'Intactivists' to San Francisco: Ban circumcision

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Oh well, if condoms are enough of a safeguard, I'm sure sexually transmitted HIV, HPV and herpes should be wiped out any day now.

For the most part, condoms don't work because people don't use them. Herpes being the obvious exception.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by starseed

When you think about it, the practice is invasive and unnecessary.

And what is your point? The process is very simple, the infant barely notices, and there are benefits. Yes it is invasive, what isn't? And define unnecessary in the context of the procedure.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I didn't realize it was either/or.

It might as well be for a lot of orthodoxy.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

the infant barely notices

Unbelievable.

Would you want me to come to your house, drug you and cut part of your dick off?

What makes it ok to do it to a baby?

[Finny61]

Originally Posted by SebC

Circumcision takes away the circumcisee's right to personal choice. It's an irreversable decision that the child is stuck with for the rest of his life.

What like I grow a little older and miss my hoodie? Give me a break.

[red '00]

I think the aids thing is a pointless argument. Even if it's true, it's really only useful in an aids ridden area where a large number of the population are infected. In north america I'd say circumcised guys and not circumcised guys have an equal chance at getting hiv/aids.

The hygiene thing is sort of valid. I mean if you don't wash your junk regularly you probably will get a little funkier down there then someone who's circumcised. But honestly like mentioned if you have access to water and a bar of irish spring this shouldn't be an issue.

The only other thing I can think of is the 'looks' thing. Everyones heard that chicks think foreskins are gross, or that circumcised wieners look "nicer". Might be the case down in the US, but I gotta think up here any guy born in the mid-late '80s or later when it really started to become unpopular has a pretty good shot at being un-snipped so lots of ladies out there have likely seen their fair share and are more accustomed to it.

Circumcision takes away the circumcisee's right to personal choice. It's an irreversable decision that the child is stuck with for the rest of his life.

pretty sure if you don't know any better you won't care too much. LOL. and it's not like there is anything wrong with being circumcised, necessarily so it's not like they're missin out on something major and completely life altering.

[pope04]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

I sport a turtleneck.

Yeah, me too. Actually, back in my day, the uncut dudes were a rarity.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

the infant barely notices.

Really? I know babies holler like hell at the least provocation, but chopping off foreskin makes grown men wince. It's butchery. It serves no medical purpose.

[Engine09]

How can genital mutilation be considered a good idea in this day and age? Keep sharp knives far away from that area, we aren't savages.

[habernac]

I'm amazed at how many people still do it. Of the people we still talk to from our pre-natal class, I believe our son is the only one who didn't have it done.

[Hanni]

Originally Posted by Mike F

First, I'll take my medical advice from a doctor rather than Penn and Teller.

Second, there are many medical procedures which are painful to undergo and uncomfortable to watch, but are worth the long term benefits.

You can make assumptions before seeing it all you want, what I referring to was the video in it of actual circumcisions with a baby crying harder than I have ever seen.

http://www.cps.ca/english/statements...TED%20DISEASES

Canadian Pediatric Society (hope this is enough doctors for you)

-Urinary tract infection is 4% higher in uncircumcised infants.
-Some studies show a correlation between std's and circumcision and some don't, I'll even give you this one that it will slightly help prevent HIV infection, however there is no way you can argue that condom use should be taught as the only real preventative measure.
-Complications are are however "amputation of the glans,84-86 acute renal failure,87 life-threatening sepsis and, rarely, death." Seems like unnecessary risk for a procedure that has little medical benefit.
-During infancy, the circumcised children had a statistically significantly higher risk of problems than the uncircumcised boys, but among the older children the uncircumcised boys had a significantly higher rate of penile problems, which included penile inflammation and phimosis. (draw I guess)
-Newborn infants exhibit physiological, autonomic and behavioural responses to noxious stimuli. These responses suggest that they experience pain, and there is evidence that preventing pain in newborns can be important.100 Newborns who undergo circumcision without an anesthetic have greater increases in heart rate, cry longer and have greater decreases in transcutaneous oxygen tension than those who undergo the procedure after administration of a dorsal penile nerve block with lidocaine.101 Behavioural differences have also been reported. Infants circumcised without an anesthetic were reported to show decreases in responsiveness and in optimal motor performance in comparison with those who received a dorsal penile nerve block.102 These differences were still evident a day after the procedure. Furthermore, a recent report has described significantly longer crying bouts and pain scores among circumcised boys than among uncircumcised boys during routine vaccination at 4 to 6 months of age. (some are done without anesthetic which is truly barbaric)


The CPS recommends that "Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely (i.e.,in the absence of medical indication) performed." Since there are no medical indications for circumcision in the newborn period, in effect, the CPS is saying that newborn circumcisions should not be performed.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Finny61

What like I grow a little older and miss my hoodie? Give me a break.

I'm simply stating arguments. If a woman's right to her body is important enough to allow killing fetuses, then surely a man's right to his body should supercede the whims of his parents, religious or not.

[Cain]

Given that there is no concrete medical reason to perform circumcisions on newborn males, I have no idea why this shouldn't go through. What reasons are there if not medical? Because dad has one? While I can understand that pressure I'm sure most can see that it is not rational. Your kid will not be you in all ways and doesn't have to be. This is the worst reason.

Religious reasons? Still a poor reason in my opinion, but I think that this is where it gets interesting. How far does religious freedom extend? Does it supersede the right of that baby to choose? Do the parents get to dictate what happens to their male child's body? Or is the baby granted the right of choice when they are capable of making an informed choice? These are the interesting questions in my opinion. Obviously most people will say that it is the parents responsibility to direct what happens to their child in this case, but how far does that extend? Why not let them circumsize females as well if that is their custom or belief? Do we only allow some sorts of mutilation for religious beliefs, or all? Interesting stuff.

Obviously no offense intended to those who are circumsized. I am sure that nobody here is saying that there is anything "wrong" with you or that you are abnormal because of this, but I do fully believe that this is a barbaric act to force upon a child. If that child grows up and decides that he wants to get a circumcision because it will bring him closer to his god, or that girls will want to handle his junk more often then that is great! Should be his decision though.

[FlameCity]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

The process is very simple, the infant barely notices, and there are benefits.

You're out of your mind if you think the infant barley notices. Have you ever seen it done? There is a link below, if you have a really strong stomach click on it, in fact you don't even need to watch it, look away and listen to that child and then say he barely noticed the procedure.

WARNING: Video linked is graphic and disturbing


Routine Infant Circumcision

[Cain]

That is a horrifying video. Crazy that parents put their son through that. Really does show how barbaric it is. Poor guy.

[The Goon]

Circumcision debates on the internet never end well.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by habernac

I'm amazed at how many people still do it.

A lot of it probably has to do with following religious customs, or the simple continuation of a pattern. I'm guessing a guy like Nage is for it mostly because it's part of his jewish background.

I would think a lot of parents have it done because that's what was done to them or that's what their religion wants them to do, not necessarily because they have some strong conviction. Not unlike people christening their baby, and then never going back to church.

[billybob123]

I once saw a news report about a guy comlaining his parents took away his 'right to enjoy sex' because they circumcised him as an infant.

I want to know how does he know he doesn't enjoy sex as much? Unless you're talking to an adult who has experienced both, how would one know the difference?

If my kid every complains about that to me, he's getting a punch in the gut. (however, if he is bagging some really hot chick, then maybe he's got a point)

[Coys1882]

This thread is getting tense - how about some levity?

How do you circumcise a redneck? Kick his sister in the chin.

[Thor]

I'm against them, you lose some sexual pleasure later from these procedures and most parents that still do this today, especially in the USA do it for aesthetic reasons and because it was done to them when they were young.

Its odd how if you ask people who are for male circumcisions what they think about the same being done for girls they are usually loudly against that.

How it 'looks' is not a valid reason for doing this to an infant, if you let the boy decide when he's an adult then go for it but to force an infant to go through this procedure which has with it some serious risks is unnecessary.