Top Questions: Things You Didn't Know About Circumcision

[gagTake]

An interesting trend we've seen on GaG are questions about circumcision. A relatively hush-hush topic, GaGers have applied their curiosity and taken to GaG to find out more about this elusive topic, and what people really think about it. Check out some recent questions that popped up and the great insight you offered!

Pros of circumcision? By @Samm64

Why is circumcision even legal still on babies/children unless it has to be done for a medical reason? By @26ukdude

Should a male be given the choice whether or not to be circumcised or should the choice be made for him as a child without his consent? By @blondfrog

What's the point of circumcision? By @LovesTVDx

What is it about US-Americans and circumcision? By @genericname85

My girlfriend of 3 years wants me to get circumcised? By Anonymous

Um what exactly is the circumcision process like? Does it make the penis look and feel very different? By @JulesRules

What makes you decide to circumcise? By @poops

Loose circumcision... the best of both worlds? By Anonymous

***

And finally, if these Q&A's are not enough, one GaGer, @Mesonfielde found a really great video that might help answer some of your nagging questions on the matter....

[DeltaDanner]

I was circumcised for religious reasons. I grew up never having any problems with it, not putting any thought into it. I still don't have a problem with it. What I have a problem with (like what @PhiOmega said) is people telling me I'm a victim for it. Calling it mutilation (even if that is what the definition is) and saying how chopped up I must be. You didn't give one pro to circumcision and all you did was bash it. You took all these opinions from GAGers but didn't give any other source. No offense to the GAGers mentioned, but that is mostly opinion right? This is an opinion site correct? Here is my opinion.
You all call it child abuse. I call it a covenant with my God that shows my commitment and readiness for Him. I don't have a problem with it, I don't resent my parents for making the decision, I don't resent my doctor for doing it, and I don't feel shame that I am like this. Would I have liked to have had a say? Of coarse. However my choice would still be the same. Everyone whines and moans about the men who are circumcised being mutilated, when all cut people I know don't care. If done right, circumcision shouldn't affect you very much. Yeah there is the pleasure thing, but that can be dealt with. It doesn't hurt me, it doesn't look like a mess, it doesn't hurt my mental state. I am fine with it.

[SnowHearth]

Kudos for you.

[PhiOmega]

Ur not a victim of anything except for these dudes who can't stop thinking about dick all the time

[Mesonfielde]

Actually, unless you chose your circumcision for yourself, it's actually your PARENTS' way to show THEIR commitment to their God using YOUR body. You want benefits? okay: 1.) negligible differences in UTI rates (USA claims that it decreases the likelihood, but the USA has higher rate of UTIs than Europe - and it's most likely due to bad hygiene ~ also, UTI can be treated with antibiotics) 2.) negligible differences in STD transmission rates (it only affects you if you have sex with infected people AND it's way less effective than a condom, in fact, even if you are circ'd you still need to use a condom for safe sex ~ also, they use circumcision as an "STD prevention measure" in Africa, only because they cannot afford condoms) 3.) it's "easier to clean" as you don't have to spend 1 second retracting your foreskin before you apply water. Fascinating difference. 4.) "It looks better", but that's only true if you grew up thinking a chopped penis is what is considered "normal".

[Skadouchebag]

@Mesonfielde It's not chopped. They just take a knife and cut around the edge. I was circumcised, and my glans is still there.

[Mesonfielde]

@skadouchebag of course. I know what circumcision is like.
www.dailymotion.com/.../xjkd30_infant-circumcision-injection-and-procedure_news

[Drealgrin]

you ARE a victim, what kind of person would be fine with someone mutilating their genitals at birth? Your religion is absurd, no apologies. God doesn't exist, some pedophile wanted to mutilate your penis as an infant and now you're left with whatever they decided to let you have. You aren't a man, you're a slave, Beholden to an idea that your value as a human being depends on someone taking a knife to your genitals. But the worst part about it, is you're victimhood will be imposed onto your own son. You will sexually mutilate your own son the same way you were sexually mutilated. Because you're a zombie.

[RainbowFanGirl]

I think men should have the right to choose whether they want to be circumcised or not. I don't think it's right that they are forced against their will as babies. If they wanted to get it done later as adults, that's perfectly fine. I personally don't care what you do with your junk. That's just me, though.

[Ananchor]

I'm an American and I lived in Europe . So I've seen both. For a woman uncut feels better, I'd say 90% of my friends agree.
As far as looks if you're a child and go "eww" at the sight of an uncut penis you probably shouldn't be having sex and need to grow the fuck up. It's not a 100 tumor, it's a tiny bit of extra skin. Some men are so fat you can't even see their penis... Which would you prefer?
It literally takes 10 seconds to clean
As far as medically, I'll explain a little, some boys are born with very tight foreskin, making it hard or impossible to pee, so circumcision is necessary... But it can be done other ways. My fiancée was born with a very tight foreskin that prevented urination. Instead of a horizontal circumcision that would removed skin. His parents asked the doctor to do a vertical cut to relieve the pressure but to preserve the foreskin. So even still there is no medical need to cut a piece of skin off a child's penis.
I fought with my sister, gave her all the info I could find, she still had it done. Now she says it's the only thing she regrets in her entire life because he was perfect the way he was

[RationalLioness]

I'm not against male circumcision though I don't avidly support it. The reasons why it's done are usually asinine in my opinion, but the benefits that I have seen for it--and I researched both pros and cons--is why I support it.

No one's going to change my mind. It's up to the parents though I wish they would allow their boys to make up their own minds. I would personally not have it done for my son. But I still think the parents have the right to decide.

[Mesonfielde]

I especially like the parents who decided to go with it and then regret it for getting a botched circumcision, which made their children have problems for a lifetime. Painful erections, chafed penises, scars all over, sometimes almost bleeding to death, or of course who doesn't know about the case of David Reimer whose entire penis was removed "by accident". That, and you're still permanently altering the genitals of a 3 days old baby.

[Mesonfielde]

I should cite things. This site was interesting.
www.mothering.com/.../...n-s-please-post-here.html

[RationalLioness]

*Yawn* You're not going to make me change my mind. No duh that there are some parents like that and there are those who are happy that they made the choice for their children. ... And?

