Are you circumcised, yes or no, and are you for, or against it as a cultural norm?

[Gooding]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

So, what do you think? Yes or no? For my part, I'll certainly advocate circumcisions for any son(s) I may have because it was done to me, as it was done to my father before me, for sanitary reasons.Others might say their nay because of the pain involved, the fact that a foreskin isn't too high maintenance, it's a Jewish tradition supported by Jewish propaganda, etc.,etc..

[Sol Invictus]

Well it looks better circumcized, sure, but I am generally against it being done at birth because besides the Ishmaeli or Jewish reason to do it, what other is there? I think if you teach proper washing technique then sanitation isn't an issue. I love my penis the way it is, but the only issue I have is that I was not asked if I wanted it removed or not, and I can't get it back. If you're circumcized as well, I recommend moisturizing the tip to cut down on the damage done to it from rubbing the inside fabric of your pants. Makes a world of difference.

[Sally]

I would not have any son of mine circumcised, unless there was a valid medical reason for it. For the most part, it seems medically needless, invasive and painful to me.

[Psychonaut]

So, what do you think? Yes or no?

I am circumcised and so is my son, but I wish that weren't the case. I was still pretty young and inexperienced in the ways of the world when my son was born. If I'd sat down and thought about it, perhaps I wouldn't've given the doctor the go ahead to circumcise him, but I had none of that luxury of time. All I really remember is that right after my wife gave birth to him (literally right after), they took him over to a table, let me snip the umbilical cord and asked me if I wanted them to circumcise him. My head was spinning and I think I just kind of nodded numbly.

Now that I've had time to think about it and to flesh out my opinions on the matter, I seriously regret my actions and my lack of forethought towards the issue. Prior to the 1800s, very few peoples aside from the Jews were regularly circumcised. Even today, the only populations apart from North Americans and Jews who are circumcised are various little pockets of tribal people in Africa and Australia. It's not as if circumcision has some kind of long history with our people. It was feverishly advocated by a handful of vocal doctors in the 1800s for what we now understand were bogus reasons. The only clear health benefit is that circumcision makes it harder to catch STDs. Personally, I don't think that nor Jewish traditions are a legitimate reason to cut off a part of a boy's penis.

[Lady L]

Yes!!! ...I agree with Gooding.

[Eldritch]

Absolutély not. Your religion requires the genital mutilation of helpless children? Well, if that's the case, then your religion sucks elephant ass. I'm sorry to be blunt, but that's really how I see it.

[Rainraven]

I think it's a bit like someone coming along and cutting off your little toe because supposedly we don't need it and it will mean you don't get athletes foot or an ingrown toenail on it..

Unnecessarily painful when there is nothing wrong with keeping it.

Edit: should have made it a poll G!

[Loki]

For my part, I'll certainly advocate circumcisions for any son(s) I may have because it was done to me, as it was done to my father before me, for sanitary reasons.


Sorry but that's just BS. If you desire sanity, wash your dick when you take a shower. The foreskin is not the cause of disease and such, bad hygiene is.



Others might say their nay because of the pain involved, the fact that a foreskin isn't too high maintenance, it's a Jewish tradition supported by Jewish propaganda, etc.,etc..

A foreskin is no maintenance at all. In fact, not having one is maintenance. The glans is constantly rubbing against clothing fabric which (I'm told) is uncomfortable. It also desensitises the penis and therefore the man will experience less sensation during sexual intercourse. Circumcision also removes much of the natural lubrication and protective mechanisms around the very sensitive glans.



Well it looks better circumcized, sure, but ...

LOL, says who? :D A man who is uncircumcised can always pull it back and it would look much the same. But the opposite can't be done.

Once it's done it's done. You can't grow it back again. But you can always have it cut off if you want. I can always become circumcised if I want, but I see no reason to have myself mutilated. Circumcision is a Middle-Eastern religious practice/ritual that has unfortunately found its way into Christian and secular North American lifestyle. It is not the case in Europe. Perhaps it's because there are so many Jews in America, and their ideas are forced upon others? The answer is that people should start questioning what these Jews are telling you to do.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

I have not been done,purely for the fact that we had enough Calamari to fill 10 Bar Mitzvah feasts on that day.:confused:

My sons were done at birth-no fuss-It was done with a "rubberband" which fell off 3 days later.
Both complain about the inconveniences as told in other posts especially the sensual part.
My eldest son thought it was a drug trip gone stale.

[Sol Invictus]

LOL, says who? :D A man who is uncircumcised can always pull it back and it would look much the same. But the opposite can't be done.


Well I personally think it looks better, and I've had girlfriends tell me they like it better too but I don't know how to explain the way it looks uncircumcised but it I guess it kinda resembles a slug?

[Vulpix]

Poll added.

[Loki]

... I don't know how to explain the way it looks uncircumcised but it I guess it kinda resembles a slug?

Maybe! :eek: But this one looks more circumcised to me. :shrug:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LbccUVbSRd8/R9FVeO4DsrI/AAAAAAAABtY/62Eh2vr3x_o/s400/banana_slug_1_sm_1.jpg

[Äike]

I voted no, because having a foreskin is clearly better then not having one. It's also a Middle-Eastern tradition, so it shouldn't be used on Europeans.

[SwordoftheVistula]

For, for the same reasons as Gooding, also it's a mark of being of a civilized people and one of the things that separates whites (most of which are circumcised) as opposed to blacks and hispanics which tend not to be.


If you're circumcized as well, I recommend moisturizing the tip to cut down on the damage done to it from rubbing the inside fabric of your pants. Makes a world of difference.

Or just wear underwear?

[Loki]

For, for the same reasons as Gooding, also it's a mark of being of a civilized people and one of the things that separates whites (most of which are circumcised) as opposed to blacks and hispanics which tend not to be.


Hmm ... a few things here:

How does circumcision make you civilized?

Are most whites circumcised? I think not. Most in North America probably are, but most in Europe, Australia and South Africa (okay there are not too many there) are not.

[Sol Invictus]

Or just wear underwear?

Huh? What's that?

Naw seriously though, there's still rubbage there too.

[Vulpix]

For, for the same reasons as Gooding, also it's a mark of being of a civilized people and one of the things that separates whites (most of which are circumcised) as opposed to blacks and hispanics which tend not to be.



Only in America. In Europe circumcision on whites is only done for medical reasons :coffee:. Non circumcision is the norm here.

[Eldritch]

For, for the same reasons as Gooding, also it's a mark of being of a civilized people and one of the things that separates whites (most of which are circumcised) as opposed to blacks and hispanics which tend not to be.





That may be the case in the U.S., but certainly not in Europe. In Europe only Jews are circumcised, while European goy boys's junk is uncut as God intended it to be.

Apropos of nothing: I never wear underwear, not even in winter, and wear my jeans until they can stand up on their own. ;)

[EWtt]

I oppose circumcision, I think it is plain mutilation if done without a valid medical reason. Also, it certainly isn't European tradition.

[Brynhild]

Hmm ... a few things here:

How does circumcision make you civilized?

Are most whites circumcised? I think not. Most in North America probably are, but most in Europe, Australia and South Africa (okay there are not too many there) are not.

It would depend when you're talking about. Nowadays it's not the norm because we're well educated enough on hygienic standards.

I have two sons, one who is and one who isn't. With my first born, I was going through a lot after the birth and I remembered a horror story about how my ex brother in law had to have his foreskin removed when he was a teenager - because it became infected. He didn't clean himself properly IMO. I thought at the time, better now than later - until I heard my 10 day old son cry and I thought "WTF have I done?"

The procedure itself was to attach a ring around the foreskin and it fell off after a few days. He doesn't complain of discomfort and he wears cotton underpants - at least your skin can breathe through that.

When my second son was born, I didn't even bother telling anybody what I decided on. The opinion is split in my family and in the humid Aussie climate you could be forgiven for believing that circumcision is the right thing to do. I went against it because of how I felt after my first born. I regret it, but he seems to be fine and none the worse for it. Unless there is a medical reason for the need to remove it, I voted no. The foreskin is its own natural protector, and with good hygienic practises, there is no reason why it should ever be removed.

[Absinthe]

For me also it is mutilation without an actual purpose. And it is sad to see that a Jewish kink has become such a trend in America, that it is consider as the distinguishing factor between whites and everybody else... :....

[Vargtand]

If someone comes at me with a knife I'll kick their ass!

Circumcision is mutilation and should be made illegal.

[Loki]

Circumcision is mutilation and should be made illegal.

I agree, I think involuntary childhood circumcision - aside for urgent medical reasons - should be made illegal and punishable by law. Genital mutilation should only ever be allowed with written consent. A baby can't do that. :(

[chap]

Around 20% of white UK males are circumcised, it was popular through to the inter-war period before fading as a practice. Until the First World War 85% of upper class males were circumcised (and around 50% of working class boys).

Remember, this shouldn't be looked at as one ethnic group versus another, in such broad terms. Some families simply have a tradition of circumcision, this does not mean they are brainwashed by propaganda, it is just their custom. I would not like to have been circumcised as a baby, I was cut much later and aesthetically the end result is pleasing. I would not have my own child circumcised, the choice should be their own unless the medical case for doing so is urgent.

[Tabiti]

Males are born with this part of skin, so let it be!

[Ulf]

I don't give a shit about Jews or whatever, I don't remember having it done or any pain associated with it. I think it looks better and is cleaner, so my male children will have it done as well.

[The Lawspeaker]

It's a Middle Eastern custom and I would see no reason to have it done with myself or (if I would ever have children) with my male offspring other then for medical reasons that might pop up.

[Freomæg]

I put my trust in nature :thumb001:.

Personally, I think it looks better uncircumcised, but then the uncircumcised will say that and the circumcised will say circumcised looks better.

[Skandi]

Ok not being male I can't give personal reasons :) But if it were bad and dirty why would evolution have developed/kept it?
On the personal note, with looks better and is more comfortable for her during intercourse, as it is a form of lubrication. Also and if any of you have been done as adults you may agree, it is easier to play with!

[Aemma]

Ok, firstly I wish people would stop saying "it's a Middle Eastern tradition, blah, blah, blah..." The fact that up until a very short while ago, it used to be the norm here in North America should suffice to prove that it is NOT ONLY a Middle Eastern tradition but a tradition among us, non-Middle Easterners, as well, for whatever reason it came into being, whether we all like it or not. Evidently there's quite the gap between practices in North America and Europe and Australia. And so be it--that's just the way our respective mores with respect to perceived issues of hygiene have developed.

Here in North America, baby boys have usually gotten circumcised. This has or had been the norm, often unquestioned as many 'norms' are. In my own province, the cost for this procedure had always been covered by the provincial health care plan up until a couple of years before our son was born. The province ended the coverage for this procedure I doubt entirely for unselfish reasons either: they saw that current medical evidence no longer supported the reason of better hygiene with circumsion and thus brought an abrupt end to paying for such. I'm not sure about longitudinal statistical studies on the matter, but I would bet you dollars-to-doughnuts that the rate of circumsion has lowered, initially not so much because of a different philosophical mindset but because the procedure is no longer covered. Not that this is bad mind you. But it just goes to show the nature of the actual impetus for a norm to be established at times.

As for our own son, well he was circumcised during his second day of life. We didn't know much about many of the issues surrounding male circumcision at the time. As norms work, we went with the norm which was prevalent in our respective families at the time. Such is tradition and imparted family wisdom I suppose.

Gods help me should my son ever read this post one day though. I doubt very much he'd be pleased with me that I talked about his willy to a bunch of online strangers. :P :D

Cheers All!...Aemma

[Loki]

Ok, firstly I wish people would stop saying "it's a Middle Eastern tradition, blah, blah, blah..." The fact that up until a very short while ago, it used to be the norm here in North America should suffice to prove that it is NOT ONLY a Middle Eastern tradition but a tradition among us, non-Middle Easterners, as well, for whatever reason it came into being, whether we all like it or not. Evidently there's quite the gap between practices in North America and Europe and Australia. And so be it--that's just the way our respective mores with respect to perceived issues of hygiene have developed.

Here in North America, baby boys have usually gotten circumcised.

It is quite a recent tradition, though. The founding fathers never did such a thing. It must be when Jewish influence had increased, that it became more prevalent in the States and Canada.

Non-religious infant circumcision was only taken up in the US after 1900. Even by 1933, only 32% of newborn American boys were circumcised. This had risen to 70% by 1945. Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision#Non-religious_circumcision_in_the_English-speaking_world). Thus it would appear that it really kicked off during and after WW2. A fairly new tradition as far as gentile North Americans are concerned.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Global_Map_of_Male_Circumcision_Prevalence_at_Coun try_Level.png/800px-Global_Map_of_Male_Circumcision_Prevalence_at_Coun try_Level.png

[Thorum]

My thoughts are with Goody, Aemma and Mrs. L on this. I wouldn't hesitate to have it done to my son. Purely for social and family reasons. As Aemma said, it was and still is custom of our society in North America here to have it done. Also, making a huge big cultural, religious health debate is ridiculous. It is no big deal. I had it done and I like my pecker without it. My "little boy" also is not bothered by fabric or desensitized in any way. Lastly, it is done with topical anesthetic so it is painless for the child.....

[Aemma]

It is quite a recent tradition, though. The founding fathers never did such a thing. It must be when Jewish influence had increased, that it became more prevalent in the States and Canada.

Non-religious infant circumcision was only taken up in the US after 1900. Even by 1933, only 32% of newborn American boys were circumcised. This had risen to 70% by 1945. Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision#Non-religious_circumcision_in_the_English-speaking_world). Thus it would appear that it really kicked off during and after WW2. Thus a fairly new tradition as far as gentile North Americans are concerned.

Fair point. And yes, a fairly new tradition. I guess my issue is that I wouldn't ascribe the preponderance for circumsion in Canada, at any rate, as one due to a Jewish influence per se so much as one due to the medical establishment of the time imposing its views on the public. It becomes very difficult for me as a Canadian, especially being a French Canadian, to view this issue as one influenced by the relatively diminutive Jewish community in my country, especially since Canada has always been a 'secular Christian' country (if that notion makes any sense :)). It's not been my experience that the influence of Jewish religio-cultural practice has been a factor in Canada, for all intents and purposes. So it is very difficult for me to even contemplate that this has been the impetus for the rise of rates of circumsion in post WW2 Canada. It would be interesting to trace the medical journals of the period in question to examine the medical thought at the time and to then examine the researchers' own religious/philosophical views.

