| Do you believe it is wrong to be circumcised when you’re a baby when it’s without your consent? I’m not very knowledgeable on circumcision benefits/negatives but a quick google search reveals to me some of these benefits include: the prevention of penis cancer, sexually transmitted diseases, and urinary tract infections, whilst the disadvantages range from: pain, scarring/wound infection, and possibly a weakened sexual experience (but there is no convincing evidence of this). What is your stance on this topic? Are you circumcised or not, and have you experienced any problems as a result? Perhaps a bigger issue may be the fact you don’t have a choice on the matter. Discuss. |
| Making any modifications to your body should be a choice, in my opinion. |
 |
| I don't care that it wasn't my choice. I wouldn't want to deal with keeping that extra skin clean, or having to pull it back every time to fap. It would be irritating. I don't believe we need to make every choice in our lives for ourselves. I'm not that paranoid. |
 |
| Oy vey! Whattaya sayin'? Of course it's good for you, goy. Why wouldn't it be? Don't go sayin' strange things now ya hear? We don't want ya startin' anuddah shoah or nuttin like that. |
 |
kickturns said: I'm cut. I don't need lotion. Stop spreading this myth. So Im uncut which means I don't need lotion |
| It's not something that should be done to babies and children. It should be left up to people to do on their own volition. All other cases should be outlawed like female genital mutilation is. If you want a comparison the closest match is a hoodectomy which is the removal of the clitoral hood but that is only a biological comparison not an effects comparison. Many of those so called benafits have studies that contradict them. Some studies claim it increases rate of STIs transmision. Only the urinary tract infection one stands but the surgery risks creating an infection of it's own that is actually worse. Every year thousands of babies die from complications of circumcision and that's in the US alone. Many botch it and leave them disfigured. There are other down sides. Circumcision leaves the glands to dry up more. It also reduces the protective barrior of beneficial bacteria. There also has been a study that found a link between circumcision and higher rates of autism. |
| I am cut man. Cut 4 lyfe. I didn't even know it wasn't natural until I was informed I was cut. I just thought it was supposed to look all sleek, thick and proud like that. I-is it gay to be attracted to your own penis but not other penisis? I heard from a reliable Rabbi that it is like the SPQR of the Legion. I am in the Jewish army now. |
 |
kickturns said: No. After you've masturbated for a while, the skin becomes far more resistant to tearing. Lotion is a messy waste. Ezekiel said: I'm cut. I don't need lotion. Stop spreading this myth. Must be that precum then. |
| I understand why people think consent is an issue when it pertains to this, because you really did have no say in the matter. They also think, "how could you put a baby through that pain?" But, for me personally, I don't care. I'm not even capable of remembering the event happening, and I have never once felt like I was wronged or robbed of something in any way. I don't really think it should be as big of an issue as people are making it. |
 |
Kittens-kun said: I understand why people think consent is an issue when it pertains to this, because you really did have no say in the matter. They also think, "how could you put a baby through that pain?" But, for me personally, I don't care. I'm not even capable of remembering the event happening, and I have never once felt like I was wronged or robbed of something in any way. I don't really think it should be as big of an issue as people are making it. Your feelings dont represent the opinion of everyone that was circumcised. There even are some people who try to get surgery to replace their foreskin. You're American aren't you? Part of why you feel that way is because of the cultural attitudes in the US since it's so common in the US, the only developed country to do it at such a high rate. |
Ezekiel said: No. After you've masturbated for a while, the skin becomes far more resistant to tearing. Lotion is a messy waste. Lol yeah I'm happy someone else said this was a myth too. @kickturns I'm cut, and I've never had a chapped? (not really sure what you're getting at with that) dick. Lotion was something used as a 'fun' assist from like age 11 to 13..beyond its never been 'necessary' to have fun - without is as @Ezekiel said mostly messy and unnecessary now (in my mid-upper 20s). As a gay guy that's been with a number of guys that were cut and a number of guys that were uncut, I don't personally have a pref or find it less/more appealing either way. So even as someone who is cut, I'm not biased. But what you're assuming Kickturns about us cut people is false. |
 |
traed said: Kittens-kun said: I understand why people think consent is an issue when it pertains to this, because you really did have no say in the matter. They also think, "how could you put a baby through that pain?" But, for me personally, I don't care. I'm not even capable of remembering the event happening, and I have never once felt like I was wronged or robbed of something in any way. I don't really think it should be as big of an issue as people are making it. Your feelings dont represent the opinion of everyone that was circumcised. There even are some people who try to get surgery to replace their foreskin. You're American aren't you? Part of why you feel that way is because of the cultural attitudes in the US since it's so common in the US, the only developed country to do it at such a high rate. I never said they did. I think the outcry is overblown. Doesn't mean people have to agree with me. I even said I understand why they are angry. |
