Circumcision (General Discussion)

Life Health & Fitness
141

I’m again suprised given your infamous preference for scientific and rational argument that you’d allow yourself to be so readily hoodwinked by such a simple device. Yes I suppose it is easy for those untrained in medicine to mock the benefits of autopsy. Mind you, it is no doubt much easier to accept given it also offers some consolation against what has been performed on oneself and what one has had performed on others.

However, even assuming an equal split among medical pathologists over the possible losses caused by circumsicion, and fankly I don’t think there is, wouldn’t it be much wiser to err on the side of caution? I mean, after all, there simply is no tipping factor in the risk reward equation. There is vast potential loss for very little gain.

And by the way, who is the unnamed source writing on that website?

I’m sure you have, but just in case, check out Wallerstein on Circumcision: The Uniquely American Medical Enigma. It was the then tipping point for me and I think it highlights rather nicely the cultural bias in the US for a very outdated European medical tradition. .

HG

"I think circumcision is a good idea… However, it is not absolutely necessary. (1946-68) I think circumcision is a good idea… However, it is not necessary. (1968-74) I strongly recommend leaving the foreskin alone. (1985) ~ Dr Benjamin Spock, Baby and Child Care

“If I was to cut off any other part of a baby for no good cause and without an anaesthetic, I’d be struck off the medical register and the parents would most likely lose custody of the child.” ~ Christopher Green, paediatrician, Camperdown Children’s Hospital, Sydney, 2001

142

:laughing:

Whatever… I assure you, I am absolutely delighted with my willy. Its given me years of blissful pleasure. I’ve never missed my foreskin… can’t miss what one (virtually) never had. Never felt any desire or need for consolation on this front.

143

Well, I don’t think I’ve been hoodwinked at all. I accept that there are various opinions and studies and assertions regarding the pro and con of circumcision. I accept that there appears to be no real need for routine/ritual circumcision. I do not accept the argument that there is NO health benefit to circumcision. This issue simply is not yet decided. Sure, ancient notions of masturbation being the cause of various diseases is easy to mock. However, there is evidence now that circumcision can help to prevent the spread of HIV and HPV. One study re the HIV aspect was published last year and a second follow-up study will be published in 2007.

I also do not know whether I would feel more pleasure with or without a foreskin, and I think nobody can know, other than a few people who have been circumcised in adulthood… and even then, anecdotal evidence one way or the other is not convincing. Maybe sex is better with a foreskin? I have no idea. But neither can anyone claim (authoritatively) that sex without a foreskin is less pleasurable.

I think even on this issue the matter is being debated:

The American Academy of Pediatrics states “a survey of adult males using self-report suggests more varied sexual practice and less sexual dysfunction in circumcised adult men. There are anecdotal reports that penile sensation and sexual satisfaction are decreased for circumcised males. Masters and Johnson noted no difference in exteroceptive and light tactile discrimination on the ventral or dorsal surfaces of the glans penis between circumcised and uncircumcised men.”[45] The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) states “The effect of circumcision on penile sensation or sexual satisfaction is unknown. Because the epithelium of a circumcised glans becomes cornified, and because some feel nerve over-stimulation leads to desensitization, many believe that the glans of a circumcised penis is less sensitive. Opinions differ about how this decreased sensitivity, which may result in prolonged time to orgasm, affects sexual satisfaction. An investigation of the exteroceptive and light tactile discrimination of the glans of circumcised and uncircumcised men found no difference on comparison. No valid evidence to date, however, supports the notion that being circumcised affects sexual sensation or satisfaction.”[69]

As such, I try to avoid stating anything in the absolute. Who’s right? I dunno.

144

Next time we hook up remind me to show you the marvels of god’s applied mechanics in the leverage a foreskin can apply to the sensitive bits of one’s member.

A veritable sea of lawsuits I;m teeling ya. You’re a lawyer, get in early!

Oops! Shit, this isn’t a PM either!

HG

145

While I look forward to seeing you again, I’ll pass on the demonstration… :smiley:

There may already have been some… but, I can’t imagine these being successful… if the tobacco companies were able to fend off liability for such a long time, it will be ages before anyone will succeed on a stolen foreskin claim…

[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]Oops! Shit, this isn’t a PM either!

HG[/quote]

:sunglasses:

146

Mark my words, at some point soon, as a generation of hopeless losers reach their mid thirties with little in the bank, or on the end of their knobs, history will look anew at this barbarous practice. Parents and quacks will be ducking for cover.

I can read the brutally wounded Tigger-infant screaming between the lines in your attempts to defend you lessened manhood. I strongly suggest you get behind this movement of as yet beknown wounded men and score big time on their claims. It could also offer some kind of healing.

HG

147

If it indeed has been “lessened”, then it was likely for the better. Over the years, mine has been referred to by several of my partners, both back in the States and here in Taiwan, as a beautiful “magic wand”, and has been nearly deified by several women, so uncommonly fantastic it apparently is… If indeed leaving the foreskin intact on my wonderous willy would have brought any added pleasure, it would certainly have been just too much, for myself and for my various partners. No doubt several of my partners would have been sent over the edge (not merely over the top), never to return. Nope. Its probably for the better that my “magic wand” has been slightly “lessened”… Too much of a good thing can be harmful, so they say.

