How do you feel about circumcision?

[meepop]

There is absolutely no reason to.
And fucking aesthetics is NOT a valid reason to chop part of their dick off. Why don't you let them grow up a little and then decide if they want a "better-looking penis".

Though really, I think it should be illegal.

I'm sorry. Do you want to scar your child for life (Figuratively speaking)? If the child decides, around the age of 5-8, and undergoes the procedure, then it's probably going to be more painful than it was as a baby. Besides, if you had a child and let them choose wouldn't you just make it seem bad so that they didn't do it? As an infant, circumcision means minimal bleeding and little to no pain. Plus, those that are un-circumcised have more chance of getting diseases because it's more difficult to clean.

As an infant it means so much pain that they often enter a state of neurological shock and faint from it. There are few other things in the world that can do that to you.
Infants have an overdeveloped pain receptors and typically experience 3 times more pain than anyone older.

But you only had a rebuttal to one of my statements. So either you had a half-assed answer or you assume I'm correct with everything else. I'll assume that and continue.

Yes, infants may have over-developed pain receptors, but at least they don't have to deal with weeks of recovery as opposed to a child, teen, or adult. And what about the problem of hygiene? You really expect 5-yr-olds to wash their penises that well?

And again, if circumcision is a decision that should be made by the person looking into it, then explain to me why children can't decide how much candy they can have? In reality, both cause happiness of some form, right? I'm sorry if that analogy sucks, but still. Yes, circumcision is a large procedure and candy is just an indulgence, but really, if you let the child decide, then it's like giving a scholar and a 5-yr-old the same test of true/false. The child has a 50% chance of getting it right.

Even if it's a teenager who looks into it himself, the parents may still be the ones paying for it and may try to talk him out of it, even though it is largely aesthetic and only provides some health benefits. Besides, as a baby you don't have anywhere to be. As a child, who wants to be the one who's considered 'different' or as a teenager who has to go through recovery, and still has tests, quizzes, homework, etc.?

 

[Dan Kaloczy]

Because once a in your life you decide...Oh, I have too much penis

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

How do I feel about it? I feel nothing. There is no obvious benefit or disadvantage in having it circumcised or uncircumcised. Would I go to get circumcised or circumcise my kids? No, but not because I have anything against it but rather because there just isn't a reason to do it.

 

[nick2150]

to all those who say uncut is not clean: try showering more
to all those who say cut is pretty: its a freakin' penis. cut or uncut it looks like excess flesh
to all those who say cut prevents STI transmission: Try using a condom ffs
to all those who say cut is more sensitive: keratin builds up to protect the glands over time as they are no longer protected from constant friction in the pant-al area

if you want to do it, by all means go ahead, but dont do it to kids who cant choose.

 

[RyanBishop]

To all the religious nuts - why remove a part of a male's body at birth? God clearly intended for a boy to have a foreskin. Are you saying God actually fucked up a bit on that and that you happen to know better?

To all the non-religious nuts - um, right. Go on and chop off a part of a baby's dick. Sure, what does he know anyway? He can't say nothing about it. And in 12 years time he'll even make up a nice rationalisation about how it doesn't look like a "worm in the mud" or some sort of stupid-ass shit.

Bah! Pisses me off. Never make the assumption that "you know better" when your agenda is to cut off a part of a human being. End of.

 

[Blaster395]

But you only had a rebuttal to one of my statements. So either you had a half-assed answer or you assume I'm correct with everything else. I'll assume that and continue.

Yes, infants may have over-developed pain receptors, but at least they don't have to deal with weeks of recovery as opposed to a child, teen, or adult. And what about the problem of hygiene? You really expect 5-yr-olds to wash their penises that well?

And again, if circumcision is a decision that should be made by the person looking into it, then explain to me why children can't decide how much candy they can have? In reality, both cause happiness of some form, right? I'm sorry if that analogy sucks, but still. Yes, circumcision is a large procedure and candy is just an indulgence, but really, if you let the child decide, then it's like giving a scholar and a 5-yr-old the same test of true/false. The child has a 50% chance of getting it right.