Hmm now you got me wondering why did the practice take off here? :) :confused:

Cheers Loki!...Aemma :)

[Loki]

Hmm now you got me wondering why did the practice take off here? :) :confused:


It would be interesting indeed to learn more about the reasons why it took off there, and who initially promoted this practice. Many of the prominent doctors in American history were Jewish or of Jewish origin - it may be that they somehow managed to project their circumcision bias into mainstream society. Maybe by pushing articles scaring people that they had to be circumcised in order to be healthy and disease-free? It's not unthinkable, but I'm speculating here. :confused:

[Æmeric]

I believe circumcision is a Middle Eastern custom that predates Abraham. I think the ancient Egyptians practiced it or at least their upper classes. Most men circumcized today are Muslims. In the US it is associated with the Jews though as a non-religious medical procedure it is fairly common. I think the reason it is so common in America is because of Jewish & Masonic influence - so the Jewish boys wouldn't look odd in lockerooms & Masons like to believe the are following the traditions of the ancients (the American Anglo upperclass at one time heavily Masonic like Britain's aristocracy). The practice started enmass in the urban centers such as New York. And as the practice spread more families consented to it so their sons would be normal. And also the hospitals approach the parents about the procedure right after birth when they are not thinking straight.

I've heard that those little foreskins are worth a lot of money, upwards of a $1,000 each. Apparently they are useful in the treatment of bedsores.

[Gooding]

Absolutély not. Your religion requires the genital mutilation of helpless children? Well, if that's the case, then your religion sucks elephant ass. I'm sorry to be blunt, but that's really how I see it.

I thought this would come up sooner or later. Despite my support for the hygienic and medical logic of circumcision, I'm not a Jew, neither are any of my family. My religion demands that I use my own gods given common sense. My religion demands that I do what's best for my own Folk. This lovely family is my lovely family. As dark as my father is, I seriously doubt that that could be attributed to any Semitic influence.

[lei.talk]

if there were some reason to be disturbed
by the fact that my son discovered
and thoroughly enjoyed masturbation
from infancy (as does the girl-child),

this non-sense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_male_circumcision#Male_circumcision_to_ prevent_masturbation) might be of some influence.

[Tolleson]

Gods help me should my son ever read this post one day though. I doubt very much he'd be pleased with me that I talked about his willy to a bunch of online strangers. :P :D

Cheers All!...Aemma

I'm going to tell him about this at the dinner table tonight!:D

Let the fireworks begin....:rage

[Aemma]

It would be interesting indeed to learn more about the reasons why it took off there, and who initially promoted this practice. Many of the prominent doctors in American history were Jewish or of Jewish origin - it may be that they somehow managed to project their circumcision bias into mainstream society. Maybe by pushing articles scaring people that they had to be circumcised in order to be healthy and disease-free? It's not unthinkable, but I'm speculating here. :confused:

Oh indeed...I think that your speculation might not be far off the mark. Personal/social biases are brought into every field of study and their respective professions. Likewise, it would be interesting to examine what studies led my own province to not financially cover this procedure any more. As long as we're speculating, I wonder if it is a sign of Western medicine's loosened hold on issues of health and an influx of allied health professions having a better foothold in the whole business of health-care?

I know I'm going off tangent here (my apologies G), but it does make for interesting speculation when one looks at politics through different optics, here the decline of Western medicine (if it can be seen as representing a more Judean/Judeo-Christian world view) and the rise of allied health practices, for instance acupuncture, Reiki, naturopathy and the like (in turn, if they can be seen as representing a more multikulti world view). If anything it makes for a very different way of seeing the world at the very least.

Fascinating--all of it. :)

Cheers Loki!

[jerney]

Do you even have to ask? Obviously no unless for medical reasons.

[jerney]

Well it looks better circumcized, sure,

..no. It looks like someone cut off what was supposed to be there. I think circumcused penises look ugly and unnatural.

[jerney]

I don't give a shit about Jews or whatever, I don't remember having it done or any pain associated with it. I think it looks better and is cleaner, so my male children will have it done as well.

That's really irresponsible parenting right there, my friend.

You were only brought up to believe it looks "cleaner" and "better". Circumcised penises look deformed in my opinion. You dick is no cleaner than a circumcised man's who regularly showers, sorry to break it to you.

[Aemma]

That's really irresponsible parenting right there, my friend.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Judgments like this are hardly necessary. Are you going to call those of us who did opt for circumcision for our male children irresponsible parents now, jerney? I don't bloody think so! What arrogance!

Become a parent first. Then, and only then, will it give you any semblance of credence in terms of crying foul.

It's entirely a family's own decision, for whatever reasons at the time, as to whether male circumcision is acceptable or not. Please keep the self-righteous "irresponsible parenting" rhetoric to yourself. It serves absolutely no constructive purpose.

[Eldritch]

I thought this would come up sooner or later. Despite my support for the hygienic and medical logic of circumcision, I'm not a Jew, neither are any of my family. My religion demands that I use my own gods given common sense. My religion demands that I do what's best for my own Folk. This lovely family is my lovely family. As dark as my father is, I seriously doubt that that could be attributed to any Semitic influence.

All right, but how is performing unnecessary cosmetic surgery without the victim's consent any more acceptable if you are doing under the guise of hygienic reasons (which don't hold any water anyway, since soap and showers exist) rather than religious ones?

[Gooding]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Judgments like this are hardly necessary. Are you going to call those of us who did opt for circumcision for our male children irresponsible parents now, jerney? I don't bloody think so! What arrogance!

Become a parent first. Then, and only then, will it give you any semblance of credence in terms of crying foul.

It's entirely a family's own decision, for whatever reasons at the time, as to whether male circumcision is acceptable or not. Please keep the self-righteous "irresponsible parenting" rhetoric to yourself. It serves absolutely no constructive purpose.

Agreed,Aemma.It is interesting, though, how a simple surgical procedure can evoke such emotional reactions, myself included. If no European nation was really interested in circumcision and it was really popular in America by the 1940s, that does remain a part of a North American's heritage, no matter how recent it may be. My Dad was born in 1944, he had it done.Neither his father nor his brothers(elder or younger) had it done to them.I was born in 1973, I had it done to me as a day old baby (and honestly, it never really slowed me down when I hit puberty). Should my wife and I have a son or two, ditto for them. Be a family's tradition old or be it new, it's a tradition, nonetheless and maybe it remains the family's business on whether or not they choose to observe that tradition.

[Sol Invictus]

What arrogance!



Took the words right out of my mouth.

[jerney]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Judgments like this are hardly necessary. Are you going to call those of us who did opt for circumcision for our male children irresponsible parents now, jerney? I don't bloody think so! What arrogance!

Become a parent first. Then, and only then, will it give you any semblance of credence in terms of crying foul.

It's entirely a family's own decision, for whatever reasons at the time, as to whether male circumcision is acceptable or not. Please keep the self-righteous "irresponsible parenting" rhetoric to yourself. It serves absolutely no constructive purpose.

I don't need to be a parent to know the basics of right and wrong. I do think getting your child circumcised and then making excuses for your decision is irresponsible parenting. If that offends you I am sorry, but I feel very strongly about this.

Btw, I think it's pretty arrogant you think you have the right to mutilate your child's genitalia for unnecessary purposes.

[Æmeric]

Most circumcized males had no choice in the matter. How many 18, 30 or 40 year old males would opt for the procedure? Why should mom & dad be making this decision for their newborn sons? Btw, we don't really need the little toe either, why not amputate that as well?

[Gooding]

All right, but how is performing unnecessary cosmetic surgery without the victim's consent any more acceptable if you are doing under the guise of hygienic reasons (which don't hold any water anyway, since soap and showers exist) rather than religious ones?

Hygienic or medical reasons, Exordium. Circumcised males are slightly less likely to catch excess filth on a hood that's not there than uncircumcised males and hence the likelihood of certain STDs are reduced. Remember, no matter how clean you might get, there are still trace elements of bacteria that remain on your body. As hot and as humid as things get down here, there is more likelihood of infection than there might be in cooler climates. Of course, "unnecessary" is a subjective term.Objectively, it might well be unnecessary in certain parts of the world, while in warmer climates, it might well be necessary to avoid needless genital infections.

[anonymaus]

But if it were bad and dirty why would evolution have developed/kept it?

You may (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure) be barking (http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/resources/clarifications/HumanBirth.html) up the wrong tree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereditary_disease).

[Gooding]

You may (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure) be barking (http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/resources/clarifications/HumanBirth.html) up the wrong tree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereditary_disease).

Very good points, anon..:):thumb001:

[Æmeric]

Curiously, female circumcision - which came from the same ancient desert societies as male circumcision - has never caught on in the West except among certain immigrant groups. And feminists have big issues with that practice. How many here who support male circumcision for newborn males would support it for newborn females.

The fact is that nearly all persons - male or female - who have ever been circumcized in the history of mankind did not make the choice themselves but had it made for them. This should tell us that there is something fundamentally wrong with the procedure.

[Gooding]

Curiously, female circumcision - which came from the same ancient desert societies as male circumcision - has never caught on in the West except among certain immigrant groups. And feminists have big issues with that practice. How many here who support male circumcision for newborn males would support it for newborn females.

The fact is that nearly all persons - male or female - who have ever been circumcized in the history of mankind did not make the choice themselves but had it made for them. This should tell us that there is something fundamentally wrong with the procedure.

The difference being, AEmeric, that the woman's area is located inside of her body while the male's part is external.The female's part is already protected, while the male's foreskin might really be little more than a nuisance to be removed.I'm quite grateful to the doctor who snipped me.:):thumb001:

[Spaniard_Truth]

Around 20% of white UK males are circumcised, it was popular through to the inter-war period before fading as a practice. Until the First World War 85% of upper class males were circumcised (and around 50% of working class boys).

Remember, this shouldn't be looked at as one ethnic group versus another, in such broad terms. Some families simply have a tradition of circumcision, this does not mean they are brainwashed by propaganda, it is just their custom. I would not like to have been circumcised as a baby, I was cut much later and aesthetically the end result is pleasing. I would not have my own child circumcised, the choice should be their own unless the medical case for doing so is urgent.

It's still alien to Britain. It only had brief popularity in the late Victorian age and early 20th century and is nothing well established in British culture:

"Edward Gibbon [1737-1794] had referred to it as a "singular mutilation" practised only by Jews and Turks and as "a painful and often dangerous rite"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_male_circumcision#Male_circumcision_in_ the_18th_century

In Britain, it was considered a Jewish practice before it was popularized, and is so again now it has lost its vogue.

[Lady L]

That's really irresponsible parenting right there, my friend.

You were only brought up to believe it looks "cleaner" and "better". Circumcised penises look deformed in my opinion. You dick is no cleaner than a circumcised man's who regularly showers, sorry to break it to you.

Well my friend, ;) a fact is that it is only your opinion that it is wrong, as it is their opinion that it is not. That doesn't make you right, nor does it make them right. So, that is why your comments are taken with a :rolleyes:

I was never " brought up " to think anything about it. It wasn't a conversation or a topic that I had discussed or even thought about growing up. And, I am for it, if that is what the parents want. I've never seen one that wasn't...

In conclusion, jerney, it is simply a choice that is up to everyone as a parent, some are pro and some are con, as with many other topics. But, you shouldn't comment on someone's parenting being irresponsible, that makes me irresponsible, Ulf, Aemma, and many other dear people to me. I don't like that. It is out of line for you to make that call based on this topic. :rolleyes:

Especially when I recall..you can't stand kids...;)

[Inese]

Yes jerney is right i agree with her!! :thumb001: I know no man or boy who is circumzised and it is a very shocking new information to me that in Northern America it is done very often! :( You know young boys come to the world with the things mother nature gave them and it is not right to cut some things away without a reason and without ask the young boys or babies!!

Really ---- it is brutal and the same horrible act like circumzision on girls you see in Africa. Hm okay you say " family tradition " but it was a tradition to slap and beat the children for little causes for a long time period in history!! Do you slap and beat your children too???? Reason: Grand -grandfather slapped the grandfather and so it is a family tradition??? O.o :coffee:

If i go to bed with a boy and he has a circumzised penis i would abort it and could not hold back laughing.....hm or maybe feeling sad for him and that he had to go trough without the parents asking him if he want it or not.
A religion who demand to disfigure the members is no religion and is a bad cult!!

[The Lawspeaker]

If i go to bed with a boy and he has a circumzised penis i would abort it and could not hold back laughing....I know where you are aiming at but it would be cruel towards your boyfriend, Inese.

I think that infant circumcision is morally wrong. The children can't consent to it and the parents decide in their stead and make a decision that will mutilate their son for life. And anyways- has there been any conclusive evidence (so far) that circumcision offers medical benefits ? I don't think so- at least not for us in Europe because our climate is different and other then those barbarians we have heard of something called "soap".


@Aemma
Even though I don't have children (yet) that doesn't mean that I don't know the difference between right and wrong.

[Gooding]

Well, I guess it's just a North American fad (and choice) that people just have to live with, thank heavens!:D I also know what's right and wrong and if my son came to me broken hearted because someone laughed at him at one of the most intimate moments a man and woman can share together, I'd tell him flat out that if she really was into him, she wouldn't have done such a thing. Also that she was an insensitive clod and unworthy of him.

[The Lawspeaker]

(and choice)
Whose ? Yours or your son's ?

[Gooding]

Whose ? Yours or your son's ?

Mine for my boy.If I raise him, I'll choose the operation.

[The Lawspeaker]

Mine for my boy.If I raise him, I'll choose the operation.
:DLooks like we will have to respectfully agree that we disagree on that one.

[Gooding]

:DLooks like we will have to respectfully agree that we disagree on that one.

Sounds all right to me, Lawspeaker.:)

[Spaniard_Truth]

You may (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestigial_structure) be barking (http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/resources/clarifications/HumanBirth.html) up the wrong tree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereditary_disease).

A genetic disorder can't be the genetic norm by definition.

[Lady L]

Whose ? Yours or your son's ?

Another thing to think about people is that alot of you use the reason " if its done to an infant, its unfair because it wasn't their choice. " " It was done to them " ...

Considering that how many people do you hear that did have it done as a baby crying and whining about it...? Hating their parents..? Not many. Most that have it are glad and most that don't don't like it. Are you guys seeing the pattern yet..? ;)

Seems like we should all be happy then instead of making horrible comments. ;):tongue

[Aemma]

@Aemma
Even though I don't have children (yet) that doesn't mean that I don't know the difference between right and wrong.

Easy for you to say such things Tristan but have you never thought that we parents who did decide to do this thought/think we're doing the RIGHT thing by our own child/ren based on the information we have/had?

Geez...

[Inese]

I know where you are aiming at but it would be cruel towards your boyfriend, Inese.
Yes maybe but please in Europe it is not common to make it!! Soooo if a boy is circumszied and is not from North America he is to a very high rate a jew or muslim and i want no one of them in my bed or around me. And if he is not one of them than it tells me that the parent house of the boy is not normal in European sense ----- what rises new questions!! Questions where i need answers before i make a relationship or have sex. Okay Lawspeaker ?? :angel

[Gooding]

Another thing to think about people is that alot of you use the reason " if its done to an infant, its unfair because it wasn't their choice. " " It was done to them " ...