[Mesonfielde]

In the end, the question is what the children think about having their foreskin taken from them without their consent, usually for no better reason than "I thought it looks better" or "so other boys won't laugh at you in the locker room" or "because I know you can't be assed to retract your foreskin when you're showering" or "your father is also circumcised so we thought we should chop off a part of your penis too after birth". Some victims of the procedure even resort to foreskin restoration, which takes a year or two to reach the desired result. I personally am proud of them for making a step to regain authority over their own body.

[Hannah591]

I find it to be totally unnatural, unnecessary and immoral in terms of babies having it done with no consent. I'd hate to grow up knowing part of my anatomy was cut off against my will.

[Mesonfielde]

The most interesting notion here is the coping mechanism of the people who are circumcised.
The way people accept what was done to them.
One of its primary elements is denial, after all.
Just like here: www.mothering.com/.../...n-s-please-post-here.html

[Skadouchebag]

Not that I'm actually for or against circumcision, but that argument would mean it's also wrong to remove any cancer a baby might have.

[Hannah591]

A natural body part that's MEANT to be there, is totally different to a mutation that kills you. Your foreskin isn't going to kill you. Entirely invalid argument. @skadouchebag

[-Zoe-]

I don't understand why this has to be an issue. Circumcised or not, just accept and be contented with it.

[RTW1983]

The foreskin is not useless. It is sexually functioning tissue. The "issue" is that this tissue is being mutilated without consent. The choice is being made for people and it permanently effects their sexual experience later in life. If a man wants to be circumcised later in life, he can be circumcised. If a man wants to be uncircumcised later in life, he can't be uncircumcised. He can't get back the nerve rich tissue that was taken from him. That's the problem. There is no excuse in this day and age to circumcise a baby.

[OpinionatedFemale]

I'm the mother of two boys. Neither of them were circumsized. Each individual parent needs to make their own call. But for me, I just didn't see why I would put them through that. And if any girl doesn't like them because of it, then she doesn't deserve them anyways.

[TedStar]

The take is a little biased ( coming from an intact guy myself lol). This video is very user friendly and quite objective

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyZm6L6udSk

My personal opinion is wait until your kid is 12/16/18 or whatever the legal age for surgical procedures is. Also don't pressure them to make a choice either way. If they ask the question, Give them all the facts, dispel the myths and let them make a FULLY INFORMED decision

[PhiOmega]

Chicks hot bro

[Mesonfielde]

Yeah, she made a video 3 years later https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbTdkWV89Ak which wasn't nearly as objective about it XD apparently times change

[Accipiter]

I'd watch those videos if that chick's voice wasn't so ear-drum damagingly awful. She can break glass with that horrible voice of hers.

[musicbrain5]

I don't have an issue with guys who are circumcised. I don't even care if people circumcise their babies. I just don't see the point in it. The only reasons I hear is that it's for esthetics and hygiene. The vagina and the vulva probably hold more bacteria and dead cells than a foreskin, so why don't we cut those away too? The whole hygiene argument is basically a straw man.

[musicbrain5]

I really wish people would actually comment with an opposing argument rather than just down voting.

[Anno_Domini]

I agree 100%. It's a double standard. The same people who abhor female circumcision turn around and support male circumcision.

[kxera]

The vagina actually is like a self cleaning oven and rids itself of impurities. Vaginal circumcision of the clitorus was actually also suggested. It just never went through, but circumcision isn't mandatory. Any man can decide not to circumcise his son's penis. Parental consent is needed.

[BoldEnigma]

Actually that's false equivalence and you're a complete idiot. Circumcision in males reduces the chance of HIV contraction through vaginal sex by 60 percent, while reducing the chance of genital herpes by 40 percent, not to mention the other STDs it protects against. The fact is that the foreskin is full of bacteria and no matter how much an uncircumcised man cleans his penis it will never be as clean as a circumcised man's. I'm in AP Biology, and one of the main concepts is that evolution is imperfect. One theory for the existence of foreskin is that because the head of the penis exposes the flesh of the urethra, when humans used to roam around in the wild without clothes, it prevented dirt and grime from entering the urethra. Now that we wear clothes, the foreskin is nothing but a useless cesspool of bacteria. Not to mention the fact that most women prefer the appearance and cleanliness of a circumcised penis.

[musicbrain5]

@BoldEnigma: Maybe most women in the US and Canada because that's what they're used to. But 2/3rds of males around the world are still uncircumcised.

[BoldEnigma]

Yeah that's right, but the difference is that most women who are used to a circumcised penis and then encounter an uncircumcised one are disgusted by it, while women who are used to uncircumcised penises and see a circumcised one are fine with it. au.ibtimes.com/survey-says-54-american-women-prefer-circumcised-penis-warning-graphic-videos-1333359

[musicbrain5]

@BoldEnigma: That survey only asked American women, and only a thousand of them at that which is a tiny sample considering there are at least 150 Million women in the USA alone. While I don't doubt that is what most American (and probably Canadian) women prefer because it's all they've seen, they really need to ask more than a thousand people. What you said had nothing to do with the contents of the link anyways.

[BoldEnigma]

Sure maybe the study is only valid for North America but the fact remains that the medical benefits of circumcision completely outweigh the "risks". The botched circumcisions you hear about are either from doctors whk were unqualified to perform the procedure in the first place, or they're just fabricated.

[musicbrain5]

@BoldEnigma: Well okay. But I still have the freedom to not circumcise my future son (s) so you're not going to change my mind with some weak scare mongering about how bad it is to be uncut. It's not unhealthy or bad for the guy. If it was as bad as you claim it is, you'd see global circumcision rates shoot through the roof. Until that happens though, I'm not going to change how I feel about it just to make you happy. Agree to disagree here.

[musicbrain5]

@BoldEnigma: Maybe you'd get somewhere if you weren't so rude to me in your first comment (I'm an idiot for having a different opinion?) I know it's hard for 16 year olds to do this, but try considering the other side of an argument before saying people are idiots or that they don't know anything.

[BoldEnigma]

W, ell I want to let you know that I respect your opinion even though I disagree. It's not really that not circumcising is unhealthy, it's that circumcision is more healthy. And while your last point seems logical, keep in mind that even though vaccinations are overwhelmingly good for your health, vaccination rates are dropping worldwide. Just like vaccinations, circumcision was very popular in our parents' days, and now that it is decreasing in popularity you will see STD rates go up again.

