Circumcision, why is this a thing...

[Cain]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Why do you guys have such strong opinions on this?

It seems pretty inconsequential to me.

To answer honestly I think I find the disconnect regarding it the most troubling. I know there are many people functioning just fine as adults/humans who are circumcised and thus it may seem to be a minor issue (and perhaps it is as a whole) but the justification for it I find lacking.

I think that opinions come out a bit stronger in something like this because it is so divided. Nobody speaks out as strongly against things that are universally condemned because there is nobody else to win over. Everyone just quietly agrees that it is terrible.

I find the divide interesting. I find the reasoning and justification tough to stomach, probably even more than the act itself.

[Cain]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Actually it is. Given average levels of hygiene there are more infections causing medical intervention with uncircumcised males. You do the typical best case scenario in your arguments. That's not the average or mean in any argument much less this one.

Yes, of course there will be more issues, but that is like saying that someone with more fingers is more prone to getting an ingrown nail.

These issues don't necessitate lopping off the entire foreskin nor fingers in the previous example. Nobody is arguing that a medically needed circumcision is a bad thing, just that it shouldn't be the default position.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Cain

Yes, of course there will be more issues, but that is like saying that someone with more fingers is more prone to getting an ingrown nail.

These issues don't necessitate lopping off the entire foreskin nor fingers in the previous example. Nobody is arguing that a medically needed circumcision is a bad thing, just that it shouldn't be the default position.

I respect that you have your opinion. But your counter arguments are absolutely ridiculous.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Cain

To answer honestly I think I find the disconnect regarding it the most troubling. I know there are many people functioning just fine as adults/humans who are circumcised and thus it may seem to be a minor issue (and perhaps it is as a whole) but the justification for it I find lacking.

I think that opinions come out a bit stronger in something like this because it is so divided. Nobody speaks out as strongly against things that are universally condemned because there is nobody else to win over. Everyone just quietly agrees that it is terrible.

I find the divide interesting. I find the reasoning and justification tough to stomach, probably even more than the act itself.

I agree with you, but the act itself is repugnant. Lopping off a sensitive piece of genitalia against someone's will? WTF.

[Cain]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You let me know when breast enlargement on infant female children is a thing and maybe then we can have a rational discussion comparing it to circumcision.

I don't think we have to wait until that point to discuss that performing a permanent medical removal of a body part is unnecessary when it is justified by the perceived sexual preferences of imagined partners down the road over a decade later.

It was an example. A ridiculous one, yes, but one that relied on the same logic.

[troutman]

So you know - when it is done as a young adult, it is a day surgery (they put you out). You would be home for a day or two, then can return to most of your routine. Swelling is gone in about 6 weeks.

[Cain]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

I respect that you have your opinion. But your counter arguments are absolutely ridiculous.

I respect yours too friend, but realize the arguments for doing it seem just as ridiculous to me.

[calf]

We didn't with our son, and are really glad we didn't as the benefits seemed to not outweigh the risks. Just seemed like an unnecessary hassle, and it doesn't take much effort at all to clean.

A few months after the procedure could have been done, after developing mystery bruises, he was diagnosed with a condition where his blood doesn't clot. The condition runs in most families, but we had no family history and no clue it was there for a few months. For families without a history, circumcision is usually where it is discovered/diagnosed, but not before significant, potentially life threatening blood loss.

The vast, vast majority of boys don't have the same risks of course (talking 1:5000 odds), but for our anecdote, we certainly dodged a bullet, and our decision definitely would have remained the same.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Why do you guys have such strong opinions on this?

It seems pretty inconsequential to me.

Men's lives revolve around their dicks.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by troutman

So you know - when it is done as a young adult, it is a day surgery (they put you out). You would be home for a day or two, then can return to most of your routine. Swelling is gone in about 6 weeks.

Also known as the age of constant, uncontrollable boners. Sounds like 6 weeks of hell.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Cain

Yes, of course there will be more issues, but that is like saying that someone with more fingers is more prone to getting an ingrown nail.

These issues don't necessitate lopping off the entire foreskin nor fingers in the previous example. Nobody is arguing that a medically needed circumcision is a bad thing, just that it shouldn't be the default position.

Ok but it's not the default position. It's a choice parents make. I don't think it's even covered under universal health care in Canada. Fewer parents chose to do it every year.



The fact is there are medical benefits to male circumcision. There is no loss of sexual sensation and very little risk or medical complications. Literally the opposite of all that is true with female circumcision.



You can disagree with any of that but arguing that male circumcision is a cruel human rights violation akin to what females go trough is just weird.

[stang]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

I think some of my family reads this so warning, I'm about to talk about my wiener:

I don't remember mine, it caused me no pain that I was consciously aware of, and it doesn't traumatize me or cause me to think that my parents mutilated me. In my opinion the "inhumane" argument not really a realistic argument. It's all I've ever known so it's not like I know what I'm missing out on, and it still works just fine. I don't know anyone who has been caused anguish one way or the other about it.

Chop it off or don't, who cares? I don't think it's nearly as evil as some of you do.

That being said, I had to get mine done in my early 20's due to medical reasons. I was aware of it, It sucked, and I was in pain for a while after. I remember it as well.

I wish i had mine done when I was a baby.

[kevman]

Circumcision is becoming less and less popular around the world. Justify it all you want but it's a dying practice based largely in religion. Progressive nations around the world show lower rates of circumcision than non-progressive nations. This trend is even seen regionally within Canada and the US.

If the best argument for circumcision is "the risks and benefits are largely neutral", why bother?

[JohnnyB]

People don't remember the pain they experienced as a baby after they've grown up, so pain inflicted upon babies is pretty much ethically fine. You can pinch, poke and cut babies any time and know there's nothing wrong about their pain in the moment because they won't remember it later. The same can be applied to animals that don't really have memories. Their pain just really doesn't matter, so we can treat them however we like.

[CroFlames]

To me it's mostly interesting how an ancient religious ritual designed to differentiate religious groups and/or reduce the sin of masturbation is still being used today. I just can't understand WHY people would do it in the 21st century.


I wonder when this thread will be cut-off.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

People don't remember the pain they experienced as a baby after they've grown up, so pain inflicted upon babies is pretty much ethically fine. You can pinch, poke and cut babies any time and know there's nothing wrong about their pain in the moment because they won't remember it later. The same can be applied to animals that don't really have memories. Their pain just really doesn't matter, so we can treat them however we like.

Never had a pet, have you?

[TheIronMaiden]

Usually people are happy with their circumstance.

[jeffporfirio]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

I think some of my family reads this so warning, I'm about to talk about my wiener:

I don't remember mine, it caused me no pain that I was consciously aware of, and it doesn't traumatize me or cause me to think that my parents mutilated me. In my opinion the "inhumane" argument not really a realistic argument. It's all I've ever known so it's not like I know what I'm missing out on, and it still works just fine. I don't know anyone who has been caused anguish one way or the other about it.

Chop it off or don't, who cares? I don't think it's nearly as evil as some of you do.

My dad was Jewish so he had mine done as a baby. We are not Jewish, but decided to have both our boys done anyways. The whole procedure lasted about a minute, and there was little to no pain.

Its easy to clean, and like Duffman said, chicks dig it.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Never had a pet, have you?

I took that entire post as sarcasm.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

To me it's mostly interesting how an ancient religious ritual designed to differentiate religious groups and/or reduce the sin of masturbation is still being used today. I just can't understand WHY people would do it in the 21st century.


I wonder when this thread will be cut-off.

You’re calling for this thread to be circumcised?