Considering that how many people do you hear that did have it done as a baby crying and whining about it...? Hating their parents..? Not many. Most that have it are glad and most that don't don't like it. Are you guys seeing the pattern yet..? ;)

Seems like we should all be happy then instead of making horrible comments. ;):tongue

I agree wholeheartedly, Lady Lyfing!:D:thumb001: I think a lot of this is also culture clash between Americans,Canadians and Europeans..

[Rainraven]

Mine for my boy.If I raise him, I'll choose the operation.

It's this lack of consent that I find to be the difficult aspect of this debate.

Yes as a parent you have the right to do what you believe is best for your child.

Does this extend to something as personal as the aesthetics of their genitalia? Just because you had it done and have no problems/regrets about it does not mean a son will feel the same way. If it is a tradition, then why not leave it until an age that you can talk to them about it. The tradition would mean a lot more if they chose to follow it than having the choice taken from them a few days after birth.

[The Lawspeaker]

Easy for you to say such things Tristan but have you never thought that we parents who did decide to do this thought/think we're doing the RIGHT thing by our own child/ren based on the information we have/had?

Geez...
Of course. But it is still mutilation. Are those practices commonly advised to all parents in the U.S and Canada ? I am sure that in enlightened western societies such as ours there are ways of finding out whether it really serves a purpose or not.

And think of one thing (just for the heck of it) if it served a purpose in our societies and protected our children: why didn't our own ancestors do it ? Why isn't it standard practice in Europe and the U.S ?

[Lady L]

It's this lack of consent that I find to be the difficult aspect of this debate.

Yes as a parent you have the right to do what you believe is best for your child.

Does this extend to something as personal as the aesthetics of their genitalia? Just because you had it done and have no problems/regrets about it does not mean a son will feel the same way. If it is a tradition, then why not leave it until an age that you can talk to them about it. The tradition would mean a lot more if they chose to follow it than having the choice taken from them a few days after birth.

And, with that being said ^ have ya'll that are con ever considered that maybe boys who didn't have it done are unhappy about it..? and wish it had been done..?

[Svarog]

I am very cut and am not either jew or a muslim, so far did not get any complains :cool:

[Rainraven]

And, with that being said ^ have ya'll that are con ever considered that maybe boys who didn't have it done are unhappy about it..? and wish it had been done..?

In which case they can get it done in later life from their own choosing :)

[Inese]

Considering that how many people do you hear that did have it done as a baby crying and whining about it...? Hating their parents..?
Your only luck is that humans can not remind them of events happened to them when they were a baby!! It is a abuse of the child brain. What is your argument please?? :confused: The same way you can say " I can slap my baby every day because i know when it is older it can not remind itself of the first years of his life like all other humans!!!" ??? No please!!

Or people get hurt or raped and then have a amnesia!! What is the answer?? " The rape was not bad because the victim had a amnesia and can not remind anything from the rape ----- eaaaasy it is not so worse!!! " :mad:

No i dont say that circumzision is like a rape but the principle behind the logic you use is similiar , it can be done because later the boy can not remind himself about the pain and cruel act. :( :coffee:

[Loki]

:twwp:

[The Lawspeaker]

The question that should be asked is this one: if circumcision really protected our children in our climate then why isn't it standard practice and why didn't our ancestors do it ?

The reason may be simple: it doesn't help one bit.

[Gooding]

It's this lack of consent that I find to be the difficult aspect of this debate.

Yes as a parent you have the right to do what you believe is best for your child.

Does this extend to something as personal as the aesthetics of their genitalia? Just because you had it done and have no problems/regrets about it does not mean a son will feel the same way. If it is a tradition, then why not leave it until an age that you can talk to them about it. The tradition would mean a lot more if they chose to follow it than having the choice taken from them a few days after birth.

Tradition is a dicy word, too, though, Rain! **cuddle,cuddle** It's simply a basic surgical procedure meant to promote the health and cleanliness of the baby.Getting rid of a placenta's done too, but would we really call that a "tradition"?I'm actually glad that that detail was handled when I was born. Some think it's a barbaric custom and I respect that, if I can't quite grasp the reasoning behind it.How can you miss what you've never had? This was never an issue growing up! It's just something done, that's all. I mean, most American and I suppose Canadian women shave their armpits and certain European women have the reputation of shaving nothing! I prefer the bare pit on a woman to a hairy one.I think this is a cultural thing.

[Beorn]

Your only luck is that humans can not remind them of events happened to them when they were a baby!! It is a abuse of the child brain. What is your argument please?? :confused: The same way you can say " I can slap my baby every day because i know when it is older it can not remind itself of the first years of his life like all other humans!!!" ??? No please!!


What Lady Lyfing was saying is the pain the baby suffers is only the then and now. It is painful, and it will cause discomfort, but the baby will grow up none the wiser to having undergone that trauma.

A comparison to physical abuse of a child is an incorrect one, as the child will suffer that pain near everyday.

[Aemma]

Of course. But it is still mutilation. Are those practices commonly advised to all parents in the U.S and Canada ? I am sure that in enlightened western societies such as ours there are ways of finding out whether it really serves a purpose or not.


Have you not read some of my previous posts in this thread Tristan? It's what was the norm in North America. Parents WERE commonly advised to have their sons circumcised for the purposes of good male hygiene back during a certain period in our recent history. This is a point some of you are not fully comprehending. We're not monsters having babies here in North America you know. When the medical establishment tells you something for long enough and it becomes 'normalised' (as in a norm is created) then a norm, in the truest sense of the word, is created. In my part of the world it was not common practice to question a medical opinion up until a short while ago.

To turn this issue into a moral absolute is actually quite distressing and not to mention divisive. NO, it's actually more depressing than anything else.

Where's SuuTie when you need him?:confused:

[The Lawspeaker]

I know. It's the same here with education (how we here get imprinted with multicultural thinking) I think but that leaves me to wonder about those that form up the medical establishment.
I am sure that a lot of names sound a bit like Rosenthal and Goldberg- since it is not a traditional European custom and as I read before it only entered American life less then what 80 years ago ? That's around the early 20th century- isn't that the same time that the Jews emigrated to America (en masse- there were some in the U.S during the Colonial Times) ?

[Gooding]

Oddly enough, it was Doctor O'Connell who circumcised me when I was born, from what my mother told me.

[The Lawspeaker]

Oddly enough, it was Doctor O'Connell who circumcised me when I was born, from what my mother told me.
Because by then it was already a "custom". The doctor only did what he had always been trained to do.

[Gooding]

Because by then it was already a "custom". The doctor only did what he had always been trained to do.

That's very true.All it was was standard procedure.

[Electronic God-Man]

:twwp:

http://www.sexwoerterbuch.info/assets_active/circumcised.jpg

It's even funnier when it is captioned in German.

[jerney]

The difference being, AEmeric, that the woman's area is located inside of her body while the male's part is external.The female's part is already protected, while the male's foreskin might really be little more than a nuisance to be removed.I'm quite grateful to the doctor who snipped me.:):thumb001:

...no. The equivalent to male circumcision would be removal of the clitoral hood. Technically it doesn't really serve any purpose other than to protect the protruding part of the clitoris (similar to what the foreskin does to the head of the penis). This area can develop smegma just like the underside of the foreskin on a penis if not cleaned regularly. So far all I see are arguments about cleanliness and "tradition". To be consistent, are you ok with Americans who want to develop a new "tradition" of removing their daughters clitoral hood at birth?

I find it a bit unsettling how some people here have such blase attitudes about mutilating a child's genitals.

[Gooding]

...no. The equivalent to male circumcision would be removal of the clitoral hood. Technically it doesn't really serve any purpose other than to protect the protruding part of the clitoris (similar to what the foreskin does to the head of the penis). This area can develop smegma just like the underside of the foreskin on a penis if not cleaned regularly. So far all I see are arguments about cleanliness and "tradition". To be consistent, are you ok with Americans who want to develop a new "tradition" of removing their daughters clitoral hood at birth?

Not for my daughter, no.What other Americans decide to do for their children is their business, short of molestation or any other form of abuse.I do advocate male circumcision as a sanitation measure.Period.

[Absinthe]

I've heard that those little foreskins are worth a lot of money, upwards of a $1,000 each. Apparently they are useful in the treatment of bedsores.

:eek: Eeeewww! Eeeewww!! :yuck: [Grossed out/out of this thread :D]

[chap]

Not for my daughter, no.What other Americans decide to do for their children is their business, short of molestation or any other form of abuse.I do advocate male circumcision as a sanitation measure.Period.

Cleanliness does not require circumcision. If it did then almost all men would be cut. If the foreskin can be retracted then the glans can be cleaned.

Circumcision of an otherwise healthy child is a dereliction of duty, it's hard to excuse.

[Gooding]

:eek: Eeeewww! Eeeewww!! :yuck: [Grossed out/out of this thread :D]

Yeah..lots to say about dickheads today..:D

[jerney]

Not for my daughter, no.What other Americans decide to do for their children is their business, short of molestation or any other form of abuse.I do advocate male circumcision as a sanitation measure.Period.

Well, did you see where I just said the same problems develop underneath the clitoral hood as underneath the foreskin if not cleaned regularly?

I may not have a penis, but I have a boyfriend who is not circumcised and we are very well acquainted and never once has there been an issue with its "cleanliness".

[Gooding]

Cool.I'm just going to sit back and enjoy the debate.:D I don't think anybody's going to change anyone else's mind in a hurry and I'm as firmly settled in my position, probably more so, even, as I was when I first stated my case.

[chap]

BTW all this stuff about Jews/Arabs/non-Europeans practising circumcision is a total red herring. Xenophobia should not be conflated with this issue, either infant circumcision is right or it is wrong, judged on it's own pros/cons.

[Æmeric]

Another thing to think about people is that alot of you use the reason " if its done to an infant, its unfair because it wasn't their choice. " " It was done to them " ...

Considering that how many people do you hear that did have it done as a baby crying and whining about it...? Hating their parents..? Not many. Most that have it are glad and most that don't don't like it. Are you guys seeing the pattern yet..? ;)

Seeing how most males had the procedure performed in the first few days of life.... it's not something we can claim a lot of trauma over. Really, it is so common place that many persons just don't think about. Seriously, how many men want to discuss their penises with their parents? By the time it might be an issue they will have plenty of other reasons to love or hate their parents. And most parents don't consent to it to be cruel, they do it because they think it is the normal thing to do or they don't think as Psychonaut pointed out when he consented to his son's circumcision.

[Gooding]

For many families, it is the normal thing to do. For many families, having a baby baptized, or having him cut through an elaborate bris is the normal thing to do.If the circumcised don't dare presume to tell other families what to do, why should the uncircumcised have that privilege? It should and it does work both ways.Psychonaut regrets having it done to his child and I respect that regret. Others who haven't had it done call it unnecessary, cruel, a desert tradition, whatever. Easy to say, I'm sure, when you've not had it done to you.There is a greater chance of smegma with an uncircumcised penis.There is a greater chance of infection, I don't care if you shower five times a day and use sandpaper on the head of your dick, with an uncircumcised rod. Foreskins retain dirt that wouldn't be there but for the foreskin.People can cry foul about the pain, but that's only when they're old enough to understand and to be traumatized by that pain.Yes, it is better to have it done as an infant.There are cultural and, as Rain pointed out to me earlier, age factors in determining the pros and cons of circumcision.The little toe helps you retain your balance, which is why we've got one.I'm not planning to walk on the head of my dick, so I don't need a built in slipper.

[Lady L]

In which case they can get it done in later life from their own choosing :)

True, but by then, it is very painful. I was just wanting to make the point that we can't assume that everyone who didn't have it as an infant is happy with that.

[Vulpix]

True, but by then, it is very painful. I was just wanting to make the point that we can't assume that everyone who didn't have it has a infant is happy with that.

As painful as it might be, they have the choice.

[Lady L]

Personally, I'm tired of hearing so much about dick and even more tired of hearing the word itself, dick. :rolleyes:

[Óttar]

I am circumcised, but I would not subject my son(s) to the procedure, as they would not be able to decide for themselves, it is completely unnecessary, and the practice originates from an alien tradition. All the excuses like sanitary reasons are hogwash. Circumcision is male genital mutilation, period. Circumcision also potentially limits sensation for intercourse, stimulation etc; but then again, I'll never know, they took it without asking me.

It's like someone said in a film I saw:

Man 1: "If you could get one thing back, what would it be?"

Man 2: "My foreskin." " What?! Nobody ever asked me if I wanted it removed, they just took it."

[Ulf]

I'm convinced that people who desire uncircumcised penises are really just huge fans of Frank Herbert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandworm_(Dune)).

[Æmeric]

I think the personal hygiene reason for circumcision is a poor one. I have 4 boys, not circumcised ( I hope they don't read this & get mad at for discusing their peewees in cyberspace) & none has ever had a hygiene problem with his penis. On the otherhand they've all gone through a stage where they had filthy ears. They wouldn't clean well behind the ears or they woukldn't clear out the wax - my wife has been embarrassed more then once by the pediatrician removing a huge glob of dry earwax out of someone's ear. Maybe we should've had their ears lopped off at birth. They could still hear without that ackward mass of flesh & cartridge & it would be easier for them to put on a bike helmet.:)

[Goidelic]

This practice isn't an old North American practice it's simply a relatively late 19th century early 20th century primitive alien barbarity that still goes on to this day in America. It's origins lie in Ancient Egypt I believe. How many English Americans that were born in the 17th or 18th century in America were circumcised? I can tell you that none of my great-grandfather's were circumcised and they were born in the 19th century. One was born in a log cabin in Kentucky, some were born in Ireland, the rest were born here in rural areas in homes, where the hospital was far away. I can't believe some people advocate circumcision, and the strange thing it always comes from people who are circumcised themselves.

I don't even think the "medical reasons" for it are really necessary reasons to do it either in most circumstances, unless of course you have a rare foreskin penile cancer, terminal disease/infection or it's full of cancer developing, which is extremely rare, probably close to 0.1%. In most cases it was probably balanitis or phimosis and needed to be probably taken care of, not removed. There are lots of myths how being circumcised suddenly prevents you from STD's. It's really like an eyelid, for instance, we don't cut our eye lids off for us to see better do we?

A foreskin goes back millions of years into evolution, mammals have them. If it's such an "old North American tradition" how many Native Americans were circumcised in the 18th century, they're technically old Americans? The point is, If you're born with one than there must be a purpose for it, right? You'd be surprised the amount of botched circumcisions yearly and radically circumcised people who slightly bleed/hurt or have peyronie type symptoms when they get erections because there is no sufficient skin to be stretched. Once it's gone it's gone, you can try restoring it, but there will always be some irreplaceable damage leftover from this alien operation.

Thankfully, I wasn't cut neither was my brother, but my father and grandfather were, which were both against this malicious practice and were educated about it. One of my new born cousin's a couple years ago was cut without doctor's consent. It seems like such a ritual nowadays to do it. I believe in the 1980's over 80% of newborn male infants were circumcised in America, now it's slightly lowered to 65-70% but still high. I believe this whole American practice of circumcision started in the 1880's. It's glorified nowadays because most pornography shows circumcised men and are labeled as "aesthetically pleasing." It's more of a primitive fashion/trend in my opinion and most people don't in the U.S. don't really know it's damaging effects because they're products of it themselves.

