The Cruelest Cut: Capped for life at age zero

Phenom

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
1,823
# The foreskin (or prepuce) is a natural, retractile, protective covering for the glans (head) of the penis, and is the most erotogenic area of the penis in terms of the quantity, concentration, and quality of specialized nerve receptors and stretch receptors that it is endowed with, especially on its inner mucosal lining (which gets redeployed behind the glans during erection).
# The foreskin contains over 240 feet of nerves and over 1,000 nerve endings, as well as being a highly vascularized structure.
# The foreskin contains “junctional mucosa that appear to be an important component of the overall sensory mechanism of the human penis”
–J. R. Taylor et al. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision.
# The foreskin is not vestigial or redundant tissue, in that no other part of the male body does what the foreskin does, or feels what the foreskin feels.
# The foreskin serves to protect the glans, thereby maintaining the glans-surface’s naturally-intended thinness, texture, and sensitivity.
# The foreskin has rich sensations in and of itself. The foreskin also plays a mechanical-lubrication role. It serves as a gliding sheath during masturbation or sexual activity, rendering the quality of the friction between the man and his partner more gentle, less abrasive. This is useful to the woman, especially with prolonged intercourse and especially with age, when she provides less liquid lubrication. With circumcision, this natural gliding mechanism is lost.
# According to a comprehensive recent study, infant responses to pain are “similar to but greater than those observed in adult subjects.”
# Infant circumcision causes severe, persistent pain.
# Some infants do not cry because they go into shock from the overwhelming pain of the surgery.
# Infants rarely receive anaesthesia or post-operative pain management.
# The fact that the foreskin in infancy is usually non-retractile serves to protect the baby’s glans penis from urine and feces during the period that he is incontinent.
# An estimated minimum of 1.3 to 6.6 million males born in the U.S. between 1940 and 1990 carry some degree of physical complication from infant circumcision. Unknown numbers carry some form of sexual or psychological complication.
# Circumcision constitutes a subtraction, removing one- to two-thirds of the penile skin system.
# Long-term possible adverse outcomes (physical) include: skin tags; skin bridges; prominent scarring (keloid scar formation); tight, painful erections; bleeding of the circumcision scar during prolonged intercouse (constituting an efficient portal of entry for HIV among other viruses); penile curvature due to uneven skin loss; skin tone variance; progressive sensitivity loss (progressive keratinization of the glans-surface); excessive/painful stimulation or prolonged exaggerated thrusting needed to achieve orgasm; beveling deformities of the glans.
# Adverse outcomes of a psychological nature that have been reported and documented include: sexual dysfunction of various forms and degrees, including impotence; awareness of a loss of normal protective, sensory, and mechanical functioning; anger, resentment; feelings of parental petrayal; feeling (awareness) of being mutilated; feelings (awareness) of one’s right to a normal intact body having been violated and removed; feelings (awareness) of being unwhole and unnatural; addictions or dependencies; sense of anatomical and sexual inferiority to genitally intact (non-circumcised) men; foreskin (or intact penis) envy.
http://www.infocirc.org/facts.htm

Circumcision Removes the Most Sensitive Parts of the Penis
Circumcision Policy Influenced by Psychosocial Factors
Circumcision Affects Sexual Behavior
Traumatic Effects of Circumcision
Survey Finds Circumcision Contributes to Vaginal Dryness
rcumcised Penis Requires More Care in Young Boys
Male Circumcision Affects Female Sexual Enjoyment
Male Circumcision and Psychosexual Effects Investigated
Foreskin Reduces the Force Required for Penetration and Increases Comfort
Early Adverse Experiences May Lead to Abnormal Brain Development and Behavior
http://www.circumcision.org/studies.htm

Someone cutting and stealing your life's most valued possession at age zero in the name of religion
Who here would support or allow people to circumcise their children in the name of religion?

Should this act be stopped & baned, made illegal, or should we continue to respect peoples religions and thus allow babies to be sliced?
 
Last edited:

The_Unbeliever

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
103,196
Should male and female circumcision under the age of 18 not be made illegal?!

