Circumcision: a Pillar of American ignorance

[Hugh Intactive]

hey im circumcised and no complaints here. for me it should be a personal choice

Yes, the personal choice of the person most directly concerned - in fact the ONLY person directly concerned - when that person is old enough to make that personal choice.

 

[SD-Fiend]

To those who insist on that "uncut is gross, cut is cleaner and healthier" bullshit...

(warning: NSFW pic)

Spoiler

Which one looks healthier again?

well your in trouble now... and i'd say the one on the right looks more like a rubber glove on a dildo

 

[Jonluw]

I mean, I'm circumcised and i don't want to be, and i never will be able to undo what was done to me. Unless of course, that one Swedish scientist works magic with stem cells.

In the Penn & Teller Bullshit episode on circumcision (You should be able to find it online), they do actually show off a couple of guys who have managed to grow back their foreskin. (NSFW)

They did so by pulling on it daily. I believe it is accepted as a method that works, actually.
It has a wikipedia page, in fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreskin_restoration

Stretching your skin and regrowing the area are a bit different.

They basically did the ear lobe thing but with their penis and weights instead of ear lobes and gauges.

At any rate, it is an unfortunate practice but it does help solidify our place in the world. Since every nation is built on hypocritical actions, we just want to be part of the club.

You aren't actually stretching the skin.
What you're doing is applying strain on the skin, thus incentivicing it to grow. Problem is that your foreskin doesn't actually grow back, you just grow a bit of skin where your foreskin would have been.

The foreskin contains a shitload of nerve endings that don't return when you "stretch" the skin like this, and the new faux-skin that you've grown isn't all that good at covering the glans, since it lacks a certain ridge on the inside.

 

[Hugh Intactive]

My circumcision has altered my quality of life absolutely none.

What are you comparing it with?

Surely there are more important breaches of freedom going on in the world.

Surely there are, and less. At 1.2 million circumcisions a year in the USA, one every 26 seconds, this is not the least. So?

On a side note, we fix cleft palettes with no consent from the child while they are still an infant. What if they wanted that hole in their mouth? (That was a joke.)

A cleft palate can be life-threatening if the baby can't feed. A foreskin is not a birth defect.

 

[LetalisK]

I do enjoy reading threads like this. It makes me so happy that I live in a society that we can have such heated and melodramatic arguments about things that are ultimately meaningless. Yay first-world problems.

Its a third world problem as well. Some tribes DO hunt people down and force circumcision on them. Due to the tribe's lack of medical knowledge, more often than not the entire penis must be amputated due to infection or fuck up. They often do it with sharp stones, machetes, or rusty knives.

There was even a tribe that went after an African politician, leaving him in a pool of his own blood.

Being hunted down and forced to be circumcized using sharp stones and rusty knives, especially as an adult(holy shit), is a third world problem.

Whether or not to allow parents to perform a completely unnecessary cosmetic surgery on their baby using sterile tools that millions upon millions have had with zero problems is a first world problem.

I really do love living in the time and place that I do.

Edit: Also, I'm not trying trying to make some pro-circumcision snide comment with this. I genuinely see threads of this type of topic with this level of argument and it reminds me how fucking lucky I am.

 

[irishda]

What's non-essential? And before you answer with fingers or toes, bear in mind that balance is dependent on the toes, so missing ones mean a decrease in balance. And fingers equate to a decline in grip. How many athletes you see running around with less than ten fingers or toes?

You're exaggerating an experience by marginalizing certain aspects of it. This is not a medieval procedure anymore where a quack swings away with a knife. There's magical inventions called anesthetic and devices that make the procedure safe, fast, and painless. If you're going to hate something at least make sure it's not for the wrong reasons.

You say there is a magical invention called aesthetic... however what you don't realize is that they don't give it to children. They strap them down and cut into a piece of sensitive nerve filled tissue usually resulting in shock and permanent and observable psychological and physiological harm. Why do we do this? Because then we don't need to teach our children proper hygiene. Oh and on a side note, the cultured tissue from a foreskin is worth about a hundred grand, making it the most valuable human tissue to be harvested. Just a thought.

Except 97% of programs in hospitals that teach newborn circumcision teach the use of an anesthetic, either locally or topically. [http://www.ambulatorypediatrics.org/article/S1530-1567%2806%2900123-7/abstract] And that was back in 2003. It sounds like you're really dramatizing this experience. I'm circumcised and I don't have any "permanent and observable psychological harm". Hasn't it seemed strange to you that the people that take the stand for circumcision are the supposed "victims" or this horrifying experience?