"In the 1880s, circumcision was recommended to prevent insanity and epilepsy, in the 1940s it was recommended to prevent STIs, the 1950s it was a cure for cancer and in the early 21st century, HIV is spread in the moist regions of the foreskin as opposed to the dry, keratinised layer of the glans."

"The foreskin is an integral, normal part of the penis. It contains about 240ft of nerves, and around 1000 nerve endings." There are variations also on how much skin is removed as well, so you may end up having 140ft of nerves still in tact, instead of 240ft of them being removed. :D:tongue;)

"State reports show that circumcision is, however, the lowest among our native American population--and is the lowest among parents who are Hispanic in culture." Our Germanic/Celtic ancestors never practiced this. :thumb001:;)

http://www.newforeskin.biz/CI/CIchart.htm

http://www.circlist.com/rites/usa.html

http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Are-the-Benefits-of-Having-a-Foreskin?&id=58669

[Paleo]

if theirs a medical need for it, yes.


just for the sake of it, no.

[RoyBatty]

The "sanitary reasons" circumcision requirement story is an old-wives tale which has been repeated so often that sheeple start believing it.

I'm not circumcised and have no foreskin related health problems. As Loki pointed out, take a damn bath once in a while! :D

Unless there's a problem why mess with it. :lightbul:

[Lyfing]

I just read 10 pages about goobies..:confused:

I have been circumcised. I'm not mad at my Momma about it. I do think though that it should have been left like it was.

What bothers me more than it being a Jewish thing or whatever else is that the important psychological transformation that can come out of such a thing seems no longer to even be thought of..

Some of the first times I remember looking at my goobie I knew something had happened to it..it activated in me centers such as these..


A fourth constellation of imprints engraved on the maturing
psyche of the infant appears (at least in those provinces of our
own civilization that have been studied for thse effects) at about
the age of four, when the physical difference between the sexes
becomes a matter of keen concern. The petite difference leads the
girl to believe (we are told) that she has been castrated, and the
boy that he is liable to be. Thereafter, in the masculine imagination
all fear of punishment is freighted with an obscurely sensed castra-
tion fear, while the female is obsessed with an envy that cannot
be quite quenched until she has brought forth from her own body
a son. Hence the value, from the female point of view, of the
madonna image and the whole system of religious references
imputing cosmic significance to her womb and breasts. But in the
male the sense of her dangerous envy is ever present. Hence the
negative estimate of the woman as a potential spiritual, if not
physical, castrator, which in the mind of the child tends to become
associated with the image of the ogress and cannibal witch, and
in religious traditions where a monastic spirit prevails is an
extremely prominent trait.

In this connection it should be noted that there is a motif oc-
curring in certain primitive mythologies, as well as in modern
surrealist painting and neurotic dream, which is known to folk-
lore as "tie toothed vagina" the vagina that castrates. And a
counterpart, the other way, is the so-called "phallic mother," a
motif perfectly illustrated in the long fingers and nose of the
witch. According to Freud, 26 the capacity of the sight of a spider
to precipitate a crisis of neurotic anxiety whether in the nursery
rhyme of Miss Muffett or in the labyrinths of modern life derives
from an unconscious association of the spider with the image of
the phallic mother; to which, perhaps, should be added the observa-
tion that the web, the spiral web, may also contribute to the
arachnid's force as a fear-releasing sign.

Primitive Mythology, Pages 73-74

...


On the psychological side, then, we may say that the boy is
being carried across the difficult threshold, from the sphere of
dependency on the mothers to that of participation in the nature
of the fathers, not only by means of a decisive physical transforma-
tion of his own body (first, in the rite of circumcision, just re-
viewed, and then, more cruelly, as we shall presently see, in the
rite of subincision), but also by means of a series of intense psy-
chological experiences, reawakening but at the same time reor-
ganizing all the primary imprints and fantasies of the infantile
unconscious. Or, to use the Freudian jargon, the elders arouse,
absorb, and redirect their sons' Oedipal impulses to aggression
(destrudo: thanatos) and simultaneously their will to live and
love (libido: eros). As we have just seen, the boy's future father-
in-law is the functionary who oSers him on a shield to the opera-
tion. "What is cut off the boy," writes Dr. Roheim, "is really the
mother; as compensation he naturally receives a wife. . , . The
glans in the foreskin is the child in the mother." 64

But there is another aspect to this great world of the men's
rites, for which no merely psychological reading of their symbolism
can adequately account; namely, the particular mythological field
to which the boy's intellect is being introduced. His crude energies
of love and aggression are being broken from their primary spheres
of reference and reorganized for manhood; but the particular sys-
tem of imagery through which this psychological transformation
is being effected has been determined not exclusively by general
psychological laws, but also, and perhaps equally, by the particular
social concerns of the local group.

And we may well marvel at the simple, adroit, wonderfully di-
rect manner in which the participation of his interest is elicited.
We have akeady seen how the sacred objects of his tribe were first
presented to his awakened imagination. Throughout his childhood
the boy had heard the awesome sound of the bull-roarers at the
time of the mysteries of the men's camp, and had been told that
the curiously whirring hum was the voice of a spirit that at the
time of his own initiation would enter his body and support him
to manhood. An anxious sense of interest and curiosity had thus
been aroused, which, at the time of the revelation, was consider-
ably shocked when it appeared that the actual spirit was a bit of
flat wood, about a foot and a half long, bearing a scratched
design on its surface, and whirled at the end of a long string. The
childhood bogey was abruptly collapsed into this tangible stick
which, however, was declared to have been derived from the
mythological realm and to be of the profoundest import both to
the boy himself, as representing his own eternal aspect, and to
his people, as constituting one of a constellation of sacred objects,
known as tjurunga, revered in the tribal rites. Pressed to the boy's
bleeding circumcision wound, his tjurunga turned his mind from
a sense of loss to one of gain and directly joined him, both emo-
tionally and in thought, to the realm of myth.

But the reader, meanwhile, must certainly have recalled, per-
haps with a touch of wonder, the celebrated Classical myth of the
death and second birth (through his father Zeus) of the babe
Dionysos.

When the great goddess Demeter we are told arrived in
Sicily from Crete with her daughter Persephone, whom she had
conceived of Zeus, she discovered a cave near the spring of
Kyane, where she hid the maiden, setting to guard her the two
serpents that were normally harnessed to the maiden's chariot.
And Persephone there began weaving a web of wool, a great robe
on which there was to be a beautiful picture of the universe; while
her mother, Demeter, contrived that the girl's father, Zeus, should
learn of her presence. The god approached his daughter in the form
of a serpent, and she conceived of him a son, Dionysos, who was
born and nurtured in the cave. The infant's toys were a ball, a
top, dice, some golden apples, a bit of wool, and a bull-roarer.
But he was also given a mirror, and while he was gazing into this,
delighted, there approached him stealthily, from behind, two Titans,
who had been sent to slay him by the goddess Hera, the jealous
wfe and queen of his father, Zeus. And they were painted with a
white clay or chalk. Pouncing upon the playing child, they tore
him into seven parts, boiled the portions in a caldron supported
by a tripod, and then roasted them on seven spits. However, when
they had consumed their divine sacrifice all except the heart,
which had been rescued by the goddess Athene Zeus, attracted
by the odor of the roasting meat, entered the cave and, when he
beheld the scene, slew the white-painted cannibal Titans with a
bolt of lightning. The goddess Athene thereupon presented the
rescued heart in a covered basket to the father, who accomplished
the resurrection according to one version of the miracle by
swallowing the precious relic and himself then giving birth to
his son. 65

It surely is no mere accident, nor consequence of parallel de-
velopment, that has brought the bull-roarers on the scene for
both the Greek and the Australian occasions, as well as the figures
masquerading in white (the Australians wearing bird down, the
Greek Titans smeared like clowns with a white clay) . For the Titans
were divine beings of an earlier generation than the gods. They
were the children of the sky and earth, and from two of their
number, Kronos and Rhea, the gods themselves the Olympians
were born. They and their mythology derive from an earlier
stratum of thought and religion than the Classical pantheon of the
Olympians, and the episodes in which they appear have frequently
traits of an extremely primitive tone. A number of recent scholars
have pointed to the parallels between these traits and those of
the rites of living primitive tribes. 66 From the Greeks, however,
we do not learn though what motherly organ Father Zeus could
have given birth to his son. In the primitive ritual this now ap-
pears.

For the next dramatic series of instructions and ordeals to
which the young Australian is subjected are those of his sub-
incision, which follow the rites of circumcision after an interval
of some five or six weeks depending on the time required by the
boy for recovery from the first operation. These extremely painful
rites commence with a brief series of instructive mimes, which
terminate with the planting of a sacred pole in the ground: a pole
made of a long spear ensheathed in grass, bound with a string of
human hair, and ornamented with alternate rings of red and white
birds' down, having a large tuft of eagle-hawk feathers affixed to
the top. And when the pole, following a final mime and dance,
has been planted, the youth is told to embrace it, for it will prevent
the operation from being painful; he need not be afraid. One of the
men lies on the ground, face downward, and a second lies on top
of him. The boy is led from the pole and placed full length, face
upward, on this living table, while the company sets up a great
shout. Immediately a third man, sitting astride the boy's body,
grasps the penis and holds it ready for the stone knife, while the
operator, appearing suddenly, slits the whole length of the urethra
from below.

Meanwhile, in the women's camp, the boy's female relatives,
having heard the men's shout, are ceremonially slashed across the
stomach and shoulders by the boy's mother.

The boy is lifted away and squats over a shield into which the
blood is allowed to drain, while one or more of the younger men
present, who have been operated on before, stand up and volun-
tarily undergo a second operation to increase the length of their
incisions. These stand, hands behind their backs and legs wide
apart, close to the sacred pole, and shout, "Come and slit mine to
the root!" They are pinioned from behind, and the operator cuts
them to the root. "Most men at some time or other undergo the
second operation," write Spencer and Gillen, "and some come
forward a third time, though a man is often as old as thirty or
thirty-five before he submits to this second operation." 67

The sexual aspect of the symbolism of this fantastic rite is
almost too obvious to require comment. The subincision wound is
frequently referred to as a "penis womb or vagina"; 68 so that the
male has been intentionally converted by the operation into a
male-female. "The Vaginal father,' " as Dr. Roheim has observed,
"replaces the 'phallic mother' of the infantile situation," 69 and the
blood that is drawn from the subincision wounds, therefore, cor-
responds in the men's imagination to the menstrual blood of the
women which in the usages of women's magic is extremely
potent. That one of the most pronounced traits of primitive
psychology, in many parts of the world, is the savage male's horror
of menstruation has long been a commonplace of anthropological
knowledge. 70 "It is a well-known fact," states Dr. Roheim, "that the
sight of the bleeding vagina produces castration anxiety in the
male. . . . The boys must always have been afraid of the castrat-
ing vagina; now the fathers have this powerful weapon." 71 But
now, too, the lads themselves have been given it. Their traumatic
separation from the mother in the rite of circumcision has thus
been balanced by an achievement of identification, simultaneously
with the mothers and with the fathers. "We are not afraid of the
bleeding vagina," they now can say; "we have it ourselves. It does
not threaten the penis; it is the penis." And finally: "We are not
separated from the mother; for 'we two are one.* " 72

But there is more to the matter than this psychological theme;
for there is a mythological theme consciously associated with the
rite, which has to be taken into account also.

Primitive Mythology, Pages 99-103

Such a mythological theme is with us Europeans as well..Just think of Odin/Loki and what comes of their dealings by way of Wyrd ( that spiders web you know )..

Later,
-Lyfing

[Lars]

"sanitary reasons"...geez. Do they teach this nonsense in American schools?

Circumcision should only be performed for medical reasons.

The penis is an internal organ and should remain that way. Ribbed condoms actually trys to mimic the foreskin. D;

[Beorn]

Just be careful the doctors don't cut too close (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=circumcision).

[Ladejarlen]

No way:) Its not a part of my culture or history. I dont know anyone who is circumsized.

[Bloodeagle]

Unfortunately, I had no choice in the matter. Mom still laughs about the event!
It seems like a very barbaric procedure imposed upon us by some Jewish doctors making the rules as they go here in North America.
I chose to let my son go wild. He is alright with it and doesn't need to explain to others in gym class why they shouldn't be staring at his Willie in the first place!
Circumcision equals reduced girth and sensitivity, ladies might pick and chose which one is more important.:D

[Electronic God-Man]

Hey, check out this botched circumcisions gallery I found: http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched1sb.html

That's page one. There are more at the bottom.

Almost forgot, be sure to see this one (http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched4ga.html).

:(

[Lulletje Rozewater]

It would be interesting indeed to learn more about the reasons why it took off there, and who initially promoted this practice. Many of the prominent doctors in American history were Jewish or of Jewish origin - it may be that they somehow managed to project their circumcision bias into mainstream society. Maybe by pushing articles scaring people that they had to be circumcised in order to be healthy and disease-free? It's not unthinkable, but I'm speculating here. :confused:

Whatever the reason I suggest to all Europeans to have it done.
The Turks and Moroccans are coming;);)


Unfortunately, I had no choice in the matter. Mom still laughs about the event!
It seems like a very barbaric procedure imposed upon us by some Jewish doctors making the rules as they go here in North America.
I chose to let my son go wild. He is alright with it and doesn't need to explain to others in gym class why they shouldn't be staring at his Willie in the first place!
Circumcision equals reduced girth and sensitivity, ladies might pick and chose which one is more important.:D

Ladies love eyelashes,not bald heads


I just read 10 pages about goobies..:confused:


Goobie heheheh.
Serious though.
I was on my way from Kitwe to Chingola(Zambia's outback and near to the Congo Border),when suddenly an Af ran across my car.
Stopped and asked what was wrong.
He somewhat slyly asked me to help give birth to his wife's baby,not far from where I stopped and in the bush.
With my pistol behind my back I followed him, just in time to see a head appearing.
I shat myself and said:"Do it yourself mate,I am not a doctor.
You are a white man and you white people know how.
Fok this, I thought by myself,but helped the "drol" out of the womb.
The sight of an initiated woman was horrifying to me.
Then the black fool asked me to tie a knot and I screamed with laughter at his naive and stupid request,but I did, about 10 cm away.
Then he asked me to bite the cord off.
This was to much.
I slapped his face and forced him down to do it himself.
Damned swartsmoel thought I would do it for him.YEEEEGGGG.
Brought them to the hospital in Chingola.She in the booth,lid open and he at he backseat with his hands out the window.
On leaving I said to him,: give your"girly" the name "whitey".