I think so, yes.

Let the child decide, not you. After all, it's his body, not yours.

I was debating with myself on how to broach this subject with my SU, but now I will suggest to my SU that we wait a while before making a decision.
 

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
8,936
In males, circumcision, has a lot of benefits, it is not all negative.
And those of you with children, think again, it reduces the risk of a number of issues and health problems.

Lack of circumcision:

Is responsible for a 12-fold higher risk of urinary tract infections. Risk = 1 in 20.
Confers a higher risk of death in the first year of life (from complications of urinary tract infections: viz. kidney failure, meningitis and infection of bone marrow).
One in ~400-900 uncircumcised men will get cancer of the penis. A quarter of these will die from it and the rest will require at least partial penile amputation as a result. (In contrast, invasive penile cancer never occurs or is infinitesimally rare in men circumcised at birth.) (Data from studies in the USA, Denmark and Australia, which are not to be confused with the often quoted, but misleading, annual incidence figures of 1 in 100,000).
Is associated with balanitis (inflammation of the glans), posthitis (inflammation of the foreskin), phimosis (inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (constriction of the penis by a tight foreskin). Up to 18% of uncircumcised boys will develop one of these by 8 years of age, whereas all are unknown in the circumcised. Risk of balanoposthitis = 1 in 6. Obstruction to urine flow = 1 in 10-50.
Means increased risk of problems that may necessitate circumcision later in life. Also, the cost can be 10 times higher for an adult.
Is the biggest risk factor for heterosexually-acquired AIDS virus infection in men. 8-times higher risk by itself, and even higher when lesions from STIs are added in. Risk per exposure = 1 in 300.
In the female partners of uncircumcised men is associated with higher incidence of cervical cancer, pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility from blockage of fallopian tubes, extopic pregnancy, genital herpes, and other conditions.


Getting circumcised will result in:

Having to go through a very minor surgical procedure that carries with it small risks.
Improved hygiene.
Much lower risk of urinary tract infections.
Much lower chance of acquiring AIDS heterosexually.
Virtually complete elimination of the risk of invasive penile cancer.
More favourable hygiene for the man's sexual partner.
More favorable sexual function.
A penis that is regarded by most as being more attractive.

Personally i opt for Cicumcision, healthy , cleaner, and good looking :D
 

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
8,936
Physical sensitivity is not the same thing as the experience of sexual pleasure. The first measure refers to the observable ways your body responds to external stimulation, the second measure refers to the way you subjectively experience that stimulation.
Unlike knowing the number of nerve endings on a penis, or the physiological changes associated with sexual response, sexual pleasure is a subjective experience that incorporates physical, psychological, emotional, and at times spiritual components.
Sexual pleasure is gained from many different regions of the body, not exclusively only the penis, so cut or uncut, is really not a big deal except from a point of health.
All the sex aids i have ever seen, in adult shops, always represent the circumcised penis, never the the uncircumcised. If it was the other way around , surely the pleasure product would depict the uncircumcised Penis, as there would be a greater demand.

The health of the Child is more important than the parents aversion.

http://www.circinfo.net/

http://www.circinfo.com/questions/qga.html
 

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
8,340
In males, circumcision, has a lot of benefits, it is not all negative.
And those of you with children, think again, it reduces the risk of a number of issues and health problems.

Lack of circumcision:

