Poll: Circumcision

[PAGEToap44]

I shudder at the thought of anything sharp in the proximity of my crotch. But I'm a dirty Brit.

 

[gigastrike]

Why is "I'm a girl, but yes" even an answer?

 

[seidlet]

So your saying that someone who is in constant pain should have to wait till they are 18 to have the Procediure

no, of course not. a medically-indicated procedure later in life is a totally different story than routine infant circumcision - HOWEVER, physicians in the united states are very circumcision-happy and have virtually no knowledge of how to deal with the foreskin - in medical schools in the US they learn VERY little about it other than how to remove it. many problems where circumcision has been recommended could have been solved through the use of manual stretching, steroid creams, or a number of other methods. i think that circumcision should be treated very seriously, and only used as a LAST resort in these situations.

 

[seidlet]

Why is "I'm a girl, but yes" even an answer?

female circumcision is a blanket term that covers a variety of types of genital cutting - it's illegal in the majority of the first-world, but it still happens. i've personally met women who were circumcised before.

 

[RheynbowDash]

im not circumsized and my girlfriend doesnt seem to mind it. doesnt bother me either.

 

[Doug]

So your saying that someone who is in constant pain should have to wait till they are 18 to have the Procediure

No - I'm and I think most of the others are saying that unless it is a medically necessary procedure (i.e. like non-retacting foreskin, etc), then it should be up to the person the procedure is being performed on to consent too. I.e. not forced on an infant.

 

[seidlet]

I'm taking my college savings, dropping out, doing menial labour and saving up for the financing of a Communist revolution in a third-world country with some like-minded psychopaths. We're looking for interested parties.

dude, sign me up.

No - I'm and I think most of the others are saying that unless it is a medically necessary procedure (i.e. like non-retacting foreskin, etc), then it should be up to the person the procedure is being performed on to consent too. I.e. not forced on an infant.

just FYI, a non-retracting foreskin is NOT, in and of itself, a reason to resort to circumcision. adults with non-retracting foreskins can manually stretch the foreskin gently over time, until the opening is large enough to retract of it's own accord. in severe cases, topical steroid cream can help things on their way. all babies are born with non-retractable foreskins which you should never, ever retract - the first person to retract a child's foreskin should be the child himself, and some individuals don't get to this point until their late teenage years. there are also some men who's foreskin NEVER fully retracts but aren't having any sorts of problems with it.

the problem seems to be that our culture is very sex-phobic. it's a rare pediatrician/family physician who will recommend playing with your penis as a method of treatment - they'd rather get you under the knife.

 

[Doug]

Why is "I'm a girl, but yes" even an answer?

female circumcision is a blanket term that covers a variety of types of genital cutting - it's illegal in the majority of the first-world, but it still happens. i've personally met women who were circumcised before.

I didn't know they where outright illegal to be honest. I know Africa has major problems with "female circumcision", although in that case outright mutilation is what they do - without pain killers or even cleaning the tools/room/skin first.

 

[sorry user name taken.]

this thread makes me cross my legs very tightly lol...

>_<

 

[Jumplion]

I'm taking my college savings, dropping out, doing menial labour and saving up for the financing of a Communist revolution in a third-world country with some like-minded psychopaths. We're looking for interested parties.

dude, sign me up.

Wrong dude, dude.

 

[Ignignoct]

So your saying that someone who is in constant pain should have to wait till they are 18 to have the Procediure

Troll-bait.

 

[Seldon2639]

I was circumcised as an infant. It has made no difference in my life.

Perhaps uncircumcised men lead glorious, sexually ecstatic lives free from the painful knowledge that their parents subjected them to some kind of torture, but I doubt it. Calling it mutilation or inhumane treatment is ridiculous, just as it is equally ridiculous to say that that circumcision is absolutely better than the alternative.

it's an autonomy issue - people too young to consent to a procedure should NOT be given a surgery that is entirely cultural and cosmetic. people would get their knickers in a twist if a baby girl's clitoral hood was removed for ANY of the reasons that we use to justify circumcision.

circumcision was designed explicitly to reduce sexual sensation - now it's become a cultural issue, and we look for reasons to justify our cultural practice.

i should probably stay out of this given that this is my 'hot button' issue, but i will say that i think it's child abuse and i think it should be illegal for all non-consenting individuals. that said, i think circumcision should be legal for both men AND women who have reached the age of consent - adults should be allowed to do whatever bizarre thing to their body that they choose.

I'm gonna have to call bulls*** here. There's no proper analogy between female genital mutilation (to use the correct term, as defined by the World Health Organization) and circumcision. FGM was designed specifically to dull sexual stimulation and decrease the chances a woman would commit adultery, but there exists no such history for male circumcision.

We can argue whether any of the reasons still apply, but when it was originally instituted (in a desert environment), it was far more about hygiene than about cosmetics. Excluding modern sanitation, it has a much greater impact on the spread of diseases (including the chances of contracting diseases which afflict someone with what can charitably be termed "crotch rot"), as well as being generally more cleanly.