[SwordoftheVistula]

Even though the medical benefits are minimal, it would still be extremely painful to be one of those people who do develop them. Same logic as getting shots really, you probably won't get the disease even without the shots, and there's a minute chance it could go wrong, but there's not really any reason not to do it (other than it might have been developed by the J00S). Maybe we should prohibit by law kids from getting shots until they are adults? They shouldn't be made to go to school, do their homework, or eat their veggies either, after all if they don't have a choice in the matter it's wrong :rolleyes:

[jerney]

^That is a horrible comparison. Children get vaccinated for diseases that can kill them. These diseases were at one time epidemic, but are no longer because of immunization.

Tight foreskin has never been an epidemic and has never killed anyone as far as I know.

[Inese]

Hey, check out this botched circumcisions gallery I found: http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched1sb.html

That's page one. There are more at the bottom.

Almost forgot, be sure to see this one (http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched4ga.html).

:(

Why post links like that??? :rolleyes: Please really it is too much!! One or two example are okay but not so many , it is not aesthetic pleasing for the eye. Do you want me to become bisexual hm then go on , so many male penis at one time ---- maybe no porn site has that much!! :confused::mad: Please dont be angry but it is too much. Too many penis , what is the next level?? " How you clean your 3 letter device after toilet??" Nooooo......:embarrassed
Okay maybe i reiceive the answer " if you dont like it dont read it " but make a warning then ------ hundred of penis photos in the link. That people know.

Maybe you think it is okay but here are some younger people like me and it is a little bit too much penis here, dick there. We have a new registered 16 year old member and i dont know if links like the one of yours are good??

[anonymaus]

what is the next level?? " How you clean our ass after toilet??" No no and no. :embarrassed

How else?

http://cn1.kaboodle.com/hi/img/2/0/0/54/d/AAAAAqLWfQAAAAAAAFTWHA.jpg

[SwordoftheVistula]

Here's one guy's account of the problems he faced as a result of not being circumcised at birth, he later had to as an adult and it was a rather painful process:

http://www.circinfo.com/an_account.html

[Loki]

Here's one guy's account of the problems he faced as a result of not being circumcised at birth, he later had to as an adult and it was a rather painful process:

http://www.circinfo.com/an_account.html

Consider the source ... it's a propaganda pro-circumcision website sponsored by a likely Jewish organisation - The Gilgal Society. Look up what Gilgal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgal) means ... it's a place name in Israel.

[Electronic God-Man]

Why post links like that??? :rolleyes: Please really it is too much!! One or two example are okay but not so many , it is not aesthetic pleasing for the eye. Do you want me to become bisexual hm then go on , so many male penis at one time ---- maybe no porn site has that much!! :confused::mad: Please dont be angry but it is too much. Too many penis , what is the next level?? " How you clean your 3 letter device after toilet??" Nooooo......:embarrassed
Okay maybe i reiceive the answer " if you dont like it dont read it " but make a warning then ------ hundred of penis photos in the link. That people know.

Maybe you think it is okay but here are some younger people like me and it is a little bit too much penis here, dick there. We have a new registered 16 year old member and i dont know if links like the one of yours are good??

Get over it. :p

Haha. I thought it was interesting...and really scary. But worth a look.

Am I the only one not understanding what a "3 letter device" is??

[SwordoftheVistula]

Consider the source ... it's a propaganda pro-circumcision website sponsored by a likely Jewish organisation - The Gilgal Society. Look up what Gilgal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgal) means ... it's a place name in Israel.

The same could be said of anti-circumcision sources, which come mainly from the militant homosexual lobby, along with feminists and other associated far left groups

[Loki]

The same could be said of anti-circumcision sources, which come mainly from the militant homosexual lobby, along with feminists and other associated far left groups

LOL. Why would anti-circumcision groups be homosexual? Well I am sure they [gays] are [anti-circumcision], as even homosexual men have preferences. And perhaps they know even better what they want in that department. :p

[Treffie]

So what happens within the Jewish-Homosexual lobby? Erm.............

[Goidelic]

Consider the source ... it's a propaganda pro-circumcision website sponsored by a likely Jewish organisation - The Gilgal Society. Look up what Gilgal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgal) means ... it's a place name in Israel.

Lol, that site is a pro-circumcision cult movement they're promoting. Would they promote this agenda thousands of years ago in barren places? I don't think so because the circumcision rate would be considerably much lower then. Just because they're circumcised they promote this darkness. It's like if a cult movement that started to cut off a bit of their small toe to claim it's "healthy and clean", and then everyone followed the cult movement. Circumcision is a barbaric cult ritual. ;)

[Inese]

Am I the only one not understanding what a "3 letter device" is??
The ass!!! :shy::shy::shy:

And you can not have enough penis hmmm?? Then watch this....looool! :D :embarrassed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72QrVxQ2cOQ

[Eldritch]

Aah, E-Rotic. Possibly the finest exponent ever of 90's Eurotrash Corolla-techno.

I once had the privilege of seeing them live, while working (back when I was a student) the hot dog stand at one of those dismal Midsummer fuckfest festivals in the sticks. In addition to that song, they performed their other unforgettable romantic classics, such as "Fritz Loves my Tits" and "Don't have Sex with Your Ex".

[Gooding]

The ass!!! :shy::shy::shy:

And you can not have enough penis hmmm?? Then watch this....looool! :D :embarrassed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72QrVxQ2cOQ


That was fucking hilarious!!:D Thank you so much for brightening my day with this great tune!:thumb001::cool::p

[Atlas]

We've discussed this before, my opinion is that I am not opposed to circumcision, I see nothing wrong with it, the fact it is a jewish or muslims custom doesn't bother me. I was cut for medical reason at 21 and sometimes I am asked whether I am a Jew or a Muslim convert.


The glans is constantly rubbing against clothing fabric which (I'm told) is uncomfortable.

Not really, when you are cut as an adolescent or an adult, you feel this for several weeks, then it's fine.

It's up to you to decide if you are gonna cut your kids.

[Solwyn]

I always thought it was barbaric and didn't get my son cut. I didn't want to cause him any more pain than being born, and (this may sound silly to some but I felt it a valid concern) I didn't want this to get stored deep in his memory banks as some sort of negative sexual association because I watched a baby get circumcized once, and he had a little erection. I could see his little face contort in pain when it was done and I remember thinking, that poor kid's reward for getting it up was THAT???

Unfortunately, as he got older, his penis grew but his foreskin didn't stretch. He experienced all sorts of irritation. The doctor kept telling us that he had to stretch it but he was too afraid to touch himself because he was always in pain. When he woke up one night in tears because his erection hurt him, I insisted to our family doctor that he get snipped. He was about four years old and he was scared to death of having an erection. I decided that this fear of his own sexual potential far outweighed the possibility of any negative associations with surgery.

A friend of mine took him into the bathroom one day to have a talk with him because he was scared shitless about going to the hospital. He came out a few moments later grinning, telling me "Mom, Uncle Sean says I'm getting a sports model!!!"

LOL

When he had his surgery, he woke up from the anaesthetic and that was the first thing out of his mouth. He tried to sit up and whip the blankets off, "Hey mom come look at my brand new penis, its a sports model now!!!" He had the nurses in stitches.

:D

[Atlas]

That was fucking hilarious!!:D Thank you so much for brightening my day with this great tune!:thumb001::cool::p

Another funny fag-song from E-rotic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4upn3M4jtQY

You're young, you're free, why don't you sleep with me ?
:icon_lol:

[Gooding]

Another funny fag-song from E-rotic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4upn3M4jtQY

You're young, you're free, why don't you sleep with me ?
:icon_lol:

LOL,BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!Wow,Dronckaert..just..damn. .:lol00002:

[Osweo]

http://www.sexwoerterbuch.info/assets_active/circumcised.jpg

It's even funnier when it is captioned in German.
Anyone else notice that the makers of this pic seem to really have gone out of their way to find the ugliest weirdest dick going for the unmutilated one? Filthy pro-barbarism propaganda! J'accuse! Why is it semi-open at the end? That's a little misleading. You get a nice little spout to direct the piss. :p

Come to think of it, Americans must piss completely differently from us... What an odd thought.

Hey, check out this botched circumcisions gallery I found: http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched1sb.html

That's page one. There are more at the bottom.
Oh my ... What a mess...

Almost forgot, be sure to see this one (http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched4ga.html).
:(
Gods. I wonder if I'm the only one: I opened it, saw the word 'gangrene' before the pictures loaded, and SHUT THAT WINDOW AS QUICK AS I DAMN WELL COULD! :eek:

Why post links like that??? :rolleyes: Please really it is too much!! One or two example are okay but not so many ,
Inese, darling, you didn't HAVE to scroll down the entire page, you know... :swl:rofl:

Too many penis , what is the next level?? " How you clean your 3 letter device after toilet??" Nooooo......:embarrassed
There actually was such a thread on Skadi, in the Good Old Days. Briefly, anyway...

[anonymaus]

Pretty certain I'll be leaving it up to my male children to decide for themselves when they're old enough.

[Cato]

I was clipped at birth, no say in the matter at all of course. But I say no now, loud and clear, for any sons that I'll be having. Stupid Jew customs have naught to do with me.

[Fortis in Arduis]

The issue here is phimosis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phimosis) a "condition where, in men, the male foreskin cannot be fully retracted from the head of the penis."

Most people do not have this problem and there is certainly no need to offer your foreskin to God as a sacrifice...

The foreskin remains forever young, like a reservoir of skin stem cells, and it is reckoned that one male foreskin can produce about six football pitches of skin, if cultured. Is that not amazing?

If there is no phimosis, why remove it?

[Idun]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

[Goidelic]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

I hate to tell you but that is just BS. The foreskin took millions of years to naturally evolve. If I have a son I will want him to look like me nice and uncut.;)

[Goidelic]

It's a Bullshit Judaic practice. ;) As for me this was not the case for me being circumcised neither my brother, but my younger brother unfortunately suffered this barbaric Jewish rituality from repeated infections. I told him rest assure in another 50 or 100 years scientists will be able to use stem cell or skin rejuvenation so you'll rejuvenate what's lost to you using genetic replications etc from this absurd Judaic practice. In another 1,000 years this will without a doubt or thought be able to have back. In the year 3000-4000 you'll probably be able to castrate someone and grow back their genitals with natural evolved cells and foreskin within no time at all. I guess we're still living in the past to not have these things come true for the unfortunate souls. Not only that but paralysis is a huge one that needs to be cured, a million years or so and this will be a dinosaur problem in the making.

[Loki]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

This is absolutely untrue - on all counts.

As for the tiny possibility of cancer ... one can just as well say humans must be skinned, and then they won't be able to get skin cancer anymore. Or, young female babies should have their breasts surgically removed, then there would be no chance of them ever getting breast cancer.

[Treffie]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

Source?

[Idun]

This is absolutely untrue - on all counts.

As for the tiny possibility of cancer ... one can just as well say humans must be skinned, and then they won't be able to get skin cancer anymore. Or, young female babies should have their breasts surgically removed, then there would be no chance of them ever getting breast cancer.

No, it is not untrue. Common sense tells you that.

[Nodens]

Well, since we've resurrected the topic, I'll comment.

Cosmetic genital mutilation with no medical or aesthetic purpose. Should be illegal to perform on minors absent compelling medical purpose. For adults, do as you will.

[Idun]

Source?

It is common knowledge. I'm surprised you haven't heard of it. As for sources look it up on the net if you are interested in knowing more. (nuns cervical cancer on Google, for example)


Here is one site:

http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/about-cancer/cancer-questions/cervical-cancer-in-virgins

"It is very unlikely that you would get cervical cancer if you are a virgin. But we do not know for sure if this completely protects you. There are risk factors for developing changes in the cervix that can lead to cancer, or for cervical cancer itself. Being sexually active from a young age is a well known risk factor.

A study done in 1950 found that woman who married before the age of 20 had twice the risk of developing cervical cancer than those who married later.

Another study done in 1952 of 13,000 nuns found no cases of cervical cancer. These studies and other much more recent studies, all indicate that women are more at risk of developing cervical cancer once they have become sexually active."


It is well-known that nuns simply don't get that cancer form, and another site said that jewish women have fewer cases of that cancer than others. Circumcision makes men more clean and less dangerous for women's health. I see nothing illogical about that.



And another site:

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/menczer1/


Cervical carcinoma is one of the most common gynecologic malignant tumors worldwide and a leading cause of death from genital malignancies in women. One of the most important epidemiologic observations concerning this neoplasm is that the disease is practically non-existent in celibate populations.


This was first noticed in the 19th century by Rigonni-Stern [1] of Verona, Italy, regarding Catholic nuns, who are sexually inactive. Gagnon of Quebec [2] subsequently confirmed this observation.


He served as a gynecologist in a few Quebec nunneries for several years, and it occurred to him that he had never seen a case of cancer of the cervix in a nun. Among 13,000 deaths of nuns, 12 were recorded as due to corpus cancer. If the same ratio of cervix to corpus cancer exists among nuns as among the general population, there should have been 5 to 8 times as many cervical cancers. Instead there was none.


These observations and the subsequent identification of risk factors led to the conclusion that cervical cancer is associated with coitus, and that it shares many characteristics with communicable diseases which follow a venereal mode of transmission.


These findings led eventually to the identification towards the end of the 20th century of the human papillomavirus and its major etiologic role in this neoplasm [3–5].


A potentially similarly important observation was published by Braithwaite [6] in The Lancet in 1901. Referring to the experience with cancer of the cervix at the Leeds General Infirmary and at the London Hospital, he stated that it was seldom or never met with amongst the numerous Jewesses'' attending these institutions.


Although the low incidence among Jewish women has been repeatedly confirmed since then, the reason for it has intrigued and eluded many investigators."

[Loki]

Common sense tells me that I have something I could get rid of at any point, should I want to. And common sense tells me that, when it's gone, it is gone, except of course if one wants reconstructive surgery to fix it. ;) I'm very clean, and very happy with myself, and I see no point in having myself mutilated. I am very thankful to my parents for not forcing this Judeo-American custom onto my healthy and natural body.

[Idun]

Common sense tells me that I have something I could get rid of at any point, should I want to. And common sense tells me that, when it's gone, it is gone, except of course if one wants reconstructive surgery to fix it. ;) I'm very clean, and very happy with myself, and I see no point in having myself mutilated. I am very thankful to my parents for not forcing this Judeo-American custom onto my healthy and natural body.

I'm sure you keep very clean Loki, and I can't recollect ever having said otherwise. :rolleyes: The fact remains that an uncircumcised penis IS harder to keep spotlessly clean since there are more crevices where very minute but dangerous particles can hide.

I don't care if it is a jewish custom or not (it is a muslim one too). I care about not getting cancer. Sorry.