Is responsible for a 12-fold higher risk of urinary tract infections. Risk = 1 in 20.
Confers a higher risk of death in the first year of life (from complications of urinary tract infections: viz. kidney failure, meningitis and infection of bone marrow).
One in ~400-900 uncircumcised men will get cancer of the penis. A quarter of these will die from it and the rest will require at least partial penile amputation as a result. (In contrast, invasive penile cancer never occurs or is infinitesimally rare in men circumcised at birth.) (Data from studies in the USA, Denmark and Australia, which are not to be confused with the often quoted, but misleading, annual incidence figures of 1 in 100,000).
Is associated with balanitis (inflammation of the glans), posthitis (inflammation of the foreskin), phimosis (inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (constriction of the penis by a tight foreskin). Up to 18% of uncircumcised boys will develop one of these by 8 years of age, whereas all are unknown in the circumcised. Risk of balanoposthitis = 1 in 6. Obstruction to urine flow = 1 in 10-50.
Means increased risk of problems that may necessitate circumcision later in life. Also, the cost can be 10 times higher for an adult.
Is the biggest risk factor for heterosexually-acquired AIDS virus infection in men. 8-times higher risk by itself, and even higher when lesions from STIs are added in. Risk per exposure = 1 in 300.
In the female partners of uncircumcised men is associated with higher incidence of cervical cancer, pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility from blockage of fallopian tubes, extopic pregnancy, genital herpes, and other conditions.

Quote:
Getting circumcised will result in:

Having to go through a very minor surgical procedure that carries with it small risks.
Improved hygiene.
Much lower risk of urinary tract infections.
Much lower chance of acquiring AIDS heterosexually.
Virtually complete elimination of the risk of invasive penile cancer.
More favourable hygiene for the man's sexual partner.
More favorable sexual function.
A penis that is regarded by most as being more attractive.

Personally i opt for Cicumcision, healthy , cleaner, and good looking :D

Most of those have been completely disproved ages ago; they're still happily quoted by some people though.

Either way, it should be no more legal than cutting off your child's hands because their fingernails are dirty.

If you want to have it done to yourself when you're 18 or older, fine; but it should be illegal to do it to your children. I see no reason for religious exemptions either.
 

Oberon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2005
Messages
72
There may well be a case for male circumcision in cases where there is some deformity of the foreskin itself, where there is pain or real problems which circumcision would improve. But in most other cases I think it's unnecessary.

Saying that circumcision cures many potential health problems is missing the point somewhat. It's too much of a blanket practice where more specific treatment would be more appropriate, *if* a problem arises.

Perhaps a "partial circumcision" would be better, if you *must* do it. That means to cut off only the very end, providing a far less obstructed path for the urine, but still retaining most of the useful functions of the foreskin.

I also think that saying having a foreskin is "worse" for hygiene is sad. It obviously means that boys/men aren't told that they have to keep it clean under there and thus hygiene problems can arise. It's better for you and your partner if you keep it clean, but since so many men didn't have a foreskin to start with, they probably don't know what to tell their son(s) if they weren't cut.

So how's this for a preventative "cure": Teach proper hygiene. Don't cut off body parts!
 
Last edited:

Necuno

Court Jester
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
58,567
theres the whole zulu/xhosa thing too - allot of mindless youths get killed every year on the 'becoming a man' trip or snippering...
 

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
8,936
Personally i find female cicumcision deplorable and barbaric, but male circumcision, is an entirely different thing altogether.
The entire reason the child is circumcised at the age that they are, is to ensure that physically they recover and heal quickly with minimal trauma, and with no long lasting effect.
In Western countries, with medicine the way it is, it is quick , easy and simple.
Those of you who advocate making it choice, I dare you to go through it at the ages that you are now, and see what its like, -- 3 weeks minimum recovery, 1-3 months no sex, and pray you dont get a morning glory in that time, it will make you cry with pain.
Go have it done , then come back and say it was better as an adult, than as a child.

Benefits of circumcision

Eliminates the risk of phimosis, which affects 1 in 10 older boys and men. This condition refers to a tight foreskin that cannot be pulled back fully, so making cleaning under it, and passing urine, difficult. Phimosis also greatly increases the risk of penile cancer, and is the cause of foreskin and catheter problems in nursing homes.

Reduces by 3-fold the risk of inflammation and infection of the skin of the penis. One in 10 uncircumcised men get inflammation of the head of the penis, which is covered by the foreskin. This rises to 1 in 3 if the uncircumcised man is diabetic. (Diabetic men also have other severe problems.) In contrast only 2% of circumcised men get this condition.

