Without it men have to rely on friction only which is a part of the reason why a lot of circumcised guys aren't as sensitive as they should be,
This is the argument I've never understood. How could you say definitively that uncut guys are more sensitive? I don't buy the argument that guys cut when they were older can say for sure, because I would think that if you had the procedure as a baby, you would heal in a different, more complete way. I don't really believe there's a way to know.
And comparing circumcision to female genital mutilation is entirely unfair. We're talking about a procedure that is forced on 4-8 year old girls (and sometimes up until first pregnancy), a procedure that can at its worst kill, and at the very least, is expected to cause extreme pain and infection. Read up on what they actually do to the women, and I don't think you would be comparing the two.
Anyway, I'd probably circumsize my son, but I think both options are fine.
"Human foreskins are in great demand for various commercial enterprises in research, medicine and cosmetics. It is a billion-dollar-a-year industry."
Someone find out which cosmetics and medicines contain foreskins so I can avoid those.
Even though that's a biased article, circumcision is nutty. Try to think of any other time you would allow someone to cut off a part of your body for hygenic purposes or on the off chance that maybe something might become infected, etc. down the road. I like Frank's lips analogy - that's how crazy it is.
I'm cut which probably would NOT have been the case had I been born, like some of my cousins, outsides the U.S. but since I was born in the States, my parents went with the old, "when in Rome" approach.
I did a bunch of research when my girl and I found out we were pregnant but didn't know the baby's sex yet. And bottomline, circumcision made no medical sense and most of the literature out there supports that claim. the only reason people tend to cut their sons these days is 1) religion, 2) other similar cultural preferences, 3) the desire for their sons to look like them. There's also 4) women like it better.
1 and 2 weren't at issue and while I gave 3 a moment's notice, I realized that was pure narcissism. As it turned out, we had a daughter so the point was moot but if we ever have a sun in the future, I still wouldn't cut them. I mean, it really, really, really makes no sense whatsoever outside of tradition.
And I agree, I wouldn't equate penile circumcision to clitoral circumcision - the latter is more extreme and traumatic but that doesn't mean that penile circumcision is all good by comparison. Seriously, how many of you would willingly go under the knife now, in adulthood? I'm assuming...not many. And if that's the case, how can you do it to your own baby?
And I agree, I wouldn't equate penile circumcision to clitoral circumcision - the latter is more extreme and traumatic but that doesn't mean that penile circumcision is all good by comparison. Seriously, how many of you would willingly go under the knife now, in adulthood? I'm assuming...not many. And if that's the case, how can you do it to your own baby?
well, I am not sure about this but I beleive that Jews do Circumcision within 8 days of birth cause the nerves have not fully developed in the child and therefore it is not supposed to hurt as much
And I agree, I wouldn't equate penile circumcision to clitoral circumcision - the latter is more extreme and traumatic but that doesn't mean that penile circumcision is all good by comparison. Seriously, how many of you would willingly go under the knife now, in adulthood? I'm assuming...not many. And if that's the case, how can you do it to your own baby?
well, I am not sure about this but I beleive that Jes do Circumcision within 8 days of birth cause the nerves have not fully developed in the child and therefore it is not supposed to hurt as much
A few years ago when my friend was pregnant with her first baby, she did as Oliver and his lady did and did a lot reading and spoke to a few different people about it. She also decided it was not necessary. She had a boy, so her opinion was realized. The baby???s dad was cut and was not as convinced by the studies and it took a bit of work to bring him on-side. I was brought up thinking that you gotta cut it and that???s all there is to it. Through my friend, I learned a lot about the reasons why not to and now I don???t believe it's necessary.
There???s not too much to be gained by saying male circumcision is less horrific than female circumcision. I do think, though, the reasons and conditions under which women go under the knife are, as Mr.Dub said, more extreme.
As for what women like/prefer/enjoy more ??? I don???t think there are any ahem hard and cough cough fast rules. I don???t have a preference.
As I woman, I aesthetically prefer the little man sans hood.
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
It seems like most American girls have developed that bias opinion based on conditioning. Chances are thier brother, cousins, boyfriend, etc are cut and thats what they're use to hearing/seeing . They've been told many myths about circumcision such as "hygiene"/"infection" etc. and anything different from that may seem "strange" to females.
It's difficult to question the decisions of thier relatives/peers when it comes to circumcision because why would your loved ones do anything to harm someone, right? Asking such questions may force you to look at them differently and quite possibly look at yourself differently and not everyone is comfortable with that.
It's difficult to question the decisions of thier relatives/peers when it comes to circumcision because why would your loved ones do anything to harm someone, right? Asking such questions may force you to look at them differently and quite possibly look at yourself differently and not everyone is comfortable with that.
I asked my mom why she did that to me after I learned about it and made the decision to let my son be spared the "executioner's axe". He answer: "I didn't really think about it, you just did it."
Although I can't blame my parents, the only reason I was really cognizant of the issue was because by the time my son came along it had become a questioned issue, albeit still largely ignored. I also had the benefit of the Internet. So, removing those two issues, I guess I can understand not questioning circumcision, however, it's a little frustrating in a way. It's like, why not? But then again, I'm not so sure, if I was placed back in time 25 or so years ago, that I would have done any different.