 

[Weentastic]

My circumcision has altered my quality of life absolutely none.

What are you comparing it with?

Surely there are more important breaches of freedom going on in the world.

Surely there are, and less. At 1.2 million circumcisions a year in the USA, one every 26 seconds, this is not the least. So?

On a side note, we fix cleft palettes with no consent from the child while they are still an infant. What if they wanted that hole in their mouth? (That was a joke.)

A cleft palate can be life-threatening if the baby can't feed. A foreskin is not a birth defect.

It may not be the least, but its damn near the least. Frequency doesn't equate significance. It's a societal norm, and I don't need to have experienced life before my circumcision to tell you that my foreskin plays such a miniscule role in my life that its presence or absence certainly doesn't affect my life. Sex is still great, my dick is clean, and all the foreskins in the world aren't going to get the job market back up to par. Calling this a part of American ignorance is a mis-attribution. My parents and I are of the Abrahamic religions, so that's how we role. If you wanted to call it Abrahamic ignorance, that might be a bit more accurate. And calling it a "pillar" of ignorace is a bit melodramatic too. Its not like circumcision is holding American society up, or down for that matter.

 

[meepop]

Uh-oh

I know it's a lot more nuanced here on the Escapist

No it isn't. Also, can we ban circumcision threads? This has to be the 4th one in two years.

The thing is that, while there is a search bar for forums, what if someone has an idea they want to post? I've been here for two to three years, and I never see any forum topics more than a couple days old. Could someone clarify for me if it is against the rules to post on old topics that haven't been posted in for about a month or so?

OT: Let me just say this: Sex is meant to be pleasurable, no? And, religion or not religion, humans were designed with these organs for reproduction. Now that I've stated the obvious, I can continue. The main point of these organs is reproduction of the species. The pleasure from the organs was not designed for self-pleasure, but as a "reward" so-to-speak for reproduction.

Masturbation does not further the species, and humans have not evolved (physically) with that mentality. My point with this? Unless you were circumcised after having sex (Not directly after, obviously), and can testify that it is more pleasurable then maybe I'll accept it. Otherwise, do not talk about how circumcision is a bad thing just because some other guy feels more/less pleasure than you.

Your parents thought it was the right thing to do, and because you wouldn't remember it or have nearly as much pain. Do you really think your parents had the internet and could look up the effects of circumcision? Now we know that circumcision may be at least somewhat-useless, but 18 years ago the internet was still changing and developing.

 

[irishda]

I'm not talking about cutting their toenails. Forcefully removing them was my point. I can give them a needle with local anaesthetic first if you feel like it.

In any case, circumcision's STD-preventing effect is negligible. And if it were really that effective: How come HIV is more prevalent in the US than in the rest of the first world?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate
Here's a weird idea: How about teaching your kids about condoms (which actually prevent STDs very effectively) instead of relying on taking away one of their personal liberties and causing them pain in the process?

Except the WHO has found that HIV transmission is reduced by anywhere from 33%-66% in third world nations. Granted, the US is not a third world nation, so the effects of its transmission prevention are negligible, but that still doesn't mean that it's benefits aren't there. And, ultimately, it does come down to the choice of the parents (since neonatal has been described as the best time for circumcision). And rest assured whichever action they choose, you'll probably be alright.

 

[Jonluw]

I'm not talking about cutting their toenails. Forcefully removing them was my point. I can give them a needle with local anaesthetic first if you feel like it.

In any case, circumcision's STD-preventing effect is negligible. And if it were really that effective: How come HIV is more prevalent in the US than in the rest of the first world?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate
Here's a weird idea: How about teaching your kids about condoms (which actually prevent STDs very effectively) instead of relying on taking away one of their personal liberties and causing them pain in the process?

Except the WHO has found that HIV transmission is reduced by anywhere from 33%-66% in third world nations. Granted, the US is not a third world nation, so the effects of its transmission prevention are negligible, but that still doesn't mean that it's benefits aren't there. And, ultimately, it does come down to the choice of the parents (since neonatal has been described as the best time for circumcision). And rest assured whichever action they choose, you'll probably be alright.

Very interesting.