As I said above, I’m quite happy with mine… it has served me and my partners very well. :sunglasses:

148

Excalibur! :laughing:

HG

149

Unsheathed! :wink:

150

Didn’t Monty Python resolve this dispute?

151

What, surely I’m not the only on that has noticed that those countries with a propensity to sever the protective sheath of their male offspring’s manhood are also the ones most willing to kill. Israelis, Muslims, Americans, please, stop brutalising your young boys, let’s have some peace, man!

Group A countries: 75-100% males circumcised.
North and West Africa plus much of East Africa, eg Algeria, Cameroon, Chad, Dahomey, Egypt (Muslim and Christian), Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Kenya. Libya, Madagascar, Mali, Mauretania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Northern Uganda, Upper Volta, Zaire [NB, some of these now have new names but it would be a real surprise if most of the guys there had grown new foreskins as a result.). Plus the Islamic areas of Asia - Afghanistan, Bahrein, Bangladesh, Indonesia (largest Muslim nation), Iran, Iraq, Israel [OK not Muslim], Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Pakistan, (Hindu minority about 10%), Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, UAE, Yemen (N+S). Plus Tonga and Samoa, with Canada and the US at the bottom end of the range.

[b]Incidence and Distribution of Circumcision (Male Genital Mutilation) Worldwide

Who Aren’t Cut - and Who Are[/b]

Stop giving the boys the chop in the bolded countries and you rule out a lot of violence.

HG

152

What do they do with all those snipped bits?

I figure it would make good bait for fishing, no?

153

Well, many Taiwanese put the umbilical stump, after it falls off, into a plastic chop…kinda like an insect in amber. You should be able to do this with other baby bits.

154

I say their hunger for war is related to insecurities stemming from their lost penile sheaths.

“My little fella aint protected, so I is gotta kill to be safe.”

HG

155

Well, HG, you almost had me believing but then in today’s news there was this:

[quote]Circumcising adult men may cut in half their risk of getting the AIDS virus through heterosexual intercourse, the U.S. government announced Wednesday, as it shut down two studies in Africa testing the link. . .

Why would male circumcision play a role? Cells in the foreskin of the penis are particularly susceptible to the HIV virus, Fauci explained. Also, the foreskin is more fragile than the tougher skin surrounding it, providing a surface that the virus could penetrate more easily.[/quote]

nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-H … r=homepage

Of course it’s always possible the study is simply another US imperialistic plot to convert the savages. :wink:

156

The fact that many people use these HIV studies to make a decision to circumcise makes me nervous. There are, sadly, circumcised heterosexual men who contract and die from AIDS. Lack of a foreskin should not lead to lack of common sense. Cut or not, cover it with laytex.

Just like teaching your son proper hygiene negates the small additional risk of infection for uncircumcised men, teaching safe sex will do more to protect him from HIV than cutting off his foreskin.

157

Well, sure, of course one should wear a condom to maximize ones protection against AIDs and other STDs. But don’t be too critical of the use of circumcision as a means of fighting AIDs – apparently the experts are believers. Here’s a few more paragraphs of the above article.

[quote]AIDS experts immediately hailed the result, saying it gave the world a new way to fight the spread of AIDS, and the directors of the two largest funds for fighting the disease said they would now consider paying for circumcisions.

“This is very exciting news,” said Daniel Halperin, an H.I.V. specialist at Harvard’s Center for Population and Development, who has argued in scientific journals for years that circumcision slows the spread of AIDS in the parts of Africa where it is practiced.

In an interview from Zimbabwe, Mr. Halperin added: “I have no doubt that, as word of this gets around, millions of African men will want to get circumcised and that will save many lives.”[/quote]

158

My only question is, how come the mutilated ones are constantly trying to enforce their will on the great uncut? I suspect it’s that exposed and vulnerable bell end, again. We that have not been mutilated have a greater sense of peace, a general belief that the world is a good place full of decent people, who are not trying to steal our precious and sensitive bits.

Mutilation is the road to Fred Smithdom. Resist it!

HG

159

[quote=“ChouDoufu”]The fact that many people use these HIV studies to make a decision to circumcise makes me nervous. There are, sadly, circumcised heterosexual men who contract and die from AIDS. Lack of a foreskin should not lead to lack of common sense. Cut or not, cover it with laytex.

Just like teaching your son proper hygiene negates the small additional risk of infection for uncircumcised men, teaching safe sex will do more to protect him from HIV than cutting off his foreskin.[/quote]

Excellent post. :bravo: :bravo: :bravo:

160

According to today’s CBC news story, circumcision is “not perfect protection, Fauci stressed. Men who become circumcised must not quit using condoms nor take other risks — and circumcision offers no protection from HIV acquired through anal sex or injection drug use, he noted.”

In areas where AIDS has truly become an epidemic, circumcision may be part of the answer to prevention. In developed nations, however, AIDS is predominantly transmitted via anal sex and drug use. So while circumcision may make sense in Africa for locales where proper sanitary conditions allow such a procedure to take place safely, it may still be an unnecessary procedure in developed nations.