If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New Scientist)   The next in a long line of Fark circumcision flamewars: World Health Organization hails circumcision as vital in HIV fight   (newscientist.com) divider line 854
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

5601 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Mar 2007 at 2:24 PM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



854 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-03-28 03:29:15 PM
Here is why I am pro-circumcision:

College. Boys.

They pee in sinks and Gatorade bottles. Instead of doing laundry they turn their underwear inside out and wear them for another month.

They can't be bothered to care about the most basic personal hygiene, so why should they take even the tiniest effort to pull back a foreskin in the shower?

You can just tell they've probably got about two weeks' worth of smegma building up.

/That's naaaasty.
 
2007-03-28 03:29:19 PM
Smarshmallow


Yes, in the post you quoted. The post at 2007-03-28 03:19:08 PM. That same post.


Touche` Indeed I didn't respond. Want to know why?

"I am a living testament to the something like 10 to 15 percent of men who experience server sensation loss."

A made up number with no citation...

Something like 80% of the time "statistics" like that are completely made up.
 
2007-03-28 03:29:31 PM
happily uncut - I have NEVER had one girl notice, ever. Only if I mention did any girl ever know. God's honest truth...
 
2007-03-28 03:30:03 PM

If it's unnecessary, and done mostly for reasons having nothing to do with health, and done on someone who doesn't understand what's happening, yes.


So I mutilated my daughter when I let my wife get her ears pierced?
 
2007-03-28 03:30:25 PM
I once saw a Jewish doctor on TV advising Moms about circumcision, and of course he advocated for it saying something along the lines of "a boy should look like his father."

What a shallow, self-serving thought. Yes, a child is a little version of "you" that "you" get to mold into whatever likeness "you" see fit.

God forbid you look at your child as a distinct human being with its own personality, needs, wants, and desires. Not just your personal little ego trip. Let them decide to cut themselves if they want to, otherwise stop laying your hangups, misconceptions, and silly superstitious tribal practices on these little clean slates, who can pretty well figure out how to get farked up on their own without your constant, incessant, and destructive meddling in their lives.
 
2007-03-28 03:30:38 PM
jst3p

Is a tonsillectomy mutilation?
If you don't need the "part" that was removed, and no damage was done, it isn't mutilation. To use that word is hyperbole.


You don't *need* your big toe, right? If you removed it, it wouldn't be mutilation, right? How about your entire foot? Your leg? You can live without a leg. Does it matter if it's voluntary or involuntary?

//If you didn't want to have it removed, and it wasn't going to kill you, it was mutilation
 
2007-03-28 03:30:39 PM
IdBeCrazyIf
As the layer of keratin grows thicker, your sensitivity goes down. That's a fact really.

Would it be fact to say the head of your penis is less sensitive with a bunch of skin flappin around it?
 
2007-03-28 03:30:49 PM
jst3p: A made up number with no citation...

Something like 80% of the time "statistics" like that are completely made up.


Not made up.

Besides...I'm feeling lazy today so I'm not going to bother since I'm talking to a brick wall anyway.
 
2007-03-28 03:30:51 PM
Dude, cutting off somebody's pinkie fits the definition of mutilation to a T. What have you been smoking?

A foreskin is not a pinkie, it was an invalid comparison.
 
2007-03-28 03:31:00 PM
I_C_Weener: Its also pretty well documented that it can help prevent HIV. So, we are stalemated...death v. enjoyment of the hoo hah.

It can decrease the chances of getting HIV, a lot less than using a condom would. Trying to pass off circumcision as a health measure is pretty weak. Again, would you cut off a child's breast tissue to prevent breast cancer later in life? She could always use formula.
 
2007-03-28 03:31:01 PM
I_C_WEENER Its also pretty well documented that it can help prevent HIV. So, we are stalemated...death v. enjoyment of the hoo hah.


Exactly.

Your choice, depending on your perceived risk and the perceived risk for your child.
 
