KungFuGuy

i'm happily uncircumcised. Hate to go on a tangent, but i disagree with circumcision even for religious reasons. Doing it at birth seems like a way to guarantee a population within the religion. waiting until an individual has the choice to go through circumcision would make the process actually meaningful to that person religously and spiritually.

Having spoken with a rabbi on the matter, I found out that most Jewish Rabbi go with a "free hand" operation that's relatively fast, where as hospitals use a device called a 'bell clamp' which involves strapping the child so it is immobile. It's been awhile since i did the paper.

to clarify on female circumcision: it's a regional thing. In some regions it involves "trimming" the labia, while in other's it involves a full removal of the clitoris. Learned this in anthropolgy from a professor who saw the operations performed.

Leto

heh. not a big deal. I'm cut. there's no issue. not irreconcilable at all. I am still incredibly sensitive, and yes, my partners have preferred it. but again, it is not a big issue.

__________________
You said you didn't give a fuck about hockey
And I never saw someone say that before
You held my hand and we walked home the long way
You were loosening my grip on Bobby Orr

http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Leto_Atreides_I

Ustwo

One of the benifits of being circumcised.

I've never had to use the word "smegma" in relation to my person.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Arsenic7

As has been said It's unnecessary.

To me it is equivalent to cutting off our childrens pinky fingers and toes, because, hey, they are unnecessary, and doing so lowers their chance of developing PINKY cancer or hurting their PINKY or sticking their pinky in their ass, not washing their hands, and comming down with a case of STINKY PINKY!

Also, to prevent confusion, the most common form of female circumcision is almost completely analogous to male circumcision...it is just the removal of the clitoral hood.

And yet one is mutilation and the other "normal" here.

Also, for the parents who want it done to their son when they are young because THEY had it done...why not let the child decide when he is an adult? Shouldn't it be his decision? You know those parents you've heard about who pierced their baby's ears or nose? How'd you react to that? What if a parent decided they wanted to tattoo their baby because it was family tradition?

__________________
This is no sig.

ngdawg

Many cultures do, in fact, pierce their daughter's ears as babies or tattoo their children. We here pierce every part of our bodies, tattoo til there's barely plain skin left. Culturely speaking, those are relatively benign.
I'm on the fence about circumcision as I do think it's a involuntary body modification that the child doesn't choose-yet I chose it done to him. Do I feel guilty? Very small part of me does. Keep in mind though, it is a more serious procedure done to an adult and one in which the pain of it would be remembered. My son was done his second day and by the time we all went home on their sixth day, there wasn't even a bandage. To those who complain their parents 'destroyed' their genitalia I would say two things: 1)we did the best we could with the knowledge we had and 2) you can't miss what you never experienced. Get over it.

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

xepherys

I'm not really sure why people are so vehemently against it. Also, using examples like "Traditional medicine also involved bleeding people to cure them. Let's do that too!" is really bad. A lot of the modern things that are "right" or "better" really aren't. A lot of traditional medicine is actually coming back. Bleeding? Leeches? Both have acceptable medical uses. What about all those great drugs and antibiotics docs love pumping into us nowadays... that must be WAY better becuase it's modern.

I hate it when people get preachy because the "old" ways are cruel and horrible and the "new" ways are enlightened and better. People probably thought that when they burned witches at the stake, too. I guess it all comes back to "to each their own". It doesn't really cause any problems, so if the family prefers it, so be it.

I'm circumcised... as are both of my sons. I thik it's beneficial. You can show studies that say it's not... there are studies that say it is. Regardless, studies and statistics mean just about zilch these days. You can get financial backing for and professioanl acceptance of even the most bullshit of studies.

billege

I'm just astonished. I shouldn't even be posting, because I'm no where near the "responsible" place someone should be when typing.

The one thing I can do, as opposed to arguing with at least half the lot of you, is comment on what just blows me away.

It's the causuality with which most of you are like "oh hell, just snip it off, they don't remember it." Or, "I'm not hearing any complaints from cut men."

Utter astonishment. That's all I'm capable of right now. That and disgust.

