Quote:
Originally Posted by pylon
LOL, anteaters are always the ones that are all butthurt when any circumcision debate is brought up. Personally I think it is a needless practice. But.... ask any woman that isn't involved with you sexually, what they prefer to get in 'close contact' with, and 90% of them will ewwwwwwwww at the wind sock.
Chicks prefer the helmet. "It isn't as juicy." is what one girlfriend said to me... which made me laugh....then gag till I puked.
|
Ha ha ha "anteaters". That's great!
You can ask women but in reality it really doesn't matter once it comes down to the deed. Women "think" that this is what they want because that's what they have been told since circumcision has been practiced. And any juicy dink that exists is just someone who doesn't wash. Women have the EXACT same bio down there so they can get just a "juicy" and when they are I ship them off to Mr. Shower the juicy exterminator.
Alberta continues to show that it is still the leader of the "backwards thinking Province in Canada".
"Canada
Wirth showed a pattern of declining incidence of circumcision from 1970 to 1979. There was a wide variation in the incidence of circumcision between with Yukon Territory reported a rate of 74.8 percent in 1978-79 while Newfoundland reported an incidence of 1.9 to 2.4 percent in 1977-78.
[19]
In 1994/95, the newborn circumcision rate in Ontario was 299.1 per thousand or 29.9%.
[20] The
Canadian Paediatric Society (1996) offered an estimate of 48 percent for the prevalence of male circumcision in Canada in 1970.
[21] In 1999, the
American Academy of Pediatrics reported that “in Canada, ~48% of males are circumcised”.
[22] However, this figure was questioned because the only citation provided for it was an Australian paper dating from 1970.
[23]
Articles published in 2003 reported Canadian neonatal male circumcision rates of "10 to 30%"
[24] and "less than 17%".
[25] According to the
Halifax Daily News, the infant circumcision rate in 2003 was "just 1.1 per cent" in Nova Scotia and nil in Newfoundland.
[26] A 2006 article placed the (2003) national rate at 13.9%.
[27]
Individual Canadian provincial health insurance plans began to delist circumcision in the 1980s.
[25] Manitoba Health Insurance Plan discontinued coverage of circumcision in 2005.
[28] Circumcision is not covered by any provincial/territorial health insurance plan.
[28]
A survey of Canadian maternity practices conducted in 2006/2007 by the national public health agency found a newborn circumcision rate of 31.9%.
[29] Rates varied markedly across the country, from close to zero in Newfoundland and Labrador to 44.3% in Alberta."
Page 267
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/rhs-ssg/pdf/tab-eng.pdf