|
kickturns said: When did I suggest being cut is better?so there definitely are benefits to being uncut. |
| and honestly to the OP, I am circumcised and - don't get me wrong, I'm all for people having the freedom to do whatever with their own body - but personally I'm happy I was when I was a baby because I couldn't imagine doing that and having cognitive understanding of the process. I'm happy I am and I'm happy it was taken care of for me when it was. |
|
kickturns said: J_LEE_C said: Lol yeah I'm happy someone else said this was a myth too. @kickturns I'm cut, and I've never had a chapped? (not really sure what you're getting at with that) dick. Lotion was something used as a 'fun' assist from like age 11 to 13..beyond its never been 'necessary' to have fun - without is as @Ezekiel said mostly messy and unnecessary now (in my mid-upper 20s). As a gay guy that's been with a number of guys that were cut and a number of guys that were uncut, I don't personally have a pref or find it less/more appealing either way. So even as someone who is cut, I'm not biased. But what you're assuming Kickturns about us cut people is false. Wow thanks for the info. Did not know that. I'm speaking from experience. Whenever I peel it back, after a while it get's irritated. I've tried fapping a few times with it peeled back, and it just takes a real long time for me to cum, it's really close to edging. I can say that I've typically heard from uncut guys that the tip is more sensitive and edging seems to be more prevalent - not Everyone but I have noticed that on more than one occasion. But I also know cut guys that love edging and are sensitive everywhere haha so its not like an exact characteristic, just some recurring observations. ;) |
|
| If it's done for medical reasons, I'm cool with it. If the reasons are religious, I'd would like the child to be old enough to decide for himself. In the first place I'm not a fan of children automatically inheriting their parents' religion. |
| I voted yes. Let the child decide when he grows older. |
| Now I see the secret of the making of the best persons. It is to grow in the open air and to eat and sleep with the earth. -Walt Whitman A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -Robert A. Heinlein |
| as someone circumcised as a child. Yes it's wrong. |
| I think it lowers the chances of HIV transmission (in males) so technically it can be a good thing. I am against doing it on kids (or people without their consent). As for women circumcision - just no. NthDegree said: In the first place I'm not a fan of children automatically inheriting their parents' religion. It's impressive how many people have the same views and yet this problem is still present in so many countries around the world. |
| It's a very simple procedure typically done when you're a fresh infant. It doesn't have anything to do with STD's or cancer. The tip of the penis is more exposed which is the most sensitive part (by far), which you can argue either increases how often you experience pleasure, or reduces the intensity of the pleasure due to it becoming more normal, though I don't really buy the reduced intensity argument. Complications due to it only come about if the doctor was trash. There shouldn't be a scar or any pain, maybe unless you get it done later in life. It's painful as an infant, not that you'd remember, but it never recurs. It does reduce the risk of infection. Bacteria tends to build up under the foreskin which doesn't tend to be a problem, but can be. Plus it's probably smelly and gross, though I wouldn't know for sure. If you have ever watched porn, you probably saw a circumcised penis, unless they were Asian. A boy who was circumcised as an infant won't ever notice that the process took place. Rumors of mental damage or trauma is all bogus. The only reason they'll ever know is if they ever come across the topic elsewhere. Basically: - It's cleaner - It's a very normal practice - There's no drawbacks Beyond that the issues regarding either the decision not to do it or to get it done is purely social. |
149597871 said: What?!?! I didn't even know there was such thing. As for women circumcision - just no |
| It only came to my knowledge a few years back that people get circumcised when they're a baby, I'm like wutttt. Anyway in our country it's more common to get circumcised when you're a bit older about 10-13 y.o., I think I was in grade school back then. For OP i think people should do what they want and get cut at an older age(Even though my country's society pressures you to get circumcised) |
 "... Because when you live in this world of my closed eyes... ... Being alone is very lonely...". |
| I don't have a penis, so obviously it's hard to say, but I don't think it should be done on kids just because. Then again, I'm European, and it's not a common practise here compared to US, maybe I would have different opinion if I was born there. I get there are some health benefits, but they aren't that life-changing, plus, wouldn't you prefer your private parts to be more sensitive, so you can gain more pleasure from sex? Although I suppose circumcised person wouldn't know the the difference anyway... |
