Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Get ready: Arguments opposing circumcision are similar to arguments opposing abortion.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Writer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:07 AM
Original message
Get ready: Arguments opposing circumcision are similar to arguments opposing abortion.
DISCUSS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mcctatas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. OMG!
this can't end well :hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConcernedCanuk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
53. you forgot something
.
.
.

:hide:

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
2. Circumcision is nothing but an attempt by women to control men's bodies,
through the creation of an artificial standard of beauty that requires genital mutilation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Beauty's got nothing to do with it
and few women find those things particularly attractive in any shape, guys.

However, it is a good way to decrease the transmission of a number of nasty diseases, HIV among them, and it is a lot easier to keep clean, especially in later life when eyesight and dexterity are both problems.

It's a decision both parents make for their male offspring, for or against, and it's just none of your damned business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. "easier to keep clean"
Thats why I also favor female genital mutilation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. and abortions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #7
15. If you're referring to cutting off clitoris, then that comparison is as absurd as the one in the OP
Just saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. Yes I am.
I also favor cutting off your children's arms to prevent them from breaking them in life.

There are a million ways we can mutilate bodies in the name of "safety". Some are merely socially acceptable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. I'm not arguing for or against 'safety.' I'm pointing out that your analogy is absurd.
Cutting off the clitoris is analogous to cutting off the whole penis, not a flap of skin at the end of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #22
30. This ENTIRE topic is absurd
Body mutilation in the name of safety is pretty absurd, unless someone is choosing to amputate a cancerous leg or something. Who the hell would amputate a healthy leg to prevent it from ever getting cancer? And who would amputate their child's leg for them?

You may be criticizing me because I am talking about a higher degree of mutilation. But the bottom line is, it is all mutilation in the name of preventing potential harm (not current danger). And the main difference here isn't in degree. Its in social acceptance.

At least, acceptance as of now. I live in a country where under 10% of babies are circumcised. The trend will be seen soon in the US too. And topics like this will all be seen as absurd from the get-go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. You're arguing by assertion and appealing to emotionalism
First, you must demonstrate that a minor surgical procedure is actually "body mutilation." It may or may not be, and you may be able to convince me, but right now you're just asserting it as a given, when in fact it's the very question at issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. Cutting off part of a body irrepairably isn't "mutilation" by definition?
Im not appealing to emotionalism. I merely do not have another word to use. Please provide one if you can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. I provided it. 'Surgical procedure.'
Upthread you railed against a procedure being undertaken for purposes of protecting against possible future risk. It seemed that you found this justification insufficient.

Do you, for that same reason, object to vaccination of infants? I mean, it's possible that the kid won't even be exposed to measles, so why subject him to the trauma of the shot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #40
45. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Dorian Gray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #37
65. Is piercing ears mutilation
My friend pierced her baby's ears recently. It's not something I would do, but I don't think of it as mutilation, either.

(Same goes for circumcision. It's not a choice I would personally make, but calling it mutilation seems overkill.)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #65
80. Is it irrepairable?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frustrated_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
75. AND reduces the rate of HIV
Snark all you want, but that has been proven over and over again.

Btw, in case you didn't notice, circumcision and clitoridectomy are fundamentally different procedures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mother Of Four Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #75
77. Clitoridectomy is defined under type 1 by the WHO-

If you go and read the PDF file for the definitions of female mutilation, on page 24 they have a list of what is considered mutilation.

Removal of the prepuce, or hood alone- is very similar to circumcision and it is defined under WHO as a form of mutilation as clitoridectomy.

"Type I: Partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or
the prepuce (clitoridectomy).

When it is important to distinguish between the
major variations of Type I mutilation, the following
subdivisions are proposed: Type Ia, removal of the
clitoral hood or prepuce only; Type Ib, removal of the
clitoris with the prepuce."

The link is on the upper right of the page. http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/fgm /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frustrated_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #77
81. Ok, thanks for the definition, but:
where exactly in that statement by WHO do they claim clitoridectomy is, as you say, "very similar to circumcision"? Or, is that simply your belief which you chose to add in under the auspices of the world health organization?

You also neglect to address the established fact that circumcision reduces the rate of HIV transmission. Clitoridectomy, conversely, has no proven health benefit, and, in my mind (for whatever it's worth), is a barbaric procedure perpetrated by sadistic assholes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. It's easier to keep an aborted baby healthy than a non-aborted baby.
Edited on Sat May-02-09 12:47 AM by Occam Bandage
The comparisons are endless!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #13
23. An aborted baby will never catch swine flu.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. All I can think of right now is
Joey from Friends and Silly Putty ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8YHVO8QnIQ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #4
33. You are right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q3JR4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #4
56. In the highly unlikely case that I
sire male offspring, I'm leaving that part of their anatomy alone. They can make that decision for themselves later on in life.