[Treffie]

It is common knowledge. I'm surprised you haven't heard of it. As for sources look it up on the net if you are interested in knowing more. (nuns cervical cancer on Google, for example)


Here is one site:

http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/about-cancer/cancer-questions/cervical-cancer-in-virgins

"It is very unlikely that you would get cervical cancer if you are a virgin. But we do not know for sure if this completely protects you. There are risk factors for developing changes in the cervix that can lead to cancer, or for cervical cancer itself. Being sexually active from a young age is a well known risk factor.

A study done in 1950 found that woman who married before the age of 20 had twice the risk of developing cervical cancer than those who married later.

Another study done in 1952 of 13,000 nuns found no cases of cervical cancer. These studies and other much more recent studies, all indicate that women are more at risk of developing cervical cancer once they have become sexually active."


It is well-known that nuns simply don't get that cancer form, and another site said that jewish women have fewer cases of that cancer than others. Circumcision makes men more clean and less dangerous for women's health. I see nothing illogical about that.



And another site:

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/menczer1/


Cervical carcinoma is one of the most common gynecologic malignant tumors worldwide and a leading cause of death from genital malignancies in women. One of the most important epidemiologic observations concerning this neoplasm is that the disease is practically non-existent in celibate populations.


This was first noticed in the 19th century by Rigonni-Stern [1] of Verona, Italy, regarding Catholic nuns, who are sexually inactive. Gagnon of Quebec [2] subsequently confirmed this observation.


He served as a gynecologist in a few Quebec nunneries for several years, and it occurred to him that he had never seen a case of cancer of the cervix in a nun. Among 13,000 deaths of nuns, 12 were recorded as due to corpus cancer. If the same ratio of cervix to corpus cancer exists among nuns as among the general population, there should have been 5 to 8 times as many cervical cancers. Instead there was none.


These observations and the subsequent identification of risk factors led to the conclusion that cervical cancer is associated with coitus, and that it shares many characteristics with communicable diseases which follow a venereal mode of transmission.


These findings led eventually to the identification towards the end of the 20th century of the human papillomavirus and its major etiologic role in this neoplasm [3–5].


A potentially similarly important observation was published by Braithwaite [6] in The Lancet in 1901. Referring to the experience with cancer of the cervix at the Leeds General Infirmary and at the London Hospital, he stated that it was seldom or never met with amongst the numerous Jewesses'' attending these institutions.


Although the low incidence among Jewish women has been repeatedly confirmed since then, the reason for it has intrigued and eluded many investigators."

That's all well and good, but how is it easier to clean a circumcised penis? Most bacteria from the penis is found in the urethra and not around the glans. Besides, I give my foreskin a really good wash when I'm in shower - we have fun together! :D Yes, my penis is a hoodie! :p

[Loki]

The fact remains that an uncircumcised penis IS harder to keep spotlessly clean since there are more crevices where very minute but dangerous particles can hide.


Actually, it isn't. I'm a man, I should know. ;) It's as easy as washing your hands, perhaps even more simple as a hand has many fingers. :p



I don't care if it is a jewish custom or not (it is a muslim one too). I care about not getting cancer. Sorry.

Then have your breasts removed, then you will never get breast cancer either. I know this may sound offensive, but not more so than it is for a woman to tell a man he should mutilate his genitalia.

[Bridie]

The fact remains that an uncircumcised penis IS harder to keep spotlessly clean since there are more crevices where very minute but dangerous particles can hide.
As with most areas of the body, "good" bacteria and anti-("bad")bacterial, anti-fungal and anti-viral substances exist to keep infection at bay... overcleansing therefore often leads to increased incidence of infection, since the body's natural protective properties are stripped away (thereby leaving the surface vulnerable to pathogenic microorganisms). It's good to keep clean, of course, but trying to keep oneself "spotlessly clean" is actually counter-productive.

Fact is that the foreskin is a protective sheath for a very sensitive part of the body... and removing it desensitises the area.

[Ariets]

I'd never cut any part of my cock, even if its just a foreskin, thats sick methinks

[Cato]

Most of the ones who've pushed the "benefits" of circumcision in my experience are Jews and people influenced by them. I'm not a dirty person, never have been. I'm not sexually promiscuous, never have been. Let the Jews and philosemites mutilate their members. Mine's already been chopped, not that it really bugs me, but I won't pass the trait along.

[lei.talk]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there
and it prevents women from getting cancer...

Common sense tells you that.please,
explain the connection between cervical cancer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cervical_cancer#Causes)
and uncircumcised men?



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Papilloma_Virus_%28HPV%29_EM.jpg/180px-Papilloma_Virus_%28HPV%29_EM.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_papillomavirus)

[anonymaus]

please,
explain the connection between cervical cancer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cervical_cancer#Causes)
and uncircumcised men?

Presumably referring to a studies such as:


...women with "high-risk" partners were 58 per cent less likely to develop cervical cancer if their partner had been circumcised.

...(HPV) was present in almost 20 per cent of uncircumcised men, but in fewer than six per cent of circumcised men.

...the inner lining of the foreskin is thought to be especially vulnerable to infection.

*** (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2157-circumcision-cuts-cervical-cancer-rates.html)

[Fred]

Wow, what frank replies, but it would have been more interesting to have an open poll. There is no reason to do it. Body modification is so gross.

[Osweo]

The issue here is phimosis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phimosis) a "condition where, in men, the male foreskin cannot be fully retracted from the head of the penis."

Most people do not have this problem and there is certainly no need to offer your foreskin to God as a sacrifice...

I actually developed a similar problem after a small 'injury', but the Russian doctor calmed me down and insisted circumcision was unnecessary, and it fixed itself after some time. :shrug:

Boys should be taught about these things in school; I was unnecessarily shit up by it. :(

[Germanicus]

My youngest son was circumcised as soon as he was out of nappies, he had a medical condition, so off it came, i felt so sorry for the little chap, had to have a salt bath with him every night.
Even had to (pull my foreskin back to show he had one like mine)..:(

[Frigga]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

How on earth would a mans foreskin or the lack of it contribute to a womans cancer risk? :confused: Nuns wouldn't get cancer in that part of the body because they do not engage in sexual activity for the most part, and it has been documented that men carry the pathogen that causes cervical cancer. A real life example that people may find interesting. Juan Peron's first wife died of cervical cancer, and so did his second wife Eva Peron. There is strong speculation that Juan Peron was a carrier for this pathogen (the name of which escapes me at the moment) that caused both of his wives to die of cervical cancer. How is it that the foreskin would be the reason for women getting cervical cancer when it is a pathogen that is carried and spread by bodily secretions?


I'm sure you keep very clean Loki, and I can't recollect ever having said otherwise. :rolleyes: The fact remains that an uncircumcised penis IS harder to keep spotlessly clean since there are more crevices where very minute but dangerous particles can hide.

I don't care if it is a jewish custom or not (it is a muslim one too). I care about not getting cancer. Sorry.

Hm, you do realize that the genitalia of a woman has far more crevices than the foreskin of a penis? It is also subject to much more secretions on a daily basis, it is a mucus membrane that is continuously kept damp by the body. The glans of an uncircumcised penis is not nearly as damp as the vulva, who's to say that men aren't going to get penile cancer from contact with our crevices that are hard to keep clean?

I'm sorry that you have been told these things, but they are not facts, they are fantasies.

[jerney]

I don't care if it is a jewish custom or not (it is a muslim one too). I care about not getting cancer. Sorry.

Then don't have sex if you're so worried?

[RoyBatty]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

Common sense tells me that Swedish feminazis have no business having sex with men. They ought to find something else to get their rocks off with. Problem solved.

As for barbaric and backward Jewish and Muslim / African circumcision practices involving both males and females, thanks but no thanks. Logic and common sense tells me that a civilised society doesn't require their "culture and cultural practices" in order to progress and benefit.

[RoyBatty]

There is strong speculation that Juan Peron was a carrier for this pathogen (the name of which escapes me at the moment) that caused both of his wives to die of cervical cancer.

Perhaps you're thinking of the papiloma virus?

http://humanpapilomavirus.blogspot.com/

[Wölfin]

I say no unless it is for medical reasons and until the boy has grown up enough to make his own decisions. If he wants to get a circumcision be it for "vanity" (stupid, I prefer uncut anyway, more natural to me and it is what I'm used to (or was used to, when I was a kid playing merrily along in the splash pool with other toddlers) anyway since Canada didn't pick up the circumcision habit of its Southern Neighbour ;) it looks pretty much the same when erected) or anything else.

[Black Turlogh]

Circumcision makes it easier for the man to keep clean down there and it prevents women from getting cancer. Nuns never get cancer in that part of the body. So I'm for it and I hope men are too since it can get the cancer figures down. The man also.. well..lasts longer, I'm told. :redface_002:

That last bit is utter tripe. How long a man can last is dependent upon a number of things, least of all whether or not he's circumcised.

[Wölfin]

That last bit is utter tripe. How long a man can last is dependent upon a number of things, least of all whether or not he's circumcised.

So is the part about cancer. Wtf? Not to mention there is such a thing as a vaccine against cervical cancer. And I think it is better for the man if he retains more sensitivity (and a man can learn to control himself and become more endurant regardless of whether he is cut or not) pleasure is supposed to be for two when it comes to sex, and I'd rather know both partners are getting optimal sensation. (Yes guys, its not because I play on the other team that I don't care about you).

[Idun]

Then have your breasts removed, then you will never get breast cancer either. I know this may sound offensive, but not more so than it is for a woman to tell a man he should mutilate his genitalia.

Wow. If you think that is a fair comparison so be it. Most normal people see that for what it is, a ludicrous statement.

Sexually active jewesses very rarely get cervical cancer.. what a coincidence, and neither do nuns. Fact.

I understand the resistance to new thought, since some people seem not quite informed here, but let's keep this at least above water level.

It is up to every individual what they want to do. Some people act as if I had suggested mandatory circumcision. lol I think it is wrong to totally speak against something that does have positive effects as it can lower the risk of cervical cancer in women (and those who say it doesn't haven't provided any proof for that so it is up to everyone to decide what view seems more logical).

Those who want their boys circumcised for hygienic reasons, or those men who are, shouldn't feel bad in any way.

[Frigga]

Plus, wanting a man to be circumcised simply for a womans ick factor, or to be more endurant because of a loss of sensitivity to me feels like selfishness on the part of the partner.

Nature made men the way they are for a reason. It's stupid for mankind to think that they know a better way and can improve on millions of years worth of evolution. :crazy:

[Brynhild]

Wow. If you think that is a fair comparison so be it. Most normal people see that for what it is, a ludicrous statement.

Sexually active jewesses very rarely get cervical cancer.. what a coincidence, and neither do nuns. Fact.

I understand the resistance to new thought, since some people seem not quite informed here, but let's keep this at least above water level.

It is up to every individual what they want to do. Some people act as if I had suggested mandatory circumcision. lol I think it is wrong to totally speak against something that does have positive effects as it can lower the risk of cervical cancer in women (and those who say it doesn't haven't provided any proof for that so it is up to everyone to decide what view seems more logical).

Those who want their boys circumcised for hygienic reasons, or those men who are, shouldn't feel bad in any way.

I've got to say, that is a bold statement, and without bothering to back that up with any solid evidence. Even if there's any truth to the men carrying this type of virus, it's not to say that all women are at risk from cervical cancer - only those who aren't resistant to it. To be circumcised just because it's aesthetically pleasing is equally ludicrous! What's your stance on female circumcision, then?

[Idun]

Plus, wanting a man to be circumcised simply for a womans ick factor...

I never said I "wanted" that..I said I had been told that men who are sometimes do last longer. If it were true, and the man is happy with his circumcision, I would hardly say that lasting longer is something negative. Would you? :)

[Idun]

What's your stance on female circumcision, then?

Do you think the two are comparable? Seems like another "cut off your breasts" remark. :rolleyes:

[Wulfhere]

Our own policy on this is that the sexual mutilation of infants - male or female makes no difference - is a gross form of child abuse, and at the very least the perpetrators should be imprisoned and be declared unfit parents. After all, what would happen if you decided to chop a few fingers off your baby? So why are his genitals fair game?

As with the finger example, if their are genuine medical reasons, obviously then this is okay. Mere claims of cleanliness (which have been scientifically debunked in any case) aren't good enough.

When a man reaches adulthood he can decide for himself if he wants part of his penis removed.

[jerney]

I never said I "wanted" that..I said I had been told that men who are sometimes do last longer. If it were true, and the man is happy with his circumcision, I would hardly say that lasting longer is something negative. Would you? :)

That sounds scientific and definitive.

[Frigga]

Wow. If you think that is a fair comparison so be it. Most normal people see that for what it is, a ludicrous statement.

How is it any less of a ludicrous statement than this:


Sexually active jewesses very rarely get cervical cancer.. what a coincidence, and neither do nuns. Fact.


I understand the resistance to new thought, since some people seem not quite informed here, but let's keep this at least above water level.

Haha.


It is up to every individual what they want to do. Some people act as if I had suggested mandatory circumcision. lol I think it is wrong to totally speak against something that does have positive effects as it can lower the risk of cervical cancer in women (and those who say it doesn't haven't provided any proof for that so it is up to everyone to decide what view seems more logical).

You may not have, but you did something equally asinine, which was to attempt to state circumstantial evidence which may or may not have any bearing on medical conditions as untarnished facts, and stated these circumstantial tidbits as causes of cervical cancer. I repeat how is it that a flap of skin is going to contribute to cervical cancer risks? The burden of proof for your nonsensical arguments of fantasy and daydreams is upon you against the common sense of those who acknowledge that Mother Nature in her infinite wisdom gave males a little bit of extra skin to protect their glans. How is it that Mother Nature could have been so flawed as to not design males without that little bit of foreskin just to spare us the trouble?


Those who want their boys circumcised for hygienic reasons, or those men who are, shouldn't feel bad in any way.

Men who already are circumcised cannot help what has been done to them. It's unfortunate, but you have to move on. But, to want to circumcise your little boy for purely hygenic reasons?? Come on girl, get a grip! Do you have any idea how barbaric that sounds?

Who in the world told you these things? Why have you not realized the fallacy of these arguments that you are spouting off as pristine truth?

[Frigga]

I never said I "wanted" that..I said I had been told that men who are sometimes do last longer. If it were true, and the man is happy with his circumcision, I would hardly say that lasting longer is something negative. Would you? :)

Well maybe you should learn to phrase your sentences and paragraphs better. Because that is how I translated it.

It has nothing to do with me as regards to his "lasting longer" or not. I still do not feel that that is a worthy enough of a trade off for an unnecessary procedure that is painful for the baby, and has lasting effects for his whole life, minute or large, depending on the man. I am a proponent of obeying Mother Nature, and if she gave my baby son a foreskin, he's going to have one unless there's a serious medical issue going on, but those are rare instances.

[Idun]

Men who already are circumcised cannot help what has been done to them. It's unfortunate, but you have to move on. But, to want to circumcise your little boy for purely hygenic reasons?? Come on girl, get a grip!

The hygienic reasons that make cervical cancer less likely.. I thought that was very obvious for most people of normal intelligence, actually, if they followed what I wrote, that is.