So I guess, at least in my own family line that I created, the retardation stops here.
One thing that I am proud of myself for is standing up for what I researched and believed in. As many stupid things as I did in high school, at least in this situation I had enough confidence in myself to tell other people to eat a dick when it came to their assinine comments. Of course, at that period that was standard practice for me, whether my actions made sense or not. Still, I'm proud of myself - had I bowed to the "peer pressure" I would've regretted it for life.
As I woman, I aesthetically prefer the little man sans hood.
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
It seems like most American girls have developed that bias opinion based on conditioning. Chances are thier brother, cousins, boyfriend, etc are cut and thats what they're use to hearing/seeing . They've been told many myths about circumcision such as "hygiene"/"infection" etc. and anything different from that may seem "strange" to females.
My preference is an informed one, and I don't apologize for it...Some guys like Brazilian bikini waxes (a look that requires a woman to subject herself to painful hair removal repeatedly to achieve), while others like/don't mind a little epidermal outgrowth in the pubic area. To each his/her own.
As I woman, I aesthetically prefer the little man sans hood.
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
It seems like most American girls have developed that bias opinion based on conditioning. Chances are thier brother, cousins, boyfriend, etc are cut and thats what they're use to hearing/seeing . They've been told many myths about circumcision such as "hygiene"/"infection" etc. and anything different from that may seem "strange" to females.
My preference is an informed one, and I don't apologize for it...Some guys like Brazilian bikini waxes (a look that requires a woman to subject herself to painful hair removal repeatedly to achieve), while others like/don't mind a little epidermal outgrowth in the pubic area. To each his/her own.
Considering that not a single major medical organization in the entire world recommends routine infant circ., could you please tell me what type of information you've recieved has shaped your preference? Perhaps something the American Academy of Pediatrics or the American Medical Association is not aware of?
No need to apologize at all, but the Brazilian wax comparison is quite far off. Grooming of pubic hairs does not involve the permanent removal of 10,000-20,000 nerve endings nor is it done without the consent of the individual.
I hope you don't think i'm grilling you here, thats not my intent. I'm trying to get a better idea of the female persepective on this because it sure does gloom up the day when you see another human have a preference for genital mutilation (male or female) :-/
IMO permanent and harmful (religious or traditional) rituals such as non-medical circumcision should not be allowed on baby boys (and especially not girls) that cannot give their own opinions about it. Harmful and unethical traditions need to be checked, seriously. Circumcising your baby for the sole reason of wanting him to look like you is a whole nother thing and should be called what it really is: sadism and narcism.
IMO permanent and harmful (religious or traditional) rituals such as non-medical circumcision should not be allowed on baby boys (and especially not girls) that cannot give their own opinions about it. Harmful and unethical traditions need to be checked, seriously. Circumcising your baby for the sole reason of wanting him to look like you is a whole nother thing and should be called what it really is: sadism and narcism.
some of this shit is getting out of hand, yeah my skins cut, my parents didn't do it cause of religion or for me to look like my dad (we don't do comparisons when we get together for holidays) my parents thought at the time it was the more sanitary, my folks are neither sadist or narcissistic, some of you dudes are straight up fuckin looney
Seriously. I have no idea where all this rage against circumcision is coming from (no pun intended) or why it's such a sensitive area (no pun intended), but it's more than a little bizarre. As long as your equipment works and isn't, ya know, turning weird colors or whatever, why get this worked up about it? Motherfuckers are spending a little too much time doing the last panel of this classic cartoon.
The only people I have ever heard advance it are people that are opposed to circumcision offering it as a straw man. It's bizarre..
I meant to ask: is it really common reasoning in the US? I hope not. I mentioned it because it came up in this thread earlier.
I don't know. Like I said, the only time I've ever heard of it is when opponents of circumcision throw it out to poo-poo it. It sounds crazy/creepy to me...
Comments
How many of you guys are circumcised
=
warning: very biased article
crazy! that sounds aweful!! But how is this an antisemetic discussion?
wait, what am I doing back in this thread?!.....AYYYOOOO!!!
This is the argument I've never understood. How could you say definitively that uncut guys are more sensitive? I don't buy the argument that guys cut when they were older can say for sure, because I would think that if you had the procedure as a baby, you would heal in a different, more complete way. I don't really believe there's a way to know.
And comparing circumcision to female genital mutilation is entirely unfair. We're talking about a procedure that is forced on 4-8 year old girls (and sometimes up until first pregnancy), a procedure that can at its worst kill, and at the very least, is expected to cause extreme pain and infection. Read up on what they actually do to the women, and I don't think you would be comparing the two.
Anyway, I'd probably circumsize my son, but I think both options are fine.
Someone find out which cosmetics and medicines contain foreskins so I can avoid those.
Even though that's a biased article, circumcision is nutty. Try to think of any other time you would allow someone to cut off a part of your body for hygenic purposes or on the off chance that maybe something might become infected, etc. down the road. I like Frank's lips analogy - that's how crazy it is.