2007-03-28 03:31:08 PM
My Corgi

You and your Corgi are both teh awesome.
 
2007-03-28 03:31:15 PM
This thread is still alive? w00t
 
2007-03-28 03:31:18 PM
strayling: /Ogg-isms?

Very fortunately, the part of my brain that comes up with images is not working at the moment--else I'd really have to hurt you for that.

/Pratchett is cool, though.
 
2007-03-28 03:31:35 PM
jst3p: "I am a living testament to the something like 10 to 15 percent of men who experience server sensation loss."

A made up number with no citation...

Something like 80% of the time "statistics" like that are completely made up.


Pussy.
 
2007-03-28 03:31:37 PM
Hell, I can come in under 3 minutes if I had to.

If I had to race, I wonder what i'd think about?
 
2007-03-28 03:32:45 PM

You don't *need* your big toe, right? If you removed it, it wouldn't be mutilation, right? How about your entire foot? Your leg? You can live without a leg. Does it matter if it's voluntary or involuntary?


You are comparing a foreskin to a leg?

There is a difference between "need" and "is required to live". The body parts you mention serve a purpose and I would notice if they were gone. The foreskin does not qualify.
 
2007-03-28 03:32:45 PM
So, what did i miss? why are people against circumcision?
 
2007-03-28 03:33:02 PM
jst3p: A foreskin is not a pinkie, it was an invalid comparison.

A foreskin is still a part of the body, and your definition included the removal or damaging of parts.
 
2007-03-28 03:33:06 PM
Let me rephrase the UNCUT argument:

"Hi,

Anyone who isn't me is mutilated, despite the fact I'm dirtier and have semen and piss stuck in my dick.

Bye."
 
2007-03-28 03:33:09 PM
Bonehead: //If you didn't want to have it removed, and it wasn't going to kill you, it was mutilation

So removing an ear lobe would be mutilation?

Altering the human body in a way that leaves you functionally the same is not mutilation. People are going to argue about the alleged 10-20% sensitivity loss (iffy! but maybe!), but the number of cut folks out there with zero complaints whatsoever says that it's a procedure that can obviously result in no loss of happiness whatsoever.
 
2007-03-28 03:33:30 PM
Smarshmallow



Pussy.

A mutilated one at that, pity me.
 
2007-03-28 03:34:11 PM
Oh you prudish american women! I date a greek girl, and in Greece, she has never SEEN a circumcised penis. It's really uncommon in Greece.

Furthermore, in these countries, less than half the men there are cut:
Australia[1],
Austria[2],
Belgium[2],
Canada[1],
China[2],
Denmark[2],
Finland[2],
France[2],
Germany[2],
Iceland[2],
Indonesia[2],
Ireland[2],
Japan[2],
Namibia[3],
Netherlands[2],
New Zealand[1],
Norway[2],
Swaziland[3],
Sweden[2],
Switzerland[2],
United Kingdom[2],
Zambia[3],
and Zimbabwe[3].
 
2007-03-28 03:34:23 PM

A foreskin is still a part of the body, and your definition included the removal or damaging of parts.


That was one, but not all of the qualifiers. Hair is a part of the body. So is a fingernail.
 
2007-03-28 03:34:31 PM
Smarshmallow It can decrease the chances of getting HIV, a lot less than using a condom would. Trying to pass off circumcision as a health measure is pretty weak. Again, would you cut off a child's breast tissue to prevent breast cancer later in life? She could always use formula.

It's not a weak argument if you have no/low access to condoms (like in Africa) and testing compared to a once in a life time procedure.

Also, although I wish people were using condoms every time when they don't know their partner's status, we all know that people don't.

It's an added layer of protection in case someone screws up and forgets. But,

USE A CONDOM EVEN IF YOU ARE CIRC'D!! AND GET TESTED.

We're in America. There's no excuse not to here.
 
