Queries about circumcision

[Rendahli]

See I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum. My foreskin doesn't go back over my head. Like....at all so I've been wondering to myself if I could give circumcision a looksee.

Even when you're erect?! Sounds painful. Maybe a case where circumcision could be a good idea. Just make sure you have soft underpants for afterwards, first few weeks will be awkward.

Nah it's not painful at all. Which is why I'm unsure about circumcision in the first place. I'm considering going to see a urologist once college is done for the summer to get a professional opinion but I'd really rather not have to get the chop.

I've not got anything against circumcision, I just dread the thoughts of those first few weeks you mentioned.

Get it checked out. From the sounds of it you have the same thing I had. I was circumcised and for me the pain after the operation was less than that of a papercut and it was pretty much healed within a week or two. Who knows though, you might get lucky and the cream they are likely to prescribe you might work, which is probably going to be more likely if you catch this thing as soon as possible. Whatever happens if you want to chat about it with me, feel free.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Because children have actually died from a purely cosmetic procedure.

A little perspective.

In every single documented case I've found, it's *ALWAYS* because the procedure wasn't performed properly (at least when talking specifically about male circumcision). Improper training, cutting, utilities, etc. I have *yet* to find a documented case where everything was done by the book and a child died anyway. (And I would be very interested in reading otherwise)

We don't stop procedures based on the fact that things fuck up when you don't do them correctly. The reasoning behind that astounds me.

Your point?

Children have died from a procedure that was not medically necessary.

The fact it was due to malpractice is irrelevant.

 

[anthony87]

See I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum. My foreskin doesn't go back over my head. Like....at all so I've been wondering to myself if I could give circumcision a looksee.

Even when you're erect?! Sounds painful. Maybe a case where circumcision could be a good idea. Just make sure you have soft underpants for afterwards, first few weeks will be awkward.

Nah it's not painful at all. Which is why I'm unsure about circumcision in the first place. I'm considering going to see a urologist once college is done for the summer to get a professional opinion but I'd really rather not have to get the chop.

I've not got anything against circumcision, I just dread the thoughts of those first few weeks you mentioned.

You can get your foreskin loosened slightly with a surgery rather than cutting the whole thing off.

Yeah I've heard of things like that and steroid creams and such that can loosen the skin. I really should go talk to a urologist about it at some stage. Fingers crossed that a snip wouldn't be necessary.

 

[anthony87]

Get it checked out. From the sounds of it you have the same thing I had. I was circumcised and for me the pain after the operation was less than that of a papercut and it was pretty much healed within a week or two. Who knows though, you might get lucky and the cream they are likely to prescribe you might work, which is probably going to be more likely if you catch this thing as soon as possible. Whatever happens if you want to chat about it with me, feel free.

See that's the rub(heh). I don't know if it's even a "thing". It's just how I've been my whole life.

 

[Rendahli]

Snip.

We don't treat infections with circumcisions anymore. That is medievil/Civil War Medical logic. That's been outdated for centuries.

We treat infections with antibiotics, which is much cheaper, and less invasive. I know this from personal experience.

Now onto pleasure. There are very few scientific studies on circumcision, and most of the studies supporting circumcision try to bullshit their way into the medical community by using samples as low as 50, and restricting themselves to one tribe in Africa.

These studies have been thrown out.
You can have this link though:

http://www.circumcision.org/studies.htm

Personally, I say you were lied to.

I suggest looking up a condition known as Balanitis xerotica obliterans which is still treated mainly by circumcision.

That infection doesn't even have a full percent chance of happening. it has a .005% chance of happening. Its a non-issue.

If it's such a non issue how come I and from the sounds of it two other people on this very thread have suffered from it?

Problems with the foreskin are less than 5% of the total population. I could easily say deviated septums are a big issue, but since its an uncommon problem I won't even pretend to advocate septum surgery "just because."

Ok, I think you've misunderstood what I was getting at. I'm not a supporter of using circumcision as a preventative meassure on people who aren't suffering from a such a condition. However, there are cases where circumcision is a genuine medical treatment, a fact which you dismissed in an earlier post.

 

[Superior Mind]

I doubt circumcision has any real impact on sexual prowess so you should be okay. People have been getting circumcised for centuries and it doesn't seem to have any major adverse impact. Whether circumcised men are better or worse off... a penis is a penis, sex is sex, it's all fairly simple when you get down to it and worrying about which model "works better" is fairly pointless in the end. Hell, we live in an age where people can and do shove bolts of metal through their cocks and claim it increases stimulation or improves their stamina... look whatever, I'll take their words for it. I think our genitals can handle quite a bit and still work as intended.

That being said circumcision carries a risk of leading to significant nerve damage which can have an impact on sex but whether this is the case for you should be obvious. I don't think it's very common

Back when my father was young circumcision was often an aesthetic choice and had nothing to do with religion or medicine. I would say though, and I imagine most doctors would agree, that removal of the foreskin for anything but medical necessity is not a good idea.