  |
Kittens-kun said: traed said: Your feelings dont represent the opinion of everyone that was circumcised. There even are some people who try to get surgery to replace their foreskin. You're American aren't you? Part of why you feel that way is because of the cultural attitudes in the US since it's so common in the US, the only developed country to do it at such a high rate. I never said they did. I think the outcry is overblown. Doesn't mean people have to agree with me. I even said I understand why they are angry. You didn't provide an argument for why it's overblown aside from you saying you're fine with yours. You actually had better arguments against it. 149597871 said: I think it lowers the chances of HIV transmission (in males) so technically it can be a good thing. I am against doing it on kids (or people without their consent). As I mentioned earlier there also are studies that say the exact opposite. All saying it reduces were all done in Africa where they have hotter temperatures and don't necisarily bathe as often as Westerners. "Recent editorials have asked the global health community to scale up male circumcision for HIV prevention in regions with HIV epidemics following the publication of three randomized controlled clinical trials (RCCTs) in Africa (in South Africa, Uganda, and Kenya).1-5 One editorial concluded: "The proven effıcacy ofMC[male circumcision] and its high cost-effectiveness in the face of a persistent heterosexual HIV epidemic argues overwhelmingly for its immediate and rapid adoption."6 This "Current Issue" review questions not the internal validity of the studies, but their external validity, an issue that has been discussed more generally in two commentaries,7,8 an editorial,9 and a systematic review of research on prevention trials10 in this journal. External validity is the issue that questions the generalization from the RCCT results to a policy of "immediate and rapid adoption" of circumcision of men across Africa." http://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/view/rmit:19702 "Almost a third (32.4%) of the men were circumcised (CM). Compared with uncircumcised (UC) men, CM have accumulated larger numbers of STI in their lifetime (CM = 73.4% vs. UC = 65.7%; P = 0.048), have higher rates of previous diagnosis of warts (CM = 18.8% vs. UC = 12.2%; P = 0.024), and were more likely to have HIV infection (CM = 43.0% vs. UC = 33.9%; P = 0.023). Results indicate that being CM predicted the likelihood of HIV infection (P value = 0.027)." http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02871.x/abstract Thrashinuva said: The tip of the penis is more exposed which is the most sensitive part (by far), which you can argue either increases how often you experience pleasure, or reduces the intensity of the pleasure due to it becoming more normal, though I don't really buy the reduced intensity argument. When erect circumcised and uncircumcised have the "tip" exposed the same amount. The skin has nerve endings in it if you remove the skin you remove the nerve endings. That alone removes some level of sensation. Complications due to it only come about if the doctor was trash. There shouldn't be a scar or any pain, maybe unless you get it done later in life. It's painful as an infant, not that you'd remember, but it never recurs. "Infants undergoing non-therapeutic circumcision are unnecessarily put at risk for a wide range of unintended adverse outcomes from the procedure. Though the risks of circumcision are often blandly characterized as being “minor and rare,” some while relatively minor, such as adhesions, are quite common and still distressing, and some, like death, while rare, can be catastrophic.[1,2] Adverse events following circumcision include not only the general risks of any surgery (bleeding, infection, and pain), but also many problems specific to the different circumcision techniques[3] and affected by variations in penile anatomy.[4,5] Babies circumcised in the neonatal intensive care unit or the special care nursery are at four times greater risk for complications than are babies circumcised in the well-baby nursery.[6] Physicians learning the procedure often receive little or no formal training,[7] nor is there any legal requirement for such.[8]" https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/complications/ It does reduce the risk of infection. Bacteria tends to build up under the foreskin which doesn't tend to be a problem, but can be. Plus it's probably smelly and gross, though I wouldn't know for sure. That's what bathing is for. You might as well say the same about girls clits under their hood because It's same effect. Also you're forgetting importance of benaficial bacteria so it goes both ways. Your whole body is covered in and full of bacteria regardless anyway. If you have ever watched porn, you probably saw a circumcised penis, unless they were Asian. Because most porn you find on english language sites is made in the US. Also you can't always tell for the reason I mentioned above about tip exposure when erect. A boy who was circumcised as an infant won't ever notice that the process took place. Rumors of mental damage or trauma is