Over 10-fold decrease in risk of urinary tract infection. Whereas risk of this is only 1 in 500 for a circumcised boy; 1 in 50 uncircumcised male infants will get a urinary tract infection. This very painful condition is particularly dangerous in infancy, and in 40% of cases can lead to kidney inflammation and disease; sepsis and meningitis can also result.

Over 20-fold decrease in risk of invasive penile cancer, which has a high fatality rate. One in 600 uncircumcised men get penile cancer, which often requires penile amputation.

Uncircumcised men have 1.5 * 2 times the risk of prostate cancer, which affects 1 in 6 men.

Reduces by approximately 3-fold the risk of getting HIV (AIDS), during sex with an infected woman. HIV enters via the vulnerable inner lining of the foreskin of a healthy penis, but can also infect via sores anywhere on the penis (caused for example by genital herpes). In countries such as Australia that have a low prevalence of HIV the risk of a heterosexual man being infected with HIV sexually is generally low. His risk, especially if uncircumcised, will be much greater if he engages in unsafe sex with people of countries in which HIV abounds.

Circumcision also affords substantial protection against sexually transmitted infections such as papilloma (wart) virus, syphilis and chancroid.

Circumcision reduces by up to 5 times the risk of the man's female partner being infected by chlamydia or getting cervical cancer (which is caused by human papilloma virus). The load of infectious bacteria and viruses that accumulate under the foreskin is delivered into the female genital tract during sex. Chlamydia has more than doubled over the past 5 years in Australia and can cause infertility (in both sexes), pelvic inflammatory disease, and ectopic pregnancy.

If not circumcised soon after birth, up to 10% will later require one anyway for medical reasons.

Credible research shows that most women prefer the appearance of the circumcised penis. They also prefer it for sexual activity. Hygiene is one reason.

There is no significant difference in sensitivity of a circumcised and uncircumcised penis.

In general, sexual function is the same or better.
Risks of circumcision

For 1 in 500 circumcisions there may be either a little bleeding * easily stopped by pressure or, less commonly, requiring stitches (1 in 1000), the need for repeat surgery (1 in 1000), or a generalized infection that will require antibiotics (1 in 4000). Although there can be a local infection, often what seems like a local infection is actually part of the normal healing process.
Serious complications (requiring hospitalization) are rare * approximately 1 in 5000.

Mutilation or loss of the penis, and death, is virtually unheard of with circumcisions performed by a competent medical practitioner. Ensure your doctor is experienced.

If a bleeding disorder such as haemophilia runs in the family, then the doctor needs to be advised as circumcision may require special preoperative treatment.

Anaesthetic is imperative, preferably a local, since a general anaesthetic carries risks, and is unnecessary. For age 0-4 months a local, not general, and for older children or teenagers a mild sedative might be considered in addition to the local. Young children who wriggle can be gently restrained. For pain after the anaesthetic wears off, an oral analgaesic medication is often prescribed.

Delay means stitches being used for circumcision of older children, teenagers and men.

So if circumcision is delayed past 4 months, total cost will become increasingly greater.

In conclusion
Circumcision confers a lifetime of medical benefits. 1 in 3 uncircumcised boys will develop a condition requiring medical attention. This means various degrees of suffering and, in rare cases, death. In contrast, risk of an easily-treatable condition is 1 in 500, and of a true complication is 1 in 5000. A successful circumcision is very unlikely to have any long-term adverse consequences.

Thus, benefits exceed moderate risks by over a hundred to one!

Brian Morris
is a Professor in the School of Medical Sciences at the University of Sydney, where he has taught medicine and science students since 1978.
http://www.circinfo.com/parents_guide/gfp.html

Women's Preferences for Penile Circumcision In Sexual Partners
http://www.geocities.com/hotsprings/2754/womenpref.html

Acceptability of male circumcision and predictors of circumcision preference among men and women in Nyanza Province, Kenya
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=16404913
 

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
89,382
No, bwana, that's not what i said, According to the Christian view:
I quoted exactly what you said. Here it is again
mr TB is Jewish?, Christians may not allow their selves to be circumcised.

