Queries about circumcision

Recommended Videos

Elate

New member
Nov 21, 2010
584
0
0
The only reason it should ever be done is for medical purposes, otherwise, no matter what anyone says it IS genital mutilation by very definition. You're cutting off a piece of skin which is there to protect the head of the penis.

I'm uncut, so yes I will probably be a bit bias, and anyone who is an adult and and wants it removed should be able to as they wish (I've considered it) but doing it to children is wrong.

Even though most of the "Medical benefits" are false, and have been proven false. Lets just consider they're true. You don't have a surgery as a child, to get your appendix removed, even though it 'Might' have medical benefits do you? And risk aside, this is no different. As for personal opinion on what it looks/feels like, well a parent wouldn't make an infant get a tattoo even if they thought it looked nice, so why is this any different to that either? There's no excuse for it, not even religious (Y'know, since people don't always follow a parents religion, like OP) it's barbaric to do that kind of thing to a child.
 

Aprilgold

New member
Apr 1, 2011
1,995
0
0
Freechoice said:
Aprilgold said:
Matthew94 said:
Why not respect your child and let him make that decision on his own?
Well, if its a child, then it can't decide for itself, its not allowed.

So fuckin' wait. Jesus, it's not like it needs to be done immediately or his dick may or may not fall off entirely. It's cosmetic surgery done for fuck-all reasoning with tangential benefits and very real consequences.
Well, if the child goes into a bar and says "I want a beer" then he won't get it, its the same exact reason that allowing children to decide what their body is.

Having your foreskin chopped off, from what I can tell, does nothing and doesn't really change what it looks like in its normal state, because in sex the foreskin is back.
 

Freechoice

New member
Dec 6, 2010
1,019
0
0
Aprilgold said:
Freechoice said:
Aprilgold said:
Matthew94 said:
Why not respect your child and let him make that decision on his own?
Well, if its a child, then it can't decide for itself, its not allowed.

So fuckin' wait. Jesus, it's not like it needs to be done immediately or his dick may or may not fall off entirely. It's cosmetic surgery done for fuck-all reasoning with tangential benefits and very real consequences.
Well, if the child goes into a bar and says "I want a beer" then he won't get it, its the same exact reason that allowing children to decide what their body is.

Having your foreskin chopped off, from what I can tell, does nothing and doesn't really change what it looks like in its normal state, because in sex the foreskin is back.
And what do we say to the child that wants a beer?
"Wait until you're older."

You know what the irresponsible thing for the parent to do is?
Buy the beer for the kid.

And the argument that it does nothing is more reason not to do it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?
 

Ferrious

Made From Corpses
Jan 6, 2010
156
0
0
I seem to post in these threads more than any others. I'm not sure what that says about me.

Context dump: I was circumcised around four years ago now, when I was 24. I've been sexually active since I was 17. I suffered from Phimosis, which was the reason I was circumcised (I ended up cutting off bloodflow after sex and passing out in the bathroom, funny story really).

The thing with these "sexual pleasure" questions is that they're massively subjective. For me, there is reduced sensation compared to before. It also takes me a lot longer to achieve orgasm than it did before the operation. That's all I can offer you, you'll never know as you have no basis for comparison. It doesn't stop sex being enjoyable and none of my partners have had any issues with it (indeed, the extra "stamina" has been seen by some as an advantage).

A verdict on it? I don't agree with it for non-medical grounds. I equate it to removing an appendix for religious reasons - unnecessary and potentially dangerous.

Sex is a wonderful thing, and you're going to have enough things to be nervous about without adding this to the mix. I'd not let it bother you.
 

Dimitriov

The end is nigh.
May 24, 2010
1,215
0
0
Hammeroj said:
Dimitriov said:
See, if I say I like chips better than anything that means I like chips more than everything else in the universe (sex, candy, true love, immortality, EVERYTHING).

If I say I like chips more than cookies it means just that and nothing else. Understand yet? NO?

Okay, what he said was that he considers "religious reasons" more important than one fairly specific thing which he considers unlikely to occur. I have no information to give on the probability of it myself, but the language is pretty clear.
The only thing to say here is that 'anything' is not necessarily a synonym of 'everything'. Just look the word up, please. Your grammer is not gooder than mine.
*sigh*

"I like chips better than everything." (This means that I like chips better than everything in the universe combined).

I like chips better than anything." (This means that I like chips better than any ONE single thing in the universe - but that single thing could be ANY thing that possibly exists).

