chitchat had a thread get hijacked into a discussion on this, but it wasn't very serious.


How similar do you feel male and female circumcision are?
Are either one ethical or medically important? What if we assume cleanliness isn't a factor?

are you circumcised? would you circumcise your child?

12/8/2008 8:40:36 PM

12/8/2008 8:41:56 PM

Not important.

Yes, yes.

12/8/2008 8:42:16 PM

12/8/2008 8:42:53 PM

male and female circumcision, especially considering male's are usually done when only hours or days old, and females are done often by force when a teenager, are nothing alike.

and while there are plenty of legitimate criticisms for male circumcision, there are also benefits or at least parity in the final outcome. For females, there isn't a single positive result.

12/8/2008 8:58:09 PM

I would disagree that male and female circumcision are nothing alike.

Male circumcision, while it does not eradicate the possibility of sexual pleasure, it removes sensitive nerves and tissue that serve a purpose in sex. There are estrogen receptors, nerve endings, and a double layer of skin that provide a gliding mechanism during intercourse and masturbation. The removal of the foreskin also causes a process called keratinization of the glans, which essentially callouses the head of the penis.

Just because the infant does not have the ability to protest, does not mean that it is a voluntary procedure. Foreskin restoration exists for a reason: adult men regret what was done to them without their consent as an infant. They had even less of a choice that the teenage girls who are forcibly circumcised. It is also a painful and risky procedure. The foreskin is torn from the glans before the body has naturally caused such a separation and this skin crushed and severed from the penis. It exposes the glans and the injured skin to dirt and bacteria. There is a risk of infection and also the risk of human error. More than one child has died or lost his penis to circumcision.

The medical benefits of male circumcision are arguable and negligible. Much of the world does not circumcise their infants. Respected medical entities in the US and abroad do not support circumcision. And if there are such benefits to circumcision then why not allow a person to make that decision as an adult rather than have that choice made for them before they could voice an opinion.

12/8/2008 9:14:01 PM

this is only something that hippy birkenstock wearing, fair trade coffee drinking, don't vaccinate our kids cause it causes autism, weirdos worry about

12/8/2008 9:15:55 PM

Quote :

"Not important."

Quote :

""

12/8/2008 9:19:08 PM

Quote :

"It is also a painful and risky procedure."

What?

How risky can it be when it's been done successfully for thousands of years?

12/8/2008 11:33:38 PM

holy shit some retardation in this thread.


MALE CIRCUMCISION = aesthetics, convenience, hygene.

FEMALE CIRCUMCISION = disabling mutilation, subjugation, patriarchal ownership.

12/8/2008 11:39:05 PM

Male Circumcision = Vast Jew Conspiracy

12/8/2008 11:49:17 PM

oh, yeah. and that ^

12/8/2008 11:53:00 PM

Yes. Maybe.

It does seem hygienic to circumcise. I mean, sometimes a shower isn't a possibility and fumunda cheese is bad enough. Having always been circumcised I don't know the difference in feel, but I would say I haven't exactly suffered through adolescence and adulthood.

It seems like it is always women who have some strong opposition to it. Guys just seem to want to go with whatever their parents did. What gives? I blame scare tactic articles.

[Edited on December 8, 2008 at 11:56 PM. Reason : l]

12/8/2008 11:56:02 PM

i feel gross yo

12/8/2008 11:56:14 PM

Both are immoral without the consent of the recipient

12/9/2008 12:00:29 AM

It seems like it is always women who have some strong opposition to it.

12/9/2008 12:01:29 AM

i oppose it being done to those too young to consent

12/9/2008 12:04:53 AM

Do you oppose tetanus shots and haircuts too?

What about those kids who are born with a tail? Should their parents wait for them to turn 18 so they can consent to having it removed?

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 12:14 AM. Reason : l]

12/9/2008 12:13:49 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:39 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:16:21 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:39 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:16:43 AM

Yes genital mutilation is on the same footing as necessary and helpful medical procedures.