all bogus. The only reason they'll ever know is if they ever come across the topic elsewhere. "Infant male circumcision continues despite growing questions about its medical justification. As usually performed without analgesia or anaesthetic, circumcision is observably painful. It is likely that genital cutting has physical, sexual, and psychological consequences too. Some studies link involuntary male circumcision with a range of negative emotions and even post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some circumcised men have described their current feelings in the language of violation, torture, mutilation, and sexual assault. In view of the acute as well as long-term risks from circumcision and the legal liabilities that might arise, it is timely for health professionals and scientists to re-examine the evidence on this issue and participate in the debate about the advisability of this surgical procedure on unconsenting minors." http://epublications.bond.edu.au/hss_pubs/36/ "Other men with whom I have worked have also made causal connections between present-day problems--such as a sense of defeat, shyness, anger, or fear--and their neonatal circumcision experiences." "In my client population of adult men, serious and sometimes disabling lifelong consequences appear to have resulted from this procedure, and long-term psychotherapy focusing on early trauma resolution appears to be effective in dealing with these consequences. Early prevention by eliminating the practice of routine circumcision is seen as desirable." http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/rhinehart1/ "With a total of 4986 ASD cases, our study showed that regardless of cultural background circumcised boys were more likely than intact boys to develop ASD before age 10 years (HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.11–1.93). Risk was particularly high for infantile autism before age five years (HR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.36–3.13). Circumcised boys in non-Muslim families were also more likely to develop hyperkinetic disorder (HR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.11–2.96). Associations with asthma were consistently inconspicuous (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.84–1.10)." http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076814565942 It's a very normal practice Depends on the scale. On small scale anything can be called normal depending where you look but outside of Africa and the Middle East it's a minority. The US is the only outlier with such large numbers. Your definition of normal is an old Jewish then Muslim practice that was later adopted by old prudes as a method of attempting to stop masturbation then carried on only by fathers wanting their baby to have their penis look like theirs and further exacerbated by unethical doctors trying to keep it going because each circumcision adds a few hundred dollars more in their pockets with each male birth. |
| I despise circumcision, so yes. The biggest problem that i have is that you don't have any fucking choice yourself. If your parents are imbeciles, then bye bye wonderful foreskin. They should make it illegal to circumcise newborn babies. If you're all grown up and want it gone for some reason, then do it, it's your body. But to not have a choice yourself for making such a large decision to YOUR OWN body is absolute nuts. |
 |
| Circumcision is practically non-existent where I'm from, so I find it a bit bizarre that it's so common in another western country such as the US. A common argument I see for circumcision is that it's supposedly "cleaner." Sure, that might be a fair point – if you're a disgusting slob who never washes himself. Of course it won't be an issue if you shower/bathe regularly like a decent human being. Also, I don't really buy the idea that it helps prevent HIV or whatever, because lots of studies seem to contradict each other. I'm generally not a fan of circumcision, because I've seen a lot of botched circumcision and gross scarred penises, and I don't wish that upon any other man. Uncut penises just look better to me, but of course that is subjective. Plus, I think it should be a personal choice that the male himself has to make when he's old enough to decide for himself. In general, though, this isn't a issue that I care a whole lot about, but I think it's a dated practice. I'm much more concerned with the fact that some batshit insane people in Africa, The Middle East, etc, still practical female genital mutilation. |
MoogFeb 10, 2018 9:56 AM
| It is a disturbing process, and cut penises generally look odd to me. |
| It is pretty disturbing if you ask me. At the very least the person receiving it should decide they want it themselves when they're old enough to be able to make a rational decision about it, not having it forced upon you by others when you're a kid. I get that it's a religious thing but come on... Not that hardly anyone does that in Sweden other than immigrants maybe but I still can't approve of it. And I don't see any sexually practical benefits to it either for that matter |
  |
| I think the person should be able to decide what procedures they want done to themselves. This is not as extreme, but I had my ears pierced when I was a baby, and even though I really like them, I wish I’d been able to pick. |
  |
