San Francisco considering banning circumcision

[ServebotFrank]

Do you know how sensitive a baby's nervous system is when it's born? Pretty fucking high. It's really traumatic for a baby and it's BRUTAL OPERATION! Look a video up I couldn't watch it all the way it's that bad.

And yet, few if any of us have any remote recollection whatsoever of it happening... soooo...
Yeah, not so big a deal. That's like saying cutting the umbilical chord is a traumatic event. Nonsense.

At the end of the day however, I fall into the camp that when it comes to children and parents, children have very few "rights." It is up to their parent to decide what they feel is best for the child until it is of the mandatory age to make its own decisions. If you're sitting around assfaced because your parents had you circumcised, you've got bigger issues that aren't being addressed in your psyche.

Besides, I find it amusing how so many people have a problem with parents making a decision about circumcision for THEIR child, and express so much concern about the child's right to decide if it wants to have foreskin or not by having it's decision made without its consent by its parents... but few seem to have any problem with parents removing a child's right to choose life altogether when it comes to abortion. On that subject, all of a sudden, babies don't have any say in the matter interestingly enough.

So essentially, our society says it's okay to kill a baby in a womb if you don't want it, but should you want it, you can't circumcise it against its will.

What an assbackwards world we live in.

If you read a post I made a while back you would've seen the part where I state that parents have no idea what the fuck circumcision is. Here let me copy and paste my post because I don't like repeating myself. Also I wasn't circumcised as it was illegal to circumcise me what with my birth defect and what not.

Spoiler

Good! I'm glad to see it go. All Circumcision was at the start was a way to stop little boys from masturbating as it decreases sexual pleasure and that is the truth. Hell no body does it for religion any more! No body does it for religion in the slightest. Women don't even know when they're deciding whether to circumcise the boy what they're doing. It's even worse here in Alaska as insurance pays for it here so everybody does it. The women naturally go, "Well his father was circumcised so I might as well do it to him." The father probably wasn't even circumcised but she has no idea what kind of physical trauma she unleashes on her child. It's traumatizing to an infant and fucking hurts.

As for it causing diseases all I ever see is people saying that it "reduces the risk of contracting HIV" Or "Chlamydia" or "Genital Warts" Or what not. You know the other, better way to not contracting HIV? NOT SLEEPING WITH SOMEONE WHO HAS HIV. Get you and your partner tested and if you still want to do it wear a goddamn condom. Circumcision is something that should never be done ever. My mother is a nurse and when patients ask exactly what the hell circumcision is she tells them and it causes them to back off once they learn the truth.

-NEVER CIRCUMCISE YOUR CHILD.

Here's the thing, some parents don't know what's best for their child at all. People complain about incompetent parents quite constantly and the mothers who usually decide the circumcision when the child is born are tricked into giving consent. Doctors want to make money and some don't give a shit about circumcision as long as they make money. Also some kids are quite unhappy when they find out that their penises were mutilated. Here's an interesting story.

There was once a boy who was circumcised. During the operation, the doctors fucked up and accidentally cut the entire penis off. To try and fix it they gave him a sex change operation so he wouldn't know. Well years later he found out and hanged himself. Think he was happy huh?

Try watching those things. When my mother herself got tricked into giving consent for circumcision she saw my older brother's penis and she cried. Do you honestly think some parents willingly do this for their child? I don't think so.

 

[LadyRhian]

Here's my opinion on this as a woman. I think it should ever only be up to the person getting circumcised. That means the guy whose dick is going under the knife. Not the parents, not the religious authorities... the person who is going to have the procedure done to them.

To those who say that having a foreskin is a health risk- there is a slightly higher chance of certain diseases, most, if not all of which can be changed by simply cleaning well under the foreskin. I've heard women saying men with a foreskin have a certain "odor" that uncircumcised men do not. Again, wash under the damn thing and it goes away. Really.

To those complaining about its looks- you're complaining because it isn't what you are used to. If there were more uncut men around, you probably wouldn't notice or care. If it means that much to you, don't take an uncircumcised man as a lover. See how easy it is? However, you then cannot complain about men wanting only big-boobed women with blonde hair. You are choosing on something equally as superficial.

I would like to know a proper opinion on this next statement as nobody has yet to really answer it. So, here goes;

Isn't it the parent's job to decide what is good for their child? Playing devil's advocate here, if you will, I've already stated my opinion, but I have yet to see anyone who is pro- or anti-circumcision deal with that aspect of it.

There is a limit to that. Parents can't smack, beat, or whatever their child, despite feeling that it is in the child's best interests. Parents can get their children microchipped or tattooed, which I feel goes beyond the pale. Parents can also decide not to get their children vaccinated, which we know leads to death for many, many children. At what point does the parent "knowing what is best for the child" get in the way of the child's autonomyand/or safety? You might also apply that to when a child is born intersexed and the parents or doctor choose which sex they feel the child should be (or is closest to) and have surgery that changes the child to one sex, and then when the child grows up, he or she suddenly feels that they are the wrong sex (or finally vocalizes this choice). It's been known to happen.