[BoldEnigma]

*uncircumcising is unhealthy

[musicbrain5]

@BoldEnigma: Vaccinations have way more health benefits for the individual and the population as a whole (herd immunity) than circumcision does. The rates are only dropping in Western countries because of morons who still think they're poisons that cause autism. That's a whole other can of worms that I don't care to open today though.

[YourFutureEx]

@Mesonfielde is the king of circumcision. You can ask him anything about it.

[Red_Arrow]

No. He is the king of uncircumcision.

[YourFutureEx]

@Red_Arrow - He has proper knowledge and I can't deny this.

[Red_Arrow]

There are expert studies on both sides. He chooses to ignore those that say other than what he likes. I have had discussions on here and he ignores anything that shows the 'other side'. So now I refuse to discuss it with him. He is passionate towards his belief to the point of disregarding all else. And if you disregard a whole side of an argument, you do not have proper knowledge.

[YourFutureEx]

@Red_Arrow - It's wrong if he ignores counter-beliefs. I've never seen him like this. Maybe you are right. You know better.

[Red_Arrow]

Not sure of your reference. I know that he has disregarded other views totally. But as far as the rights or wrongs of circumcision, especially to young boys, I see both sides and claim no magic knowledge of what is absolute truth.

[Mesonfielde]

@Red_Arrow most of the studies that show the usually referred benefits of circumcision are from studies made in the USA, which are obviously biased. It's like that USA-originated study on how Coca Cola and other soft drinks have zero harmful effects (which was funded by Coca Cola). If one wants to see valid points on circumcision, they need to look at the studies that don't gain obvious benefits from either supporting or not supporting it, which is why I tend to link stuff from pages that are not USA-based (UK, other places in Europe , etc) Even I can't deny that it's a last-measure procedure in case someone has untreatable phimosis, but that still doesn't mean it is the first go-to solution, especially on 3 day old babies. UTIs are treatable with antibiotics, and STDs are preventable with a way higher success rate by condoms. Most of the time, the actual counter-arguments by circ supporters tends to be that "foreskin is just unnecessary skin", which I can cite that isn't true.

[Red_Arrow]

Most of the studies of most health things are paid for with American money or a large percentage of American money. Especially in third world countries, the money has to come from other places. But I don't see the correlation between Coca-Cola and foreskins. Surely you are not trying to tell us that Coca-cola circumcises their cans before we see them?

[YourFutureEx]

@Mesonfielde - *new message received*

[Northeast106]

@mesonfielde I'm from the U. S and I'm circumcised. I agree with you that medically it is unnecessary, though some people prefer the look. Then again, so is breast augmentation, most cosmetic surgeries are not necessary. Some people are still willing to take that risk though.

[Mesonfielde]

@Northeast106 I don't see parents implanting silicone in their 3 day old daughters' breasts to make them more appealing to men when they'll be older, though.

[Northeast106]

@mesonfielde true, but they do have female circumcision in Africa and the middle east. Either way your right, it's an unnecessary risk for an infant. Let people choose as an adult, I won't have my children touched knowing what i know now.

[Mesonfielde]

@Northeast106 except "female circumcision" is actually outlawed and seen as genital mutilation in the West, so that's a key difference :p

[Northeast106]

@mesonfielde it's not outlawed everywhere. Besides laws are nothing if no one agrees with, follows, or enforces them. They still practice it, I think the best course of action is to modernize the practice (overseas). It will reduce complications, and the west would face less resistance. Trying to force people to change their ways comes off as imperialism. If they just used a medical setting, rather than a sharp stone, or a knife for the procedures the complication rate for women in that part of the world would decrease. I'm just viewing it from a practical perspective.

[Mesonfielde]

@Northeast106 you'd think educating people why it's actually not good for them would be more effective.

[Northeast106]

@mesonfielde Good luck. This is a part of the world where kids shows have a mickey mouse knock off encouraging suicide bombing.

[Mesonfielde]

@Northeast106 ... I like to think of that as natural selection at work, it's a shame that they take so many good people with them.

[Red_Arrow]

A very biased piece, which would be fine for a member, but not a G@G editor. Starting with "Pros of circumcision?' and the only response shown is one that is not a pro.

Followed by a comment that the only reason we have circumcision is because people don't care for boys as much as for girls. (What crap)

And it just continues. As I said, it is fine for a My Take from a member, but not as a statement from the editor. Very wrong.

[randomwhiteguy]

You're right, an editor shouldn't put anything of pros and con's, and only do one, do botj

[Mesonfielde]

Why? It's kind of true. Circumcision is an outdated religious procedure designed in the deserts, that is so prevalent in the USA today because Kellogg was successful at making people think that masturbation is the cause of all problems. In the end, today, most of its "benefits" essentially come down to people thinking that the foreskin causes cancer and infections, which is just unrealistic. People in the USA don't have a significantly lower rate of UTIs than Europeans, there are studies about it. I do admit this take is a slight bit biased even in my opinion, I usually list the supposed benefits of circumcision and counter them with data and studies. :p For example, they say "it reduces the risk of STDs". There are studies which show that it's insignificant compared to condoms, and the reason why it's used for this purpose in Africa is because they cannot afford condoms. Also, this is like forcing girls on birth control because "they WILL have sex (with people who have STDs).

[Red_Arrow]

Why? Because editors should not cite opinions to prove their opinions especially in this kind of media. Medical Research Council Tropical Epidemiology Group, United Kingdom. natasha. larke@lshtm. ac. uk found some evidence of HPV prevention and higher clearance in men who were circumcised. H A Weiss, S L Thomas, S K Munabi, and R J Hayes did several studies in Africa, USA, UK, and Australia that found that there were reductions in syphilis, chancroid, and genital herpes with circumcision. Many other studies have found a relationship between childhood circumcision and prevention of other diseases. And yes, many have been in the US, but that is because the US organizations have spent the money to research those things where others have not. "Unrealistic"? Some studies have not only shown higher rates of cancer and infections in uncircumcised males, but have explained why.

[Mesonfielde]

Sooo you're saying that it makes sense to decide for a 3 days old baby that they'll be having sex with STD infected people with no protection of any kind?

[Red_Arrow]

The chances that they will have unprotected sex with some people at some is actually high (just read G@G). Combining all the different diseases rather than just looking at one at a time, the chances of sex with one of those pepople is high. In fact, the number of HPV infected people alone is quite high especially considering many carry it without developing it themselves.