I like chips better than something." (This means that there is ONE SPECIFIC thing that I like less than chips - there COULD be other things that I also prefer chips to, but the one established point is that there is SOMETHING I like chips better than).

He used a "something" (religious reasons are more important than the minor chance of fuck ups - I paraphrased that - in this case we have a single thing "a chance" that is deemed less important than the other), but you said "anything" which as I have clearly explained above means something else.

I am explaining this because you may have a basic grasp of English, but clearly do not have a handle on logic.
 

odanhammer

New member
Oct 11, 2009
98
0
0
i find this question , in my area to be somewhat silly.
My area has decided that you have to pay for this , rather then it being covered by the government. ( I live in canada by the way)
The reason this changed since when i was born, is that there is "little medical reason to do this procedure"
The reason it was done before , is that it reduced the amount of infections in that area.
To this date people my age that had this done before the age of 1 have zero , i mean zero problems related to infection around the head of the penis. There might be 1 or 2 cases ever.
Extremely rare.
Children that have parents that cannot afford this procedure are finding an increase in the amount of infections they are dealing with( around the head of the penis)
Infact since they started charging for this , the increase in infection has tripled in my area.


As for loss of feeling or anything else like this. I cannot compare , i find so long as you have the right parnter , someone you fit into (literally) well. Its all that matters.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,526
0
0
Lumber Barber said:
Daystar Clarion said:
Shit.

This won't end well.

Anyone who wishes to survive may join me in my bunker. I have all the hookers and Blackjack you could ever want.

OT: Any doctor worth their salt will tell you that any medical procedure has risks and removing a small boy's foreskin for anything less than a medical concern is not a great idea.
But... But you'll put me in your experimentation lab, won't you?!
Yes.

How else will I create a horde of super zombies?
 

Rastien

Pro Misinformationalist
Jun 22, 2011
1,221
0
0
Relish in Chaos said:
OK, so I know that this can be a somewhat private issue (not just for me, but for many people), but I want some discussion and insight into it anyway.

I'll start off by giving some background information that may or may not be particularly relevant to the rest of my story. My parents are Muslim, and I only became a fully-fledged Atheist about four or, at the latest, five years ago. But when I was about four, I was circumcised. I think I recall my mum telling me that it wasn't necessarily to do with "our" religion, but that I'd had some kind of infection and the best thing to do was to circumcise me so it wouldn't be an obstruction anymore. However, I'm not entirely sure how true that is, and she could've just been shovelling me lies to keep me quiet, on the basis that I wouldn't remember it when I grew up.

Now, some of my friends and websites that I've visited, detailing various medical studies, have said that circumcision can reduce the sensitivity of a man's penis and, therefore, reduce sexual pleasure, with some (potentially biased) opinions dubbing it "genital mutilation" (which shocked me). Obviously, this is a concern for someone like me, a 16-year-old heterosexual boy who's looking to have sex with a potential girlfriend some time in the future, and I'd hate for one or both of us to be short-changed unfairly like that.

But other websites and studies I've looked at have said that there's no change, and/or that it can actually expose/enhance certain areas of the penis, giving the same or more sexual pleasure, and some women like it. So basically, what I'm asking here is to have some kind of definitive, unbiased verdict on the whole thing, because I don't need yet another thing to stress about (as sad as that may sound) and I'd rather it not be a problem in the future.
Shitstorm inc, or as it now will be known:


Heres the deal women will have a prefrence, this won't stop them getting it on with you simple as that (at least not from what i have been told or heard uncut man here and no issues).

At the end of the day a cock is a cock and does the same job cut or uncut, theres gonna be bias from all blokes as they will defend which ever they possess.

It is completely irrelavant wether you have been cut or uncut.

Honestly of the women i have asked out of curiosty most will have a prefrence like blokes have a prefrence to bush or no bush just the way it is. This WILL NOT STOP them getting it on with you seriously stop worrying about it and just enjoy yourself.

-edit The op didn't ask anything about wether its ethically questionable or not kinda getting derailed if we begin discussing this indepth.
 

Archroy

New member
Sep 30, 2010
47
0
0
DevilWithaHalo said:
I have *yet* to find a documented case where everything was done by the book and a child died anyway. (And I would be very interested in reading otherwise)
Take a look here for circumcision related deaths. I dunno how many of them you would regard as fitting your criteria though.

http://www.cirp.org/library/death/

And the following is a fucking beauty. Religion at work in the modern world:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/baby-dies-circumcision-ritual-herpes_n_1322420.html
 

Maze1125

New member
Oct 14, 2008
1,679
0
0
odanhammer said:
Children that have parents that cannot afford this procedure are finding an increase in the amount of infections they are dealing with( around the head of the penis)
Infact since they started charging for this , the increase in infection has tripled in my area.
Do you have any sources for that information, and are they taking into account infections caused by the circumcision surgery?
 