I'm astonished more that a large group of people, that I normally consider more intelligent than the general populace, are just so "bleh, cut it" about the whole thing. Like, it's really not a big deal at all.

Amazing. Sick, and barbaric, but amazing.

The whole thread is proof that this tradition of male genital mutilation is so ingrained that intelligent people will set aside thier better reason, and move ahead unfettered.

__________________
I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence:
"My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend."

SecretMethod70

You know, it's amazing the types of things that can end up being discussed in a political science class...such as the time last term where we spent about half a class of mine talking about this .

Anyway, objectively I'm forced to take the position that it is genital mutilation. There is no reason for it whatsoever, and the fact it is so entrenched into society - especially American society - doesn't even remotely resemble an excuse for the procedure.

Admittedly, I think circumcised penises look better (to the degree to which I am capable of thinking a penis looks good ), but that is a matter of socialization. The fact I have grown up in a society where circumcision is the norm and have, therefore, been socialized to find it more aesthetically pleasing does not change the fact that it is the unnecessary mutilation of genetalia.Completely agreed.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

hrandani

I'm with you, buddy.

Sheeple. It's like when I talk to my grandma and she says something like " I can't believe they let niggers vote now."

It's the accepted belief of the time that people refuse to consider deeply enough to change. Sheer ignorance.

I can already feel the ban, so I might as well add that there is nothing people hate more than being called ignorant. Especially parents. Because hell, it's their child, right? They know everything.

I have nothing but disdain for people who claim to research the topic and still go ahead and remove part of their baby's natural anatomy. And it's purely a fucked up, cultural thing that has no bearing on reality.

If a doctor circumcised my child, I would kill him. It's that simple.

healer

It's called Phimosis, and I'm a sufferer. Although I don't really see it that way. My foreskin rolls back far enough in order to keep everything clean and there's no pain during intercourse as long as she's naturally lubricated. There are ways to stretch the skin manually or using a cortizone cream applied daily, resulting in the skin being able to move freely over the glans over time. The problem is that men suffering from this condition have never had their glans exposed and thus it is extremely sensitive. More exposure would result in an obvious loss in sensation, but I dont know if I'm willing. I think I'm more afraid of sex becoming less pleasurable and not being able to get my sensitivity back once lost.

As for the OP, I think circumcision for the sake of doing it is unnecessary. Neither me or my Dad are and if I have a son I'm leaving him intact. If he wants to later on in life or when he becomes sexually active, I'll have no problem with it. I think it should be a choice. Not the default.

__________________

hulk

Same here, and with my dad and youngest brother. I was snipped at a very young age, and have never really noticed any side effects. I'm sure as hell not embarrased about it, nor do I miss the extra skin.

I think the whole issue is overblown, actually. There was one member above who advocated murder as a response to small-scale, voluntary medical procedure. Several others decrying it as the worst form of child abuse around. I don't know about you, but I can think of many, MANY things worse to do to a child.

The procedure, however, could be a lot nicer. From here:
Ouch, yo. That's not so much a question of cultural/religious ethics as a question of medical ethics, I think. I was under general anesthetic for my operation, which I assumed was the norm. Hence, the results of the studies on post-traumatic stress and long-term mental health may be more a result of a painful procedure at a young age than circumcision itself.

__________________
"'There's a tendency among the press to attribute the creation of a game to a single person,' says Warren Spector, creator of Thief and Deus Ex."
-- From an IGN game review.

Dragonknight

Do I think it's mutilation. no. Just like I don't think piercings or tattoos are mutilation. I was snipped as a child and yeah all those bad side affects have Never been experienced by myself or any of the men that I've known over my life, because of this I would say that there is nothing wrong with it. Then again some one older and wiser then I found enough people willing to say yes this hurt there life to say that circumcision has negative affects. I've never even actually heard of those side affects in till I read this post. Some feel very strongly about this subject though and that surprises me as well.

__________________
Freedom is NOT Free.

Xazy

Sexual abuse?!? To me it is about religious belief nothing to do with that at all. But if you want to talk pain, I know someone who became religeous as an adult, I think he was 31, when he had his circumcision.

ASU2003

I'm not sure killing the doctor would be the best, but I wouldn't let it happen in the first place.

