BS: Circumcision: pros and cons

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 03:09 PM

Right freakin' ON, Clinton! I got one simple message for the pro-circumcision crowd...(buncha stinkin' child-abusin' perverts)

TOUCH MY BANANA WITHOUT MY PERMISSION AND YOU DIE!!!!!

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bill kennedy
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 03:09 PM

circumcision is mutilation period
as a circumcised male whom Daylia has not met, let me say yes, I regret having been circumcised

as to how it started in the US on non religious grounds let me suggest what was merely alluded to in a post above

a doctor could charge a couple of hundred dollars or whatever (I know it has fluctuated and increased over the years, so whatever it is today 2000 or so) for a normal delivery of a boy child.

Add a circumcision, quick snip and a little more work for the nurses but who cares now the doctor can bill for an additional surgical procedure. a money machine, pure and simple, though no doubt there may well have been dodctors who actually believed there might be some therapeutic reason for the procedure, most did it for the bucks. not for any good reason. mutilation not as severe as female circumcision, but no less wrong. can;t believe it still goes on, and can't accept the feeble argument from some men I know that they allowed thier sons to be circumcised so they wouldn't 'look different' then the fathers. how many of you had fathers that compared thier penises with you? or you ever accidentally got a look at? long ago time to put an end to this barbaric practice in secular society leave it to the tribal religions if they so choose, but I would even argue that there is no placve for genital mutilation of others in a humane society. If you are lucky enough to reach the age of reason or manhood or adulthood and decide that you want to be circumcised as a mark of your covenant with some god or other, or as a lark, or as a test, or for whatever other lamne reason you might think of that is your right, pay for it or do it yourself, but no one has the right to do that to a child. IMHO

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 03:07 PM

oh, brother ...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 03:03 PM

"How about judging/condemning your neighbour's appearance... Doesn't that just reek of ignorance and bigotry?"

If you want to call me a bigot because I think people who use religion as a rational to justify mutilating their children, you go right a head... it says more about you than it does about me...

This isn't about wearing a turban, or having to face a certain direction when you pray... this isn't about what you think some invisible man in the sky said about what you can and cannot eat on certain days of the week.... This is child abuse... plain and simple...

If your religion said it was o.k. for a man to beat his wife, I'd be JUST as condemning and condescending of that practice as well....

Oh... wait... That's already been done...

I don't know why I'm surprised to find such prevalent attitudes here, I really don't....

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 02:51 PM

"The evolutionary--may I use that term?--reason for the foreskin is to protect the sensitve "

Then what the hell am I doin' in a paved city?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 02:31 PM

How about judging/condemning your neighbour's appearance, choices and cultural traditions according to your own personal preferences, standards and biases - instead of according to theirs? Doesn't that just reek of ignorance and bigotry?

Want a more accurate measure of other people, when they differ from yourself?

Better use the right yardstick then.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 01:58 PM

"All others should be grateful that their parents cared enough..."

To have them mutilated???
Hardly...   What an ignorant, barbaric concept...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: saulgoldie
Date: 18 Oct 05 - 01:35 PM

The evolutionary--may I use that term?--reason for the foreskin is to protect the sensitve head from the whipping of the tall grass as one ran through it naked. I suggest that all circumcision survivors who might have been planning to run through tall grass naked could be upset with their parents. All others should be grateful that their parents cared enough about their health to have it done.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 11:01 PM

Ummm...not sure what you're getting at with that comment, Art. Are you referring to the bull's ears? Or an unlucky matador's cojones?

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 09:41 PM

And that is how I can see that there is possibly beauty and validity to the traditions around La Corrida--bullfights.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 07:26 PM

You can't know what you are missing if you've never had it.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 07:26 PM

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: frogprince
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 07:24 PM

I grieve to think of all the nights when I've lain there soaked with sweat, trying to catch my breath, and thinking, "If only my parents hadn't had me mutilated as a child, that might have been enjoyable "

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 05:32 AM

"A state of enlightenment" - now that's the kind of talk that fundamentalists of all types tend to use, religious or secular. Brave New World...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Terry K
Date: 17 Oct 05 - 02:09 AM

It'd be even better if all the people who need this kind of symbolic nonsense could be educated into a state of enlightenment.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:36 PM

The clerical tonsure can be seen as a kind of symbolic circumcision. It'd be good if it could be adopted as a substitute in cultures where circumcision is seen as a significant ritual of inclusion.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:17 PM

Excellent!

That's about as rational as today's justifications.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:10 PM

I finally found the information I was looking for in regards to how this practice spread to the U.S.

"Circumcision gained in importance in the USA only after allopathic medical doctors, playing upon prevailing sexual anxieties, urged it as a "cure" for a long list of childhood diseases and "disorders, "to include polio, tuberculosis, bedwetting, and a new syndrome which appeared widely in the medical literature known as "masturbatory insanity." Circumcision was then advocated along with a host of exceedingly harsh, pain-inducing devices and practices designed to thwart any vestige of genital pleasure in children (Paige 1978)."

So although it probably started long before 2300 B.C., as a shamanistic ritual, the reasons for doing it have changed throughout time. It seems that it originated as a sacrifice.

