Circumcision.

[Espi]

Joe, you're either trolling, or you do not understand what people have a problem with. The issue is whose choice circumcision should be. I'd like to hear if you have any argument for why the person who recieves it does not need to have a say in it.

There is no necessity for a normal healthy man to have his foreskin removed, period. It's beyond me why circumcisions are still being made to unconsenting boys. You can have your foreskin removed at any point in your life, but you can never have it back (duh). That choice should not be up to anyone but the individual himself.

 

[nasher168]

As long as the man genuinly needs to have it removed for some medical reason, I have no prolem with it, I just feel sorry for them. But as soon as it is done for religious reasons or to prevent masturbation (as was common in the Victorian era) then I am absolutely disgusted by it, regardless of whether the man gave consent or not. Whether it gives pleasure is not the issue for me (although it doubtlessly does have an effect), it is the act of mutilation that I find utterly abhorent. If someone wanted to cut off my earlobes for some religious reason, I would have just as much of a problem with that as I do with circumcision.

Anyway, as for pleasure, I have proof that it causes pleasure. Simply grip the skin near the middle of the penis with finger and thumb (whether it's erect or not makes no difference) and gently pull down. There is a slight sensation of pleasure as the foreskin rolls back. People who are circumcised cannot physically do this, therefore the foreskin gives pleasure, at least indirectly.
That may have sounded kinda wrong, but that's not really my concern. Enjoy.

 

[JerseyDagmar]

So...if man is made in the image of god, does that mean god still has his foreskin?

 

[Abi]

Even if it plays little to no role in sex, it's still horrible. The emotional consequences are just as bad as the physical.

I'm circumcised and every time I think about it I feel so violated. The thought that my parents chopped off a very private an important part of my body with no regrets is sickening. I've even asked them about it recently, and not only do they not regret it, but that they think I'm in the wrong for questioning their decision about my body. Apparently, they were too embarrassed to show me how to clean myself if I had a foreskin (dad's cut). Not a good feeling to know that the people who should care for you most mutilate your genitals because their embarrassed to show their own son proper hygiene.

 

[Spase]

Okay... I decided I had to chime in here...

I agree that circumcision is kind of a silly tradition without any real basis. That said, I agree with Joe that the idea people are promoting that most of your feeling is in the foreskin is just silly. As someone who isn't circumcised I can tell you that I could play with my foreskin all day long without any satisfaction from it. Sensitivity does not equal sexual pleasure. Period. It really is just another patch of skin in terms of the *kind* of feeling it's able to perceive.

One person did make a valid point about the effect of circumcision on sex though. JBeukema brings up the issue of negative friction and how it's reduced by your foreskin. This is true.

I agree that it's a silly tradition but you're sensationalizing it with this BS about how most of the feeling in your penis is lost when you're circumcised. Even if those counts of nerve endings is entirely accurate you're misrepresenting the issue.

I seriously never expected to talk about my penis on LoR :shock:

 

[Ozymandyus]

I was planning to sit out too, but I'll add that my own circumcision doesn't bother me a bit. I have my adenoids and tonsils out too, which also doesn't bother me. I sincerely doubt it would have changed my life one bit.

Also, I get plenty of sensation in that area, thanks for asking. But if you want to be all upset about it, that's fine with me. I'm just not marching alongside anyone in your march towards freedom from circumcision.

Compared to the hardships encountered by my parents insisting I go to church, this was absolutely nothing.

 

[Espi]

I'm just not marching alongside anyone in your march towards freedom from circumcision.

I don't see how anyone can shrug it off as a non-issue that a pretty much irreversible operation like this is being done to kids without their consent.

I generally dislike analogies, but eh.

Would you be okay with, say, someone having their childrens' pinky toes removed (I know, random) without their consent? Or how about breast implants for your newborn daughter?

I mean, sure, they'd live with it. But shouldn't these things be THEIR decision if they ever feel the need?

 

[nasher168]

I could play with my foreskin all day long without any satisfaction from it.

Really? Strange person.

 

[Otokogoroshi]

I don't think anyone here is against all circumcisions. However most of us are likely (as I am) against giving circumcisions to children before they can even make a decision about it (IE as an infant).

You want to cut off your foreskin? Sure. Go for it. However it shouldn't be perfectly acceptable to just cut off parts of your kids for your religion or just because you think its 'healthier'

 

[Spase]

Really? Strange person.

Hah. Do you want specifics?

I suppose I should have been more detailed...

Stimulation from pressure on the shaft of the penis through the skin? Yes. Stimulation from anything that's only messing with the skin, for example forskin that's hanging past the tip? No.

Now you have me wondering if I'm defective! :lol:

 

[CultOfDusty]

I'm an uncircumcised American, and very glad of it. I find it amazing that there is even a word for being "uncircumcised". If you are born without having your legs cut off, you're not considered, unamputated. We never refer to people who still have their head on their shoulder as "undecapitated". There should be "circumscribed" and "normal". The world "uncircumcised" seems unnecessary.

 

[irmerk]

I'm an uncircumcised American, and very glad of it. I find it amazing that there is even a word for being "uncircumcised". If you are born without having your legs cut off, you're not considered, unamputated. We never refer to people who still have their head on their shoulder as "undecapitated". There should be "circumscribed" and "normal". The world "uncircumcised" seems unnecessary.

Haha, very interesting. I guess I have never thought of it exactly like that. Good perspective.