It's the whole attitude of "It's good enough for me, then it must be good for him." logic that doesn't make sense to me. Yes, we circumcised men are damaged, evolution created the foreskin for a reason and we lost it. But just because our parents made a mistake, doesn't mean that we have to repeat it. Education and knowledge about this will help reduce the numbers. However, I could never be friends with anybody who watched the video of it being performed, and still went ahead and did it to their son.

The other thing is, I wonder why this never gets talked about on TV? You would think the Discovery Health Channel could do a show about the most common surgery in America.

Leto

you're asigning too much of a deal to it.

carry on with life.

__________________
You said you didn't give a fuck about hockey
And I never saw someone say that before
You held my hand and we walked home the long way
You were loosening my grip on Bobby Orr

http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Leto_Atreides_I

Charlatan

The big difference is that the piercings and tattoos that you are refering to were done by adults with their concent.

Circumcision is done to a baby.

Answer this: Would you tattoo your baby?

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Poppinjay

It comes up as a hot topic every now and then. I remember there were a lot of investigative reports in the mid 80's on this. The one thing that is permanently etched in my mind are the "oopsies".

http://www.fathermag.com/health/circ...r/horror.shtml

There is risk with every surgery. A slip of the wrist and junior's genetalia is damaged.

The thing that bothers me about the studies that favor circumcision is that they defend, rather than show proof. And a good many of them choose to label opposing studies as anti-semetism.

__________________
I think the Apocalypse is happening all around us. We go on eating desserts and watching TV. I know I do. I wish we were more capable of sustained passion and sustained resistance. We should be screaming and what we do is gossip. -Lydia Millet

pan6467

Penn and Teller did a great Bullshit! episode on this.

Everything I have ever read clearly states that foreskin helps sexual arousal, helps enjoyment and prolongs the male orgasm.

But I wouldn't know...... I'm not a freak my parents made sure I was circumsized so that I wouldn't look funny in the showers at school..... which is weird because at our school very rarely did they allow us to shower after gym class in JHS and SHS.... which sucked if you had gym early in the day.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

SecretMethod70

Uh, I'm not sure why you said this...

But anyway, as someone else pointed out, this is hardly a good idea. Just like pro-lifers who kill abortion doctors, this would do nothing but hurt your cause and your future. Absolutely nothing good would come of it. In fact, it would only strengthen the idea that you're just a messed up person for challenging the social norm and no one would even consider that you may be correct. Not to mention, as much as circumcision is genital mutilation, it is also not likely to negatively effect your child in the long run. Pretty silly to kill someone over what basically amounts to piercing your child's ear in terms of the most likely long-term negative effects (I say this knowing there can be serious complications but also noting that they are not overwhelmingly common).

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

xepherys

I love how people who agree with something that happens to be the social norm these days are ALWAYS sheep (sheeple). I'm intelligent, and I made a decision. It was based on several beliefs and facts. I didn't circumcise my son because the kids next door are (I have no idea hoenstly). I did it because I felt it was the right choice for my child. Just because you don't like it doesn't make ME wrong. What disgusts me is the utter lack of tolerance some people have for other people's views. That, and the Dutch. Oh wait, sorry. But all kidding aside, you cannot assume someone is ignorant and making a "follow tha pack" decision SOLELY because that decision happens to be the common one. That itself is ignorant.

stevie667

Neither have i, yet the boys are still happily intact
Can't go blaming poor hygene on this ya know.

Personally, why on earth would you want to circumsize (baring medical reasons)? You couldn't go thinning out your sack, you wouldn't lop off your earlobes, so why mutilate jr?

__________________
Office hours have changed. Please call during office hours for more information.

Glory's Sun

ig·no·rant Audio pronunciation of "ignorant" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gnr-nt)
adj.

1. Lacking education or knowledge.
2. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.
3. Unaware or uninformed.


I just want to throw this out there. I didn't realize that making a decision based on what you read or believe is ignorant.