There's been a lot of lobbying in the last century or so to have circumcision grow in the United States. It's tough to trust surveys on the matter.
Of course, there's the fact that any doctor with a brain does not reccomend circumcision unless medically necessary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision#Positions_of_medical_associations
They used to do so in the US, but quit when facts got in the way of the whole thing.

 

[Rekrul]

what ever the medical reason was, im sure it had a negative impact on things of a sexual nature, and as time goes on it will become more numbed.

Honestly no, there have only been improvements. My problem was it was too big and too tight so it didn't go back and forth and also didn't get anywhere near as hard or big as it does now, so my confidence is higher = better sex and also harder, bigger cock = better sex.

Its fine talking about my cock on the internet because you don't know me

 

[LetalisK]

Whether or not to allow parents to perform a completely unnecessary cosmetic surgery on their baby using sterile tools that millions upon millions have had with zero problems is a first world problem.

But that's not true. There's a huge risk of complications, facing as it's an unnecessary thing. Thousands and thousands of men who lost their genitals to circumcision.

There's a 1-3% risk of immediate medical complications, and an even bigger risk of indirect complications, or failure of the procedure in a way a second surgery is needed.

All in all it costs society millions in tax money, and it's a big risk with the lives of children who have almost without exception not been able to consent to it.

What exactly is the risk of indirect complications? Unless it's much larger than the immediate complications, I can't classify that as a "huge risk". An unnecessary one(and thus still a bad decision), but not a huge one.

 

[BRex21]

What's non-essential? And before you answer with fingers or toes, bear in mind that balance is dependent on the toes, so missing ones mean a decrease in balance. And fingers equate to a decline in grip. How many athletes you see running around with less than ten fingers or toes?

You're exaggerating an experience by marginalizing certain aspects of it. This is not a medieval procedure anymore where a quack swings away with a knife. There's magical inventions called anesthetic and devices that make the procedure safe, fast, and painless. If you're going to hate something at least make sure it's not for the wrong reasons.

You say there is a magical invention called aesthetic... however what you don't realize is that they don't give it to children. They strap them down and cut into a piece of sensitive nerve filled tissue usually resulting in shock and permanent and observable psychological and physiological harm. Why do we do this? Because then we don't need to teach our children proper hygiene. Oh and on a side note, the cultured tissue from a foreskin is worth about a hundred grand, making it the most valuable human tissue to be harvested. Just a thought.

Except 97% of programs in hospitals that teach newborn circumcision teach the use of an anesthetic, either locally or topically. [http://www.ambulatorypediatrics.org/article/S1530-1567%2806%2900123-7/abstract] And that was back in 2003. It sounds like you're really dramatizing this experience. I'm circumcised and I don't have any "permanent and observable psychological harm". Hasn't it seemed strange to you that the people that take the stand for circumcision are the supposed "victims" or this horrifying experience?

So now "tough to use anaesthetic" is the same as do use anaesthetic, The problem is that there is nothing that has been proven to be both safe and effective. This study shows something pretty shocking, that at least 3% of doctors trained through residency never even bothered to learn how to anaesthetize patients. This shows that it is not necessary to use or even know how to properly administer anaesthetic and that is completely unacceptable, imagine if your dentist started pulling teeth without bothering to learn about novocaine. There previous study showed 29% of doctors didn't bother to learn about anaesthetic. One of their sources [http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/lander/] stated:
"Many male newborns who are circumcised in North America do not receive anesthetics (64%-96% in some areas)."

While I have to compliment you on choosing a study that would cost me 40 bucks to actually read, I have to assume you didn't get at it either as all evidence points towards this being a study saying "anaesthetic is safe and should be used" not "anaesthetic is being used."

Oh and to me it does not seem strange that many people who take the stand for circumcision are the victims or this horrifying experience, its part of human nature. People who grow up with abuse are much more likely to search out or recreate more abusive environments. Children who grow up in abusive environments will often seek out or recreate the abuse they suffered and will often profess that their abuser loves them, People who have gone through hazing are usually the strongest defenders of these practices. I mean think about this, you are standing up to defend mature adults rights to have unnecessary cosmetic surgery performed on a defenceless infant,a surgery known to cause complications, including loss of penis and death and you are doing so by trying to build a case that a good number of them are at least trained to use some form of painkillers during the procedure.

 

[praetor_alpha]

I do not think that most circumcisions in America are done for religious reasons. Some who claim to because of it likely claim to be Christian, but have not been to a church in years (if ever).