Even if it's a teenager who looks into it himself, the parents may still be the ones paying for it and may try to talk him out of it, even though it is largely aesthetic and only provides some health benefits. Besides, as a baby you don't have anywhere to be. As a child, who wants to be the one who's considered 'different' or as a teenager who has to go through recovery, and still has tests, quizzes, homework, etc.?

Yes, 5-yr-olds should be able to wash themselves.

Your analogy sucks massively. Candy is bad if excess is consumed. And why would you ask a 5-yr-old? Try 16 years old instead.

You still pay for it to happen to babies so I doubt that would change anything. Aesthetic? It looks fine to me without removing random parts of it. There is conflicting evidence about health benefits but it mostly point to there being no benefit or it actually increasing the risk of STDs.
Why the fuck would people be comparing dicks at that age anyway? Usually they complain about something being missing and consider that to be unusual, instead of the other way around (possibly an evolved reaction to seeing mutilation?).
Getting an operation done "Coz everyone else has done it" is one of the stupidest things I have heard. Simple solution to the problem: Give nobody the surgery for a generation and it will be seen as normal to be uncircumcised.

 

[DazBurger]

There is absolutely no reason to.
And fucking aesthetics is NOT a valid reason to chop part of their dick off. Why don't you let them grow up a little and then decide if they want a "better-looking penis".

Though really, I think it should be illegal.

Um... why?

A newborn can't remember the pain and heals in days - whereas an adult must go through several weeks of painful recovery.

Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?

If you don't care for it, that's fine, but why so... passionate about this topic?

So by your logic, tattooing a baby is perfectly okay?
Because it can't remember the pain and it heals in days?

-snip
Foreskin is useless. It serves no practical purpose - it has no effect on sexual stimulation or pleasure.

The foreskin protects the "head", keeping it sensitive.
When the foreskin is removed, the skin on the head hardens and becomes much less sensitive.

So it could be compared to numbing down a baby girls clit.


But hey... Its all okay! Because it looks better! And really suits the toddlers brand new tattoo!

 

[Newby_Newb]

It is child abuse, plain and simple.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

Female genital mutilation is done to remove a woman's ability to feel sexual pleasure - it isn't merely decorative. The male version would be smashing the testicles to create a eunuch.

How is slicing off part of the nerve system and exposing the rest to get numb, and doing so at an age where the child is unable to make the decision himself or defend himself? You're mutilating the child's genitalia to reduce sexual pleasure for religious reasons. There is no difference.

They really aren't comparable. FGM's equivalent for males would be castration, not circumcision.

They're still able to procreate, the purpose is to reduce sexual pleasure to reduce the likelihood of adultery, just as with males.

<Now the other post un-disappeared, please delete this one mods>

This is a legitimate thread and all you have to do is post your opinion. If you disagree, that's fine, but no sense in overreacting.

Nono, you don't understand, I reposted my first one because it didn't appear in the thread. I assumed the escapist had eaten it but then it appeared along with my new one.

I'm sorry, but I am going to have to strongly disagree on this. As a circumcised male, it hasnt reduced my pleasure in the slightest. Also, I know for a fact my parents didnt have it done to "reduce" my pleasure to keep me from straying.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

There is absolutely no reason to.
And fucking aesthetics is NOT a valid reason to chop part of their dick off. Why don't you let them grow up a little and then decide if they want a "better-looking penis".

Though really, I think it should be illegal.

Um... why?

A newborn can't remember the pain and heals in days - whereas an adult must go through several weeks of painful recovery.

Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?

If you don't care for it, that's fine, but why so... passionate about this topic?

So by your logic, tattooing a baby is perfectly okay?
Because it can't remember the pain and it heals in days?

-snip
Foreskin is useless. It serves no practical purpose - it has no effect on sexual stimulation or pleasure.

The foreskin protects the "head", keeping it sensitive.
When the foreskin is removed, the skin on the head hardens and becomes much less sensitive.

So it could be compared to numbing down a baby girls clit.


But hey... Its all okay! Because it looks better! And really suits the toddlers brand new tattoo!

It does NOT make the head less sensitive! Where are you getting this from? If mine were any more sensitive, walking down the street in a pair of jeans would be a serious problem. So, I fail to see the logic in that comment.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

It is child abuse, plain and simple.

No, its not... plain and simple.

 

[epikAXE]

There is absolutely no reason to.
And fucking aesthetics is NOT a valid reason to chop part of their dick off. Why don't you let them grow up a little and then decide if they want a "better-looking penis".

Though really, I think it should be illegal.

Um... why?

A newborn can't remember the pain and heals in days - whereas an adult must go through several weeks of painful recovery.

Also, how is circumcision different from pierced ears or a tattoo?

If you don't care for it, that's fine, but why so... passionate about this topic?

You forget that a tattoo and piercings are choices.
Its like the fact that I was never christened or circumcised, because my parents felt that if I, later in life became a born again Christian, or wanted a 'better looking penis' I would decide for myself.

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

If it's part of your religion, I don't see the problem, as long as it's done properly.

from a religion stand point, it's doing what it normally does and forces itself on offspring.

The issue is it's unfair to let religious groups get away with it, while normal people cannot.
It's got to be one or the other and I for one suggest not allowing parents to put their child at risk.

Everyone should be allowed to do it, if that's what they want. Sure, parents shouldn't FORCE their children into anything, but if it's their religion and they believe it's right and thus should do it.

If it's just a personal choice, it has less credibility but is still valid.

 

[DSQ]

for the simple reason that it is a better-looking penis. Seriously, uncircumcised penises look like a worm trying to escape from mud.

Maybe where you are from but where i'm from (uk) it is the other way round. Personally I can hardly look at a circumsized penis. It looks like an open wound but without the blood... ugh.

(full disclosure: I'm a girl.)

 

[weker]

they believe it's right and thus should do it

Just because they believe it to be right doesn't mean it is, If its about hair colour or something as a child fair play but this is removing a part of the body which can greatly effect things like sexual pleasure. It is also a mark of a religion. So not only are they forcing their beliefs on how the body should look on the child but also a sign that they are part of the religion (if their american not as much it seems)

 

[Amphoteric]

Circumcision does have medical benefits.........

If you live in Africa where water is extremely limited

 

[Blaster395]

Circumcision does have medical benefits.........

If you live in Africa where water is extremely limited

And even this is disputed and has conflicting evidence.

 

[Bobbety]

]That's like saying "I never want to go through having an ingrown toenail again, so I wish I had my feet chopped off instead". Obviously that's a more extreme example, but the principle holds.

Recovering from an ingrown toenail doesn't require your feet to be chopped off... That and it doesn't tie in with the sexual awkwardness that many teenagers have to deal with. So yes that is an extreme example. I'm not saying the rest of your post is wrong (not at all), I'm just saying the topic is far less black and white and more debatable than some people seem to think. In fact, I used to think that circumcision was a disgusting mutilation to do to anyone, but after fully recovering I see it isn't that bad. I'm still somewhat on the fence on whether I would have it done to my kids, I guess it depends on the mothers opinion on the matter.

Way to beg the question. A circumcised male can't be opposed to circumcision without being "irrational"? Please.

Why not? A man could wish that his parents never "mutilated" him as a child and not do the same to his kids, and would therefore be opposed to the practice.

Why do you prefer it, if you don't mind me asking? Anything apart from the relief of whatever your health problem was?

I dislike the way the foreskin moves during sex/masturbation. For a long time I wasn't even aware this was how it worked as mine was "stuck" (ie. couldn't ever pull it back, which was a big part of why I was forced to get it removed).

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

If mine were any more sensitive, walking down the street in a pair of jeans would be a serious problem. So, I fail to see the logic in that comment.

oh how true this is, good god sometimes the right pair of pants with the right pair of boxers causes my third leg to shoot out like a whack a mole in an arcade