I think there's a lot of misinformation about circumcision and I'm certainly not qualified enough to comment about what's true or not. There are arguments that it is for hygiene and conflicting arguments about whether it increases sexual prowess or not. I think the hygiene argument is fairly flawed though, especially when you consider that the metzitzah b'peh technique of circumcision requires the mohel to suck and even chew lightly on the wound - pretty damn abhorrent practice, not to mention incredibly unhygienic but borne from mistaken bronze-age medical theories that blood must be removed from the wound and saliva had healing qualities. I am, unfortunately, not making that up and it still goes on to this day although thankfully it is not common.

I think circumcision is genital mutilation unless it is required for medicinal reasons. If there is no reason to slice off a part of your body but you do it anyway how is that not mutilation? I've always found it so utterly bizarre that it comes mostly from religion too. Consider their argument that we're all made perfect in God's image except that part which needs to be cut off. Mental. Even more bizarre is that even a mohel can get squeamish at the thought of female circumcision, even the less awful versions, (and it gets pretty awful for some girls, I won't go into it,) and yet see no problems with hacking off the foreskin of a newborn baby because Genesis 17:10-14 said otherwise his 'soul shall be cut off from his people'.

Anyway I've gone into far too much detail and talked about penises for far too long, (I'm clearly procrastinating here,) so I'll leave it at that.

 

[JochemHippie]

Circumcised myself, medical reasons, too big for my foreskin ;3

Let's see, well I miss some nerves because of it, don't know what I'm missing though. Sex still feels amazing.

Well cut is usually cleaner and tastier, so unless you keep it very clean down there don't expect many to volunteer for it...
For sexual partners, yeah I prefer cut.

Though who gives a flying fuck, just give me a guy that's good in bed.

 

[Rendahli]

See that's the rub(heh). I don't know if it's even a "thing". It's just how I've been my whole life.

Well in that case I would still suggest getting it seen to, even if the doc suggests getting the snip, they can't force you into it if you don't think it's necessary.

 

[BlindTom]

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=263813

everything you need to know

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I don't care if the number of deaths is low. There shouldn't be deaths for a procedure that has no benefits (other than saving 1m in the shower) especially on a person who hasn't consented to it.

Okay, we are going to look at the precise situation you are describing right here. The number of deaths is excessive in comparison to the amount of time it takes.
I will assume the average lifespan to be seventy years (though it is pointless in this calculation) and that the foreskin would have to be washed daily.
Time taken through washing=1m/day*365days/year*70years=17.74 days
Time taken through death=70years
Likelihood of death through circumcision=16 in 90,000 (the high estimate. The low one is 1 in 500,000.)
Time taken through death by circumcision per procedure=70years*365days/year*16deaths/90000deaths=4.542 days
The amount of time lost to each death through circumcision is less a third of the amount of time used to clean a foreskin by your own estimate. I personally don't care., and I have no intention of having my own child circumcised, but looking at that I may actually be making the illogical choice there, especially if the low estimate is taken into consideration.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Since when is "the minute chance of fuck-ups" not covered by 'anything'? Unless the guy mistyped, I'm pretty sure I understood his point to the fullest extent. He views religious views as important to some degree, I'm asking why.

The added social cohesion from adhering to norms is far greater than 0.018% chance of death. That chance of death is so insignificant the lolipop the doctor gives you afterwards makes it worth it.

 

[Freechoice]

It's actually rather simple. It's not the circumcision itself that is the covenant, but rather that God commanded to Abraham that he and all his male descendants should have a reminder in their flesh of the covenant in which God promised that Abraham would be fruitful and multiply, so what better place for the reminder than the thing that lets you be fruitful and multiply. Sources: being Jewish.

Ah, so we can understand from the Talmudic point of view that it's still really fucking stupid.


So you don't think that issues of competence to determine one's participation in medical procedures should be an issue? It's just whatever the patient says yes to, unless he's incapable of responding, in which case the doctor decides?[/quote]

Hippocratic Oath. A doctor that just sells his practice to whomever wants it is at best, a bad doctor and at worst, violating the oath.

Honestly, I'd leave this decision up to my spouse, because I really couldn't care less.

FotY material right here.

 

[Odbarc]

I hear you lose 70% of the sensitivity.
I'm uncut and as an adult with a choice to alter that, I wouldn't for the life of me opt to lose my foreskin because of some stupid aesthetic purpose. I have never had an infection or other unsightly problem with my penis or foreskin my entire life. I can't imagine what excuses people use to poison adults into mutilating their children with some fear based penis-infection story and other bullshit.
I'm equally disgusting with female circumcision and think it's not in the least bit different for boys.

 

[theheroofaction]

I present a third side to this.

That side is the "Why the hell does anyone care" side.
Seriously.
Either way it's not that big of a deal, It's just a minor detail in someones life and arguing about it isn't going to change anything.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I don't care if the number of deaths is low. There shouldn't be deaths for a procedure that has no benefits (other than saving 1m in the shower) especially on a person who hasn't consented to it.