Jonluw

New member
May 23, 2010
7,245
0
0
Bhaalspawn said:
Jonluw said:
Bhaalspawn said:
Male circumcision is not an issue. It's not as big a health risk as most people make it out to be, and is usually only done for sanitary reasons by the Jewish and Islamic faith (as far as I know, don't quote me on that).

Female circumcision on the other hand... *shudder* Anyone who does that to their daughter is a butcher.

While I'm alright for a parent's right to choose for their child, certain limits really should be applied to things like this. Here in Canada, for example, a doctor reserves the right to refuse to perform cosmetic procedures (of which circumcision is considered one) on anyone not old enough to consent (12 with parental permission, 18 without).

Parents looking to circumcise their daughter... get arrested.
You are aware that there are plenty of different kinds of both female and male circumcision, right?
Many types of female circumcision are far less intrusive than the most common male procedure. However, all of them are illegal in the western world. It goes to show that legislation regarding circumcision is not based on rational reasons.
snip
Did I seriously just read that laws regarding circumcision are not based on rationality?

Male circumcision is done for mostly sanitary reasons, or religious reasons that serve the same purpose.

Female circumcision is done for one reason. They assume it will reduce a woman's libido. And the different styles of circumcision all involve the removal of the clitoris, cutting the ability to feel sexual pleasure by a severe amount in adulthood.

In Canada, this is considered permanantly disabling someone, and is illegal here and in ANY place in the world that claims to be civilized. It's nothing more than a butchering job, and most of the time is done sans-anesthesia and not even in a hospital.

Women escaping the threat of FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) can be granted asylum in Canada and the US, allowing them instant immigration to these countries.

Captcha: Uncharted Island

The places where FGM is still practiced.
I just told you that there are different types of female circumcision.
Some of them are far less intrusive than male circumcision.
Female circumcision is not "only" done to reduce the libido. That's one kind of cutting.
And the main reasons for cutting men are cosmetic and religious.
Seriously, it is pretty much no more sanitary than keeping your foreskin.
 

somonels

New member
Oct 12, 2010
1,209
0
0
All uncircumcised men can take solace in the fact that they aren't phimotics.
Turtleneck goes up, turtleneck comes down, turtleneck goes up, turtleneck comes down.
 

DugMachine

New member
Apr 5, 2010
2,566
0
0
Well i've only ever grown up uncut so I can't really tell how the sex is when cut. I don't see the point of cutting if it's not for medical reasons like the tight foreskin or whatever its called.

As for the bacteria and smell or whatever... FUCK MAN, just wash your junk and pull the skin back when you pee. It's as simple as that.
 

Nuke_em_05

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2009
828
0
21
Relish in Chaos said:
So basically, what I'm asking here is to have some kind of definitive, unbiased verdict on the whole thing,
Bahahahaha!

You're asking an internet forum for a definitive, unbiased verdict?


Okay, for my "unbiased" verdict: meh.

I'm circumcised, it happened when I was a baby. While my parents are "Christian", I don't think that was a factor in the decision. My mom was (and still is) a practicing nurse, and she seems to think it is safer. Uncircumcised are more prone to infection.

On the flip side, my brother-in-law was not circumcised, he got an infection in his 20's, and they had to circumcise him then. I don't remember my circumcision, and I don't care. I guarantee you that my brother-in-law remembers his, and I'm sure he cares a great deal.

As far as sex goes; well, my wife and I have had no problems with me being circumcised. We enjoy sex so much we're on baby #2 (due 13 months after the first).

I'd ask my brother-in-law for a before and after evaluation, but he's boning my sister and I just don't want to know.

As for you, OP, you're already circumcised, so you're just going to have to deal with it. Knowing that it might have been better (even though you have no frame of reference at all), isn't going to change how it is for you.

So, deal with it, move on.
 

Maze1125

New member
Oct 14, 2008
1,679
0
0
Nuke_em_05 said:
On the flip side, my brother-in-law was not circumcised, he got an infection in his 20's, and they had to circumcise him then. I don't remember my circumcision, and I don't care. I guarantee you that my brother-in-law remembers his, and I'm sure he cares a great deal.
So your argument is that it's better to inflict pain on a baby than on a consenting adult?