And when you realize that the primary reason for a child to be circumcised is that, essentially, the parents just want their boy to look like all the other boys and not be teased about what his penis looks like, I begin to wonder what they mean when they are claiming to do it for "What's good for their child".

 

[ServebotFrank]

snip.

I don't recall ever saying I knew humanity better or I was holier than thou or what not. A lot of parents are tricked into circumcision. Also one of the main reasons that an un-circumcised penis might look weird is because we're used to circumcised penises so much that a normal one looks strange when it shouldn't.

 

[Tdc2182]

Uhh, that's like forcing people to not take vaccines.

It's kind of the place you really don't want to get fungi

 

[Devil's Due]

It's completely different, because a girl who is circumcised IS damaged for life, whereas (again, as a circumcised man) men are not affected seriously.

Here's a study [http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circumcision-causes-100-deaths-each-year-in-us/] that says 100 baby boys die every year in the United States from botched circumcisions.

Seriously, that low? I see more people dying yearly by any other operation. Should we ban those as well? When the operation is botched, it doesn't mean the practice is wrong. It means the OPERATION was preformed wrong.

All I see in this thread, as with EVERY OTHER CIRCUMCISION THREAD EVERY WEEK, is "my penis looks amazing the way it is, I can't believe others have / don't have it cut! They're immoral and/or crazy because my penis is obviously superior!" or the lately Escapist attitude of "Stick it to the man! Let us do whatever we want! Rape, murder, steal, who cares. Our lives, our choices!"

Oh Escapist. When only a few years ago you were literally named the "Last Bastion of Humanity on the Internet." (Or intelligence, it was so long ago) Now it's just "Weee!"


Flameshields prepared, and a captain who has been at the helm so long that he just doesn't care anymore.
This shall be amusing.

 

[hashinta]

What the hell happened to our rights? Sure our parents may have chosen for me, but hell I don't care(it is normal for Americans, and we arent even religious)

Actually no, circumcised is becoming a curio in America. Hispanic immigration means that less people are circumcised. To the Hispanic community, circumcision is bullshit. Unless the Vatican mandates it, they wont follow traditional American culture and its pseudo science if you can call it that. Hell, American culture pushes mysticism while demonizing science. It's culture, and even then over 90% of the men in the world are not circumcised. America is one of the few nations that still practice this, but Europe abolished the practice long ago when they realized it was a barbaric practice.

not sure where you get that 90% is uncircumcised. most sources point to it being 30-40% circumcised. here is one such site http://www.circlist.com/rites/rates.html

 

[Sparcrypt]

I'm circumcised. I don't see why not, not entirely sure why, but I don't remember any of the pain and I didn't know circumcision from castration until I was twelve. I don't give a care either way.

If it's done to you and you're fine with it, no problem
If it's not done to you and you're fine with it, no problem
If it's not done to you and you're not fine with it, no problem, you have the option of getting it done.
However... if it's done to you and you're NOT fine with it? Well too bad.

So no, parents should not decide for kids. There are people out there who had the choice made for them and don't like it - but too bad for them. And of course the rare but occasional mishap where they are castrated or otherwise damaged by mistake...

 

[HyenaThePirate]

snip

So a few horror stories and a couple of personal "tragic" anecdotes and we're supposed to just simply wipe the slate clean? Sorry for your life experiences buddy, but that's not nearly enough for me to simply say "That's right, strip parents of yet another right to decide for their children what they want, unless it involves killing them before they leave the womb."

You see, while your story of circumcision is sad and depressing, mine has been a happy one. I'm pleased with the way my purple headed yogurt slinger turned out. I don't mind not having to take that extra moment to scrub under the 'hood.' I enjoy the streamlined appeal... but none of that matters. I trust and love my parents. They love and care for me. And until I was old enough to decide for myself, my parents, and most others, decided what was best FOR me. Not the Government.

GOvernment has no BUSINESS in the small, daily goings on of its people. I want LESS government involvement in my life, not constantly expanding more and more things that they "deem" necessary. I see no problem in parents having a CHOICE. ALL CHOICE. It's their kid. Their flesh and blood, they made it, their genetic material. They get to decide, barring monsterous evils. Gouging out your kids eyes on a whim? Okay that's bad, lets ban that. Spanking a child as a form of discipline? Carry on, teach em anyway you think is best. You prefer for them to be circumcised because you believe (and some doctors believe, the debate is no where near absolute on whether it is hygenically advantageous or not, and I don't know why some people on this thread are carrying on as if it was decided long ago that being uncircumcized was decided to be less hygenic.. because it has NOT been decided. One study says yes, an equal number of studies says no. There is a debate left to be had.) then the PARENT gets to decide. The kid can learn to live with it, sorry, we don't always get to choose everything in life. Given the option i'd have preferred to have never cut my hair a day in my life and have long luxurious hair that swept down my body like a fur coat... but my parents weren't going to give into that nonsense. What shall we decide next? That all children will be fed a vegetarian diet because science thinks it's the healthiest?