2007-03-28 03:34:31 PM
cover6.cduniverse.com
 
2007-03-28 03:34:43 PM
jst3p: So you have experienced sex with both a cut and uncut penis?

Otherwise you are comparing your experience to... nothing.


You're a pretty crappy troll. I demand better!
 
2007-03-28 03:34:45 PM
Wait, there's something wrong with peeing in the sink?

Even if the dishes in it are dirty?

Damn. My family will be pissed tonight.
 
2007-03-28 03:34:57 PM
Some studies show that women who have sex with circumcised men have a HIGHER risk of contracting AIDS and that being circumcised only reduces the man's risk.

In Africa the way circumcisions are performed people die every year from bleeding to death or infections at the site of the circumcision.

Circumcision is a solution seeking a problem.

AIDS already has a solution.

AIDS could LITERALLY be ELIMINATED in ONE generation if EVERYONE used CONDOMS!

Watch the video floating around on the Internet of a circumcision taking place in a US hospital (it's terrifying and horrible). Then ask yourself what it would be like done in Africa where there isn't basic health care in so many areas. It's disaster waiting to happen in so many ways.
 
2007-03-28 03:35:01 PM
To the cut fellas -- you don't know what you're missing, and I'm fine with that as long as you are.

Study in Europe among women who've slept with both found that they preferred natural fellas. Of course, a survey of American women who've only slept with cut dudes is going to find otherwise because it's 'different'.

No link because I'm lazy and don't care.

/GF says there's no comparison, prefers natural, but maybe she's lying and sleeping with one of you cut studs on the sly
//ducks from flamewar
 
2007-03-28 03:35:12 PM
DaShredda: Would it be fact to say the head of your penis is less sensitive with a bunch of skin flappin around it?

Actually no since the skin hugs tightly around the head of the penis when not hard. It also keeps the skin at a higher moisture level so it stays soft and supple and as such the nerve endings are never covered over and retain maximum exposure.

Really if a cut guy is curious, purchase the man hood and use it for a week. You'll notice the difference.

I found it to be too much of a chore to use all the time though, and just purchase the Aneros which allows me to keep my endurance and come when I want to.
 
2007-03-28 03:35:39 PM
>>>You can just tell they've probably got about two weeks' worth of smegma building up.
-
-
Ever meet a woman who was freaked out by the idea of performing oral, or just didn't do it "because"? This is probably why. I'm sure a thousand kinds of bacteria fermenting in someones forskin is pleasant to some...I think I need to vomit.
 
2007-03-28 03:35:39 PM
DaShredda: ...Anyone who isn't me is mutilated, despite the fact I'm dirtier and have semen and piss stuck in my dick.

I am uncut, and it's so clean you could eat off it. In fact, why don't you demonstrate by taking a long haul suck? :-)
 
2007-03-28 03:36:03 PM
Isn't 'female circumcision' really removal of the clitoris?

If so, shouldn't it properly be called a 'cliterectomy'?

and if this is the case, wouldn't there be millions of howling pissed off women ready to remove a man's peener entirely?

/asking because I'm uninformed of this earthling practice.
 
2007-03-28 03:36:20 PM
NaziKamikaze
Wow...Farnham's Freehold. The only time I've heard it was when my father had the book (from his younger days) and gave it to me.

I wondered why the husband, wife, and kid were floating...never read it though.


Dude, if you still have that copy it is better than most of the others you can get. You want either a new most recent printing or the origional with the floaters on the cover. I was in a fourm a few years ago and they were discussing Farnhams Freehold and the bighest argument was over differances between the two books. Apperantly there are some editions that came out in the 70's and early 80's when some of the more controversial topics were removed. I have not ever been able to verify this information though as I have only found 2 copies of the book and they were both from the same printing date. It seems that some people will trash it if they don't like it.

/sad really
 
2007-03-28 03:36:47 PM
IdBeCrazyIf


Funny, that's what I use Tantra for.
 