[Mesonfielde]

it's a bit more of a russian roulette though. This type of "protection" if you can even call it that matters only if you actually switch partners often.

[BoldEnigma]

The fact is that circumcision has proven medical benefits, reducing the chance of HIV contraction by 60 percent and genital herpes by 40 percent, not to mention the other STDs where research hasn't been conducted. Women will turn you down for being uncircumsised, but no woman will turn you down for being circumcised.

[Belgie]

"The fact is that circumcision has proven medical benefits" Bullshit. "Women will turn you down for being uncircumsised" More bullshit. "no woman will turn you down for being circumcised. " My god, just stop with the bullshit already.

[BoldEnigma]

Just because you disagree with the implications of scientific facts doesn't make these facts any less true; circumcision significantly reduces the chance of STD transmission from vaginal sex. Not to mention the fact that it eliminates the possibility of having an odor due to poor hygiene. Have fun with your disgusting sac of harmful bacteria stuck on your penis. Mine is cleaner, healthier, and better looking without it.

[musicbrain5]

If only you knew about all the kinds of bacteria that thrive inside our bodies, especially in the intestinal tract.

[LuckyLittleLucy]

The thing is, you're quoting 'scientific facts' about preventing diseases, when you could just use a condom. Which does the same thing. And this idea that you're more hygienic if you're circumcised can easily be solved with the simple idea of washing. I can understand why you'd see the 'benefits' but you can achieve the same thing by practising safe sex and good hygiene. I'd like to think I'm unbiased because I don't have a penis and have had enough sex education lessons to understand this stuff- so please don't think I don't understand. I can see why you'd believe medical research but the idea that women will turn you down because of the choices you make about your genitals is pretty off. And if it does happen then the US people need to consider why this doesn't happen in so many other countries. My main problem with your opinion is that you're so rude about other people's choices. I respect that you believe circumcision is good, but respect other people's choice to disagree.

[BoldEnigma]

@musicbrain5 The bacteria that live inside the digestive tract are confined to the digestive tract for a reason. When people's intestines rupture and those bacteria escape, it becomes a very bad thing, and almost always results in death. Your argument is irrelevant because digestive tract bacteria are only non pathogenic when they remain in the digestive tract.

[BoldEnigma]

@LuckyLittleLucy Maybe I come off as rude when I have to deal with people who make visceral arguments that have no basis in science, and who have little to no knowledge of the subject. I'm in a college level Biology course, so unless somebody here is a doctor, I know more about this subject than all of you. Sounds douchey, but it's true. Now to address your other points, yes good hygiene can help keep the penis clean however it is undeniable that no amount of washing will ever make an uncircumsised penis as clean as a circumcised one, simply because the foreskin harbors bacteria and viruses. As for the condom argument, lots of people prefer other methods of birth control because condoms reduce pleasure for them. Condoms can also break and aren't 100 percent effective. I'm confident knowing that any STD would have a harder time surviving on my penis than on an uncircumsised one.

[LuckyLittleLucy]

@BoldEnigma I understand where you come from and your reasons for it. However, if a guy will be much healthier and help to prevent all these issues by being circumcised, why is he born with a foreskin at all? Do you cut off all your hair to stop it catching fire? Or to stop head lice? I agree that prevention is better than cure but I hope this analogy will help you to understand why many people will disagree with you.

[BoldEnigma]

@LuckyLittleLucy Well one of the first things they teach us in AP Biology is that evolution is not perfect, and that something that may be good in some ways can be detrimental in other ways. It's possible that foreskin was needed to reduce friction during intercourse back in humans' uncivilized days. There are many possible theories. That said, thanks for trying to help me understand the other side of the argument.

[rocksongwriter]

"reducing the chance of HIV contraction by 60 percent..." You know how to reduce the chance of HIV contraction by 100%? Don't have unprotected sex with people who have AIDS.

[BoldEnigma]

@rocksongwriter Think for a second. Most people with HiV (get it right you fool, HIV is the virus itself, AIDS is the condition that results from it if left untreated) aren't going to tell you that they have HIV, or they don't even know themselves. There aren't many short term symptoms. Plus, condoms aren't very effective at reducing STD transmission rates, I mean they help, but not that much.

[rocksongwriter]

You call me a fool (you're so pleasant), but I not only don't have ay STDs, but I haven't put myself in any situation where I could even get an STD.

[rocksongwriter]

"Women will turn you down for being uncircumsised, but no woman will turn you down for being circumcised." Let's see all the women who 'upvoted' your answer so far... none! We've yet to see a single woman who agrees with your answer. But not only do women disagree with your answer, but the U. S. Government disagrees with you too in regards to your scientific claim that circumcision reduces STDs by any significant amount. The National Institutes of Health (nih. gov) released a report that says: "A systematic review and meta-analyses were performed on studies of genital discharge syndrome versus genital ulcerative disease, genital discharge syndrome, nonspecific urethritis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, genital ulcerative disease, chancroid, syphilis, herpes simplex virus, human papillomavirus, and contracting a sexually transmitted infection of any type. Chlamydia, gonorrhea, genital herpes, and human papillomavirus are not significantly impacted by circumcision."

[rocksongwriter]

Genital herpes is not significantly impacted by circumcision? How can that be when you said that circumcision reduces the chance of contracting genital herpes by 40 percent?

Let's continue reading this report...

"Intact men appear to be of greater risk for genital ulcerative disease while at lower risk for genital discharge syndrome, nonspecific urethritis, genital warts, and the overall risk of any sexually transmitted infection."

WHAT? This report conducted by people who are actually scientists (unlike you) says that intact (uncircumcised) men have a lower overall risk of any sexually transmitted infection. Why, that's the OPPOSITE of what you said! Who's the fool now?

Read the report yourself:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3654279/

Here's my advice to you... you said you're taking a college level biology course, I recommend you pay attention when you're in class and pay attention when reading your textbook.

[rocksongwriter]

So, @Belgie, you were right. Everything @BoldEnigma said was wrong. He even misspelled 'uncircumcised' in his original answer.

[BoldEnigma]

@rocksongwriter Actually, if we you wanna play that game both the CBC and the American Academy of Pediatrics support circumcision, "the benefits outweigh any risks". So actually, you're wrong. And considering the popularity of an Internet post with a sample size of less than 10 people to gauge public support of an idea is asinine, just like you are.

[rocksongwriter]

@BoldEnigma: "Actually, if we you wanna play that game both the CBC and the American Academy of Pediatrics support circumcision, "the benefits outweigh any risks"." Then why haven't you posted any links? You've posted NOTHING to back up your argument. "So actually, you're wrong." All I did was quote an actual scientific study released by the government. So really you are calling real scientists "wrong" and then not posting any proof of your argument. "And considering the popularity of an Internet post with a sample size of less than 10 people to gauge public support of an idea is asinine, just like you are." Ouch! An insult by a 16-year-old! Why don't you worry about passing your drivers exam and maybe finish high school first before you tackle debating college grads who have had way more science classes than you.

[rocksongwriter]

By saying "sample size of less than 10 people" you imply that only 10 people have SEEN your original post, which is doubtful given how many people have scrolled through this page and commented on posts.

But let's face it, by making outlandish claims, failing to provide any studies to back up your argument, and personally attacking anybody who disagrees with you, you're nothing but a common troll who is merely trying to get a reaction out of people.

Here... you can read about all the problems regarding your precious American Academy of Pediatrics report, including the fact that the report was influenced by financial conflicts of interest (see #7).

https://www.circumcision.org/aap.htm

^Circumcision. org is run by the Circumcision Resource Center which is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational organization with the purpose of informing the public and professionals about the practice of male circumcision. Have fun.

[BoldEnigma]

@rocksongwriter You're so pathetic that you have to resort to attacking my age. If you want to be a condescending douche and use ad hominem attacks, go ahead. Two can play at that game. My mind is 100 times more powerful than yours will ever be, and you're 34. That's why you've been alive for 34 years and you still rely on this website to give you info about men and women. Oh and you asked for links? Here's 5 or so you imbecile: www.huffingtonpost.com/.../...efits_n_6255460.html
www.healthline.com/.../cdc-encourages-circumcision-120314
www.webmd.com/.../cdc-endorses-circumcision-for-health-reasons
www.npr.org/.../cdc-considers-counseling-males-of-all-ages-on-circumcision
www.scientificamerican.com/.../

[BoldEnigma]

Oh and just for your information, I have taken multiple college classes, including college biology. How long has it been since you've been in college? A decade? If you knew anything about science, especially the field of medicine, you'd know that there are new discoveries being made constantly. How does it feel to have a 16-year-old hand you your ass?

[rocksongwriter]

"My mind is 100 times more powerful than yours will ever be..." LOL! "That's why you've been alive for 34 years and you still rely on this website to give you info about men and women." I come to this site to give advice and to be a mentor. "Oh and you asked for links? Here's 5..." Your links reference the American Academy of Pediatrics report, which has already to proven to be flawed and biased. So since your links cite faulty research, they're not valid. "Oh and just for your information, I have taken multiple college classes, including college biology." I doubt that. "How long has it been since you've been in college? A decade?" Less than that. "How does it feel to have a 16-year-old hand you your ass?" Why was your hand on my ass? You should start being nice to people, then you'd have friends and not be alone all the time.

[rocksongwriter]

@BoldEnigma

[live4love]

Uncircumsized dicks are gross, I'm glad circumsition is a thing

[jmsdtl321]

So are fat chicks... but we keep them around... lol

[godfatherfan]

I see many posts by women on this issue... WHY?
It has nothing to do with women other then what they see when they are having sex with a guy. My ex wife, who is a RN (nurse).. and her entire office is all women nurses... every one of them (except 1) said that a uncircumcised penis would be a complete deal breaker for them in a relationship.
I am circumcised, I had my 3 sons circumcised, I would do it again, I would tell any man he should be. It is visually better for the large majority of women, esp here in the USA. It also is safer and less prone to medical conditions. A penis is gross enough to look at when circumcised, when it isn't it is just nasty beyond belief. I have never seen one in real life thankfully, but I have seen them in pic's and porn.

[MonaAmour]

Really interesting take - i didn't realize it was such a hot issue...

[Jersey1]

It isn't a hot issue, only here on GaG by some who dont like it.

[Mesonfielde]

@Jersey1 actually, it's only a hot issue in the USA, where people don't see why slicing off a part of a baby's body permanently is morally and physiologically problematic.

[Jersey1]

No one, no one, is talking about this in the US. you are from Eastern Europe so you have no idea about what is happening here. No one brings this up in conversation, no one. You have some hangups on this as you always post about it bthere is a deep seated issue with you. It isn't normal at all for someone to have such a focus on this, it is symptomatic of something bigger.

[PhiOmega]

@Jersey1 SO fucking true bro!!! XD

[zorro8888]

I'm just surprised all of those weren't from "Mesonfielde" lol

[PhiOmega]

Lol, same here

[Red_Arrow]

4 out of ten were.

[Mesonfielde]

Hey, I'm not the only one active on this subject :P

[Red_Arrow]

@Mesonfielde - And yet your name is always the first to come to mind when the topic is mentioned. You are the MOST active and MOST vocal to the point that you might as well be the only one active on this subject, at least on the side you stand on.

[Mesonfielde]

@Red_Arrow well, it's always nice to be objective on the subject, without being culturally indoctrinated to think that slicing off parts of your body for whatever reason is "normal"

[Red_Arrow]

As I said elsewhere in this discussion, I see both sides of the argument and claim no magic knowledge of the absolute truth. If you want to be objective you might try that yourself. Also, as I said in this discussion, Discussing with you on this topic gets one nowhere, so I choose not to. Also, too many people are getting notices of mentions over and over in this and I will end my part in bothering all these people. Now.

[Queen_naki5]

I won't circumsize my future sons. It's becoming a thing of the past.

[Mesonfielde]

Thanks for the citing! :D

<3

[TedStar]

Theme songhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HJKW2ZcRtMY

[rthomas43]

I am fascinated with Mesonfielde's fascination with other men's genitalia.

[Mesonfielde]

I must admit, I was surprised when my dedication required me to look up pictures to prove my points from time to time. But the question goes far beyond mere looks, it's about the idea itself and its implications and consequences.

[ComDom]

It's a scientific fact that Circumcision is very medically beneficial.