Once you take it away they can never get it back. I'm not going to make that decision for anyone else.

Q3JR4.
Opposed to non-consensual genital mutation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
68. Not True
I think it's more of an attempt by a subset of men trying to control all mens' bodies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. Penis's have souls. Don't end a beating foreskin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. You can't stop the beating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. It's a foreskin, not a choice!
Thou shalt not cut
Pray for the pre-cut


Dang, got stuck in cliche land
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Yeah, you're using cliches like there's no tomorrow!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underseasurveyor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. Nope. Didn't circumcise my son
and I have not ever heard of or seen a reasons to have done so. As a matter of fact he's very glad I didn't take that choice away from him. He likes being whole and unmarred just as he was the day he was born.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. Is his umbilical cord still attached?
If not, then how did you break it to him that he's marred and less than whole?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. You miss the point. Baby boys are taken from their moms
to be cleaned up and weighed. They have cr@p put in their eyes that blurs their vision and they have their penis cut. It's not a great welcome, when you think of it.

I didn't let the hospital do silver nitrate or circumcision despite being threatened and made to sign a foot of forms. My kids could see just fine and were following me with their eyes the first day which sped up the whole bonding thingy. They didn't seem to miss being cut and have never complained about it.

Birth is traumatic enough with out enhancing the experience for no reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. The day-one 'bonding thingy' was most likely psychological and most likely your perception
As to the rest, I defy you to find me any person in the history of the world, living or dead, who recalls the trauma of birth or anything that happened during his or her first week of life.

I'm not arguing in favor of arbitrary cruelty, but the "birth is a trauma" argument is ridiculous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #18
29. No. When the baby moves his head to follow you around the room
that is measureable and not just perception. Christ.

And why the f do you think people don't remember birth?

It's so amazing how little people actually think this through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. I agree--you're not thinking this through.
Even if your baby turned its head to follow you around the room, you were a big alien blob at that point. You weren't a recognizable, bond-able face until quite a while after.

And I know why the fuck people don't remember birth. It's the same reason that they don't actually bond with you on that day (despite your apparent recollection). It's also why there is no lingering psychological trauma resulting from the birth, from the weigh-in, or from a circumcision performed days after the birth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. It always cracks me up that people with no experience or larning
to speak of feel so free to come to such sweeping conclusions.

lol

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. Ordinarily, I don't make fun of people's typographical errors
But in this case...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #43
47. That's a personal attack, which is contrary to DU's TOS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
50. Silver nitrate WAS used to prevent eye infections, not so much now. AND most req by law to do abx
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001606....
Because of the significance of neonatal conjunctivitis, all hospitals (most required by state law) routinely use silver nitrate or antibiotic drops, such as erythromycin, in a newborn's eyes to prevent disease. Silver nitrate is no longer commonly used, and has been mostly replaced by antibiotic eye drops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underseasurveyor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. Darling that a natural part of separation
at the time of birth. Now if his foreskin was meant to detach from his little baby penis as well at birth then this thread wouldn't even exist.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. 'Meant' is an entirely subjective concept
We weren't "meant" to be vaccinated or to wear clothing, either.

Also, since humans are a subset of the natural world, then anything we do--from spewing meconium to building nuclear reactors--is natural. "Natural" is, ironically, an artificial designator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underseasurveyor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #19
27. A-ha
I see what you are saying even if it is to the extreme. And yes ironically it holds true to a degree. But that's where brains and opposable thumbs come into play.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
handmade34 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
9. absurd comparison
it is all about choice... abortion is the choice of the individual, circumcision should be the choice of the individual. My boys were not circumcised and they now have the choice to either cut or not! So far, they are happy the way they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #9
21. Spot on.
Edited on Sat May-02-09 12:57 AM by Oregone
Let the child make the choice (when they are old enough to decide).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. Yeah!
And let them decide what to eat, how to behave, and whether to be vaccinated. Power to the children! Power to the children!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Not neccesarily power to the "children" at all regarding this
Its power to the adult. When I turned a certain age (16), my dad said to me that I should decide whether to do it myself.

Shortly thereafter, I also was behaving and eating according to my own will too.

Look, lets bring it back to the original poster. At what point can a female decide to have an abortion herself? Should her parents always decide for her? Do her parents own and control her body until she is a legal adult? No, we respect the *daughters* right to choose what to do with her body. Now respect the *sons* right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. If a newborn baby were pregnant, I'd say that it's up to the parents to decide
What if a baby is born with a massive, but almost entirely cosmetic, deformity. Do the parents have any right to opt for corrective surgery, or must they wait until the child is 16?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #28
31. A newborn baby CANNOT get pregnant. Guess what...a newborn boy isn't going to contract an STD from..
Edited on Sat May-02-09 01:11 AM by Oregone
not being snipped during sexual intercourse with a dirty whore in a NORMAL world.