It was also interesting to read that it was not always practiced by Jews. Apparently Moses outlawed the practice at one point in time.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 04:08 PM

"I posted those links to illustrate the HUGE individual and cultural differences in what is considered to be physically beautiful and desirable - or horrific and abusive."

Gottcha. Thanks, Daylia.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,Skinned Alive
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 03:20 PM

Thanks for the bold comments daylia.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 03:01 PM

As usual McGrath, you have linked us to a most informative article.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,nameless guest #5766
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:47 PM

According to McGrath of Harlow (16 Oct 05 - 12:37 PM): One thing I hadn't realised until looking something up for this thread is that there is nothing in the Koran requiring circumcision of male Muslims.

I'm no expert on Islam, but I do know that male circumcision is required in Judaism. I also know that in McGrath of Harlow has said in Middle East threads that Judaism and Islam are essentially the same religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:24 PM

Hey, you know what? I have a suspicion that we're not going to come to an agreement on this. Still, that's not likely to stop everybody from beating each other over the head about it (so to speak). Oh, well...

Aloha,
Mark

PS, Clinton, since reading medical literature is part of what I do for a living, I'd be interested in seeing some specific references to the "reams and reams of reputable medical literature" that dismisses those two very limited claims. I'm not familiar with any, but would be happy to know about them.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 02:12 PM

What people do to themselves is one thing. What things they do to their children or their babies is another thing. Whether it's a matter or surgery or sex, the same kind of principle applies.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:45 PM

Peace, I posted those links to illustrate the HUGE individual and cultural differences in what is considered to be physically beautiful and desirable - or horrific and abusive.   

What Brazilian natives do to their lips, or other people(s) do to their genitals may be judged as horrific or abusive by Westerners raised with a very different set of cultural biases - but not by the people themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:37 PM

Much better to leave such procedures until the people concerned have grown up and can decide for themselves, leaving aside the rare cases where there is some genuine abnormality that needs to be corrected.

One thing I hadn't realised until looking something up for this thread is that there is nothing in the Koran requiring circumcision of male Muslims. In a way it's more of a cultural tradition than a formal requirement. There are some Muslims who are opposed to circumcision of children and babies, on religious and ethical grounds. (See here).

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:02 PM

PS if you're hoodless, and feeling victimized or bereft for the first time in your life after persuing this thread, you might find this comforting. (WARNING - not for the faint-hearted)

Shes more interested in the subject than I

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:53 AM

Pretty pics, but I don't see what point you are trying to make.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:44 AM

PS if you're hoodless, and feeling victimized or bereft for the first time in your life after persuing this thread, you might find this comforting. (WARNING - not for the faint-hearted)

J: Story of a Subincision

Scroll down the bottom of the page for rationale, commentary and photos.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:21 AM

Well, bobad, I'd consider this mutilation. But I bet he doesn't!

Prolonged, patient, well-intentioned "education" and/or ridicule would most likely cure him, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:05 AM

OK, and . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 11:03 AM

" the medical benefits have already mentioned above"
And they're all dismissed by reams and reams of reputable medical opinion and research...

"The only reasons for the circumcision of minors can be religious or cultural ones."
And those reasons are wrong... plain and simple...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,'Cat protecting her family's privacy
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 10:54 AM

My immediate family features exclusively hoodless males. None consider themselves mutilated or abused. All are potent, virile, fully functional, happy and healthy.

And stinky-dinky? Whassat??

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Peace
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 10:52 AM

Good point, bobad. I don't think it would be frivilous to bring in pierced ears at this juncture. Many kids--mostly girl kids--have their ears pierced before they reach the age of majority.

Mutilation is mutilation is mutilation . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 10:15 AM

"The only reasons for the circumcision of minors can be religious or cultural ones."

I agree with the above statement and question why most societies readily accept this rationale for males but are horrified when it is applied to females.

The reasons presented in this forum have been predicated on the degree of mutilation. What is the standard for an acceptable degree of non-consensual mutilation?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 09:40 AM

A woman expert/authority on male circumcision.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,joe
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 09:40 AM

I wrote in a previous thread that circumcision causes very little pain - at least that was my experience a year ago. That's not to say it's ok to cut babies who have no choice in the matter. The "preventing problems in later life" argument doesn't hold up . Nobody talks about removing a kid's appendix so why a foreskin? The only reasons for the circumcision of minors can be religious or cultural ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 09:36 AM

Sorry folks, you do sound quite convincing, but your arguments against male circumsion just doesn't hold up (hee hee!) in real life.

I've yet to meet a hoodless male who harboured any "issues" whatsoever around his long-lost foreskin, or considered himself "abused", "mutilated", or otherwise inconvenienced in any way.

In fact, they seem quite proud, not to mention fond of their aesthetically pleasing, smegma-free, well-sculpted appendages.

Likewise, the hooded males I've known seem equally pleased with their parts and prowess. However, I've heard a more than a few complaints about being afflicted with occasional-to-regular bouts of itchy, over-sensitive "sticky dicky" (also known, in some intimate circles, as "stinky-dinky").