Seriously, what's the big harm of circumsision?? Does it do permanant damage to the child. ( I don't want to hear yes because it takes off a little piece of skin.) Boo friggin hoo. If that's the case then please don't let your kid ride a bike or participate in sports because it could cause damage to that child. I have yet to meet a man who said that circumsision caused his problems in life or it had some profound effect on him. So unless someone can show me facts supporting long term problematic effects then it's simply a decision that is made by the parents. The parents are the care takers. The parents decide (until old enough) what is best for the child. If a parental unit decides circumsision is the right choice for their child.. then fine. If they don't .. then fine. It shouldn't really make a difference. A penis is a penis.

xepherys

guccilvr is right on the money. In fact, as a parent it's 100% our job TO make decisions for our children. So yes, we do this to babies. We make our children do chores to. In fact, most of them woudl CHOOSE not to if left to their own accord. We make them study, we ground them, maybe spank them, give them time outs, make them eat their peas and all sorts of other nasty things. And we say, "While you under our roof, you play by our rules", and it should be that way until they are out on their own (read not just until age 18). We make those decisions using the information provided to us and our own logic and thoughts. As I said above, just becuase you disagree doesn't make us wrong.

Charlatan

Seriously, what's the big harm of Infibulation?

As a parent, I've decided that it is best for my young daughter to have her vulva sewn shut by the process of Infibulation. It will not effect the use -- we will leave a small enough hole for her to urinate and to expel menstal blood (when the time is right). In the meantime she will be safe from getting raped.

I can't believe more people don't do this in North America. She is young so she feels no pain and she won't know what she is missing. Most importantly, she will be safe from rape. My culture does it all the time. I don't understand what the big deal is.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

xepherys

I don't see the correlation between seing something shut with possible permanent side effects and snipping of a relatively small flap of flesh that has NO PROVEN permanent side effects. Can you make a reasonable argument that compares one to the other? No apples to oranges thanks!

Glory's Sun

Charlatan.. I have to admit.. I laughed while reading your reply. Now I'm not trying to offend you.. it's just that infibulation is much more intrusive than circumsision. Circumsision doesn't take away the right to have a fully functioning organ. I totally see the other side of this argument and how it's not necessary and all that. I just feel that for some to claim it's ignorant and barbaric is.. well.. ignorant at best. There is no real argument on why you <i>shouldn't</i> do this and there's no real argument on why you </i>should</i> do this. So that makes it null and leaves it up to the parents. Different cultures believe different things. I can't condemn some tribe who performs circumsision on girls or whatever they do because that's what they know. It's their belief system. In this society it's seen as normal for boys to be circumsized. Why?? It's been ingrained. Is it necessary? I've already answered this. No. But like I said.. unless it does something to the child that is mind altering or causes more than a few seconds of pain.. then I fail to see the problem. I'm glad my parents chose to have me circumsized.

I guess it all comes down to individual <b>belief structure</b> in the end. I believe it's ok. You don't. I won't say you're wrong, because you aren't, you just have a different structure.

Charlatan

The way I see it, my daughter is protected from rape and she can have the skin re-opened when she reaches the age of concent.

It doesn't change the function or the use of her vagina. It protects her and she feels nothing.

Imagine how embarrased she would be when we live in Africa if she doesn't look like all that other little girls in the village.

Ultimately, it really is my choice right? I am the parent and she is a baby.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Charlatan

It seems to me that if there is no reason to do it... why do it.

Unless you have a covanent with God... i.e. you are a Jew, there is no reason for this proceedure.

With the exception of religion, is see no cultural reason for doing this proceedure. The only reason I see is aesthetic or because I want to.

These are not good enough reasons.

I happen to like the look of pointed ears. Perhaps I should have my baby's ears surgically modified to be pointy. It won't affect her hearing and she will look cooler than all the other kids in her daycare.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Gatorade Frost

For me, it's aesthetic. I think my penis is prettier without a turtle neck and because of that I'm glad my parents circumcised me when I was born. I don't actually remember being circumcised, and in fact I never even realised it until I was in middle school and I was like "Oh... Circumcision? I guess so."

With the knowledge I have now, I wouldn't circumcise my son, but mainly because I'd be worried that he would grow up and then bitch at me for circumcising him, not because I think it does any actual harm.