BTW...regarding your point...last time I checked, a foreskin isn't a cosmetic deformity. WTF? How are you able to draw any comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. What do you think of parents who get their kids' ears pierced?
The analogy between the foreskin and a cosmetic deformity depends not on whether the foreskin is a deformity but upon whether the procedure is elective and decided by the parents.

WTF? How are you not able to see the comparison?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. I don't particularly like the entire concept
Do these parents not realize that its a pain in the ass treating and cleaning pierced ear (and a toddler isn't going to help out)? Buy some damn clip ons. A child shouldn't be a fashion accessory. Fortunately, its reversible, eh?

Regarding your example of some cosmetic deformity, which would impact a child's social development and emotional well-being (as well as their future), its a bit different than a foreskin, which for the most part, will not impact a child AT ALL until they are of age they can decide to do it themselves (if it even impacts them thereafter).

Should a parent also be allowed to have vasectomies performed on their child (elective procedure to control population or pre-marital conception)?

The absence of circumcision on an individual, until they can decide themselves, does not introduce any real potential for harm to a child. On the other hand, it allows the individual to not engage in the operation if they prefer not to. That is called CHOICE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. The vasectomy analogy is absurd, because circumcision does not affect fertility
Let's posit that the cosmetic deformity is something easily concealed by clothes, like a non-functional ear growing an inch below the navel.

Also, you're misunderstanding the concept of circumcision as a ward against STDs. The reason it's performed so soon after birth is that the child retains no memory of the procedure nor any psychological trauma. As such, the pain is not a deterrent to making the choice objectively. But if, say, the parents choose to wait until the child is 16, then the child will experience considerably greater pain (due to nerve formation that isn't complete in newborn) and will also retain a memory of the procedure.

Therefore, comparing the circumcision of a newborn to the circumcision of an adolescent is absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #39
42. "Also, you're misunderstanding the concept of circumcision as a ward against STDs"
When I let my son start fucking hookers, Ill also think he will be old enough to decide to get the operation done (or not).

Look, the pain thing....women get 400 ccs of silicone shoved in their breasts from their bellybuttons. I think they can deal with it, and it isn't as if there aren't pain killers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #42
46. So you're saying that anyone with an STD is a hooker. Nice.
Also, the analogy between breast enlargement surgery and circumcision is false. The former is an internal procedure involving the injection/insertion of foreign objects/devices into the body, typically performed under general anesthetic. Circumcision requires no implantation and is performed under local anesthetic. The difference in the level of physical trauma associated with each procedure is so vastly different as to make the analogy irretrievably absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #28
60. What the...??
If a newborn baby were pregnant

What in HELL are you people talking about??!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #60
69. Hey, if they're allowed to use totally absurd analogies, I don't see why I can't, too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elshiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:02 AM
Response to Original message
25. .....
:popcorn: :popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:36 AM
Response to Original message
44. That's it? Just...............*DISCUSS*?
I would not allow it for my son
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
48. To hell with this deliberate flamebait.
You, sir, are and idiot*.

* Yes, that is a deliberate misspelling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
49. I love my Dick. It's cut. It has this VERY cool racing stripe below the mushroom head
that I never fail to point out to my lovers.

What else would you like to know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
51. I thought this was a joke thread, but it seems to be providing much entertainment
snarking and name calling. Very funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. ^_^
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:09 AM
Response to Original message
54. I believe in the individual's right to autonomy over their own body. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:11 AM
Response to Original message
55. Genital mutilation. Discuss.
Edited on Sat May-02-09 02:12 AM by TechBear_Seattle
Removal of the foreskin is identical to removal of the clitoral hood, which is decried as unnecessary, cruel and deliberate mutilation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tektonik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
57. It's mutilation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:38 AM
Response to Original message
58. what an incredibly dumb argument.
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContinentalOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
59. Nope, you got that one exactly backwards.
Both issues are about control over one's own body. Trouble is, only one of them is an actual useful, occasionally necessary medical procedure. I'll leave it up to you to figure out which one that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 03:22 AM
Response to Original message
61. I don't know, but smoking is digusting and should be outlawed!!
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
62. Circumcision in the US was to a big extent about keeping boys from masturbating..
http://www.cirp.org/pages/whycirc.html

"To obtain the best results one must cut away enough skin and mucous membrane to rather put it on the stretch when erections come later. There must be no play in the skin after the wound has thoroughly healed, but it must fit tightly over the penis, for should there be any play the patient will be found to readily resume his practice not begrudging the time and extra energy required to produce the orgasm... We may not be sure that we have done away with the possibility of masturbation, but we may feel confident that we have limited it to within the danger lines."