Okay, we are going to look at the precise situation you are describing right here. The number of deaths is excessive in comparison to the amount of time it takes.
I will assume the average lifespan to be seventy years (though it is pointless in this calculation) and that the foreskin would have to be washed daily.
Time taken through washing-1m/day*365days/year*70years=17.74 days
Time taken through circumcision =70years
Likelihood of death through circumcision=16 in 90,000 (the high estimate. The low one is 1 in 500,000.)
70years*365days/year*16deaths/90000deaths=4.542 days
The amount of time lost to each death through circumcision is less a third of the amount of time used to clean a foreskin by your own estimate. I personally don't care., and I have no intention of having my own child circumcised, but looking at that I may actually be making the illogical choice there, especially if the low estimate is taken into consideration.

Time lost to death? Time taken through circumcision? What does that even mean?

I have no idea what you have posted, maybe it made sense in your head but it sure as shit doesn't on the post.

If you are trying to say that it saves you time in the day then just wake up an hour early and you'll gain years of time.

Pre-post EDIT

"The number of deaths is excessive in comparison to the amount of time it takes."

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying it has no benefits other than saving 1m in a day and people shouldn't die just because of such a pithy benefit.

Sorry, I was speaking math, but essentially what I meant was that the amount of time (life) used up through deaths by circumcision is less than the amount of time (life) used through washing foreskins. I also mislabeled a variable. I will edit that.

 

[lacktheknack]

I present a third side to this.

That side is the "Why the hell does anyone care" side.
Seriously.
Either way it's not that big of a deal, It's just a minor detail in someones life and arguing about it isn't going to change anything.

Why do we discuss most things?

Most thing in life are trivial, should we all just sit in silence?

No, but there's usually a "Really Good Bacon" option.

 

[Slayer_2]

Nah it's not painful at all. Which is why I'm unsure about circumcision in the first place. I'm considering going to see a urologist once college is done for the summer to get a professional opinion but I'd really rather not have to get the chop.

I've not got anything against circumcision, I just dread the thoughts of those first few weeks you mentioned.

Oh, in that case, I wouldn't even bother, I think tons of guys have that "problem". No pain caused by it, why bother? I guarantee the post-op will be uncomfortable, at best.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Sorry, I was speaking math, but essentially what I meant was that the amount of time (life) used up through deaths by circumcision is less than the amount of time (life) used through washing foreskins. I also mislabeled a variable. I will edit that.

Oh, I know math but I didn't think you would try to put someone's life simply as a variable.

Anyway, I countered your math by saying that waking up even 10m early each day would save 10x more time than circumcision and wouldn't affect you body in any noticeable way.

I think that things would be better if people would take the time to consider the math behind their decisions. Life is a simple variable really. It's just the amount of time you're got to spend. I actually really like using it as a variable to be honest.

Well that isn't fair. You can't use outside variables like that. It ruins the point of all the numbers I had to put into my calculator. Now I find my life to be purposeless. Why did you have to do that?

 

[JimB]

Sorry but what? I don't get your point.

Oh, I'm not making points yet. For now, I'm just exploring your position.

I am referring to competence in the legal sense. A child is generally incompetent to participate in his own medical care, so the power to make those decisions is given to the parents or guardians. Someone suffering from a severe enough dementia is incompetent, and the power to make those decisions is turned over to whoever has his durable power of attorney. From what I gather, you think no one but the patient himself should be allowed to determine what medical procedures he undergoes, and if the patient can't make statements of consent, then only the doctor should be able to. You think the wishes of the family members responsible for the patient's care should be kept out of the process. Is that right?

Issues of competence, I would assume anyone who is a trained doctor should be competent enough to perform a medical procedure.

So you believe a doctor will have the patient's best interests at heart more than the patient's family will? Or do you just assume the patient's family is too ignorant to make the decision? Because I work with doctors, and they're as likely to be morons as anyone else is. I've known doctors who refuse to prescribe pain medications for people dying of cancer because they think a dose of sub-lingual morphine will kill the patient.

Who's already dying.

Of cancer.

And is in pain.

And whose pain could be alleviated by a dose of morphine so small it probably wouldn't kill a sick golden retriever.

EDIT: ...Okay, in retrospect, that last bit is a point. Sorry about that.

 

[Freechoice]

snip

You know that this is an ethical discussion with tangential practicality as evidence, right? While you can measure human life in time, it's generally not seen as the "right" thing to do.

And whoo, you lose 17 days and change. I've wasted more time just sitting on my ass doing fuck all than I have cleaning my dick. You waste a year of your life at stoplights. If you're going to nickle and dime your time, you could do it in less than fatal ways.

Also, min-maxing sucks.

I present a third side to this.

That side is the "Why the hell does anyone care" side.
Seriously.
Either way it's not that big of a deal, It's just a minor detail in someones life and arguing about it isn't going to change anything.

Because we can.