"Circumcising the newborn facilitates penile hygiene, prevents cancer of the penis and decreases the incidence of genital herpes in later life. Whether it decreases the incidence of cancer of the cervix is still uncertain. More important, neonatal circumcision is associated with much lower morbidity and mortality and with lower costs than therapeutic circumcision. Thus, prophylactic circumcision is recommended for the male population as a whole."

"Three randomized trials in Africa demonstrated that adult male circumcision decreases human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) acquisition in men by 51% to 60%"

"Two trials demonstrated that male circumcision reduces the risk of acquiring genital herpes by 28% to 34%, and the risk of developing genital ulceration by 47%"

"While some consider male circumcision to be primarily a male issue, one trial also reported derivative benefits for female partners of circumcised men; the risk of HR-HPV for female partners was reduced by 28%, the risk of bacterial vaginosis was reduced by 40%, and the risk of trichomoniasis was reduced by 48%"

"“Male circumcision is in principle equivalent to childhood vaccination,” said the lead author, Brian J. Morris, emeritus professor of medical sciences at the University of Sydney. “Just as there are opponents of vaccination, there are opponents of circumcision. But their arguments are emotional and unscientific, and should be disregarded.”

www.mayoclinic.org/.../PRC-20013585

well.blogs.nytimes.com/.../?_r=0

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3684945/

www.cnn.com/.../index.html

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1862490/

[ComDom]

More info:

www.webmd.com/.../circumcision#4

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../...efits_n_6255460.html

www.nytimes.com/.../...s-pediatric-group-says.html

[Jager66]

Well the vast majority of medical experts in the world disagree with your opinion and that of the AAP and have made public statements on the issue based on their interpretation of the science. So like everything in the world there will be controversy and differing opinions but the medical consensus is that Circumcision, unless medicaly needed, is a very bad thing.

www.skeptic.org.uk/.../711-infant-circumcision

[ComDom]

@jagger66 what I said isn't an opinion. It's a scientific fact that it reduces risk. The ONLY argument against it is sexual pleasure and a miniscule risk that essentially never happens in first world countries. What you linked me is apparently someone ranting about a book. I don't see the point. I've read dissenting opinions but even those in the medical community didn't disagree with the science they just basically liked foreskin. Very poor reasoning as far as I can tell. I couldn't care less if people want their foreskin but to say it's a good idea to keep it is probably false.

[ComDom]

@jager66 also it might be a stretch to call them "medical experts" if they think that way.

[Jager66]

You are wrong and need to learn exactly how you are mistaken, the article I linked is a good place to start. Also keep in mind that: The AAP stated in a later publication—after drawing considerable fire from paediatric and statistical experts21,[40],[41]—their main conclusion was based on a “feeling.”[42] It has many authority/expert citations/quotes including: -Royal Dutch Medical Association -A group of 38 authorities in child health and epidemiology, UK, mainland Europe , and Canada -The President of Germany’s Paediatric Society -Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians Among many others, perhaps these experts know a bit more then the incompleted studies Brian Morris uses to push his ideological view of the issue.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 Even if what you're saying was true (and it doesn't appear it is) I can't validate the citations because they aren't links. Also lol the extended version "https://oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp" is a dead link, not very promising. Having a Bibliography does not necessarily mean it's valid.

Pseudo-science can (and apparently is) doing the same thing. The only source I can check is: "pediatrics.aappublications.org/.../reply and that's one dissenting opinion to the report... again not very promising, proves nothing. There is always dissenting opinion in the scientific community. That does not mean the view is relevant.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 This is a liberal health service that essentially agrees with my point: "www.nhs.uk/.../Advantages-and-disadvantages.aspx"

pros:
-Circumcision may reduce the risk of developing a urinary tract infection (UTI), such as a bladder infection.
-Circumcision may reduce the risk of getting some types of sexually transmitted infections, such as HIV and genital herpes.
-Circumcision may reduce the risk of female partners developing some types of sexually transmitted infections, such as bacterial vaginosis and trichomoniasis.
-Circumcision may reduce the risk of developing cancer of the penis.

cons:
-Reduced sensitivity – an uncircumcised penis is more sensitive than a circumcised penis, meaning that circumcised men may experience less pleasure during sex.
-Potential complications of circumcision – these include excessive bleeding, post-operative infection and, in rare cases, injury to the urethra.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 I stand corrected the link is working now. That's weird.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 I suppose I should say it's clear he is bias at least. I'm still looking into it.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 ultimately though none of this matters my other sources don't only utilize his material. There have been other studies done agreeing with at least some of his material. His point is that it should be compulsory. I disagree with that but it's probably foolish to keep it. It's in line with vaccines and what not.

[Mesonfielde]

Oh, all of those links in support of circumcision are from the USA. Why am I not surprised. A place where girls and boys learn that "foreskin is disgusting", and need to grasp at any straws they can find to "scientifically" explain why genital mutilation has nothing wrong with it.

Of course, none of it is actually true. Or at least, not as severely as they claim. For example, the reduced HIV infection rate - you need to have sex with a HIV infected person for that, WITHOUT a condom (also, it's relevant in Africa because they can't afford condoms).

Reduced risk of UTIs due to how the glans dries out (image of a circ and the same penis restored https://i.img ur. com/00vP7SW. jpg ) and thus there can be less bacteria, sure, but you can achieve the same result by having a daily shower, and not letting the pee just linger inside your wangsleeve. Also, even if you get a UTI, you can treat it with anti-biotics.

Also, the foreskin has functions, and isn't just a "flab of skin".

www.psychologytoday.com/.../more-circumcision-myths-you-may-believe-hygiene-and-stds

www.birthtakesavillage.com/function-of-foreskin/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9393302

pediatrics.aappublications.org/.../...ull.pdf+html

www.prweb.com/releases/2013/3/prweb10539181.htm

[ComDom]

@Mesonfielde "Oh, all of those links in support of circumcision are from the USA."

All but one. One of those is from the U. K.

"Of course, none of it is actually true. Or at least, not as severely as they claim."

Yes it is. It's all essentially true as far as I can tell.

"Also, even if you get a UTI, you can treat it with anti-biotics."

That's like saying you don't need vaccines because you have medicine, a pretty poor argument.

"Also, the foreskin has functions, and isn't just a "flab of skin"."

It has a function.

