Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Belle Rose on February 22, 2013 at 1:42am

Oh yah, and to address your concern about women thinking an uncircumcised penis is ugly, I call bullshit. Besides, it's all in how you use it, LOL!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on February 22, 2013 at 9:37am

I've been told that oral sex is more appetizing when one doesn't have to pull the loose skin down only possibly to be confronted with smegma (a paste consisting of a combination of sweat, dead skin, and whatever microbes may have been breeding in that matrix).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by john mcdonald on February 22, 2013 at 10:37am

I saw a circumcision in Israel some years ago, blood was everywhere, the baby was howling apoplectically, the dude doing the chopping was in religious bliss, what a circus. I am not circumcised. I was brought up in Britain. One is not circumcised by default in the UK. It only occurs by special request in the UK. When my son was born 25 years ago in the U.S., multiple times I had to fend off nurses attempting to get my newborn son in the system for his circumcision. Now, I don't really care if he looks like me or not, or has good oral sex or not. I did care that when he turns 18, he has all his body parts intact, and if he wants to start whacking off parts of his body at the age of consent, well, if I did my job he should be able to make an informed decision by the age of 18. Well, he's 26 now, and still has a foreskin. So...bottom line, at least for my son, he preferred to keep all of his body parts. Something tells me, most males, if given a choice, would opt for not getting chopped up.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mallory on February 22, 2013 at 7:01pm

There's no law that says circumcision can only occur in infancy.  Let the kid decide for himself when he's thirteen.

Think about it rationally - you are cutting off part of your son's body, and as much as 70% of his sexually sensitive nerve endings in the interests of improving his hygine, and altering the appearance of his genitalia.

The risks may be miniscule, but it's an unnecessary procedure, which could result in the complete destruction of his penis, and his hopes for a normal life. It's rare, but infections, accidents, and malfunctioning cautary equipment do destroy a few penises each year - even under modern western sterile conditions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on February 22, 2013 at 8:13pm

Not only that, but it REALLY smarts!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pope OoO (Out of Order) on February 22, 2013 at 10:42pm

Wow, 35 pages was quite a read. Felt like a 2 season marathon.

Heather I thought I remembered you saying you're not a sciency person, but you did pretty well here.

I'm cut, wish I wasn't, but it's not a big deal. I would have chosen No for a boy if I had one, i.e. his choice, later in life. I liked seeing both sides of the story here. My only criticism (as in many forum discussions) is how some people feel so strongly about their side, that they generalize their opinion to a one-size-fits-all "everyone should... blah blah". I personally think the default should be to leave the choice open to the kid, unless the unlikely infections become likely and do cause a problem.

And vaccinate.

This thread should be relevant for several more years, at least in the U.S.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Heather Spoonheim on February 22, 2013 at 10:54pm

I've never claimed that I'm not sciency - I've simply claimed that I'm not an actual scientist and do not feel that my failure to believe in fairy tales should require my having to prove scientific theories.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on April 17, 2013 at 1:16pm

I realize this is an old topic, but I misplaced the URL to a site that responds thoroughly and definitively to this issue, which I've now recovered, and would be remiss if I did not share it with any who might have an interest.

Sagacious Hawk, not trying to play matchmaker here, but the blog in question is written by a "Sagacious Mama" (I'm just sayin' --), and can be found here:

http://sagaciousmama.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/20-reasons-i-did-not-...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on April 17, 2013 at 2:40pm

It's more entertaining (imo) paired with rebuttal and subsequent exchange:
http://circumcisionnews.blogspot.ca/2010/04/20-reasons-revisited.html

Also interesting that there was a link provided to a class action suit:
http://www.sueeasy.com/class_action_detail.php?case_id=258

The comments range from people who seem like they should be filing individual malpractice suits to seemingly frivolous or misdirected claims.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dr.Grixis on April 17, 2013 at 3:34pm

That website is a bit weird indeed, still, i find any malpractice resulting from a unnecessary cultural practice that removes an intact part of the body a very sad thing indeed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on April 17, 2013 at 4:13pm

On the whole, I agree, unless or course, the doctor actually botched the job, and I read one account in which that may well have been the case. I don't know how successful such a lawsuit would be, but other than an actual malpracticing doctor, the parents are the ones who should be named as defendants.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jorita on April 17, 2013 at 5:59pm

At age two my son had to be circumcised because of medical problems, it was a horrible op he had 9 stitches "dissolving stitches" 5 years after the op we were still taking stitches out that did not dissolve. After this I would not do it again unless there is a medical problem.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 33
• 34
• 35
• 36
• 37
• Next ›
• Page