The Cruelest Cut: Capped for life at age zero

[Neo]

This whole line of argument is pointless - unless you undergo circumcision or I have a reversal neither of us can possibly argue from a position of understanding.

You grew up circumcised, remember. You never got a choice so you live with the decision made for you. That's cool.

I think the more pertinent questions are;

- How many male forumites intend to undergo the operation?
- How many have had themselves circumcised as adults?
- How many wish they were snipped as babies?

If it's a significant number we can argue it should be considered for newborns. If not, they were violated.

 

[nthdimension]

The number of nerve endings apparently lost is regularly bandied about, but how does that number compare to the total nerve endings in the body?

Is sex really better uncircumcised or just different?

I'm plenty sensitive, but for me there is a lot more to it than genital sensitivity. Maybe having this small piece of highly sensitive skin makes uncircumcised men more penis-oriented.

 

[noxibox]

I dont know how to respond to this. Its a little scary that you find mutilation acceptable... but I suppose its a culture thing.

I don't think it is a matter of finding it acceptable, but arguing against it being treated as the equal of the mutilation of girls that also gets referred to as circumcision. I don't think there are grounds for routinely circumcising boys, especially when the reason it became common in the US is apparently because they believed it would prevent masturbation. Typical puritan nutcases. On the other hand I don't see much to support the claim that any significant number of boys have been seriously physically or psychologically harmed by the practice. It is not even in the same league as girls who have had most or nearly all of their external genitalia removed.

Because male circumcision is obviously unnecessary surgery it isn't something that should be done to children for religious or aesthetic reasons.

 

[noxibox]

Regarding hygiene a common excuse given by schools for why boys are not allowed to have long hair like girls is that boys can't be relied upon to keep it neat and clean. That and other things like not allowing boys to wear jewellery are in essence sexist. This sexism extends into workplace dress codes.

 

[.geek]

If it's a significant number we can argue it should be considered for newborns. If not, they were violated.

I'm sure adults can speak for themselves as to whether or not they were "violated".

 

[.geek]

And this also extends to circumcision, But all ok(in those two forumites who support it) to spoil the rest of the boys one and only sex life and possible put him in a lifelong truma or possibly cause brain damage.

LOL. Brain damage?

 

[Claymore]

What is unacceptable is FGM - which is clearly a far cry from male circumcision.

There are various grades of FGM, ranging from a mere nick on the clitoris to full excision and infibulation.

In most Western countries, even the former will get you a jail sentence; however, Orthodox Jewish Metzitzah, which involves the mohel circumcising a boy and sucking the blood from the penis with his mouth is quite acceptable.

 

[bwana]

And this also extends to circumcision, But all ok(in those two forumites who support it) to spoil the rest of the boys one and only sex life and possible put him in a lifelong truma or possibly cause brain damage.

What I support is the right of the parent to chose. Did I, or anyone say that boys must undergo circumcision?

I'm a parent and just like every other parent I have to make decisions that will have long lasting effects on their well being and to be honest the foreskin, despite your odd obsession with it, just doesn't rank highly. I've somehow managed to escape possible brain damage and trauma and my "one and only sex life" has been spectacular.

You made me think of an old joke . . . what's the useless piece of skin at the end of a penis called? . . . You.

 

[Pitbull]

"one and only sex life" has been spectacular.

I have it about 4 times a week

/Just joking .. Chill guys

 

[Claymore]

What I support is the right of the parent to chose. Did I, or anyone say that boys must undergo circumcision?

I'm a parent and just like every other parent I have to make decisions that will have long lasting effects on their well being and to be honest the foreskin, despite your odd obsession with it, just doesn't rank highly. I've somehow managed to escape possible brain damage and trauma and my "one and only sex life" has been spectacular.

What if you insist your son is circumcised, and in 20 years' time, he comes to you and tells you he didn't want it done? What recourse do you have then?

Or worse, what if your son happens to be one of the percentage of boys to suffer circumcision complications, like David Reimer? How the hell can you explain that to them (assuming the "complication" wasn't death)?

 

[bwana]

@Orangeman - dont shout - it's really quite unnecessary.

You don't own your children, they own them selves

You're not a parent are you. All that they "own themselves" is mighty noble but it flies straight out the window the very first time you lay your eyes on them. They're my responsibility plain and simple.

Or worse, what if your son happens to be one of the percentage of boys to suffer circumcision complications, like David Reimer? How the hell can you explain that to them (assuming the "complication" wasn't death)?

What percentage are cases like the unfortunate David Reimer?

Anyhow - you're all entitled to your opinions. Said my peace and I'm done.

 

[noxibox]

But all ok(in those two forumites who support it) to spoil the rest of the boys one and only sex life and possible put him in a lifelong truma or possibly cause brain damage.

So far no-one has put forward any real evidence that it spolis someone's sexual experiences. I'm neither convinced that the surgery is particularly traumatic for the child nor that there is any brain damage.

 

[Claymore]

What percentage are cases like the unfortunate David Reimer?

Pretty small - but taking a chance like that *for no reason* seems a little daft to me. Of course, there are less severe complications too - those range from 2 to 20%, depending on what you class as "complications". And that's not counting the 100% rate of loss - that of the most sensitive part of the male body.

 

[Claymore]

So far no-one has put forward any real evidence that it spolis someone's sexual experiences.

Sexual pleasure is very subjective, so I'm sure that most people are perfectly happy with what they have. That said, losing so much sensitive genital tissue and the functionality that goes with it sure as hell can't be an improvement!

I'm neither convinced that the surgery is particularly traumatic for the child nor that there is any brain damage.

Want to view some video clips of the procedure?

 

[nthdimension]

That said, losing so much sensitive genital tissue and the functionality that goes with it sure as hell can't be an improvement!

You don't know that it is a lesser experience. It may be different. Maybe those who are uncircumcised are getting a lesser experience. Maybe removal of excessively sensitive skin causes the rest of the organ to compensate. Maybe circumcised men are less focussed on their penis as a source of pleasure. Not even the experience of every uncircumcised male can be the same because the foreskin varies so much in size and probably in sensitivity.

What is happening is that anti-circumcision campaigners are causing psychological harm by convincing circumcised men that their lives have been ruined.

 

[Pitbull]

Hold the truck.

Either i missed something or I don't know.

The sensitive part is the "Head". Now I would assume that the head of a circumcised man becomes hard and dry ? Am I correct ?

Based on that it would take some of the feeling away wouldn't it ?

 

[nthdimension]

The sensitive part is the "Head". Now I would assume that the head of a circumcised man becomes hard and dry ? Am I correct ?

Yes it does dry out, but the body is adaptable so maybe the nerves increase their sensitivity to compensate. Maybe the drop in sensitivity is minimal.

From what I have read those who would like to restore the glans can slowly stretch out the skin so that it once again covers it.

 

[bwana]

Hold the truck.

Either i missed something or I don't know.

The sensitive part is the "Head". Now I would assume that the head of a circumcised man becomes hard and dry ? Am I correct ?

Based on that it would take some of the feeling away wouldn't it ?

ROFL. I didn't want to get drawn back into this but no, it doesn't - it doesnt harden up like like a fingertip or the heal of your foot. Also, there is an abundance of sensitivity.

 

[Neo]

ROFL. I didn't want to get drawn back into this but........

You pulled out prematurely?

 

[bwana]

You pulled out prematurely?

Touché