EDIT - I see you chose not to address the clear refutation of your claim that circumcision doesnt help prevent HIV/AIDS
The United Nations has formally acknowledged that male circumcision cuts the risk of contracting HIV by up to 60 per cent for heterosexual men.
60% is considerable bit more than "a slight preventive effect"
 
Last edited:

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
8,340

Half (or 60% or whatever) sounds very impressive, until you look at the actual *numbers*. In the Orange farm study here in SA, of the men who contracted HIV, it was 0.7% of the total who were circumcised and 1.6% who were not. Tiny damn absolute percentages over 2 years.

There are some other issues with the studies too. For example, the Orange Farm study was terminated early; strangely, the rate of circumcised men contracting HIV was catching up later on in the study.

Despite all the crowing press releases, none of these AIDS/circumcision studies have been published in any scientific journals. Lancet actually refused to publish the Orange Farm study. And you'll find the same couple of guys behind these studies - Bailey and Halperin.

And finally, the HIV studies are completely irrelevant with regard to infant circumcision anyway; if adults want to do it to themselves and risk HIV by not using a condom, that's their business.
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
64,307
In males, circumcision, has a lot of benefits, it is not all negative.
And those of you with children, think again, it reduces the risk of a number of issues and health problems.






Personally i opt for Cicumcision, healthy , cleaner, and good looking :D

I accidentaly stumped on to this thread.. I never post here and prob. won't again.

I have to say this.

If you're saying it's good to have the little guy capped for what ever reason, your going agains the fact that you've been created in mirror image of GOD.

That being said. You then say that GOD's creation has a flaw ?

Sorry guys... It should be banned and let the child decide after age 18.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
23,338
I don't think it should be done unless there is a good, immediate, medical reason. However you can't equate it to female circumcision or cutting off a hand. What is done to girls in primitive countries should not even be referred to by the same term.

Whether or not male circumcision has any significant effect on sex looks like pure conjecture.
 

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
8,340
Those of you who advocate making it choice, I dare you to go through it at the ages that you are now, and see what its like, -- 3 weeks minimum recovery, 1-3 months no sex, and pray you dont get a morning glory in that time, it will make you cry with pain.
Go have it done , then come back and say it was better as an adult, than as a child.

Big difference. As an adult, you get full anaesthetic; in the US, only about 50% of infants get any pain medication, and most of the time any is given, it's EMLA cream, which is next to useless. Adults get pain medication afterwards for as long as they need it. Infants don't, they just get to experience a raw wound in their diaper; they can't even tell you when it hurts. If there are complications, adults can easily go back to the urologist; infant complications often don't get noticed.

As for the surgery itself: infants are typically circumcised by medical interns or by obstetricians who have to deal with tiny baby genitals, and guess what it'll be like in 20 years time; adult circumcisions are typically done by urologists, experts in male anatomy, and there's no guesswork involved.

As an adult, you are aware of the procedure, and you've given consent. As an infant, you gave no consent, and if you didn't like the decision someone else made for you, that's tough, because without your consent something has been taken away that you'll never get back.
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
64,307
Big difference. As an adult, you get full anaesthetic; in the US, only about 50% of infants get any pain medication, and most of the time any is given, it's EMLA cream, which is next to useless. Adults get pain medication afterwards for as long as they need it. Infants don't, they just get to experience a raw wound in their diaper; they can't even tell you when it hurts. If there are complications, adults can easily go back to the urologist; infant complications often don't get noticed.

As for the surgery itself: infants are typically circumcised by medical interns or by obstetricians who have to deal with tiny baby genitals, and guess what it'll be like in 20 years time; adult circumcisions are typically done by urologists, experts in male anatomy, and there's no guesswork involved.

As an adult, you are aware of the procedure, and you've given consent. As an infant, you gave no consent, and if you didn't like the decision someone else made for you, that's tough, because without your consent something has been taken away that you'll never get back.

It not reversable.. How can you choose on behalf of another human being who has to live with your choice ?

I agree with you 100 %
 
Top