Also, check the poll results, interesting...
a tisket a tasket, look what's in the basket.
this is much worse though. I used to know her and she's cool as hell.
Age 5... ouch. Yeah, I'd say having all your sensitive pieces removed would be terrible... at least I've got some of mine.
But when you put it in the same context, how crazy is it that something like circumcision is so popular in an industrialized nation like the US?
I think that's just an American bias. Although, as an American, I can see what you mean.
apart from that, it's supposed to be more pleasing for the lady.
I did a bunch of research when my girl and I found out we were pregnant but didn't know the baby's sex yet. And bottomline, circumcision made no medical sense and most of the literature out there supports that claim. the only reason people tend to cut their sons these days is 1) religion, 2) other similar cultural preferences, 3) the desire for their sons to look like them. There's also 4) women like it better.
1 and 2 weren't at issue and while I gave 3 a moment's notice, I realized that was pure narcissism. As it turned out, we had a daughter so the point was moot but if we ever have a sun in the future, I still wouldn't cut them. I mean, it really, really, really makes no sense whatsoever outside of tradition.
And I agree, I wouldn't equate penile circumcision to clitoral circumcision - the latter is more extreme and traumatic but that doesn't mean that penile circumcision is all good by comparison. Seriously, how many of you would willingly go under the knife now, in adulthood? I'm assuming...not many. And if that's the case, how can you do it to your own baby?
well, I am not sure about this but I beleive that Jews do Circumcision within 8 days of birth cause the nerves have not fully developed in the child and therefore it is not supposed to hurt as much
Adult circumcision just seems cruel
PS I just wasted my 2000th post on this
There???s not too much to be gained by saying male circumcision is less horrific than female circumcision. I do think, though, the reasons and conditions under which women go under the knife are, as Mr.Dub said, more extreme.
As for what women like/prefer/enjoy more ??? I don???t think there are any ahem hard and cough cough fast rules. I don???t have a preference.
It seems like most American girls have developed that bias opinion based on conditioning. Chances are thier brother, cousins, boyfriend, etc are cut and thats what they're use to hearing/seeing . They've been told many myths about circumcision such as "hygiene"/"infection" etc. and anything different from that may seem "strange" to females.
It's difficult to question the decisions of thier relatives/peers when it comes to circumcision because why would your loved ones do anything to harm someone, right? Asking such questions may force you to look at them differently and quite possibly look at yourself differently and not everyone is comfortable with that.
I asked my mom why she did that to me after I learned about it and made the decision to let my son be spared the "executioner's axe". He answer: "I didn't really think about it, you just did it."
Although I can't blame my parents, the only reason I was really cognizant of the issue was because by the time my son came along it had become a questioned issue, albeit still largely ignored. I also had the benefit of the Internet. So, removing those two issues, I guess I can understand not questioning circumcision, however, it's a little frustrating in a way. It's like, why not? But then again, I'm not so sure, if I was placed back in time 25 or so years ago, that I would have done any different.
So I guess, at least in my own family line that I created, the retardation stops here.
One thing that I am proud of myself for is standing up for what I researched and believed in. As many stupid things as I did in high school, at least in this situation I had enough confidence in myself to tell other people to eat a dick when it came to their assinine comments. Of course, at that period that was standard practice for me, whether my actions made sense or not.
Just curious...has ANYONE EVER heard of such a thing?
My preference is an informed one, and I don't apologize for it...Some guys like Brazilian bikini waxes (a look that requires a woman to subject herself to painful hair removal repeatedly to achieve), while others like/don't mind a little epidermal outgrowth in the pubic area. To each his/her own.
Considering that not a single major medical organization in the entire world recommends routine infant circ., could you please tell me what type of information you've recieved has shaped your preference? Perhaps something the American Academy of Pediatrics or the American Medical Association is not aware of?
No need to apologize at all, but the Brazilian wax comparison is quite far off. Grooming of pubic hairs does not involve the permanent removal of 10,000-20,000 nerve endings nor is it done without the consent of the individual.
I hope you don't think i'm grilling you here, thats not my intent. I'm trying to get a better idea of the female persepective on this because it sure does gloom up the day when you see another human have a preference for genital mutilation (male or female) :-/
some of this shit is getting out of hand, yeah my skins cut, my parents didn't do it cause of religion or for me to look like my dad (we don't do comparisons when we get together for holidays) my parents thought at the time it was the more sanitary, my folks are neither sadist or narcissistic, some of you dudes are straight up fuckin looney
Where does this justification even come from?
The only people I have ever heard advance it are people that are opposed to circumcision offering it as a straw man. It's bizarre..
I meant to ask: is it really common reasoning in the US? I hope not. I mentioned it because it came up in this thread earlier.
Seriously. I have no idea where all this rage against circumcision is coming from (no pun intended) or why it's such a sensitive area (no pun intended), but it's more than a little bizarre. As long as your equipment works and isn't, ya know, turning weird colors or whatever, why get this worked up about it? Motherfuckers are spending a little too much time doing the last panel of this classic cartoon.
this whole thread is bizarre
I don't know. Like I said, the only time I've ever heard of it is when opponents of circumcision throw it out to poo-poo it. It sounds crazy/creepy to me...