__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips

BadNick

As I'm reading this thread, I'm eating a bag of pork rinds ...fried pork skins... I love these things but I have to watch I don't get my keyboard too greasey. I keep thinking that they're probably all those foreskins fried up crispy by some enterprising person. Zero net carbs, too.

Obviously ...to me at least... for the general population male circumcision is gradually going the way of the dodo bird and for good reasons. But since it's a religious ritual for some, and IMO not harmful if done properly, it's here as long as the religious traditions are here.

Glory's Sun

You win!!!

BadNick

Why thank you but I doubt many of the folks in this thread would agree to end the debate on such a tasty note.

ngdawg

Is this the same as piercings? Because, really, that train of thought applies there too.

She's too old now. Should have done it when she was a couple of days old. Now she'll have to wait til she's 18
Bottom line is, probably 99.5% of what we do to our bodies is for aesthetics or ease of maintenance. Culture or 'how it's always been done' maybe the other .5%(at least in North America)

__________________
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either of'em.

SecretMethod70

Well, if I have a daughter I am now making plans to have her labia minora chopped off. It doesn't really serve much of a purpose - no more than male foreskin at least - and I think it would be more aesthetically pleasing.

I'd love to see the outrage which would assuredly occur if I actually tried to have that done.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Gatorade Frost

Doesn't having the labia or clitoris make sex painful for a female?

__________________
I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh, yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well."
Emo Philips

Charlatan

I agree. When she's old enough to ask for a piercing, I will take this under consideration. I don't think it is my place to pierce her ears (or anything) until she has some say in it.


That's absolutely true. The main difference is that as adults (or children or teenagers) we have some say in the proccess.

It isn't done without our permission.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Jinn

I'm just as shocked as the posters above, but for a different reason.

Why should I see this is as mutilation? I happen to think that circumcised penises look better, and if pornography is any indicator.. so do a lot of people.

Furthermore, my parents circumcised me for health reasons, not religious reasons (my father is a rabid atheist). There was credible evidence (and still is credible evidence) that it provides a health benefit. Common sense alone tells me that a damp dark place is not as clean as an exposed area. Science most assuredly backs this claim (not penis cancer, those studies were not very well controlled -- but bacterial infections) and so I have no problem with it.

Female Genital Mutilation is either done out of ignorance or malice; male circumcision is usually neither. FGM is also done to remove pleasurable sensation s for women, whereas circumcision does not.

You're comparing apples and oranges -- it HAS to be done as a child, so there is no chance to ask them what they'd wish. It's not like tattooing, where you can wait 18 years and they can decide.

So in that respect, screw you. I like my exposed head.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

Jinn

Some additional research, for the skeptics (like me) among us.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

billege

Leto-

I appreciate you feel I’m spending too much time on this. However, I disagree, and will keep posting. You’re welcome to skip over my posts.

It’s tough for me to know where to start discussing this. There’s so much I want to touch on.

I’d like to start with the cleanliness topic. It has two components, one for women to pay attention to, and one for men.

I’m sure that those of you possessing vaginas have at one time or another been exposed to the idea that your vagina stinks. In fact, there’s an entire industry selling products (FDS, douches, etc.) to make your vagina “not stink.” If you’ve ever watched a stand up comedian talk about “eating pussy” then you’ve heard more comments about the “smell.” You’ve heard the “fish jokes,” and you’ve read the discussions on our own TFP where women struggle with men who do believe their partner’s vagina is “dirty” “smelly” etc. If fact, I’ve read threads and met both men and women, who refuse any kind of sex during menstruation because of various opinions centered on cleanliness. The words “gross” “icky” “disgusting” “smelly” are often used in these discussions.

I say all this to make perfectly clear that the loathing of the vagina’s natural smell and lubrication is well ingrained in our culture. Women deal with this every day. They struggle to educate men to the facts, yet support male genital mutilation for reasons of cleanliness. Such hypocrisy is so deep, it’s not even conscious.

