Poll: Bans on Circumcision?

[Eisenfaust]

meh? as far as i can tell, not alot of guys go around saying "damn, i wish i had foreskin".

To be perfectly honest most of us that had it done, had it done as babies, you grow up thinking it is "normal" until you start high school and sharing showers after PE. I think I was about 11 or 12 before I saw a dude who had foreskin and I thought he had a deformity. Boy that was an embarrassing conversation with my teacher. If I actually knew the difference between sensitivity during sexual encounters I might be pretty damn pissed off with my parents, but I don't, so I'm rather indifferent when it comes to my own bait and tackle , but when considering it's future as a practice I don't see why it should continue really.

Parents decide on the method of raising the child

Using that logic we shouldn't ban female circumcision either, after all they can still reproduce, what does it matter if they enjoy it or not... Like it or not we have a great many laws that limit the amount of choices parents can make regarding their children, we have compulsory education, standards of care that must be met or they child is taken away, etc.

in... fairness, that was entirely not what i meant... actually put the whole point i made in next time... which was that that the parental role has far more potential for impact (even within the pervue of legality). I was not simply saying that parents get to decide what happens, the end, go home, but rather that there are bigger influences than the removal of an inch or two of skin that may or may not have any effect in the long run, and thus more important things to focus on, legislatively. As for confusion caused by seeing someone different to yourself, surely that's part and parcel with a much wider range of issues than JUST circumcision, and not all of them as easily explainable either...

beyond that female circumcision is obviously a *tad* more severe, given it's robbing them of staisfaction of a base human physiological and psychological drive, rather than merely possibly affecting sensitivity to a unknown degree in an unknown direction through a procedure that has been practiced in one form or another without grand incedent for thousands of years.

 

[astrav1]

I prefer uncircumcised penises, both visually and sexually.

I think circumcision on infants for no medical reason should be banned, yes.

I thought you said you were a lesbian. On another note, I say there's not a whole lot wrong with it. I was circumcised for no reason and happy with it.

Not really sure what I am.

Don't care too much, to be honest. I just go with what I like at the time.

Oh. Well that clears things up then.

 

[Koroviev]

I apologize for this, I do need to provide a source. I recall it from a WHO pamphlet, and yes, I am aware of WHO's stance on male circumcision, at least as it concerns developing nations. I have a feeling I should have said scar tissue, but until I locate the source, you can disregard my comments.

All good man, I was just curious. I'd never heard of it before, and my current girl was actually surprised at how soft the skin is, so I just wanted to know.

It's actually called a circumcision scar. You can look it up through Wikipedia, which provides sources for further information. I'm pretty sure that tissue has something to do with preventing HIV transmission, but I don't want to dig myself deeper by stating as fact right now XD

 

[blackwind14]

My personal opinion is to ban it outright, with the provision for a medical need. I feel I must make it clear this makes religious circumcision illegal as well. Religion should not factor into any medical procedure. I'm looking at you, Jehovah's witnesses.

 

[Lusty]

Unnecessary surgery on babies = bad.

 

[Koroviev]

wow, the religion thing is nearly getting this thread out of hand...

Anyway, I respect the right of the Jewish community to engage in the practice- I understand it's done by someone who's been specially trained in the correct surgical techniques and a small amount of local anaesthetic can be used as well.

I'm not circumcised as I'm Catholic, although there's no prohibition on it in my religion, it's just not practised very much.

A non-Jewish friend of mine had the procedure done as a child, but for medical reasons.
Doesn't really seem to factor in daily life, so it's no big deal.

I think our attention should be directed towards people who practice it without the appropriate medical training or supervision.
There have been a few tragic cases in Dublin where a child has bled to death as a result of a botched circumcision as part of a non-Jewish ritual, amongst newly immigrant families originating from African nations.

Furthermore- female circumcision IS genital mutilation, and is utterly barbaric.
I don't have detailed reports or links to share, so I can't comment much on the matter, although it has cropped up in the Irish media on occasion that asylum seekers from war torn nations in Africa have claimed that such a fate awaits their daughters if they are deported.

I respect the right of parents to share and practice their faith with their children, but I think it crosses the line when they want to permanently alter their child for the sake of it. First, it is an appeal to tradition, which is a logical fallacy. I mean, think about it. What if I am part of some obscure religion that calls for Johnny's ears to be clipped at the top? I assure you that my religion has been around for at least 1000 years and I think he can clean less of an ear better. Does that seem like a good idea?