Incidentally, no, it's not about autonomy. Parents make medical decisions all the damned time. Children have no autonomy in terms of medical proxy, with good reason. If what you're saying is that no medical procedures should be preformed on on a child unless absolutely medically necessary, you'd be removing a *lot* of medical procedures. Braces are usually more cosmetic than necessary, same thing with retainers, or even those few children born with tails and need to get them cut off. You can say those aren't as "traumatic", but then you'd need to define the limits of traumatic, and prove that circumcision counts.

 

[SickCuchulainn]

UK guy here, and intact.

If someone gets it done of their own volition or for medical reasons then fair do's but infant circumcision is simple barbarism - there's no consent involved, and I'm fairly sure most people's genitals aren't the concern of their parents.

 

[Dastardos]

Coming from a Jewish family I'm circumcised since the week of my birth.

 

[Skalman]

I was circumcised as an infant. It has made no difference in my life.

Perhaps uncircumcised men lead glorious, sexually ecstatic lives free from the painful knowledge that their parents subjected them to some kind of torture, but I doubt it. Calling it mutilation or inhumane treatment is ridiculous, just as it is equally ridiculous to say that that circumcision is absolutely better than the alternative.

it's an autonomy issue - people too young to consent to a procedure should NOT be given a surgery that is entirely cultural and cosmetic. people would get their knickers in a twist if a baby girl's clitoral hood was removed for ANY of the reasons that we use to justify circumcision.

circumcision was designed explicitly to reduce sexual sensation - now it's become a cultural issue, and we look for reasons to justify our cultural practice.

i should probably stay out of this given that this is my 'hot button' issue, but i will say that i think it's child abuse and i think it should be illegal for all non-consenting individuals. that said, i think circumcision should be legal for both men AND women who have reached the age of consent - adults should be allowed to do whatever bizarre thing to their body that they choose.

This woman is wise and speaks the truth, listen to her!

I was circumcised as an infant. It has made no difference in my life.

Perhaps uncircumcised men lead glorious, sexually ecstatic lives free from the painful knowledge that their parents subjected them to some kind of torture, but I doubt it. Calling it mutilation or inhumane treatment is ridiculous, just as it is equally ridiculous to say that that circumcision is absolutely better than the alternative.

it's an autonomy issue - people too young to consent to a procedure should NOT be given a surgery that is entirely cultural and cosmetic. people would get their knickers in a twist if a baby girl's clitoral hood was removed for ANY of the reasons that we use to justify circumcision.

circumcision was designed explicitly to reduce sexual sensation - now it's become a cultural issue, and we look for reasons to justify our cultural practice.

i should probably stay out of this given that this is my 'hot button' issue, but i will say that i think it's child abuse and i think it should be illegal for all non-consenting individuals. that said, i think circumcision should be legal for both men AND women who have reached the age of consent - adults should be allowed to do whatever bizarre thing to their body that they choose.

I'm gonna have to call bulls*** here. There's no proper analogy between female genital mutilation (to use the correct term, as defined by the World Health Organization) and circumcision. FGM was designed specifically to dull sexual stimulation and decrease the chances a woman would commit adultery, but there exists no such history for male circumcision.

Whatever the original reason was, the fact is still that circumcision lessens sensitivity of the glans and therefore stimulation and pleasure.

So your saying that someone who is in constant pain should have to wait till they are 18 to have the Procediure

Troll-bait.

I'd say.

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

[Hallow'sEve]

the debate is why should it be done at all if there's no real BENEFIT to having it done.

If there's no benefit either way, why argue? If you are there's not much you can really do about it.

 

[Seldon2639]

Whatever the original reason was, the fact is still that circumcision lessens sensitivity of the glans and therefore stimulation and pleasure.

Maybe there's a misunderstanding here, but is there any circumcised man here who is unable to feel stimulation and pleasure, or even feels "less"? I promise you, the orgasm one experiences as a circumcised man is no less than that of an uncircumcised man. Hell, if there is any desensitization, that would just mean we can last longer, no?

 

[Skalman]

the debate is why should it be done at all if there's no real BENEFIT to having it done.

If there's no benefit either way, why argue? If you are there's not much you can really do about it.

Well, because many people think it's morally wrong to do it to infants or young children who have no say in the matter.

 

[Skalman]

Whatever the original reason was, the fact is still that circumcision lessens sensitivity of the glans and therefore stimulation and pleasure.

Maybe there's a misunderstanding here, but is there any circumcised man here who is unable to feel stimulation and pleasure, or even feels "less"? I promise you, the orgasm one experiences as a circumcised man is no less than that of an uncircumcised man. Hell, if there is any desensitization, that would just mean we can last longer, no?

Well, I said lessens, not removes.
And lasing longer can be achieved just as well through mental training. There's really no need to go all scissor happy...

 

[Ignignoct]

the debate is why should it be done at all if there's no real BENEFIT to having it done.

If there's no benefit either way, why argue? If you are there's not much you can really do about it.

The reason to argue it is because some people don't know why they do much of what they do, and accept it as customs or tradition.

Also, this is a message board, where people congregate to discuss, and indeed, argue things.

News at 11.