Freedom is either freedom or it's not. No city, let alone state should be telling people what they can and cannot do in regards to their children provided it isn't some sort of extreme scenario like child rape and amputating body parts, things that CAN psychologically affect the MAJORITY of children that it would affect. Children living 'scarred' lives from circumcision is such a small minority it hardly registers. I don't think I've ever come across someone that couldn't function or was doomed to an unhappy existance because his parents nipped off that little bit when he was a wee tot.

Sorry, just not buying it. You've your opinion, I've mine and I doubt we'll ever agree.

 

[The_Yeti]

I know its probably a popular angle to blame people on these, but its totally the gay community on this one.

More sensitivity = Less ~active~ time needed on the male behalf in bed = Less happy women = Straight man has a bitchier wife. Hell, i'd bet a months pay it was started by an unsatisfied convent of "Virgin Mary" nuns.

 

[Kashrlyyk]

...Circumcision is usually done because the parents genuinely believe it's in their child's best interest or for honest religious convictions that you have no right to deny.
...
If it hurt I don't care, I sure as hell can't remember it.

There is a community in Winsconsin that is completely convinced that praying to god is enough to heal any disease. They thought it was in the child's best interest to not see a real doctor, that is was a "test of faith".

Their 11 year old daughter died of diabetes while her parents were standing around praying.

But according to your post, that I quoted, that girls death is alright because the parents had "honest religious convictions" which noone is allowed to deny them.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,341574,00.html

Now to the second sentence: Everything when done to someone very young is not remembered. Would that make the rape of an infant less horrible a crime?
Too extreme?
What about beating the shit out of someone lying in a coma? If the coma is long enough there will be no marks left and it will not be remembered by the victim. But does that somehow make the assault less criminal or even more criminal because you attacked a defenseless person?

...

Should be up to the parents their kid, they're responsibility, their money.

...

Basically you are saying: Children are not human beings and therefore have no rights, but they are the property of the parents.

What if they refuse to drive their children to hospital when they are sick? Would that be ok too because it is "their kid, they're responsibility, their money"?

Also see the link above.

...
It's stuff like this that make me embarrassed for living in CA.

Do you really feel embarrassed because CA strengthened the right of the child to have an unharmed body? Oh, I forgot. Children are not human beings, but the property of the parents and they should be allowed to do what ever they want to with their property.

Basically every single one who argues it should be the right of the parents treats children as property of the parents, not as human beings with a right to have an unharmed body.

 

[Sparcrypt]

And yet, few if any of us have any remote recollection whatsoever of it happening... soooo...
Yeah, not so big a deal.

... if they don't remember it then all is well? So if I take your sister out, slip a drug into her drink and next thing she knows she wakes up safe and alone in her bed at home with no memory of anything bad happening, anything I did to her the night before would be completely OK? Right?

Or maybe it's just OK to do anything to a baby cause 'they wont remember it'?

If it had never been practiced before and was a brand new idea, what do you think most peoples reaction would be when asked if they wanted it done? There are no real benefits to it (the one I hear the most is cleaning.. which is only true in the same way a toilet is easier to clean if the lid is already up instead of down).

I don't care if an adult wants to make the choice themselves, that's fine. But no, it shouldn't be done on newborns.

 

[LetalisK]

It amuses me to no end when people make a big deal about this, even going so far as to compare it to/call it genital mutilation. Melodramatic much? At worst, it's a simple cosmetic procedure that doesn't deserve even a fraction of the righteous indignation some people seem to give it. The difference between having a foreskin or not is negligible. Hence why I also don't give a shit if they ban it. It's a non-issue.

 

[Yoshemo]

1: It is a religious practice, 2: It can keep it from getting certain diseases 3: It makes sex more pleasurable

Everything you said was wrong.
Removing the foreskin removes 40% of the penis' ability to feel. The foreskin is one of the most sensitive parts of the penis and it helps keep the glans sensitive and able to feel as much pleasure as possible.
Its a religious practice because it was used to discourage masturbation which is considered a sin by the Jews, Christians, and Muslims.
It does help prevent urinary tract infections, but its nothing that properly cleaning your penis can't do. As for STDs like AIDS, statistics show that circumcised people are more likely to become infected than non-circumcised. The evidence is just a google search away, which I won't do for you because I'm going to bed. But if you care about reality, you'll do some research.
At the very least, give your kid the freedom to choose once hes an adult. You have nothing to lose by letting them choose. I only wish my parents would have let me choose..