2007-03-28 03:36:58 PM
For those who advocate this for religious reasons, why would God create a part of your body that he thinks sucks and should be sawn off?
"You know what part of man I really screwed up? That foreskin thing. What was I thinking? Well, that and the appendix."
 
2007-03-28 03:37:06 PM

You're a pretty crappy troll. I demand better!


Not trolling this time. He said he was sure uncut guys got more pleasure. I want to know how he quantifies it.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:41 PM
Sorry to bring this back up, but why is male circumcision just fine but female circumcision is called mutilation?

Aren't both mutilation? I mean, that's what it is when it comes down to it correct? It's not natural for either side I would think.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:42 PM
sjistarr
Video of a male infant being circumcised:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmX6RdRNoqk


Oh how cute, its so gentle and calm. I think hes even praying with divine thankfullness at the loss of that icky flesh. What have I been thinking? I'll go to the bathroom with my swiss army knife and correct this travesty right now!!

/Hell no i'm not going to watch that farking video.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:42 PM
Mr.Churka: Funny, that's what I use Tantra for.

I'm not nearly that disciplined.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:44 PM
FARK.


Uncircumsised males tend to have better orgasms than circumsised males. That's one thing they never tell you in Sex Ed.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:46 PM
I applaud all you uncut men who keep yourselves clean. And those of you who will make sure your sons keep themselves clean until they're at an age when they can do it themselves.

But I sincerely hope that as you age, you make sure your wife (or child or other caregiver) knows how to and is willing to properly clean yourself once you're unable.

Trust me, as a person who has worked in a hospital, there is nothing more stomach-turning than the stench of gangrene of the penis.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:46 PM
AIDS could LITERALLY be ELIMINATED in ONE generation if EVERYONE used CONDOMS!


Somebody didn't pay attention in health class when they talked about the effectiveness of condoms.
 
2007-03-28 03:37:57 PM
swingerofbirches: AIDS could LITERALLY be ELIMINATED in ONE generation if EVERYONE used CONDOMS!

So could every other STD--imagine that.

Now, how are you going to solve the supply chain problem of getting the condoms to everybody, not to mention enforcing their use?
 
2007-03-28 03:37:58 PM
jst3p

I'm just going to tell you to research the purpose of the foreskin. If you can tell me the foreskin is irrelevent after learning it's purpose, I'll buy you a beer.

//it ain't all about you either...
 
2007-03-28 03:38:18 PM
AIDS could LITERALLY be ELIMINATED in ONE generation if EVERYONE used CONDOMS!


Good luck getting everyone to do that. I really wish they would.
 
2007-03-28 03:38:24 PM
MrGumboPants: But clearly there are bazillions of cut people out there with functional sex lives. More than functional!

And if we cut off every kid's pinkie finger, they'd also have perfectly functional lives.

So we get back to the point that using the word 'mutilation', which implies a destructive alteration, just doesn't fit. And I'm sure you understand that.

I'm being perfectly honest when I say that I don't "understand" that. I don't think that the consequences are major, but it's still an unnecessary, permanent disfigurement of a child's genitals. If that child decides later in life that he wants to have unprotected sex with HIV+ people, with a slightly smaller chance of contacting the disease, then he can get the operation himself.

It's exactly like piercing. Tiny-slightly-possibly dangerous (people do periodically die from piercing), totally unnecessary, essentially harmless.

Except that it has a large chance of greatly reducing pleasure from sex. That's a big difference.

If you want to call that 'mutilation', then I think you're succumbing to the symbolism of the act and not the reality.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but yes, to a degree, it's the idea that offends me more than the act. We, as a modern society, shouldn't be altering babies' genitals for what really are aesthetic reasons.
 
2007-03-28 03:38:25 PM
It's like chopping off your ears to prevent an ear infection.
 
2007-03-28 03:38:54 PM
jst3p: Either you are a troll, an idiot or just intellectually dishonest.

This is a circumcision thread. All bets are off.
 
Displayed 50 of 854 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report