I'm guessing you guys are mostly American, yeah?
Because in England optional circumsision is (to my knowledge) basically unheard of. |
:
|
:
|
'I heard that in Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia, women's clitorises are burnt with very hot rocks, and remember-they don't have any anaesthetic.'
For f*cks sake, do they not know that women are the pinacle of evolution and are actually at the top of the evolutionary ladder?! Though, i am a bit weary when it comes to Tribal shtuffs. As i hate the fact that many of the original, native tribes are steadily becoming westernised and suffering from it (alkohol abuse, drug abuse etc) and losing their traditional values. However, if they're not tribes people and are quite aware of their surroundings and do it purely 'cos they're c*nts, we should bomb the Hell out of them. Iraqi-styleeeee. |
Yeah, I don't see the point in female 'circumcision'. Which is also why I don't see the point in male circumcision. It is as bad as mutilating your body. Just because the vast majority of people who are circumcised have it done as infants, and therefore you don't remember it, doesn't make it okay.
Would you chop off your pinky toe? No, I don't think so. Yet it is also utterly useless. So why mutilate the sexual organs of all things? It is barbaric. Why I understand that it is practice in Judaisim, that doesn't dismiss its barbaric-ness solely on it being religious. That's like saying ritual killings in cult religions is okay because its part of the religion - though not too that extent of course. Alcar... |
:
:
|
:
:
There is a justifiable argument then that circumcision is not still needed today but seeing as it causes no harm, then there is no problem And, yes, I did just want the chance to use the word 'smegma'. |
:
Oof, the description of female circumcision makes me wince at just the thought. (And so does the word smegma.) I suppose that's how some of you guys may feel towards male circumcision, although as far as I know, there aren't as many negative side effects. Sure, you may lose some sensitivity, but you don't experience pain during sex. However, I have heard that it can lead to increased chances of premature ejaculation... Is that true? I would almost think that if those that still have more sensitivity with the foreskin would have the increased chance. On a side (and vain) note, I agree that uncircumcised penises look like wobbles, whatever those things are. |
:
|
I don't mean to sound like I'm stereotyping of course... but y'know, tell 'em what they want to hear, and they'll believe it! Just like religion. "There is an afterlife"... "there's a god and he loves you"... "all your sins are forgiven"... Wishful thinking. God certainly has quite a macabre sense of humour for a being so loving.
|
:
"who noticed that guys without a foreskin" YEAH cause there was this bunch of guys who just happened to not have a foreskin, mostly during the great onionring shortage of 1504BC, and then there was this OTHER bunch of guys who just happened to be looking at dicks... mostly during the great brothel shortage of 1504BC, yep, all sounds like a totally legitimate argument to me. Nate was definately making a serious point there. :rolleyes: |
I really don't think I have to explain myself! Actually it's pretty late (early), I wasn't really sure what he said, but I saw infection in there somewhere, so I thought I might throw something on the table.
|
:
|
"Why is it that I only ever hear this kind of thing from homosexuals, crackpot "scientific discoveries" in womens magazine articles and saggy-breasted hairy-legged womens rights activists?"
No no no no, its because we all like ladies cos they're nice to look at!...apart from, y'know, fat ugly ones and stuff...I'm stop this right here...before some girls come beat me up... Oh you guys do realise we're talking about how good different cocks look, right? Shouldnt we...y'know...just not? :-P |
'Why is it that I only ever hear this kind of thing from homosexuals, crackpot "scientific discoveries" in womens magazine articles and saggy-breasted hairy-legged womens rights activists?'
Because we're evolved enough to know *Tuts* Silly Muffy. 'However, I have heard that it can lead to increased chances of premature ejaculation...' That would explain a lot. When they complained i was "too fast" i always thought they were just jealous of my running capabilities...*Sigh* |
:
There's no point to it. Still, if you want to, it's your decision. But I don't know why you'd sacrifice all that pleasure. As for the look of circumcised and uncircumcised penises, I don't really see much difference. It's a penis. Not your face. Alcar... |
Or... is it? :p
The whole concept of female circumcision makes me queasy. Although, comparing it to male circumcision, it is certainly... comparable. In some ways at least. I think this thread has made me opinionated. I'm now personally against circumcision at birth. If an adult is adamant enough to want to mutilate his or her own genitals, they can go right ahead. Otherwise, things should be left the way they are. |
I was quite disappointed with my vagueness of my previous post in this thread, so I checked some stuff so I could re-assert my position, this time sans the aforementioned vagueness. Some of this may be, "Well, no duh," but I'm writing it all down just in case.
Moving right along. All males are born with, basically, a flap of skin over the head of the penis; a natural sleave made of skin for your nether region, so to speak. And that's all it is...loose skin. It serves no desernable purpose. It's like the appendix; Maybe it served some long-forgotton purpose in the womb, but now that you're alive and one your own, it's utterly useless. Circumcision is simply cutting off this natural, "sleave." It doesn't reduce size or potency or any crap like that. Now, there are a few, small benefits to being circumcised. Obviously, there are very few (Believe me...if there were a lot, EVERYONE would be getting circumcised). To start with, there are the previously mentioned diseases, but those are so rare, that it's not a big risk at all. It's really a matter of convienience, really. There is one thing that sleave excells at...collecting bacteria and gunk from the surrounding evironment. Now, if that's your thing, whatever. But for those of us whose hobbies to not include cultivating a colony of bacteria in our genital area, we've got to clean it out...that is, those of us who are not circumcised. If you are, those things just come off in the shower like everything else. If you're not...well, you've got some cleaning to do, haven't you? On top of this, I've heard that there is a sensitivity thing to. This flap isupposedly makes sex somewhat less comfortable, and removing it is supposed to make it less painful, and more...pleasureable. I say supposedly, because I myself have no experience or personal knowledge for comparision. Maybe the doctors are wrong. I dont' know. That's the value of circumcision (Sans all religious significance). Now, as all of you can plainly see...that's not a whole lot. Well, that's why it's optional then, isn't it. But I will tell you this: It's better to be circumcised as an infant, on the 8th day of being alive. Why? Circumcision...it's supposed to be a dreadfully painful experience. Not only that, but it takes weeks to recover, as some of my dad's old navy buddies would testify to. HOWEVER, on the 8th day of being born, doctors have discovered an interesting phenomenon. For that day, and that day alone, the vitamin K in your blood spikes; raises sky high! Vitamin K is what's responsible for blood clotting, mind you. All doctors would confirm that that is the best possible day to get circumcised, if you don't want to be sore for weeks afterwards, that is. Finally, I'd like to finish with the roots of circumcision, which have nothing to do with masterbation (Sorry Mojoman. Less sensitivity means it's less uncomfortable, like I stated earlier). As far as I can see, a historical figure known only as Abraham was suppossedly told my God, that if he put his absolute faith and trust in him, that he would grant him desendants far too numerous to count (For those of you who think Abraham was a goober for this, it would serve to note that he is technically the forefather of every Arab and Hebrew on the face of the Earth). For those of us who read the Bible, Abraham made a covenant with God; that he, and every male member of his family (No mention of female members, though) would be circumcised (It also says that all infants should preferably be circumcised on the 8th day...hmmm). The Hebrews, and I would think the Arabs, still do it to this day. As do Christians, I suppose keeping in with their heritage or something, and other people, for the various reasons I listed earlier. That's it, I think. |
:
:
:
|
:
The foreskin actually makes sex more pleasureable, and in some cases is the only thing that triggers an orgasm. Without it, these particular people are unable to achieve an orgasm, and therefore never ejaculate. To that end, it is vital to the continuation of the human race. Now, with that in mind, try telling me that it's useless. ;) Also, the appendix is believed by most physicians to've been where cellulose was digested in the evolutionary predecessor to the modern human. |
:
...You where saying? ;) EDIT: As for the appendix, I said it did serve some purpose in the past...but it is no longer vital or important now. |
:
:
:
Finally, I'd just like to mention that I cannot honestly see how men masturbate without a foreskin. I know they do the same thing, but, it's the foreskin which provides the pleasure. Not to mention the friction would be worse :| Alcar... |
I personally do not see how removing the foreskin could increase chances of ejaculation. From a logical standpoint, it seems that the foreskin acts as a form of making ejaculation easier. But then again, as I am uncircumcised, I guess I have no say in the matter, unless I go out and circumcise my self and root the nearest object in sight.
But I'm not that desperate... ;) There. We can all sp33k like adults. Luckily Stingbee isn't here, or he'd go "PEN15! lol". |
*Sigh.*
Wow...what were the odds of this happening...again. Alcar, I can garuntee 100% that I have been circumcised (Warning! Before and after illustrations of process.).* I highly doubt that my father, doctors, internet information pages, and my text book would simultaneously lie to me. I have no problem ejaculating, and there is no, "friction." Removing it does not increase or decrease chances of ejaculation. Also, you seem to be suggesting that I support the emidiate circumcision of everyone. Not so! I was simply stating that there is more to it than just some old Jewish custom. You don't have to emediately remove it, or even remove it at all. But if you wanted to, there certainly are other reasons. And yes, I do know that it decreases sensitivity...but I'm not quite sure if it's in the way you seem to mean. As far as grime goes, I've heard mixed reports in both directions. |
:
:
Alcar... |
Meh...oh well. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that nether side is disadvantaged. Circumcised people aren't sexually disadvantaged or anything, is my real point. At least I got to clear up the origin, and Dino's apparent confusion. Nice discussion anyway, Alcar. :)
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a fanfic to write. |
"I didn't know that you were homosexual, drakan."
When I said we, I was refering to guys, And you dont know anything about me anyway ':-I |
Circumcised penis' are more pleasant to look at, HOWEVER, the removal of the foreskin does reduce sensitivity. There's a new procedure in Brazil to stop premature ejaculation, part of that procedure is to cut some nerve endings, but the other part is to circumcise the male.
Also, in '89 the Cameron study was published and reported an 8.2 times higher risk of HIV infection among uncircumcised men. On the downside for my Muffy cohorts, however, is that circumcised penis' have problems with female "dryness" (lovely(!)) Oh well. |
That's nothing a little K-Y can't fix. ;)
*Ahem*... Anyway, as for the earlier discussed comparison of percentages of circumcision in the U.S. to other countries, I read that 55% of American males are. So it's about half and half over here. I feel silly for never giving thought to how it could such a difference in other developed countries. |
:
:
:
:
Here's a site with more informationhttp://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/ |