Poll: If you ever have a son, will you have him circumcised?

[JUMBO PALACE]

To be honest I'm not quite sure. I'm leaning more towards no. I'm cut, but why should I make the decision for him? It's his body.

 

[TheEvilCheese]

I wont ever have it done without his express consent.
If he came to me out of the blue, I'd research it with him and make sure he wanted to go through with it, and if he did I'd let him.

UK resident here, the one of my friends that is *snipped* [sub](that I know of, only six of us were involved in the conversation)[/sub] is the odd one out.

 

[drbarno]

If my son wants to have his penis multilated, that's his choice.

Doesn't mean I'll let him though.

 

[Ham_authority95]

I would abort him. I hate kids.

That was blunt enough to make my day.

OT: Probably not, but it doesn't matter either way.

Wow. I feel stupid that I've wasted 2 minutes posting in such a non-issue thread.

 

[Technicolor]

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

That is because male and female circumcision are two very different things. Male circumcision merely removes the foreskin, and possibly removes a small amount of pleasure receptors. Supposedly it allows for longer sex and a easier to clean penis (which really doesn't apply to modern society).

Female Circumcision involves removal of the clitoris (and in some cases more), thereby removing a large amount of pleasure receptors. Pretty much destroying sex for the participant. I would refer to it as mutilation.

 

[Thaluikhain]

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

You can't compare the two. The foreskin is totally unneccesary, it's removal does not adversely affect the man.

Removing part or all of the clitoris has obvious effects on the woman, and the practice of basically sowing the vagina shut to ensure she stays a virgin (though they cut other bits off while doing that) has serious health implications as well.

EDIT: Double ninja'd

 

[YawningAngel]

Not unless he's really naughty.

 

[Amberella]

The boyfriend and I talked about it and nope, he will not be circumcised.

 

[Mr. Eff_v1legacy]

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

You do understand the difference right? Maybe you should go research the details a little before you say they are the same. It's like comparing a nose piercing to cutting your nose off.

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

That is because male and female circumcision are two very different things. Male circumcision merely removes the foreskin, and possibly removes a small amount of pleasure receptors. Supposedly it allows for longer sex and a easier to clean penis (which really doesn't apply to modern society).

Female Circumcision involves removal of the clitoris (and in some cases more), thereby removing a large amount of pleasure receptors. Pretty much destroying sex for the participant. I would refer to it as mutilation.

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

You can't compare the two. The foreskin is totally unneccesary, it's removal does not adversely affect the man.

Removing part or all of the clitoris has obvious effects on the woman, and the practice of basically sowing the vagina shut to ensure she stays a virgin (though they cut other bits off while doing that) has serious health implications as well.

EDIT: Double ninja'd

I'm not saying the two are identical pieces of the body, or arguing for their necessity. Admitted, I do not know everything about the procedures performed on females. But the way I see it, both procedures involve mutilation of the genitalia. One is commonly accepted in society; the other is condemned. And I don't see why that is.

 

[draconiansundae]

No way. There is literally no reason I should, besides tradition, which is not goos enough.

 

[Ace of Spades]

No. I am not circumcised, and I wasn't even aware that the concept existed for most of my life, and I'm still not convinced of the supposed medical benefit. Call me ignorant if you like, but I will never accept that cutting skin off of someone's penis is a good idea.

 

[Carlston]

The health benefits are a crock.
Like a foreskin is a magical force field to help protect against HIV.
That's teaching a kid because he's cut he's got some type of protection. You stick yer wang in it, and it has HIV guess what. If a condom can't protect you 100 percent what makes you think the skin will.

Prevents infection, better hygiene. All rubbish as that has to do with just scrubbing your nuts. We do not live in a 3rd world country anymore and we are not in the great American depression where we are trying to save so much water the government demands we don't take as many baths and keep our heads shaved.

It always comes back to Religion, that the invisible man in the sky thinks your more pious if you cut. Which then falls back to forcing people into hygiene/infection but now the mythical powers of the flying spaghetti monster shaking a finger at you or sending you to hell if you argue.

So when I have a son, no I will not. And he will learn... scrub your crotch and keep it clean.

 

[draconiansundae]

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

You do understand the difference right? Maybe you should go research the details a little before you say they are the same. It's like comparing a nose piercing to cutting your nose off.

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

That is because male and female circumcision are two very different things. Male circumcision merely removes the foreskin, and possibly removes a small amount of pleasure receptors. Supposedly it allows for longer sex and a easier to clean penis (which really doesn't apply to modern society).

Female Circumcision involves removal of the clitoris (and in some cases more), thereby removing a large amount of pleasure receptors. Pretty much destroying sex for the participant. I would refer to it as mutilation.

No. I find it quite abhorrent.
I find it funny how up in arms people get about how bad "female genital mutilation" is, yet "circumcision" (see how it has a nice word to describe it?) is perfectly acceptable.

You can't compare the two. The foreskin is totally unneccesary, it's removal does not adversely affect the man.

Removing part or all of the clitoris has obvious effects on the woman, and the practice of basically sowing the vagina shut to ensure she stays a virgin (though they cut other bits off while doing that) has serious health implications as well.

EDIT: Double ninja'd

I'm not saying the two are identical pieces of the body, or arguing for their necessity. Admitted, I do not know everything about the procedures performed on females. But the way I see it, both procedures involve mutilation of the genitalia. One is commonly accepted in society; the other is condemned. And I don't see why that is.

No, no, no, no.

Male circumcision has no effect on the male's ability to reach orgasm. Female circumcision os the cutting or burning off of the clitoris, essentially making it impossible for female's to experience sexual pleasure or achieve orgasm if done properly.

 

[The Gnome King]

Absolutely not. I am 100% opposed to male genital mutilation, which I feel circumcision is. You can read a lot about it here -

http://www.nocirc.org/