Are you fucking kidding me?

12/9/2008 12:17:02 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:39 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:17:04 AM

Wait, are you seriously comparing male circumcision with tetanus shots? or corrective surgery?

Male circumcision isn't a needed operation, billions of men on the planet aren't circumcised and are fine. With hygiene what it is today it is not needed. There is little to no evidence that male circumcision is beneficial to any meaningful degree.

I could care less, but come on.

12/9/2008 12:18:27 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:39 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:20:29 AM

in before the suspension and can duke please like edit the post so theres not so many pictures?

12/9/2008 12:20:36 AM

No, not at all. I'm using it to point out that "lack of consent" as an argument really doesn't hold much water when you're dealing with a social norm.

12/9/2008 12:21:08 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:38 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:28:13 AM

Quote :

"More than one child has died or lost his penis to circumcision. "

Good lord, this lady is paranoid about her baby's wiener.

12/9/2008 12:28:47 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:38 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:28:49 AM

[Edited on December 9, 2008 at 6:38 AM. Reason : cats suck]

12/9/2008 12:29:32 AM

Quote :

"The removal of the foreskin also causes a process called keratinization of the glans, which essentially callouses the head of the penis."

What kind moonbat, anti-circumcision website did you plagiarize this from?

So what you're trying to say is that you're a doctor, and not a woman with an English degree, who knows more about this than the thousands of doctors who have no problem with performing this procedure, right?

Look, if you don't want to have your kid cut, it's nobody's business but your own, but I don't know how you're going to convince anyone that such a widely accepted and practiced medical procedure, in use for thousands of years, is so terrible.

People are going overboard on the other side as well. If a parent weighs the pro's and con's and decides they don't want to have their baby cut, that doesn't somehow make them a bad parent.

12/9/2008 12:38:30 AM

Quote :

"widely accepted and practiced medical procedure, in use for thousands of years"

yea, excepted it wasn't considered a medical procedure until about a century ago.

12/9/2008 12:40:51 AM

so? there wasnt much medicine at all, before much longer than that

12/9/2008 12:57:29 AM

well, you can't use the argument that it's been around for thousands of years with the medical argument. At its root, it is a religious practice. It became a medical practice with out any real scientific basis, and most recent research in the area has shown it doesn't do much good.

12/9/2008 1:18:07 AM

Besides the fact that they are mostly done without consent, there is nothing remotely similar between a male having a little piece of skin cut off and a female having her clitoris removed and/or her vagina sewed shut.

12/9/2008 1:29:02 AM

I don't think it really matters, which is why I'm always weirded out by either

a) People who freak out about others circumcising a child, and
b) Chicks who freak out about dudes who are uncircumcised

Also: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1865

12/9/2008 2:45:03 AM

Quote :

"At its root, it is a religious practice. "

true. but you can also say that about many modern, non-religious events.

Quote :

"it became a medical practice with out any real scientific basis, and most recent research in the area has shown it doesn't do much good."

well it certainly doesnt do any harm.

what it does do, is increase personal hygiene and convenience. maybe not by much, but i'd rather NOT have to clear out dried urine and smegma from useless skin folds on my penis several times a day, thank you.

and it also reduces aerodynamic drag.

12/9/2008 3:34:10 AM

To bottombaby--FYI:

Genital Warts

Quote :

"In uncircumcised men, circumcision may help prevent recurrence."

http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec17/ch200/ch200i.html

Washing Penis Soon After Sex Increases Risk Of HIV Among Uncircumcised Men, Study Says

Quote :

"Washing the penis minutes after sex might increase the risk of HIV infection among uncircumcised men, according to a study funded by NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and presented on July 25 at the 4th IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment and Prevention in Sydney, Australia, the New York Times reports. According to the Times, the washing analysis was the secondary part of a study undertaken to determine the effectiveness of male circumcision as an HIV prevention method."