[Frigga]

Instead of trying to coyly tell me that I'm a moron, how about actually answering my questions mmkay?

[Idun]

Instead of trying to coyly tell me that I'm a moron, how about actually answering my questions mmkay?

I just did. You apparently didn't grasp it.

[Brynhild]

Do you think the two are comparable? Seems like another "cut off your breasts" remark. :rolleyes:

Actually, yes I do. Both forms of circumcision take away those sensations important for one's libido. Your very statement proves that you're another Nutzi who doesn"t accept another person's views particularly easily. I've also noticed that, to date, you can't back up what you've been saying, so therefore I put you in the "not somebody I would take seriously" category.

[Frigga]

I just did. You apparently didn't grasp it.

No, I think that it is you that is unable to answer the question logically, so you're throwing it back in my face, and trying to insult my intelligence. Nice try.

Now, one more time, read my posts, which I've so obligingly quoted for you, and actually see what I have to say. Now, you refute them. That's how it works chicky poo.


How on earth would a mans foreskin or the lack of it contribute to a womans cancer risk? :confused: Nuns wouldn't get cancer in that part of the body because they do not engage in sexual activity for the most part, and it has been documented that men carry the pathogen that causes cervical cancer. A real life example that people may find interesting. Juan Peron's first wife died of cervical cancer, and so did his second wife Eva Peron. There is strong speculation that Juan Peron was a carrier for this pathogen (the name of which escapes me at the moment) that caused both of his wives to die of cervical cancer. How is it that the foreskin would be the reason for women getting cervical cancer when it is a pathogen that is carried and spread by bodily secretions?



Hm, you do realize that the genitalia of a woman has far more crevices than the foreskin of a penis? It is also subject to much more secretions on a daily basis, it is a mucus membrane that is continuously kept damp by the body. The glans of an uncircumcised penis is not nearly as damp as the vulva, who's to say that men aren't going to get penile cancer from contact with our crevices that are hard to keep clean?

I'm sorry that you have been told these things, but they are not facts, they are fantasies.

Please pay special attention to the bolded paragraph please.


Perhaps you're thinking of the papiloma virus?

http://humanpapilomavirus.blogspot.com/

Also, how would the HPV be affected by circumcision? Could you please be so kind as to answer me that?


How is it any less of a ludicrous statement than this:

You may not have, but you did something equally asinine, which was to attempt to state circumstantial evidence which may or may not have any bearing on medical conditions as untarnished facts, and stated these circumstantial tidbits as causes of cervical cancer. I repeat how is it that a flap of skin is going to contribute to cervical cancer risks? The burden of proof for your nonsensical arguments of fantasy and daydreams is upon you against the common sense of those who acknowledge that Mother Nature in her infinite wisdom gave males a little bit of extra skin to protect their glans. How is it that Mother Nature could have been so flawed as to not design males without that little bit of foreskin just to spare us the trouble?



Men who already are circumcised cannot help what has been done to them. It's unfortunate, but you have to move on. But, to want to circumcise your little boy for purely hygenic reasons?? Come on girl, get a grip! Do you have any idea how barbaric that sounds?

Who in the world told you these things? Why have you not realized the fallacy of these arguments that you are spouting off as pristine truth?


Well maybe you should learn to phrase your sentences and paragraphs better. Because that is how I translated it.

It has nothing to do with me as regards to his "lasting longer" or not. I still do not feel that that is a worthy enough of a trade off for an unnecessary procedure that is painful for the baby, and has lasting effects for his whole life, minute or large, depending on the man. I am a proponent of obeying Mother Nature, and if she gave my baby son a foreskin, he's going to have one unless there's a serious medical issue going on, but those are rare instances.

Your thorough and thoughtful response is greatly appreciated.

[Treffie]

The hygienic reasons that make cervical cancer less likely.. I thought that was very obvious for most people of normal intelligence, actually, if they followed what I wrote, that is.

Is it? You still haven't come up with any concrete evidence that it is more hygienic.

[RoyBatty]

The hygienic reasonsthat make cervical cancer less likely.. I thought that was very obvious for most people of normal intelligence, actually, if they followed what I wrote, that is.

Even if "hygiene" were a factor, have you ever heard about taking a bath or would you rather not wait that long, lol???? What a clown!!! :D

[Black Turlogh]

And I think it is better for the man if he retains more sensitivity [...]

Unfortunately (or fortunately for some of us) that sensitivity ends up trailing off as a man becomes more sexually active. At least I assume that's the case for most men, as it was the case for me.

As for the argument about cancer, even if it's true, what are you going to do? It seems getting some sort of disease or virus is completely unavoidable these days. If you're not getting cancer, you'll end up fading off into Schiavo status thanks to Alzheimer's. If you somehow manage to dodge Alzheimer's, you'll end up getting E coli from undercooked beef. Swine flu, avian flu, superaids - it makes no difference. :thumb001:

[Zyklop]

Hygiene...men last longer....
Why not use a condom?

[la bombe]

IMO it's stupid and pointless, unless there's a medical reason of course.

[Radojica]

Can man be half circumcised :confused:?

[Loki]

Wow. If you think that is a fair comparison so be it. Most normal people see that for what it is, a ludicrous statement.

Sexually active jewesses very rarely get cervical cancer.. what a coincidence, and neither do nuns. Fact.


Actually it is a good comparison. According to US statistics:



In 2008 an estimated 3,870 women in the US will die of cervical cancer




In 2007, breast cancer was expected to cause 40,910 deaths in the US (7% of cancer deaths; almost 2% of all deaths)


Thus, as you can see, breast cancer is ten times more deadly than cervical cancer. And, it would be a leap of faith to assume that all cervical cancer is caused by uncircumcized penises.

Motor vehicle traffic deaths accounted to 43,664 in the US. That means, you are more than ten times as likely to die when you get into a car, than by having sex with an uncircumcized male -- and even that is based on the ludicrous assumption that all cervical cancer deaths are caused by uncircumcized sex.

[Idun]

Actually it is a good comparison.

The difference is of course that it is hardly the same thing to cut off someone's breasts and to circumcise someone. If you cut off your legs you won't get cancer in the legs..what kind of stupid argument is that? I think your argument is puerile.

I happen to believe that circumcision prevents cervical cancer in women, a potentially life-threatening disease, so I think that concern is more important. Very simple. We will have to agree to disagree.

[Loki]

The difference is of course that it is hardly them same thing to cut off someone's breasts and to circumcise someone. I think your arguement is puerile.

Well if the breast removal is too harsh, how about never crossing a street again, or getting into a car again. You'll be much safer, guaranteed.

[Idun]

Well if the breast removal is too harsh, how about never crossing a street again, or getting into a car again. You'll be much safer, guaranteed.

How about just stopping being puerile. Is that possible? ;)

[Loki]

How about just stopping being puerile. Is that possible? ;)

If opposing your argument that circumcision is all these wonderful things you mentioned, is being "puerile", then no, sorry, I can't stop.

[Idun]

If opposing your argument that circumcision is all these wonderful things you mentioned, is being "puerile", then no, sorry, I can't stop.

No, you cannot stop baiting so I'll be the mature one and say enough is enough.

[Anthropos]

The bait is fine as it is, au naturel and uncut.

[Germanicus]

How on earth would a mans foreskin or the lack of it contribute to a womans cancer risk? :confused: Nuns wouldn't get cancer in that part of the body because they do not engage in sexual activity for the most part, and it has been documented that men carry the pathogen that causes cervical cancer. A real life example that people may find interesting. Juan Peron's first wife died of cervical cancer, and so did his second wife Eva Peron. There is strong speculation that Juan Peron was a carrier for this pathogen (the name of which escapes me at the moment) that caused both of his wives to die of cervical cancer. How is it that the foreskin would be the reason for women getting cervical cancer when it is a pathogen that is carried and spread by bodily secretions?



Hm, you do realize that the genitalia of a woman has far more crevices than the foreskin of a penis? It is also subject to much more secretions on a daily basis, it is a mucus membrane that is continuously kept damp by the body. The glans of an uncircumcised penis is not nearly as damp as the vulva, who's to say that men aren't going to get penile cancer from contact with our crevices that are hard to keep clean?

I'm sorry that you have been told these things, but they are not facts, they are fantasies.



Many years ago i am ashamed to say, i had unprotected sex with one or two ladies, who thought giving sex to a man that took them out for an evening out was the expected thing to do.
However, weeks later i developed a discharge and very annoying rash.
On giving a sample of urine and then being subjected to a physical examination of the penis, it was very roughly scraped around the glands with a wooden spatula, it was scraped twice as i am a very clean guy, was told that it does'nt need to be washed everyday.
The other test was the umbrella jobby down the hole of my penis, which made me wince i can tell you.
The next week i went to the clinic for the prognosis to my condition, the scraping of my penis was smeared onto a glass and cultured to see if i had contracted a venereal disease.
The upshot was, i did not VD or any non specific VD, the answer was i washed my penis too much, and had changed the soap i was using to a much stronger one, all it was was a type of Doby rash.


(i know, i am shameless)

[Gooding]

Wow! It's been just about six months since the thread got started and it's still running strong? Well, the anti-snippers are obviously in the majority here, although I still uphold the medical benefits and lack of smegma involved with getting snipped as an infant, others will hold their own views. I see now that this issue is a very serious one..

[Fred]

Wow! It's been just about six months since the thread got started and it's still running strong? Well, the anti-snippers are obviously in the majority here, although I still uphold the medical benefits and lack of smegma involved with getting snipped as an infant, others will hold their own views. I see now that this issue is a very serious one..Perhaps there is a correlation between dry glans and erectile dysfunction? Men, be glad for that smegma!:D

[Piparskeggr]

What was done, can not be undone :D

[Wölfin]

Why is it that conversation gets always very emotional and personal when penises (especially whether they should be tinkered with) are the focus?

[Frigga]

No, you cannot stop baiting so I'll be the mature one and say enough is enough.

:pound:

Come on honey, you can do better than that! Obviously you don't have a leg to stand on, or else you wouldn't be trying to pull the maturity card! :D How about you just concede defeat for this argument, mmkay? ;)

[Osweo]

I never said I "wanted" that..I said I had been told that men who are sometimes do last longer.
Are you insomniac or something?!? Let that poor man SLEEP! :p

(i know, i am shameless)
Not at all, such things should be passed on for the ease of mind of younger men who are worried about such things. :thumb001:

[Fred]

:pound:

Come on honey, you can do better than that! Obviously you don't have a leg to stand on, or else you wouldn't be trying to pull the maturity card! :D How about you just concede defeat for this argument, mmkay? ;)Yes, no leg to stand on!:pound:


Are you insomniac or something?!? Let that poor man SLEEP! :p

Not at all, such things should be passed on for the ease of mind of younger men who are worried about such things. :thumb001:There is a fine line between TMI and IMHO.:embarrassed

[Electronic God-Man]

http://www.sexwoerterbuch.info/assets_active/circumcised.jpg

It's even funnier when it is captioned in German.

Oh and by the way, I forgot to add...

Mein Schwanz ist beschnitten. :D

[Fred]

Oh and by the way, I forgot to add...

Mein Schwanz ist beschnitten. :Dhttp://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10505


Why is it that conversation gets always very emotional and personal when penises (especially whether they should be tinkered with) are the focus?Penis-envy?


The bait is fine as it is, au naturel and uncut.Gone fishin'?

[Phlegethon]

Why is it that conversation gets always very emotional and personal when penises (especially whether they should be tinkered with) are the focus?

You would understand if you had one.

[Osweo]

As for Idun's 'lasting longer' nonsense, the only way to REALLY go even halfway to proving that would be through carefully arranged twin studies.

"Excuse me sir, madam, my name's Dr. Menge.. er 'Schmidt'. I see you've just given birth to two wonderful twin boys, congratulations! Now, would you be interested in doing medical science a great favour, and letting me cut a bit off one of them's dick? Your cooperation would be most welcome!" :p

[jerney]

As for Idun's 'lasting longer' nonsense, the only way to REALLY go even halfway to proving that would be through carefully arranged twin studies.

Perhaps the men she is with just want to get it over with quicker when they're with her..?

[Phlegethon]

Depends on whether they get paid a flat fee or by the minute.

[Goidelic]

Can man be half circumcised :confused:?

Yes, if it is a very loose circumcision. Sometimes it will end up looking like a man born intact with a shorter foreskin covering half the glans. Sometimes the frenulum is left intact from circumcision, other times sometimes men have botched circumcisions because of this barbaric alien procedure. Usually, though this isn't the case, generally babies in the U.S. are radically circumcised doctors perform the Judaic-Radical Style Medical quackery. My brother was radically circumcised, we think the doctor took off too much. He had a medical condition and had to be cut, I still think he shouldn't have been circumcised and should have suffered some medical consequences because of it.

[Mesrine]

NO.

"So you're the psycho who cuts dicks? WTF is wrong with you?" *headbutt*

[Goidelic]

I fail to see the medical condition needed in being circumcised. At worst, you can lose a kidney if it is due to a urinary-kidney infection, big deal, people donate kidney's all the time. Penile cancer is also extremely rare and it is not due to being uncircumcised. The foreskin took millions of years to evolve and is more important imo.

[Majar]

"No!" for mutilating babies and children this way (unless absolutely necessary, as in a medical emergency). When a boy becomes a young man at the age of maturity, if he decides he wants to become circumcised for supposed 'health benefits,' for 'looks' or for some other personal reason, then it should be an option available. But in general it should be something people are dissuaded from.

[Fred]

"No!" for mutilating babies and children this way (unless absolutely necessary, as in a medical emergency). When a boy becomes a young man at the age of maturity, if he decides he wants to become circumcised for supposed 'health benefits,' for 'looks' or for some other personal reason, then it should be an option available. But in general it should be something people are dissuaded from.In a sense, I agree, but don't hold it against the Jews or Muslims if that is their preference. All the women will know where their men come from!:D

[Inese]

NO.

"So you're the psycho who cuts dicks? WTF is wrong with you?" *headbutt*
Yes go and tell it your big mahgreb or Black french muslim friends you hypocrite!!

Cultures and religions who tell the people that they should cut parts from the body skin are crazy and stupid

[Poltergeist]

There is a curious fact that Islam doesn't require circumcision from adult converts, whereas it is required from gentile converts to Judaism (yes, there is such thing like conversion to Judaism). :eek:

[Inese]

There is a curious fact that Islam doesn't require circumcision from adult converts, whereas it is required from gentile converts to Judaism (yes, there is such thing like conversion to Judaism). :eek:

:blah: http://www.missionislam.com/health/circumcisionislam.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/malecircumcision/religions_3.shtml

[Poltergeist]

:blah: http://www.missionislam.com/health/circumcisionislam.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/malecircumcision/religions_3.shtml

Anyone ever expected any intelligent comment from a brain-dead hysterical barbie girl?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEzh10_xoqw

Where is the good old Hors when one needs him? :(

[Treffie]

:blah: http://www.missionislam.com/health/circumcisionislam.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/malecircumcision/religions_3.shtml

Those articles do not relate to adult converts, as Saltimbanque stated.