This link didn't show me anything aside from appearance I guess: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9393302

This isn't even a source at all as far as I can tell: www.birthtakesavillage.com/function-of-foreskin/

"pediatrics. aappublications. org/.../... ull. pdf+html"
"www.prweb.com/releases/2013/3/prweb10539181.htm"

These are ONLY dissenting opinion. There is ALWAYS dissenting opinion in EVERY field of science. You fail to understand that I guess.

I'm curious about the AAP's rebuttal.

[ComDom]

it has a function just not a necessary one as far as I can tell and no beneficial one other than sexual feelings

[Jager66]

@comDom Since you brought it up the bias of the pro circ. crowed is very well known. I did some digging into it a while back and it's been found that some of these guys are using fake names and referencing their won research and are part of ideological religious circumcision groups etc.. Just saying it might be something you want to look into.

It is not a scientific fact that it reduces STI's.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18280846

Research is showing a connection betweenhaving forskin and reduced HIV infection.
https://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/hill1/

I really don't like doing peoples research for them because all it ends up being is an argument. I feel I have given you more then enough to investigate especially if you read though the first article I linked and it's sources.

[BoldEnigma]

@ComDom is killing you guys. No amount of scientific research is enough to change the minds of people like you. You're just like the anti-vaccination crowd in that your pre conceived opinions about circumcision cloud your judgment.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "they are at variance with the recently published
report by Fergusson et al, who, using data from another
New Zealand cohort, found that circumcision reduced by
more than one-half the risk of any STI up to age 25 years"

Most of studies done show it DOES reduce rates of STI's. Maybe you found a bias one? It happens.

www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/.../...son.pdf

"I really don't like doing peoples research for them because all it ends up being is an argument."

I don't need you to research it for me. I've already researched it. It appears pretty clear what's going on. I'm not sure what your hangup is.

"This brief review of the evidence does not pretend to be a balanced presentation."

Why would you even send this? This is bias opinion. It's not even science as far as I can tell like at all.
https://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/hill1/

I say again references NEVER necessarily equal accuracy EVER. That article or whatever that is makes it quite clear.

@BoldEnigma yeah I have no idea their deal. Europeans are pretty attached to their ideology I guess.

[ComDom]

I think it's funny how attached people are to foreskin... It's like tonsils, wisdom teeth, or the appendix. They have to call it "genital mutilation" in order to scare people into thinking like they do. Next they'll start saying stuff like, "appendix annihilation" or "wisdom teeth destruction". Give me a break on the loaded language. Plus a lot of girls think it's gross... well aside from European ones I guess.

[Jager66]

@comdom You said that it is a scientific fact circumcision is good. That's why I pointed out contradictory research, hoping it might ignight your curiosity, instead you have chosen to dig in deeper. The articles linked are full of all their sources, plenty of verifying you can do. Again I am not going to do your research for you. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. Even if: - It is totally contrary to the public opinion of world experts on the matter from nearly every developed nation. - The AAP it self stated that a pro leaning position from them is based on feelings not fact. - Statistical experts examining research findings say there is no reason to believe it is a good thing. - It is a HORRIBLE ethical violation. - Knowing the MASSIVE psychological damage it causes in developing brains, preventing the child from properly bonding with it's mother that will lead to every all kinds of disfunction in many people.

[Jager66]

Infant circumcision is so traumatic that children, sometimes, die from the pain. The glans does not have a membrane yet and is part of the foreskin. It is, litterally, ripped off the glans then cut off. This is done to the most sensitive part of the human body WITHOUT any pain killers. Babies routinely pass out unconscious from the pain and some even die from it, it is that severe. Also go learn how early trauma influences brain development and morality. The ramifications of this are enormous.

[Jager66]

@boldenigma Lol no he really isn't. What he is doing is refusing to read citations, which are far far to many to be listed on this site in link form. There is a reason nearly every major world peadiatrics authority on the planet openly says they are against circumcision. You compared us to people against vaccines, yet that is literally what DotCom is doing, going against every world health authority on the subject who has reviewed the data and determined the PRO position is for crack pots. Even the AAP has stated as much, which is essentially the source for almost all his information.

[ComDom]

@jager66 "The articles linked are full of all their sources, plenty of verifying you can do. Again I am not going to do your research for you." I checked your sources they were bad. You don't need to do research for me. I already did... again. EXCEPT the dissenting argument was so-so. Ironically their pointing out "cultural bias" was seemingly quite bias itself. "It is totally contrary to the public opinion of world experts on the matter from nearly every developed nation." It is contrary to the SOME of the professionals in the world... experts is debatable. So... yeah. Essentially all of your citations were dubious but you can't see that for some reason. Maybe they don't teach how to research where you're from. "The AAP it self stated that a pro leaning position from them is based on feelings not fact." Lol no this has not been substantiated as far as I can tell, at all.

[ComDom]

@jager66 "Statistical experts examining research findings say there is no reason to believe it is a good thing." Statistical "experts" (not sure why you keep calling most of these people experts lol) are obviously bias... and they are bias with emotions. The science against it is dubious. I'll have to look into the rebuttal although I'm not sure it's necessary since the real experts aren't taking it into account apparently. I wasn't aware people took European scientists seriously until they moved here. "It is a HORRIBLE ethical violation." Not really. Debatable. "Knowing the MASSIVE psychological damage it causes in developing brains, preventing the child from properly bonding with it's mother that will lead to every all kinds of disfunction in many people." You attempting to substantiate that would amuse me. "Infant circumcision is so traumatic that children, sometimes, die from the pain." Lol back any of this up. That is so amusing and pretty sure it's essentially false.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Also go learn how early trauma influences brain development and morality. The ramifications of this are enormous." I have researched it. I'm not sure how you've become deluded into thinking I haven't. Back any of this up for the tenth time. But try to use better sources most of this is... bad. One link was good. I'll give you credit, dissenting opinion is valid. I'm curious about the other side. "Lol no he really isn't. What he is doing is refusing to read citations, which are far far to many to be listed on this site in link form." Lol yes I am. I have read your citations and they were bad. Very bad. Well aside from one. Very bias euro-centric touchy feely garbage. You're of the same pseudo-scientific minds as anti-vaccinations and anti-gluten. It's sad. "There is a reason nearly every major world peadiatrics authority on the planet openly says they are against circumcision." Even if that were true, it's called emotion not science. Your point?