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/80310.php

Circumcision for baby boys: Weighing the pros and cons

Quote :

"The benefits Circumcision may have health benefits, including: Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it easy to wash the penis — although it's simple to clean an uncircumcised penis, too. Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The risk of urinary tract infections in the first year is low, but these infections may be up to 10 times as common in uncircumcised baby boys. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on. Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis may be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can also lead to inflammation of the head of the penis. Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. Decreased risk of sexually transmitted diseases. Safe sexual practices remain essential, but circumcised men may have a slightly lower risk of certain sexually transmitted diseases — including HIV, the virus that causes AIDS The drawbacks Circumcision also has drawbacks, including: Surgical risks. Excessive bleeding and infection are uncommon, but possible. The foreskin may be cut too short or too long or fail to heal properly. If the remaining foreskin reattaches to the end of the penis, minor surgery may be needed to correct it. Pain. Circumcision hurts. Local anesthesia can block nerve sensations during the procedure."

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/circumcision/PR00040

Sorry, ma'am--the benefits significantly outweigh the risks. Besides, I've never had much use for a pink hoodie anyway.

12/9/2008 3:41:01 AM

looks like joe_schmoe and hooksaw agree on the most important things:

penile geometry

12/9/2008 3:47:50 AM

Lets say you had to wait until you were 18 to decide whether or not to become circumcised. How many people would do it? Someone quoted a 20% adult circumcision rate in the other thread.

12/9/2008 8:47:55 AM

This is why the chit chat thread blew up. Any of you people who think circumcision is the same as female mutation need to put down the fair trade coffee and grow the fuck up.

12/9/2008 9:06:58 AM

i don't think it's the same. and i think that there are possibly some macro-scale positive impacts in poorer communities from male circumcision (hygiene/stds). BUT i don't think that would influence me to circumcise my male children in the future.

12/9/2008 9:13:13 AM

The positives are not small. This is a procedure the baby will not remember.

12/9/2008 9:20:13 AM

Quote :

"Both are immoral without the consent of the recipient"

So all medical procedures will be put on hold till your child is 18?

12/9/2008 9:25:02 AM

Quote :

" Morris Sorrells of National Organization of Circumcision Information Resources Center and colleagues created a "penile sensitivity map" by measuring the sensitivity of 19 locations on the penises of 159 male volunteers. Of the participants, 91 were circumcised as infants and none had histories of penile or sexual dysfunction. For circumcised penises, the most sensitive region was the circumcision scar on the underside of the penis, the researchers found. For uncircumcised penises, the areas most receptive to pressure were five regions normally removed during circumcision — all of which were more sensitive than the most sensitive part of the circumcised penis."

http://www.livescience.com/health/070615_penis_sensitivity.html

now i was circumcised, so i can't tell you how much of a difference it makes for sexual pleasure. but it seems like it could be pretty significant.

12/9/2008 9:25:12 AM

I would think that it's near impossible for a circumcised dude to jerk it without some sort of lube.

that's reason enough to be glad my cock wears a turtleneck.

12/9/2008 9:50:23 AM

Quote :

"I would think that it's near impossible for a circumcised dude to jerk it without some sort of lube."

not at all.

12/9/2008 9:52:58 AM

it's not difficult at all, plus we have the added bonus of not having some females recoil in terror at the sight/feel of our uncircumcised cock.

12/9/2008 9:56:01 AM

Quote :

"holy shit some retardation in this thread. MALE CIRCUMCISION = aesthetics, convenience, hygene. FEMALE CIRCUMCISION = disabling mutilation, subjugation, patriarchal ownership. "

absolutely right.

aesthetics "it has no personality"

Quote :

"I would think that it's near impossible for a circumcised dude to jerk it without some sort of lube. that's reason enough to be glad my cock wears a turtleneck. "

haha thats some funny shit and completely possible.

12/9/2008 9:57:18 AM

yeah see, i don't know, just going by perception. i don't have one of each to compare.

12/9/2008 10:07:15 AM