However, this quote below does


Is it compulsory for a Non-Muslim man to be circumcised upon conversion?

A boy who has not attained puberty must be circumcised when his family converts to Islam. Circumcision is optional for a man above the age of puberty. But he who opts not to be circumcised should regularly clean the area underneath the foreskin of his penis because, in Islam, cleanliness of the body is obligatory for performing prayers.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/convert/islam_conversion_main.htm

[Inese]

Those articles do not relate to adult converts, as Saltimbanque stated.
Ok and how many of all Muslims are adult converts?? :rolleyes: 1% of all Muslims or less?? You know , the very big majority of all Muslims are circumcised without medical need, it is a islamic ritual. And many islamic countrys circumcise female genitals too please look at Africa!!

Saltimbanque was talking about " adult converts" to defend the Islam against my attack a little bit and you support him. Hm come on you two please show me more of your Pro Europeaness :lol: and defend Islam a little bit more ---- Al Frankawi will help you, i am very sure! :icon_yawn:

[Treffie]

Ok and how many of all Muslims are adult converts?? :rolleyes: 1% of all Muslims or less?? You know , the very big majority of all Muslims are circumcised without medical need, it is a islamic ritual. And many islamic countrys circumcise female genitals too please look at Africa!!

Saltimbanque was talking about " adult converts" to defend the Islam against my attack in a indirect way and you support him. Hm come on please you two, show me more of your Pro Europeaness and defend Islam a little bit more ---- Al Frankawi will help you, i am very sure! :icon_yawn:

I'm stating facts, and not acting like a fool like you. Before you engage your foot into your mouth, please think about what you're saying.

Give it a rest, Inese.

[Inese]

I'm stating facts, and not acting like a fool like you. Before you engage your foot into your mouth, please think about what you're saying.
I was not asking for your facts about "adult converts" , i was saying that religions who want that people cut body parts are crazy and that Al Frankawi is a big hypocrite, he welcomes mahgrab and african people with open arms but says circumcision is for psychos!! Sorry but hello?? :coffee:
That you come to defend him is no wonder Mister Multicultural. And i dont give it a rest , my opinion is no crime and i am not here to comfort multicultural or multiethnical feelings of some people

[Poltergeist]

I'm stating facts, and not acting like a fool like you. Before you engage your foot into your mouth, please think about what you're saying.

Think? That's such an un-Inese activity. You can't possibly expect that.

[Treffie]

I was not asking for your facts about "adult converts" , i was saying that religions who want that people cut body parts are crazy and that Al Frankawi is a big hypocrite, he welcomes mahgrab and african people with open arms but says circumcision is for psychos!! Sorry but hello?? :coffee:
That you come to defend him is no wonder Mister Multicultural. And i dont give it a rest , my opinion is no crime and i am not here to comfort multicultural or multiethnical feelings of some people

Geez Inese, I was correcting you in your reply to Saltimbanque, here

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=141920&postcount=207

He stated that adult converts to Islam don't have to be circumcised, you replied with incorrect information. What amazes me with you is not your ability to speak English (it's perfectly fine in my opinion), but your inability to argue effectively. You post irrelevant information which is then corrected by myself and then you go on the defensive. Another point I wish to make are those posters who thank you for posting information in your last two posts in this thread that are clearly irrelevant - are you blind or do you thank Inese for posting any old crap?

Anyway, please tell me where I've stated that I'm pro-Islam? There's one thing that you excel at, and that's making assumptions.

[SwordoftheVistula]

Related poll up:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10946

[Matuo]

I am against circumcision, so answer is "no".

[Thulsa Doom]

What? NO!

No knifes is allowed nearby der alte Kamerade.

I´m actually against all interference on kids whether it is tattooing, piercing or mutilation.

[Dario Argento]

I personally think it's a mutilation. I think the foreskin was developed naturally by natural selection by a good reason and only in sand climated where their underforeskin would get full of sand and infected like Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Israel, etc.. should practice it. Otherwise in other regions is pointless and kills the sensivity of the penis. Having foreskin is having intense sex while circumsized sex is akin to using a strapon of a dildo. They say you can last "longer" but you can also last longer if you do certain excersices.

I think chopping off the prepuce, is in other words a genital mutilation akin to female genital cutting or removing the eyelids. I would never lynch my son this way. My father was lynched by some jewish evil doctors like a good portion of people in my country (but not all) but gladly he didn't do the same with me.

What's your thoughts on this?

[Cato]

What's your thoughts on this?

*Looks down at his circumcised member and lawls*

[Dario Argento]

*Looks down at his circumcised member and lawls*

I am not saying I hate circumcised people. But you should aknowledge for most people (in the USA) they cannot avoid. These systematic mutilations must stop. Would you, understanding the implication of this, let your son be lynched?

[Adalwolf]

Circumcision is a barbaric process and I will always hold a certain degree of animosity towards my parents who blindly agreed to have it done for me. Apparently it cuts out sexual pleasures almost 3/4.

[la bombe]

There's already a thread about this

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4667

[The Ripper]

I think its spelled circumcision. ;) And I also think its pretty barbaric, despite the different excuses mentioned, such as "hygiene". If its a necessary medical procedure, its of course different.

But barbarians will have their barbarisms, its not something that bothers me. I don't want to "save" the girls and boys of East Africa from circumcision, I couldn't care less.

[Dario Argento]

Circumcision is a barbaric process and I will always hold a certain degree of animosity towards my parents who blindly agreed to have it done for me. Apparently it cuts out sexual pleasures almost 3/4.

I am glad you understand the implication of this mutilation, unlike most cut people who instad try to justify it and will stop passing this ritual of mutilation onto your children and grandchildren. I had an American girl jump out of bed from me saying I had an "elefant trunk". That made me very pissed off and grind teeth in anger and want to educate her on the subject, but I instead made a thread here.

[Cato]

I am not saying I hate circumcised people. But you should aknowledge for most people (in the USA) they cannot avoid. These systematic mutilations must stop. Would you, understanding the implication of this, let your son be lynched?

If it's good enough for the Pharaohs, whom the Jews borrowed the tradition from, I'll have no complaints.

[Dario Argento]

If it's good enough for the Pharaohs, whom the Jews borrowed the tradition from, I'll have no complaints.

That's brutal! Do you have any legitimate reason to do this?

[Cato]

That's brutal! Do you have any legitimate reason to do this?

:confused:

Um... I don't like dick cheese?

[Adalwolf]

I am glad you understand the implication of this mutilation, unlike most cut people who instad try to justify it and will stop passing this ritual of mutilation onto your children and grandchildren. I had an American girl jump out of bed from me saying I had an "elefant trunk". That made me very pissed off and grind teeth in anger and want to educate her on the subject, but I instead made a thread here.

Haha! It's clearly a pointless procedure, which has no benefits besides some ridiculous Jewish pseudo beliefs. I am not still angry at my parents, but rather disappointed that they follow traditions so blindly..

[The Ripper]

I am not still angry at my parents, but rather disappointed that they follow traditions so blindly..

Are you Jewish, Muslim or some kind of African animist? ;)

[Adalwolf]

I'm a Christian. :) And I became one at 19 years old, not from some blind guided faith. When you have dabbled in the Occult like I have, you will know that peace and spiritual clarity can only be achieved through Jesus Christ..

[Dario Argento]

:confused:

Um... I don't like dick cheese?

Shower maybe? That's like cutting off my nose because I don't like mucousity.

You should have a better excuse to perpetuate this systematic ritual of mutilation other than "dick cheese"

[The Ripper]

I'm a Christian. :) And I became one at 19 years old, not from some blind guided faith. When you have dabbled in the Occult like I have, you will know that peace and spiritual clarity can only be achieved through Jesus Christ..

I was simply wondering which tradtition your parents followed in circumcising you? A cure for masturbation?


The role of infant circumcision in the United States of America is mysterious. The US is the only country in the world where the majority of baby boys have part of their penises cut off for non-religious reasons. Yet this extraordinary custom is very much taken for granted. If it were being introduced today, it would certainly be rejected as barbaric and un-American.

History
Contrary to most accounts, the ancient history of ritual circumcision is almost completely irrelevant to the US. Secular circumcision began as a "cure" for masturbation late in the 19th century in England. It swiftly crossed the Atlantic - though it was only ever confined to the upper classes in its homeland, where it has since withered and died.



http://www.circumstitions.com/USA.html

[la bombe]

For the record, I'm 100% against infant circumcision unless it's for a valid medical reason. I don't care what adults do, but there's really no reason to chop off part of your child's genitalia.

[Adalwolf]

I think they just got it done because it was the common thing to do 20 years ago... Most likely those swindler doc's convinced them of some bullshit ''sanitary'' reason or whatever.

[Dario Argento]

I was simply wondering which tradtition your parents followed in circumcising you? A cure for masturbation?



http://www.circumstitions.com/USA.html

It makes sense, as basically, circumcision "makes the penis deaf", turning it in nothing but only into a insensible steak of meat.

[Foxy]

How many people here are circumcised??:confused: I thought this practise was made only in "very barbaric places" like Africa, Maghreb and Arabia, but I think that I was wrong...

In Italy, lucky, nobody does except Jews. I find it abominable and useless and it is a reason why I hate islam so much.

[Óttar]

I won't subject my children to the practice. It is alien to my culture and I do not have a right to make a decision for them in this regard. I personally was circumsized. I don't think my mother had the right to make that decision. As for whether 3/4 of the sensation is taken away, people have no basis for comparison, including the people who arbitrarily chose that figure. I'll never know for sure, but I am a downright horn-dog and I still get pleasure aplenty.


Having foreskin is having intense sex while circumsized sex is akin to using a strapon of a dildo. They say you can last "longer" but you can also last longer if you do certain excersices.

How does that make sense? People who are circumsized get f_cked up the ass? :confused:

As far as aesthetics are concerned, I think uncircumsized wiener looks strange, but then again, I am circumsized.

[jerney]

There's already a thread about this where it's been discussed to death, but anyway, I'm opposed to it for all reasons with the exception of medical necessity. And yes, in my book it's as equally disturbing and wrong as female circumcision, though obviously there are much more extreme and disfiguring forms of female circumcision.

[The Ripper]

There's already a thread about this where it's been discussed to death, but anyway, I'm opposed to it for all reasons with the exception of medical necessity. And yes, in my book it's as equally disturbing and wrong as female circumcision, though obviously there are much more extreme and disfiguring forms of female circumcision.

I think its rather hypocritical that for males its called "circumcision" and for females "genital mutilation". One is clearly more acceptable than the other in the eyes of society, even in Europe. Politicians can worry about immigrant girls being sent to their home countries to get cut up, but no one will raise a finger against circumcision. :rolleyes:

[Óttar]

I think its rather hypocritical that for males its called "circumcision" and for females "genital mutilation". One is clearly more acceptable than the other in the eyes of society, even in Europe. Politicians can worry about immigrant girls being sent to their home countries to get cut up, but no one will raise a finger against circumcision. :rolleyes:
You guys are making it sound like circumsized people can't have orgasms. I get off just fine. The practical male equivalent of FGM would be castration. The Pharaohs and Jews got off just fine. Girls in Africa will never come.

[Foxy]

I think its rather hypocritical that for males its called "circumcision" and for females "genital mutilation". One is clearly more acceptable than the other in the eyes of society, even in Europe. Politicians can worry about immigrant girls being sent to their home countries to get cut up, but no one will raise a finger against circumcision. :rolleyes:

Well, becouse female circumcision is more dangereous, causes insensitivity and sometimes also infertily. The practise is illegal in Italy but as many muslim immigrants sent back to their countries their daughters, sometimes even kidnapping them from Italian mothers against this practise, the government is thinking or already has decided to autorize this practise in a way that girls won't lost sensitivity and igeny will be assured.

But for me it is absurd that thank to these parassites who come in Italy we have to change even our law, even becouse no Italian would find female circumcision acceptable, and also male circumcision is seen pretty bad!!
Circumcised men are not our ideal... :rolleyes2: It is as sexy as to think about a chicken.

[Adalwolf]

Apparently FGM is a lot worse, though. Pain can actually arise for them in ordinary situations like urination and menstruation. Neither are acceptable in my view, but FGM is on another level.

[jerney]

I think its rather hypocritical that for males its called "circumcision" and for females "genital mutilation". One is clearly more acceptable than the other in the eyes of society, even in Europe. Politicians can worry about immigrant girls being sent to their home countries to get cut up, but no one will raise a finger against circumcision. :rolleyes:

Ottar does have a point, it's not like guys can't perform sexually and enjoy sex if they're circumcised so that's probably why it's often not compared to FGM, especially when most cases are so extreme and disturbing and the female can only have painful sex, but I still do think male circumcision is a form mutilation, it's just one of the less extreme forms. The female equivalent would be when they only cut off the hood of the clitoris (they do it for desensitization purposes I think)

[jerney]

As far as aesthetics are concerned, I think uncircumsized wiener looks strange, but then again, I am circumsized.

I think it's weird that somebody would find something in its natural, intended form to be weird :confused:

[Curtis24]

Is there research about how it cuts down the pleasure of sex?

[Wyn]

In Italy, lucky, nobody does except Jews.

I believe this is the case for most of Europe (including Muslims, of course, they outnumber Jews in most European countries).

[Dario Argento]

I won't subject my children to the practice. It is alien to my culture and I do not have a right to make a decision for them in this regard. I personally was circumsized. I don't think my mother had the right to make that decision. As for whether 3/4 of the sensation is taken away, people have no basis for comparison, including the people who arbitrarily chose that figure. I'll never know for sure, but I am a downright horn-dog and I still get pleasure aplenty.



How does that make sense? People who are circumsized get f_cked up the ass? :confused:

As far as aesthetics are concerned, I think uncircumsized wiener looks strange, but then again, I am circumsized.

It makes sense because circumsized sex, on the active part is much like Lesbian sex with a strapon dildo. The penis just becomes an insensible stick.

[Dario Argento]

I think it's weird that somebody would find something in its natural, intended form to be weird :confused:

Agreed, the thought of walking around with a peeled banana between my legs grinding my underwear is just sickening.

[Foxy]

I believe this is the case for most of Europe (including Muslims, of course, they outnumber Jews in most European countries).

Of course. I didn't think that in the USA it was normal and even common. That was my shock for today... So far I had been thinking that Americans were Europeans also in their habits.


Is there research about how it cuts down the pleasure of sex?

It seems that after the cut a new skin coat grows which is thicker and harder and makes you feel less pleasure but makes you last longer. Sorry for the bad English but in this field I am not an expert.

[Adalwolf]

Is there research about how it cuts down the pleasure of sex?

Plenty.

http://www.coloradonocirc.org/sexual.php