BananaBeam said: I researched what female circumcision was and it definitely isn't on par with male genital mutilation... At least for males it can possibly have some benefits. Yes it's genital mutilation. It's on par with Female Genital Mutiliation. |
| Yes, I think it's wrong to be circumcised without one's consent. |
  WORK IN PROGRESS ~The frog leapt forth to my lilypad memory.~ I was indoctrinated by an inamorata rabbit, Adenomata affronted. It was the verecund, dismissed creatures That I jubilated in most. This rabbit I would nurture, At the aiguille of esse, The anneal of noblesse. ❤️ Birdie ❤️ |
| I mean the benefits to both are moot. Personally I am okay with being cut and functionally speaking it doesn't change how your penis works. So i wouldn't consider it mutilation if done properly. While someone could make the case it lowers the chances of certain stds/stis but so do condoms plus i live in a country where those are readily accessible. female circumcision however is a disgusting practice and should never be done. |
  come, you sweet hour of death |
traed said: Complications due to it only come about if the doctor was trash. There shouldn't be a scar or any pain, maybe unless you get it done later in life. It's painful as an infant, not that you'd remember, but it never recurs. "Infants undergoing non-therapeutic circumcision are unnecessarily put at risk for a wide range of unintended adverse outcomes from the procedure. Though the risks of circumcision are often blandly characterized as being “minor and rare,” some while relatively minor, such as adhesions, are quite common and still distressing, and some, like death, while rare, can be catastrophic.[1,2] Adverse events following circumcision include not only the general risks of any surgery (bleeding, infection, and pain), but also many problems specific to the different circumcision techniques[3] and affected by variations in penile anatomy.[4,5] Babies circumcised in the neonatal intensive care unit or the special care nursery are at four times greater risk for complications than are babies circumcised in the well-baby nursery.[6] Physicians learning the procedure often receive little or no formal training,[7] nor is there any legal requirement for such.[8]" https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/complications/ "Can be catastrophic" [1,2] - Sourced by a 1983 study about circumcisions done by non-medical professionals outside of a hospital. Rather, this whole article is from 1983. [7] and [8] are from 1975 and 1956. That's what bathing is for. You might as well say the same about girls clits under their hood because It's same effect. Also you're forgetting importance of benaficial bacteria so it goes both ways. Your whole body is covered in and full of bacteria regardless anyway. I think you're overestimating the benefits here."Infant male circumcision continues despite growing questions about its medical justification. As usually performed without analgesia or anaesthetic, circumcision is observably painful. It is likely that genital cutting has physical, sexual, and psychological consequences too. Some studies link involuntary male circumcision with a range of negative emotions and even post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some circumcised men have described their current feelings in the language of violation, torture, mutilation, and sexual assault. In view of the acute as well as long-term risks from circumcision and the legal liabilities that might arise, it is timely for health professionals and scientists to re-examine the evidence on this issue and participate in the debate about the advisability of this surgical procedure on unconsenting minors." http://epublications.bond.edu.au/hss_pubs/36/ The source for that is this article which is criticized by their peers: "CIRP believes that the authors exhibit a fundamental mis-understanding of human sexuality." And this article which is a case study about how repetitive pain at young ages affects adult behavior in rats. "Other men with whom I have worked have also made causal connections between present-day problems--such as a sense of defeat, shyness, anger, or fear--and their neonatal circumcision experiences." "In my client population of adult men, serious and sometimes disabling lifelong consequences appear to have resulted from this procedure, and long-term psychotherapy focusing on early trauma resolution appears to be effective in dealing with these consequences. Early prevention by eliminating the practice of routine circumcision is seen as desirable." http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/rhinehart1/ This is a psychologist using his patients as examples of causation. I think it should be obvious how large of a problem this. It's not a proper scientific study. "With a total of 4986 ASD cases, our study showed that regardless of cultural background circumcised boys were more likely than intact boys to develop ASD before age 10 years (HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.11–1.93). Risk was particularly high for infantile autism before age five years (HR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.36–3.13). Circumcised boys in non-Muslim families were also more likely to develop hyperkinetic disorder (HR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.11–2.96). Associations with asthma were consistently inconspicuous (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.84–1.10)." http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076814565942 "To our knowledge, there is no prior evidence to suggest a link between circumcision and hyperactivity disorder, so our finding of an increased risk of this common neurobehavioral disorder among circumcised boys in non-Muslim families was unexpected and needs cautious interpretation." The article is only studying correlation and recognizes that no such correlation had ever been found before, suggesting the cause to be something else. Depends on the scale. On small scale anything can be called normal depending where you look but outside of Africa and the Middle East it's a minority. The US is the only outlier with such large numbers. Your definition of normal is an old Jewish then Muslim practice that was later adopted by old prudes as a method of attempting to stop masturbation then carried on only by fathers wanting their baby to have their penis look like theirs and further exacerbated by unethical doctors trying to keep it going because each circumcision adds a few hundred dollars more in their pockets with each male birth. I'm certainly not saying that it's statistically common, but that the procedure carried out by a medical professional is common enough to be considered reliable, specifically in countries where it's not an unheard of practice. |
traed said: 149597871 said: I think it lowers the chances of HIV transmission (in males) so technically it can be a good thing. I am against doing it on kids (or people without their consent). As I mentioned earlier there also are studies that say the exact opposite. All saying it reduces were all done in Africa where they have hotter temperatures and don't necisarily bathe as often as Westerners. "Recent editorials have asked the global health community to scale up male circumcision for HIV prevention in regions with HIV epidemics following the publication of three randomized controlled clinical trials (RCCTs) in Africa (in South Africa, Uganda, and Kenya).1-5 One editorial concluded: "The proven effıcacy ofMC[male circumcision] and its high cost-effectiveness in the face of a persistent heterosexual HIV epidemic argues overwhelmingly for its immediate and rapid adoption."6 This "Current Issue" review questions not the internal validity of the studies, but their external validity, an issue that has been discussed more generally in two commentaries,7,8 an editorial,9 and a systematic review of research on prevention trials10 in this journal. External validity is the issue that questions the generalization from the RCCT results to a policy of "immediate and rapid adoption" of circumcision of men across Africa." http://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/view/rmit:19702 "Almost a third (32.4%) of the men were circumcised (CM). Compared with uncircumcised (UC) men, CM have accumulated larger numbers of STI in their lifetime (CM = 73.4% vs. UC = 65.7%; P = 0.048), have higher rates of previous diagnosis of warts (CM = 18.8% vs. UC = 12.2%; P = 0.024), and were more likely to have HIV infection (CM = 43.0% vs. UC = 33.9%; P = 0.023). Results indicate that being CM predicted the likelihood of HIV infection (P value = 0.027)." http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02871.x/abstract It seems that you are far better prepared for discussing this topic than I am. To be honest I didn't do any research before posting the comment, I just remembered that I've heard it somewhere. Bambi said: 149597871 said: What?!?! I didn't even know there was such thing.As for women circumcision - just no I researched what female circumcision was and it definitely isn't on par with male genital mutilation... At least for males it can possibly have some benefits. Yes, I had the same reaction when I first heard about it. Not only it's not on par with male circumcision but it is a crime against humanity. Being a woman in some countries is... |
| i mean, i don't have a dick, but It's genital mutilation and that's not right and a really fucked up thing to do to a kid. I think it's a practice that should end. |
 |
| None of the poll options above. It depends on yourself - if you want it yourelf - for religious reasons (not forced cause of your parents will) or if it's necessary cause of health reasons. All in all it's just wrong if the one who gets circumcision doesn't want it. Also people often forget that there are cultures out there which do circumcision to young girls clit on primitive barbarian ways (e.g. with broken glass) so that they die. Even if it's the year 2018 the world isn't industrial/ "modern" everywhere. |
 |
| @traed Sorry man, I've got better things to do than argue about penis skin on an anime forum website. |
|
| circumcised dick is the normal thing here in the philippines, before the internet i thought most of the world does circumcision too i do not find it wrong since there are no downsides anyway besides weeks of pain after the surgery |
| It's okay lol. It probably is a lot more convenient. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
Bambi said: BananaBeam said: I researched what female circumcision was and it definitely isn't on par with male genital mutilation... At least for males it can possibly have some benefits. Yes it's genital mutilation. It's on par with Female Genital Mutiliation. FGM is a wide range. An equivalent is a hoodectomy (removal of clitoral hood) but the effects on males is more like the FGM where they scar up part of the clitoris by cutting it with a needle. Botched circumcisions of males can go as far as accidentally cutting off the end of the penis. The most common forms of FGM are actually the scarring of thw clit more than the full sexual nullification where they just leave a tiny hole but the cliterectomy (removal of the clitoris) is second most common. As I have been pointing out throughout the thread the up sides are not conclusively proven or are exagerated and the downsides outweigh them as proven by various studies and I haven't brought up all the issues yet. If you want to know of other fucked up rituals look up "breast ironing" Kittens-kun said: @traed Sorry man, I've got better things to do than argue about penis skin on an anime forum website. Then why post in this thread in the first place when you won't defend your opinion calling opposition to unnecisary plastic surgery for babies that can lead to disfigurment or death overblown? Gan_water said: It's okay lol. It probably is a lot more convenient. Actually there is a study that says the opposite that it requires more maintenance. "To document prospectively variation in penile morphology and clinical findings in children. The study comprised a consecutive sample of 468 boys whose consultation with a physician included a genital examination in a primary-care paediatric practice in rural northern Wisconsin. Circumcised boys under 3 years of age were significantly more likely to have a partially or completely covered glans, a reddened meatus, balanitis, or trapped epithelial debris, and less likely to have a fully exposed glans than were circumcised boys of 3 years or older. Among the 238 boys under 3 years, those circumcised were significantly more likely to have non-cosmetic problems, including coronal adhesions, trapped epithelial debris, a reddened meatus, preputial stenosis (phimosis) and balanitis, than were boys with a foreskin. Findings in the circumcised group under 3 years included: fully exposed glans (n = 78, 35.6%), partially covered glans (n = 67, 30.6%), adhesions (25.6%), completely covered glans (20.1%), entrapped desquamated epithelial debris (24.7%), reddened meatus (19.1%), balanitis (15.5%), and preputial stenosis (0.9%). Only two genital examinations in boys with foreskins revealed pertinent findings. Coronal adhesions develop in circumcised boys at 2-6 months of age and usually resolve by 24 months. The degree of skin covering the glans after neonatal circumcision peaks at 6 months of age. There are significant variations of appearance in circumcised boys; clinical findings are much more common in these boys than previously reported in retrospective studies. The circumcised penis requires more care than the intact penis during the first 3 years of life. Parents should be instructed to retract and clean any skin covering the glans in circumcised boys, to prevent adhesions forming and debris from accumulating. Penile inflammation (balanitis) may be more common in circumcised boys; preputial stenosis (phimosis) affects circumcised and intact boys with equal frequency. The revision of circumcision for purely cosmetic reasons should be discouraged on both medical and ethical grounds." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13837379_Variability_in_penile_appearance_and_penile_findings_A_prospective_study Thrashinuva said: traed said: "Infants undergoing non-therapeutic circumcision are unnecessarily put at risk for a wide range of unintended adverse outcomes from the procedure. Though the risks of circumcision are often blandly characterized as being “minor and rare,” some while relatively minor, such as adhesions, are quite common and still distressing, and some, like death, while rare, can be catastrophic.[1,2] Adverse events following circumcision include not only the general risks of any surgery (bleeding, infection, and pain), but also many problems specific to the different circumcision techniques[3] and affected by variations in penile anatomy.[4,5] Babies circumcised in the neonatal intensive care unit or the special care nursery are at four times greater risk for complications than are babies circumcised in the well-baby nursery.[6] Physicians learning the procedure often receive little or no formal training,[7] nor is there any legal requirement for such.[8]" https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/complications/ "Can be catastrophic" [1,2] - Sourced by a 1983 study about circumcisions done by non-medical professionals outside of a hospital. Rather, this whole article is from 1983. [7] and [8] are from 1975 and 1956. That's irrelevant because it still can lead to all sorts of complications that are catastrophic. This is from 2010. First other source I could find that talks about lack of qualifications or rules of standards "Of 36 obstetric-gynecology residents 27 responded to the survey. Most respondents planned to perform neonatal circumcision when in practice, 44% had no formal training in circumcision and most were comfortable performing routine neonatal circumcision. Overall respondents were less comfortable evaluating whether the a newborn penis could undergo circumcision safely. When presented with 10 pictures of penises and asked to determine whether the neonate should undergo circumcision, 0% of respondents correctly identified all contraindications to neonatal circumcision with an average of 42% of contraindications identified correctly. Of the respondents 77% listed practical experience as the first choice to learn a procedure with an online module preferred by 55% as the second choice." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022534710031484 Considering they allow Jewish rabbis and whatnot to do tradition circumcisions including sucking the blood with their mouth I doubt they have laws requiring many qualifications. I think you're overestimating the benefits here. Then stop bathing if you think it doesn't do anything. The source for that is this article which is criticized by their peers: "CIRP believes that the authors exhibit a fundamental mis-understanding of human sexuality." And this article which is a case study about how repetitive pain at young ages affects adult behavior in rats. So you want more... "Before circumcision, in all children to be circumcised a tendency to depression and an increase in anxiety were observed regardless of the presence of subgroups. At the end of the study, it was found that low socioeconomic level, disrupted family dynamic, and/or the presence of mental disease in a parent could increase the predisposition to pre and post-operative depression. At this stage the main factor determining the level of anxiety is the procedure of circumcision itself." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1698031X16300772 "Circumcised infants showed a stronger pain response to subsequent routine vaccination than uncircumcised infants. Among the circumcised group, preoperative treatment with Emla attenuated the pain response to vaccination. We recommend treatment to prevent neonatal circumcision pain." http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio2/ This is a psychologist using his patients as examples of causation. I think it should be obvious how large of a problem this. It's not a proper scientific study. It's called a case study. Case studies are important in psychology to know what to try to look for in other studies. I can bring up other studies. "To our knowledge, there is no prior evidence to suggest a link between circumcision and hyperactivity disorder, so our finding of an increased risk of this common neurobehavioral disorder among circumcised boys in non-Muslim families was unexpected and needs cautious interpretation." The article is only studying correlation and recognizes that no such correlation had ever been found before, suggesting the cause to be something else. It was the first study to do that I think otherwise they would cite past studies. They are just saying more studies should be done to confirm it. This is standard language used in studies. They always say that. The cause may be anaesthesia which is used in a minority of circumcisions but it's highly unethical to do it without. I'm certainly not saying that it's statistically common, but that the procedure carried out by a medical professional is common enough to be considered reliable, specifically in countries where it's not an unheard of practice. Normal means common. Very normal means very common. It might have been more right to call it a standard procedure. |
| I thought it was actually just done to make masturbation more difficult. Or, to make you not such a quick shooter, well, unless it is a mind over matter thing for you. I have no idea if I can tantric masturbate because of my circumcision or, I am just good like that. I guess I should be thankful for being properly cut in a general hospital though? Since I have never had any problems or complications. Not like I advocate doing such a unnecessary surgery in the first place to a wee babe. Downsides? Hmmm, I dunno, it really detracts from when I call those body modification freaks with horn implants under their scalp and shit. Like, I just feel so hollow. Like, I am not all the way into it. Like, just deep down, I am just a modified penis trying to establish its place in this crazy world. |
SoverignFeb 10, 2018 7:11 PM
|
| Please circumcise if you hadn't ://:/:/ but it's your choice tho, im just saying |
 |
| @traed I just wanted to give my opinion. I didn't expect people to come at me trying to have an argument. I really don't give enough of a shit about this topic to argue with people. Ok with it? Not ok with? I don't really care either way. |
|
| Yeah to be honest I don't give a shit how other men are dealing with their dicks. This is more work than it's worth. |
yosimba2000 said: I voted yes. Let the child decide when he grows older. Lol, I'm not being a dick - no pun intended - but I think you misread the poll question. The Poll Question is different than the thread title. the question is your circumcision/non-circumcision status...not if it's wrong or not. |
|
More topics from this board
» is 200k the limit?YukiTheAlmighty - May 11 |
23 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
20 minutes ago |
|
» Do you celebrate your Birthday ( 1 2 )ST63LTH - May 7 |
55 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
25 minutes ago |
|
» fav dish from your culture or country?BEEKAT - Jun 18, 2021 |
21 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
32 minutes ago |
|
» what makes you send someone a friend request?707supremacist - Apr 29 |
42 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
36 minutes ago |
|
» Lonely Teens Are Making "Friends" With AIsdeg - May 11 |
36 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
40 minutes ago |