(E.J. Spratling, MD. Medical Record, Masturbation in the Adult, vol. 48, no. 13, September 28, 1895, pp. 442-443.)

Here is an example of what another sexaphobic American doctor had to say about masturbation in 1903:

"It (self abuse) lays the foundation for consumption, paralysis and heart disease. It weakens the memory, makes a boy careless, negligent and listless. It even makes many lose their minds; others, when grown, commit suicide.... Don't think it does no harm to your boy because he does not suffer now, for the effects of this vice come on so slowly that the victim is often very near death before you realize that he has done himself harm. It is worthy of note that many eminent physicians now advocate the custom of circumcision..."

(Mary R. Melendy, MD, The Ideal Woman - For Maidens, Wives and Mothers, 1903.)


Interestingly, Messrs. John Harvey Kellogg and Sylvester Graham (advocates of fibre, of both the moral and dietary varieties) were involved in this movement. Here's what Dr. Kellogg recommended:

A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment. In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement.

(John Harvey Kellogg, M.D., "Treatment for Self-Abuse and its Effects," Plain Fact for Old and Young. Burlington, Iowa: F. Segner & Co. (1888). P. 295)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
and-justice-for-all Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 05:55 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. Evil bastards...
"A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment. In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement."

Sounds like torture to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 06:03 AM
Response to Reply #63
64. Not in their own minds..
I think they honestly believed they were doing the right thing.

Which does not keep their actions from being objectively "evil", for lack of a better word.

We are all heroes in our own story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dorian Gray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:07 AM
Response to Original message
66. I'm always curious
about how many men who have been circumcised are happy about it vs. those who wish they hadn't been (or feel violated for being so). And vice versa. Those who weren't who wish that they were.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. i, for one, appreicate the fact my parents were wise enough to have me circumcised
i dig the clean, sporty look, and so have most of my lovers. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NeedleCast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #66
72. I'm snipped. Couldn't possibly care less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #72
74. You're only saying that because you've been brainwashed by the pro-mutilation cult
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mother Of Four Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
70. Both my sons are-

And if I could go back in time to reverse the choice I would. I was ignorant, and my youngest son suffered for it. See what doctors DON'T tell you is there is about a 1 percent chance that when the circ is done the skin will start to glove down from the glans. That happened to my now 16 year old, I ended up holding my baby and talking to him on a immobilization board while the Dr stitched his skin back to where it was supposed to be.

I've been with both types, my husband now is uncut. To tell the truth, I prefer it. It FEELS a hell of alot better.

Think of it this way, when you cut the foreskin off you also cut off all sorts of nerve endings. You remove the natural protection and lubrication from the outside of the glans.
It's kind of like your tongue, if you kept the tip of it outside your mouth all the time- letting it dry out and rub against things it's not supposed to the majority of your tongue would still taste but it would never taste things as well as if you kept it how it was supposed to be, in your mouth and protected.

I couldn't imagine ever being with a cut man again, they look so...naked. (No offense guys, there are alot of women who prefer the cut look- I used to be one of them)

Benefits of NOT circing-
Increased feeling for the man
No scar tissue
Ability to actually fill to capacity without being "Stretched"
Feels better for the woman
More fun to play with
Among many others.

This is a good read, it's the only site I was able to find quickly that had the information about what exactly a foreskin has in it. http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm

You know what the ONLY benefits of circing are?

To make it look "pretty" and a nebulous idea that it will prevent cancer, stds, or is "unclean" ...thing is it's sexual activity itself that is usually the indicator of a mans chance for those things and simple education will totally erase the "unclean" issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #70
78. how ironic. you'd never deign to be with a "cut" man again and
yet you had both your sons circumsized. I'd never make a decision on whether or not to be with someone on such a shallow basis. btw, I didn't have my son who is 22 circumsized, not that I feel that strongly about it, because I did my homework, and it didn't seem necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mother Of Four Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #78
79. Uhm-
Re-read. I said I can't imagine...not that I never would be. Good gracious. To ME, a cut man looks naked now. Also keep in mind I've been with my second husband for close to 15 years. So imagining is all I'm really willing to do when it comes to other men.

I also had my sons circumcised before I ever met my second husband, when I was with my first husband. Who, by the way, is cut.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NeedleCast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
71. Well Done, by the way
Ahhhhh, if we could only channel the passion we put into telling other people what to do and then pounding into a thousand foot deep crevasse we might actually get some important shit done instead of finger wagging over a relatively unimportant personal choice...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
73. 3-day old infant boys demand to have control of their bodies!
and just in case they don't...there's this:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frustrated_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
76. They're both matters of personal choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-02-09 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
82. locking
Hit and run flamebait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC