Male circumcision is a good thing

Post Reply New Topic

even when that practice results in people having lifelong trauma because of it?

there are several examples of people where it becomes a close personal issue, even after restoration.

in essence that would mean that we trade the rights of those parents(perhaps with the justification of limited health benefits) to exert their aesthetic and cultural preferences with the trauma of those people.

as a practice i think its very valid to consider how one should deal with this issue, perhaps the golden middle road would be to wait at least long enough for there to be a modicum of input from the child themselves, to their mind that would at least remove the feeling of complete non choice.

thats what we call a herd derp moment when very sleepy.

hi cultus. to go back to my use of the term queer, i do take your point.

where i live, the word is actually often still used in it's original sense, i.e. to denote strange, odd or unusual, and rarely if ever used as a descriptor of sexual orientation, either in a derogatory or affirmative sense.

however i do understand that my use of the word in a wider forum such as this might be open to misinterpretation.

But you are looking to make policy on the basis of outliers. Parents consent to all manner of medical procedures on a daily basis. Some of those procedures carry a lethal risk, but parents are expected to weigh the risks and benefits and make a mature decision. Yes, some men have deep seated disorders that stem from their circumcisions. But do they present in sufficient numbers to mandate a prohibition on the procedure?

I feel the same way about this as I feel about the data that demonstrate medical benefits to the procedure: both are relevant, but neither are sufficiently significant to determine the question that an individual pair of parents are going to make in respect of a specific boy.



I see at least two problems with that.

First, the medical literature strongly suggests that the beneficial impacts of circumcision diminish with time, so you are putting off a decision and you will have fewer positives to support that decision (depending, of course, on when you consider the child to be able to provide that modicum of input).

Second, as a principle, we have long established that parents are competent to make medical decisions for their children. Parents decide to vaccinate their children. Parents consent to surgery. Parents administer prescriptions to their children. And it is parents who are able to approach these questions from the perspective of informed consent. Why do we decide that a different approach is merited on the particular issue of circumcision? If the principle is that parents are in the best position to make decisions about their children, then that principle applies whether we agree with those decisions or not. Sometimes parents will make the wrong decision. That's part of the parenting package.

im sure the parents in Africa and the middle east who get there girls clits cut off also feel like there competent enough to make that decision. im sure in there mind they have plenty of justifications to hold there little girl down and remove apart of her body. it make her less likely to cheat on hers husband, it will reduce the spread of std's. if she has no pleasure from sex she wont seek it unless its to make kids. there no chance of getting cancer on that clit. im sure it makes the vagina a little ezer to wash to.

with that logic not only should we keep cutting the foreskin off our guys, but remove the clits to, imagine how much less std's we will have between that. this is what its about now right, reducing std's at the cost of physical pleasure.

i herd bob marley got toe cancer and it spread to his longs, we better remove toes in case any one else gets toe cancer. pluss toes are kinda hard to wash you know, you have to bend down to get to them. oh and dont forget the ear lobes, we dont even really need those to hear and people forget to wash those all the time. we best just chop those off while we have this baby tied down to a little table with a greedy doctor slicing away at his body parts.


or maybe, just maybe we stop removing perfectly functioning body parts of our children for fashion statements. teach them how to clean them selfs and how to use condoms.

education works better than genital mutilation, penal cancer already pretty f*****g rare to begin with. taking 2 second longer in the bath to wash the kids dick ant that much of a chore.

my theory on why some of the older people in here support it is cause there parents did it to them, and they did it to there kids. same reason why the people in Africa lop off there kids clits, there mom did it to her, so she does it to her daughter. im sure deep down those who think this is ok know better, but to justify the abuse they had and the abuse they have given to there kids they have to convince them selfs this is ok. that its ok to tie a little child to a table, to get a sharp knife and start hacking away at there genitals as they cry in pain with out any pain killers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance any one?

i bet its hard to be a parent who mutilated there kids penises. its hard to accept your decision has led to irreversible harm. so instead of admitting the mistakes people try to justify it, what our culture bin doing for years. it went from masturbation is horrible to oh its cleaner, to oh it reduces aids and the always present like father like son.

our society keeps searching in the dark for reasons to justify the abuse they had and the abuse they have given there children. its a nation wide mental disorder. but every generation we get more people who stop the cycle of abuse, who realize i shoulnt be tieing my kid to a bord and paying a doctor to hack away at his body. as time goes on this abusive barbaric pratice will fade away. and it will become a laughable joke for a great great great great grand kids. who will think of us as morons for ever thinking this was a ok thing to do.

so those who bin abused, who abused there kids and promote the abuse of others, really think about it. try to see it from the other side of the fence. maybe just maybe this isn't ok, maybe this is in fact child abuse, abuse that your parents gave to you cause there parents gave them and so on and so forth, and a cycle you may or may of not continued. and if you did it to your child. its ok. you did not know better. you did not have the education needed to make an inform decision. just do the best you can to prevent it from happening to your grand kids or any other children you may have.

those who say you cant compare female to male. you are wrong. yes we can. and yes the female version is worse. but the decision making process that leads to the male and female are almost the same. its cultural tradition, it will benefit my child, the reasons they use to justify mutilation of there girls are the same we use to mutilate our boys. reason why so many people want to separate the to is cause of that reason, we see the female version as barbaric but the male version as ok. just another example of cognitive dissonance

Already posted this:

Still not a brilliant reason to use it on infants. Adults can get them when they decide.

Also, cutting my arm will reduce the chance of arm infection by 50% and will reduce a lot of the surface I have to clean. Does not mean I should do it.


So, as an adult I find condoms being a much more reliable solution that works 97% and do not include the annoyance of having people cut stuff from my penis.



Oh no! Smegma!! !! !!!111111111111111111111111111111111111111

We've been here, weren't we? The truth of the matter is that you have never experienced what it is like to have smegma in your whole life. You are in no way authoritative at all to speak about it. So, you can't argue with me on this topic. And thus I can proudly say that cleaning smegma is no more a curse than having to cut my nails.
----------------
We need to stop promoting bronze age solutions to our problems. Mild reduction in infection rates are a big deal only for people who don't use condoms. And those people are f*****g stupid.

We people from the modern age, tend to do better. Instead of cutting our hands in case of infection, we use antibiotics. Instead of wearing sheep skin to avoid pregancies we use condoms. Instead of praying to a bearded deity, we solve problems through actual science.

What I can read from your article is that there is NOTHING, that circumcision offers that is not solvable through more modern and civilized means, including : Actually cleaning your penis from time to time and using condoms when having sex with unreliable people. Cutting your penis because "god says so" is the idiotic bronze-age solution. Because bronze age people didn't have plastic or soup. Well, it sucks to be them. But really, we can do better. Much better, in fact. It is time to call things like they are. And instead of apologist scientists trying to justify the horrible actions of their parents' making studies desperately trying to find any justification, it is time to grow up. We are not cavemen any more. We don't make sheep sacrifices to a war god so that he is not angry and causes storms on us. We have grown up. So really, can you take your filthy bronze age tradition out of other people's lives? At least stop enforcing it on infants. Let them decide whether the benefits outweigh the risks or not when they are grown up.

And your article.
.

OH really?

False equivalence much?

Hey ruveyn, fun trivia bits about fingernails and hair that you may not be very experienced with: a) They grow back. b) They don't have nerves stuck strategically to make sure you receive a world of pain when they are cut.


Hey, you insist of calling your cut penis "perfected" or "improved", Unfortunately for me, it seems that I although you are allowed to brag about how your penis is better than others , I cannot use the level of profanity that would be required to rightfully bash you after this level of bigotry. Ok. Then.

Are you serious? Circumcision is done without any pain relieving medication? Wow. I just can't imagine why a parent would subject their child to such pain.

At the very least, parents should have to sit in the operating room and hear their baby shriek.

most infections will be of a less serious nature, something that is easily cured by medication, there are plenty of ways to prevent std's in the first place(i would say that that isnt really a plus, since the probablities are so low one would need better protection in a modern context anyway)

so in essence the argument is this; the reduced chance of one of the mildest types of cancer both in occurence and with respects to how treatable it is vs the trauma of people that have lost their choice and any chance at all of redeeming it, and a doctor still doesnt see any issue with it??

now that actually worries me, you often have a very good grasp of even difficult ethical debates and while i do see your point both with respect to regulation but also to the parents having the best chance at making the right choice out of a group of other people, that in the first place is the issue.

here in denmark there is a legal procedure for dealing with children and custody, no matter age a child can always be asked by a professional child behavior specialist in a controlled setting,

sure we are dealing with children, there are many things one needs to account for, the manipulation of parents most of all, something that would also be an issue in cases like this.
i dont really see why this is an argument, something as simple as reliigious confirmation can incur trauma when forced upon children.

Easy Peasy. Don't have your infant male children circumcised. Isn't that simple? What other people do for their kids is THEIR business. What you do or do not do for YOUR kids is YOUR business.

ruveyn

As a first step, can I humbly suggest the banning of traditional Jewish circumcision in favour of a surgical approach? I don't know what I find more disturbing - that there are parents who actually want their local rabbi to bite the foreskin off their child with his teeth, or that a number of children have contracted herpes because of this method.

Don't tell me it's preserving culture. Petri dishes have cultures, too.

That's a good one man! ... that was a joke right? ....Googles... well only sort of, that's great and I thought catholic priests liked them young.


So you not only want a man to cut off your kids foreskin but to suck their dick until it bleeds.
Man Ruveyn please tell me this is an ignorant troll that posted this on wikipedia. That's just wrong.

That is very old fashioned and very Eastern European. In the U.S. Orhodox mohels scrub up like surgeons and use anti-biotic powder in the operational area. They draw blood mechanically, not with the mouth with is not a hygienic thing to do. A modern Mohel also wears a mask while he is doing his thing.

ruveyn

That's a bit of a problematic position from an infectious disease perspective.

First, not all STI's are treatable--let alone curable. Our heavy reliance on antibiotics to deal with bacterial infections has created numerous drug resistant strains of various infectious agents. Tuberculosis is, of course, the most obvious--but drug resistant gonorrhea is a worsening problem. We are essentially down to only one remaining effective treatment, and there is some clinical evidence of resistance developing to that treatment, as well.

Now that's not to suggest that routine circumcision is the answer to drug-resistant STI's. But in a world in which there are many drug resistant or untreatable STI's out there, anything that can mitigate transmission rates has the potential to present public health benefits.



I think you still need to quantify the number of men that experience disorders as a result of their circumcisions. You claim, with good reason, that penile cancers are mild both with respect to their occurrence and their lethality. All well and good. But are the occurrence and impacts of circumcision trauma any greater? You imply that they are, but with no clinical evidence to suggest that this is so.

And while a child behaviour specialist is useful when dealing with a child who is verbal, the greatest health benefits are observed in men who were circumcised as infants, when there is no potential to seek a boy's input.

At the end of the day, no matter how vocal the anti-circumcision lobby is, in the absence of proper scientific evidence that the risks of infant male circumcision outweigh the benefits, I am not content to see the decision taken away from parents.

I might be persuaded otherwise at some point, but the case has not yet been made.

wrong, when parents abuse there children cps takes them away to protect them from there parents. society has always put the protection of children as a high priority, even against there parents. the well being of children comes before the desires of parents in our society.

in 1997 our society decided female genital mutilation was child abuse and the parents desires came second to the well being of the child, now we need to give that protection to the boys.