All very well, but religions have for centuries involved rites and rituals which appear rather kooky to outsiders.

The Romans thought early Christians actually ate flesh and drank blood when celebrating Eucharist, after all.

Also, I agree with your point, although at the same time we can't just lump in a religious practice that's carefully monitored with the same kind of mutilation by witch-doctors.

I'm not really qualified to argue the Jewish position on it, and I also realise that the same goes for tribal rituals.

However, I will say that while I'm uncomfortable with the idea of it being done to me, at the same time it's not a harmful procedure when correctly performed on a male child.

It's done in an extremely humane manner in the Jewish faith, but I cede your point about altering of the body. I would point out that the parents consent on this matter.

That's really something to be argued between a person born into the Jewish faith and a Rabbi, though.
All very well to object, but are you honestly going to start calling people who practise the ritual barbarians?

Why don't we ask people who've actually had it done at infancy?

No, they are not ritual barbarians. When they base their argument on tradition, they are simply appealing to tradition. In that case, they are illogical. Calling them ritual barbarians would amount to an ad hominem fallacy.

 

[Koroviev]

Unnecessary surgery on babies = bad.

It's not a fact. Based on the circumstances in developed nations, I think it's an unfair practice, but I can't say with any authority that it is unequivocally bad.

 

[Diligent]

People who are circumcised always spout the same argument for circumcision, and I don't get it.
I'm pretty sick of all the misconceptions about it. There is absolutely no reason to do it "just because".
I've lived 27 years uncircumcised and have not had any issues with cleanliness. It absolutely does detract from sexual pleasure, weather you know it or not, because there are TONS of nerve endings in the foreskin, which also protects the head of the penis and keeps it more sensitive. Also, it is not simply a bit of extra superfluous skin "like a finger nail" as an earlier post said, circumcision involves removing half the surface area of the penis.

Watch this video, listen to the baby screaming, then shut the fuck up.
WARNING, REALLY GRAPHIC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDuDhkiDdns

 

[messy]

There was a Jewish doctor who was circumcising babies with his teeth (as part of a particular religious doctrine, I'm not saying all Jewish people do this. My reference is the book God is not Great by Christopher Hitchens so yes biased by this is not just some rumour) and this lead to some of the children catching Herpes, not the strictly true "herpes" which is transmitted through sexual intercourse but the type which normally forms cold sores on lips. Practises like this I say should go.

you've been misinformed. There is a practice known as metzitzah b'peh, or oral suction, in which the mohel sucks blood from the circumcision wound. Traditionally this was done as an attempt to avoid complications, but as you say this has been linked to the transmission of herpes. Only the most Orthodox Jews practiced this to begin with, and the ones that still do are advised to use a sterile glass tube.

the bottom line is that rabbis aren't going around biting the foreskins off of infants.

Oh I was never suggesting they were and I do apologise if it read as such, I was brining up one example that I know of. I was not making a blanket accusation of the Jewish people or faith. And if I have been misinformed I do apologise, like I say the text was biased and biting off does sound worse then sucking out blood.

I still stand by that this practise should stop, no matter how uncommon it is.

Honestly, even as a (Reform) Jew, I'd never even heard of the practice until a thread like this one with someone shouting "THEY'RE BITING DICKS OFF!!!!!11". you're certainly entitled to your opinion, I just wanted to make sure it was based on actual facts.

Cheers, in all honesty (although odds are this comes off as sarcastic). No point going into this sort of debate without all the facts.

 

[Koroviev]

My personal opinion is to ban it outright, with the provision for a medical need. I feel I must make it clear this makes religious circumcision illegal as well. Religion should not factor into any medical procedure. I'm looking at you, Jehovah's witnesses.

Religious people are not the only ones who support it, though. There are plenty of people who opt to have it performed on their children for cosmetic reasons. Either way I disagree with the practice.

 

[Zarmi]

Banned for kids, I say. People should make their own decision if they want to get circumcised, and they can't do that as small children.

 

[gillebro]

I think as an adult you should be allowed to do whatever you damn well want (also i think fellas, if you were to chop part of your junk off, neither you nor your lady partners would thank you), but circumcising baby boys is cruel. it hurts them so much that they go into shock.

No they don't

it has no medical benefits at all (what is this crap about circumcised penises being cleaner? seriously? it's called WASHING)

You'd be amazed how many people can't do it properly. Other than that it's very difficult to cleap a hooded penis as clean as a circumsised one

and it's just inhumane! i'm so glad that in australia and england it isn't as practiced as it is in america.

You may surprised, but it's done loads. The only differnece between the US and the rest of the world, is that there are more circumisions done for religious reasons.

i dunno, yanks... i heard somewhere that you have to request not to have your child circumcised now. please tell me that's not true...

It's not true. Don't feel all threatened about circumcisions, it's absolutely nothing. Generally people feel squeamish about them because they are uneducated, or they believe silly rumours. I suppose if you relate the concept of circumcision or castration, it can be scary, but the reality is far from it. The foreskin is rather like the human tail-useless thanks to evolution, but with no reason to loose it fully. Thousands of people (perhaps millions) have circumcisions, and have very very normal lives. There is nothing wrong or humiliating, or mutilating about it, not unless you are a very shallow and simple human being. Female circumcision, now that's a different matter altogether

I'm relieved to hear that.

What do you mean they don't go into shock? they start falling asleep. that's shock.

i know people have circumcisions and go on to have normal lives and all that. i'm not going to tell somebody they're a total moron for choosing to have it done. I might question why they would want to lose half the nerve endings on their penis, but whatever... maybe they find they're oversensitive, or that sex is far too pleasurable for them, or something.

as for uncircumcised penises being harder to wash, well... i guess. extra folds and all, but heaps of us have to make do with our bits that are harder to wash than most other people's. i, for instance, am fat. those folds are a ***** to get clean, but i manage it. i apologise if that's tmi, but you hear what i'm saying. i don't think the fact that it's easier to clean is grounds enough to do it. i do however think that the fact that it sends babies into shock (sorry, i'm not going to agree with you on that matter. i've seen footage and it was alarming), it cuts off half the nerve endings down there, it was promoted by fundamentalist christians whose aim was to stop boys from touching themselves, it's unnecessary surgery and, hello, it makes your dick smaller!! is enough reason NOT to do it.

 

[Koroviev]

One thing people appear to be missing in this thread is that it is actually possible to regain what was cut away with a simple method. People talk about this stuff like it isn't reversible, but it is like Penn and Teller showed during an episode dedicated about circumcision.

That means that if you grow up later and want the removed parts back, then you can actually get them back. Thus there is no real reason for a ban.

Why should men have to go through a procedure to restore what was taken from them when we could just prevent parents from removing it in the first place?

 

[awesomeClaw]

I think all circumcision on children should be banned. (Except for medical reasons, ofcourse.)
ESPECIALLY religious circumcision. After you´re 18 though?

Sure, cut the foreskin of your dick, who cares, but a parent should NEVER be allowed to do it for any other reason than medical.

 

[Justank]

People who are circumcised always spout the same argument for circumcision, and I don't get it.
I'm pretty sick of all the misconceptions about it. There is absolutely no reason to do it "just because".
I've lived 27 years uncircumcised and have not had any issues with cleanliness. It absolutely does detract from sexual pleasure, weather you know it or not, because there are TONS of nerve endings in the foreskin, which also protects the head of the penis and keeps it more sensitive. Also, it is not simply a bit of extra superfluous skin "like a finger nail" as an earlier post said, circumcision involves removing half the surface area of the penis.

Watch this video, listen to the baby screaming, then shut the fuck up.
WARNING, REALLY GRAPHIC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDuDhkiDdns

See, the sexual pleasure thing is what I'm curious to hear a point of view on from someone who had the circumcision done later in life, like 25+. I have no issues whatsoever with the pleasure I get from sex, and I don't really see having 50% more of the same tissue making that much of a difference. But to hear from someone who has experienced both would be very interesting.

 

[Bloodstain]

Medical reasons yes. But otherwise it should be illegal until a person is 18.

Its not circumcision. Thats just a pretty word for "GENITAL MUTILATION". Its a sick and twisted act commited by demented and sick religious types.

And people who think it looks better. I hate those people.
I agree with you, complete ban for people under the age of 18, unless it has medical reasons.

 

[ReaperzXIII]

Ok you guys make circumcision seem way worst than it is, I'm circumcised it makes absolutely no difference to me, I don't remember the pain and it doesn't really effect me other than I dont have a foreskin.