At no point (growing up in a church going Baptist family) have I ever heard a preacher promote circumcision in a sermon. Ever. And if anything is important in any way, I would have heard it a million billion times from my parents. Not once have they ever explained why they had me cut, nor have they ever said (nor have I concluded) that my dick is a result of what we believe.

What I have heard is that all the old Jewish laws are voided. Even the 10 commandments. You can't expect non-Jews to go to a Jewish temple and perform sacrifices, especially since Jesus took care of that. And I do believe that we are made in His image, so to me that's a good reason He gave us a foreskin. What He gave, we should keep and cherish.

My parents have an extremely pessimistic view of the world when it comes to sexual predators, pedophiles, and other "perverts". As in, I tell them about a new friend, they interrupt me and ask "are you SURE they aren't a pervert?" Of course they told me to say something when someone touched me down there, but they neglected to do that when I could not, and let someone else touch me down there WITH A KNIFE!

Those are the reasons I am against infant circumcision, and even thinking about it disgusts me.

 

[Dwarfman]

some small bit of useless skin off my privates

HALF YOUR PENILE SKIN [http://www.circumstitions.com/Notjustaflap.html]. No exaggeration. Half of your penis' surface, and precisely the most sensitive part, gone. It's not a minor change by any sensible scale. It's only a non-issue as long as you remain ignorant about it.

And ofcourse your willing to tell us horribly sick and crippled people about our ignorance and pyscological problems and mutalated weeners. I swear you guys have more of an issue about it than we do. No seriously I don't fucking care. I'm sure you feel it's in my best interests to try and convince me that I'm impotent, or scarred or that I should start calling my parents monsters. Guess what buddy it ain't happening.

 

[Samus Aran but a man]

Reliable citation needed for anyone claiming that circumcision makes sex any less enjoyable.

5 seconds of searching on google came up with

^ "Circumcision policy statement. American Academy of Pediatrics. Task Force on Circumcision". Pediatrics 103 (3): 686?93. March 1999. doi:10.1542/peds.103.3.686 . PMID 10049981 .

Boyle, Gregory J; Svoboda, J Steven; Goldman, Ronald; Fernandez, Ephrem (2002). "Male circumcision: pain, trauma, and psychosexual sequelae" . Bond University Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences.

Sorrells, Morriss L.; James L. Snyder, Mark D. Reiss, Christopher Eden, Marilyn F. Milos, Norma Wilcox and Robert S. Van Howe (March 2007). "Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis" (PDF). BJU International 99 (4): 864?869. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x . PMID 17378847 .

I would show more but I'm going to bed now.

To masturbate.

With my uncut penis.

U jelly?

Sure, go ahead. Although it kind of looks like you didn't really bother reading the thread, as there have been different studies saying different things since that one post I have, and even a wikipedia article summarizing the results of major studies. I would say that you should go over a thread better before responding to posts on the first page, but I guess you had more important things you needed to go get done, so I understand.

muahahahahah I do have more important things to do then argue with strangers about an issue that will never be solved. Circumcision threads always end with agreeing to disagree.

 

[Conza]

At this point in out modern society, there is little justification for such an act, yet America continues this ridiculous practice, for largely cosmetic reasons, along with the ideology, "I was, so my son will be". Is this not insane? It is absurd to perform surgery based on cosmetic reasons unless of some horrible deformity or mutilation. Besides, the foreskin offers more pleasure, and keeps the head lubricated. Many people perform this act, because they do no know the alternative, and that is truly tragic. Throughout Eurasia, and the rest of the world circumcision is on the decline, because people have recognized these truths for over half a century. The only reason (Outside of religion), is that is can reduce the chances of catching HIV, something that has been huge problem within 3rd-world countries, but why not offer condoms instead of a permanent surgical solution, reintroduce the female condom, an older tool originally intended to offer women the tool necessary to keep themselves safe. What say you? This is not an attack, only an outcry.

I don't think its necessary, but I also don't understand why people want other people to stop it, the cruelty of it?

How could someone be Jewish and not be circumcised? It's become sort of synonymous, that's probably one of my only complaints about the religion, the requirement of it, but its done (mostly), when the child is too young to remember the pain of it, I don't know if they are given pain killers or not.

It's only the Jews that circumsize their people isn't it? So if it could be culturally/religiously accepted by the Jewish community at large, and they are the majority/all of the people that do it, that'd solve this problem I think...