So far as I know, we’re not in the common practice of slicing off labia majora to solve the issue of female odor. However, we are slicing off the foreskin to satisfy the same line of thinking. Any woman who rallies to circumcision’s cause is not only agreeing with the same thought that declares her vagina “smelly” and “dirty,” but she’s also exposing her hypocrisy if she has ever rejected the idea of her vagina as “smelly” or “dirty” in its natural state.

Men who rally to male genital mutilation for cleanliness reasons have now bought stock in the idea that a natural penis’ lubrication is unclean. Most men didn’t even know their penises were supposed to be able to lubricate. Yet, some of you talk about “no side effects…”

Let’s move on to the idea of choice.

Tattooing or piercing compared to male genital mutilation is an apples/oranges situation. But let’s address it anyway. Piercing, such as the ears of a young girl, is quite different than the removal of her earlobes or labia majora. Try having an infant’s clit pierced, and let me know what the police say.

Tattooing is only legal in this country at the age of adulthood, or with the parents permission. They are permanent body modifications that should be made by adults. They should not be made for a child unless solid reasons can be shown. It’s awfully challenging to think of valid reasons to pierce, tattoo, or perform genital mutilation on a child. Adults can modify their bodies at will.

I do not believe that parents who have chosen to mutilate their sons are “sheep.” They have looked (I dearly hope) at facts and made a choice based on their beliefs and own reason.

However, I do believe they’ve made the wrong choice. They’ve chosen to permanently modify their son’s penises from their natural condition, because they felt like it. The boys will not live healthier lives now because of it, nor will they experience the type of sexual pleasures they would have pre-mutilation. Their glans will not be protected nor nourished by the foreskin and its benefits.

It’s true that the rest of their sexual and genital functions will happen, and enable someone to say “there’s no side effects.” Similarly, if I surgically cut off a finger, close after birth, I could say there were no side effects; or, sliced off the female’s labia majora. The fact is a large portion of the penis’ functional structure has been arbitrarily cut off. The penis functions without the hood, but not as nature intended. As it’s done without consent at birth, very few mutilated men can make the basis for a comparison cut/uncut.

As to appearance: We’ve been socialized to believe the cut penis is better looking. Women as well as men. Just like we’ve been socialized to believe in bigger tits, smaller stomachs, narrower hips, and fuller lips. In fact, such a large portion of us have cut penises, most of us didn’t know there was a different way to be, until we saw “that weirdo” in the locker room. Given the intense social pressures to fit in, it’s no small wonder we’re happy we’re all one big mutilated bunch, especially at that age.
I’d also like to go out on a limb an say there’s some latent anger at the mutilation that’s transferred to sons. I hardly would say fathers are conscious of it, but there’s certainly something sick about the train of thought “I’m mutilated, so he’s going to be too.” Further exploration of that train of thought should reveal that Dad doesn’t have a base awareness that he is “mutilated.” He’s accepted his disfigurement by his parents all his life. Challenging that is a very complicated mental process.

It’s just a small flap of skin, and thus not a big deal. So are earlobes. Yet, it’s not aesthetically acceptable to cut off earlobes.

I’ve said what I have to say.

I fervently hope time does show, not that parents who’ve chosen to mutilate are wrong per se, but that the practice of societal endorsed mutilation is wrong.

__________________
I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence:
"My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend."

Charlatan

Because a lot of people like something does not neccesarily make it right. And it proves nothing other than what the majority of males are having done (or not done) to them. European porn has a lot of uncircumcised penises what does that prove?


My parents circumcised me for health reasons. It was reason it was proscribed to the vast majority of babies in the past. Most of the reasoning behind this has been proven false or spurious at best.

Your common sense approach would suggest that all women should be dirty and/or bacteria ridden. The vagina is damp, dark place and excretes the same fluids (for lack of a more techincal term) as the glans below the foreskin do.

Soap and water. Say it with me. Soap and water.

I understand the urge to prepetuate this uneccessary proceedure upon our kids. Believe me. I am circumsized and when we had my son I had to think about it. Did I want my son to look different from me? In my mind, all I know is the circumsized penis.

After some thought and some discussion and some research... I decided to not have it done.

It was uneccessary. There was no pressing reason to have it done. Aesthetics and "just because I like it" is not a good enough reason.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke