumcised, do I hate my parents for it? Not at all. In fact, I live in America, and I have yet to see an uncircumcised penis in person(locker room, showers, etc.), so I guess it's nice to not be a 'Freak'
It's normal in America, therefore, I'm glad I'm circumcised.
If I lived in Europe, I'd rather not be circumcised(or whatever is normal over there.)
I heard it's terrible to have it down later in life though... I don't think waiting is really a good idea.
It's normal in America, therefore, I'm glad I'm circumcised.
If I lived in Europe, I'd rather not be circumcised(or whatever is normal over there.)
I heard it's terrible to have it down later in life though... I don't think waiting is really a good idea.
"Parents shouldn't do it do their kids. Let them decide when they'er older."
My question is:
Why is it okay to take a sharp rock to a males' penis but not to a females' clitorides?
Answer:
It isn't right either way, just the male circumcision has been done for so long in the West that nobody seems to complain about it.
My question is:
Why is it okay to take a sharp rock to a males' penis but not to a females' clitorides?
Answer:
It isn't right either way, just the male circumcision has been done for so long in the West that nobody seems to complain about it.
Why do some religions love to mutilate the genitals of newborns? Behind the excuses and fairy-tales, you are fucking with the sexual organs of someone who is nowhere near capable of giving informed consent; removing a part of his organ which serves some very important functions and contains a lot of nerves.
It's a barbaric practice which has an attached death-toll. Yup, newborn boys do in rare cases die from an unneeded, destructive cosmetic surgery.
It's a barbaric practice which has an attached death-toll. Yup, newborn boys do in rare cases die from an unneeded, destructive cosmetic surgery.
RamirezDoEverything said:
Well done - you are calling people who are no circumcised freaks but would change your position as soon as you were put into a situation where you would be reidiculed for it. There is nothing freaky about either type of penis but thanks for showing how you will follow he herd and not think for yourself.
So if you were no circumcised but had the choice later would you do it or would you be one of those 'freaks'?RamirezDoEverything said:
The problem with this whole debate is that people who are circumcised think this is an ATTACK on their penis or their parents. This is NOT personal. Just because people do not agree with circumcism does not mean they feel sorry for you, or think you are a deformed.
Just as people who are circumcised (for the most part) do not really care if you have a foreskin or not and the only time they do is if they feel attacked or threatened so retaliate with errr derr smegma lololol.
This post has too many people defending their penises and lashing out at others because they feel their ego being hurt rather than looking at facts and logic. (both camps not just one)
bullshitTheRightToArmBears said:
I've held the fact that I was circumcised against my parents since I was 15. I'm quite honestly fucking pissed as its genital mutilation in my eyes.
On Topic: Can a parent get their child a tatoo when they're a baby?
Its a non-medically-necesary surgery. What other surgery, that isn't medically necesary, can one have for their kid?
thats right, NONE.
As far as I'm concerned, if you're an adult and you decide to get circumcised, than its your choice, you made the choice, and you're stuck with it for life. but for fuck sake, DON'T force genital mutilation on a child.
Besides, there aren't any medical benefits:
The purpouse of removing the foreskin is to prevent masturbation because it removes 90% of the pleasure receptors.
The only benefit from removing those receptors is that one might last longer when they're having sex because they can't feel nearly as much.
Reducing risk of cancer is NOT a benefit. That's like saying "you're less likely to get breast cancer if you lob your daughter's tits off." but you don't see anyone doing that, now do you?
Also, the HIV arguement is a lie.
If you actuallty look at where circumcision is most common, and then look at the countries that have the highest levels of HIV/AIDs, you'll find that America has the highest circumcision rate in the world, and 3 times as many HIV cases (next to the large number of circumcision to HIV ratios of Africa) compared to Europe, where circumcision is very uncommon, and HIV ratios are much lower.
And I know our European friends are just as sexually active as us Americans so don't try and argue it.