As for sexual function and satisfaction, I think there IS something to to be said for that increase in "latent ejaculatory time". It's a case of one partner's loss becoming both partner's gain. However, since human sexual performance/satisfaction are a function of so much more than nerve endings, it's nothing to write home to mama about imo.

And as for circumcision being "sexual assault of a child", I suppose that depends on personal opinion + prevailing family/community/religious/cultural norms and laws. There are many instances where neglecting to circumcise a child constitutes real social, psychological, and yes sexual abuse. For one example, check out these ancient, lavish social traditions:

Traditional Anatolian (Turkish) Marriage and Circumcision Rituals

Circumcision is an operation in which the foreskin of the penis is removed. It is a practice of great religious significance. Circumcision is known to have been practiced in ancient Egypt even before it was introduced to the Jews as part of Allah's covenant with Abraham. In Islam, however, the authority for circumcision came not from the Qur'an but from the example of the Prophet Mohammed. In Islam, whatever the prophet does or says is called sunnet; therefore this word stands for circumcision in modern Turkish.

Urologists claim that circumcised males have far fewer urinary tract infections and are less at risk for catching sexually transmitted diseases than are uncircumcised males.

As an Islamic country, in Turkey all Moslem boys are circumcised between the ages 2-14 by licensed circumcising surgeons. From the social point of view, the most prominent feature of circumcision is the introduction of a child to his religious society as a new member. This explains the reason for circumcision of people who convert into Moslems as a first step. It is impressed on a boy at a very early age that circumcision is a step for transition to manhood. As long as they are accepted as very important events in people's lives, circumcisions are generally made with big ceremonies in festive atmosphere...

Interesting, too, that the 2002 study I posted suggesting functional and satisfaction benefits of circumcision was carried out in a Turkish university.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 08:11 AM

Mark

If the cervixes of females were removed that would reduce the incidence of cervical cancer in them also.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Terry K
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 06:39 AM

There are no pros, it's all a con.

Everyone associated has been conned by the generation before them. It's all to do with superstition and the mindless perpetuation of a mythology that no thinking person could ever subscribe to.

I would advocate that the perpetrators stop mutilating children.

Other than that, I don't really hold any strong views on the issue.

cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 16 Oct 05 - 12:49 AM

Clinton, the medical benefits have already mentioned above, but here they are again. One is a documented decrease in the incidence of cervical cancer in the partners of circumcised men. The other is a documented decrease in the incidence of urinary tract infections (including pyelonephritis, or infection of the kidney, and urosepsis, or bloodstream infection starting in the urinary tract, both of which can be fatal) in circumcised male infants under one year of age. Again, does that justify circumcision? Not necessarily. Would it justify it in the mind of someone whose child had a severe or even fatal urinary tract infection? You bet your bippy, but that's not how public policy is made.

To answer the question about bathing baby: In a small number of boys, the foreskin is retractable at birth. In most, it's firmly attached to the glans--removing these adhesions to loosen the foreskin is half of the circumcision procedure in a newborn. It becomes retractable in most boys some time between infancy and puberty--yes, that's a very wide window. Until it is easily retractable, it should not be forcibly pulled back. Once it is easily retractable, it should be pulled back and the glans cleaned on a regular basis.

There will be a short quiz next week.

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,The Ridged Band
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:53 PM

The Inside Skinney (or, Know Thy Prepuce

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:43 PM

Again - its the rights of the child the matter.

If an adult chooses cirmumcision - for whatever reason - it is a personal decision and is based on informed consent. A child does not have that choice therefore, circumcision is sexual assault of a child.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:23 PM

Or is a dildo or a vibrator or the middle finger more effective?
Ho Hum.
Or let Fido do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,Ladies: Does It Matter?
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 11:07 PM

Okay, has a woman here had sex with a "clad" gentleman and one that was "skinned"? Could you tell the difference? Was one "better" than the other?

We need the sexual "skinney" on the subject.

Skinned Alive (as a babe)

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: *daylia*
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:55 PM

Removal of the vagina or the cervix would be a better contraceptive, though ...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:51 PM

Having a foreskin does not make one susceptible to HIV, high risk sexual behaviour, among other activities, does.

It's like saying women should have their cervixes or vaginas removed as that would reduce the risk of HPV.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:48 PM

Wouldn't it just be easier to wear a condom?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:39 PM

Today (Oct. 15, 2005) The New York Times published an editorial titled "Preventing the Spread of AIDS."

The editorial promotes circumcision as a powerful protector against AIDS. The results of a new study in South Africa are summarized. It is suggested that the penis's foreskin has cells that are particularly receptive to the AIDS virus.

Preventing the Spread of AIDS

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 15 Oct 05 - 10:28 PM

"WEll, I rather doubt removal of the labia enhances sexual function/satisfication."

I didn't see anyone making that claim but I suspect you are inferring from the opinion that removal of the foreskin increases "ejaculatory latency time" whatever that is supposed to mean.

The foreskin and the labia are rich in nerve endings which promote sexual response so to say that the removal of either enhances sexual function/satisfaction is a specious argument at best.