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "going against every world health authority on the subject who has reviewed the data and determined the PRO position is for crack pots." You're clearly deluded. Where have you concocted this from? lol the only argument you have is emotion. At first I felt bad but now it's worrisome. You had ONLY one good link. That's it. The rest of them were... bad. At least as far as your point went. They were essentially irrelevant. "Even the AAP has stated as much, which is essentially the source for almost all his information." Lol no? That wasn't the AAP, that was a dissenting argument as far as I can tell. They always have those. I'm not sure why you aren't paying attention.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 I'm giving you too much credit here lol the only emotional arguments are coming from you and Europe and they are poor, really poor. They apparently acknowledge the science but don't recommend doing it necessarily because of a tiny risk and emotion. It's just sad. Not surprising coming from Europe as I said before. Tbh idc if you guys wanna do something foolish, do it.

[Jager66]

Ok a few things... If you are going to call me on a logical fallacy at least get it right. I could be called on appeal to authority but to mistake that for an emotional appeal could make someone wonder about your ability to make a rational judgement on this issue. Just because I made an appeal to authority does not mean I am wrong. That thing about the AAP is in the journal of medical ethics, I no longer have a subscription so can't link it but it's there. You know that I don't want to educate you and what is with this leftist thing you keep mentioning? Also, since this subject interests you, you should look into the psychological harm aspect, it's a new area of study, in relation to circ., but very interesting! Yeppers, I agree people are 100% free to make their own choices, yet another reason not to circ. a child, if they want it done they can do it as an adult when the benefits to STD reduction matter and they can have anesthetic.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Just because I made an appeal to authority does not mean I am wrong." If you are trying to prove your point as an appeal to authority you are wrong. I also did not formally say you had committed a fallacy. Although you're pushing the edge pretty closely I think. "That thing about the AAP is in the journal of medical ethics, I no longer have a subscription so can't link it but it's there." Then that isn't very helpful now is it? I don't believe they have retracted their viewpoint as of yet but you are welcome to try to prove that wrong if you like, as far as I can tell they shouldn't. Especially not for the sake of Euro-Emotional arguments. "You know that I don't want to educate you" I don't want you to educate me. I don't think you have the info because it probably doesn't exist. I'm giving you the opportunity to not look foolish. "and what is with this leftist thing you keep mentioning?" Europe is generally socialist/liberal and has questionable perspectives.

[Jager66]

OK, so it just occurred to me that perhaps I should make it clear what exactly my position is. I am saying circumcision of minors, especially infants, should not be done. I am NOT taking the position of creating a false dichotomy, that circumcision is either 100% wrong or 100% right regardless of outlying factors such as age, medical condition, individual choice. Or that there are no benefits to having it done and only harm is caused.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Also, since this subject interests you, you should look into the psychological harm aspect, it's a new area of study, in relation to circ., but very interesting!" Psychology interests me, pseudo-science does not. And that is what you appear to be spreading. This reminds me of people who buy into propaganda. Is it possible that circumcision can cause psychological developmental issues? Sure. Does it seem likely to me thus far? No. But for the sake of respect in this discussion I did look into it briefly and found nothing that looked reputable, just more emotional arguments. "Yeppers, I agree people are 100% free to make their own choices, yet another reason not to circ. a child, if they want it done they can do it as an adult when the benefits to STD reduction matter and they can have anesthetic." I'm iffy on that, especially if the data is true. I don't think it should be compulsory though, thus far. Plenty of people have been circumcised. It's quite common.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 I stand by the data I put forward and it appears to be far more compelling than anything you've brought. If you want to buy into emotional 'data' and questionable methodology that's up to you. But I'm very glad I'm not in Europe . Their politics and social structure worry me.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "It is legitimate for parents to take into account cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions, in addition to the medical factors, when making this decision. Analgesia is safe and effective in reducing the procedural pain associated with circumcision; therefore, if a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided. If circumcision is performed in the newborn period, it should only be done on infants who are stable and healthy."

I don't know where you got the idea that they aren't given some form of pain killers though. Pretty sad you buy into that.

pediatrics.aappublications.org/.../686.full

[Jager66]

Are you honestly saying that STI risk reduction for children is a good reason to circ. a baby? I don't think you know what an emotional appeal is, it seems as though the logic of ethics is emotional appeal in your world, this is a very inaccurate interpretation. If you are seriously going to argue that trauma has no effect on the brain then you are going to have to overturn a huge amount of modern psychology, like nearly all of it. It is a well known fact that trauma can have huge negative effects on the brain, especially the developing brain. It is well known that circumcision is very traumatic on an infant. The only missing research link, that is currently being investigated, is the direct link that the trauma from circumcision can also cause these effects in individuals and so far all evidence, which is not yet conclusive, points to yes it does.

[Jager66]

www.thewholenetwork.org/.../infant-circumcision-with-anesthesia-does-it-really-help-the-pain

Pretty sad you buy into torturing infants.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Are you honestly saying that STI risk reduction for children is a good reason to circ. a baby?" Potentially sure. They get rid of tonsils for similar reasons too. As far as I can tell it's more than just that though. Yours is a fear argument, a weak one here, given that it's a common procedure that has limited if any repercussion. "I don't think you know what an emotional appeal is, it seems as though the logic of ethics is emotional appeal in your world, this is a very inaccurate interpretation." Logic and ethics don't really go hand in hand as far as deduction go. I was trying to avoid dragging that into this but you made me do it lol morality is subjective, always, UNLESS there is a God. So if you are trying to prove a point like this using "ethics" it isn't going to go very far most likely.

[Jager66]

https://cpj.sagepub.com/content/25/8/412.abstract

incase you can't click citations

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "It is well known that circumcision is very traumatic on an infant." And you have to substantiate this claim. I think we have a fallacy too if you're saying that it's proven because it's "well know". I can find the specific fallacy later if you like?

[Jager66]

Ok so bottom line. I do not believe in painfully mutilating the genitals of a nonconsenting minor so they can gain questionable benefits that won't even benefit them until they are an adult anyway, when they could elect to have the procedure of their own free will. You believe in subjecting nonconsenting infants to genital cutting regardless of any harm it may cause them because you do not believe they should have the right to make that choice for them self's, yet paradoxically you do not support mandatory circ. because free choice... Yeah we are not going to agree on this.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Pretty sad you buy into torturing infants."

Torturing infants? You literally just made me laugh out loud thank you lol I needed that today.

"www.thewholenetwork.org/.../infant-circumcision-with-anesthesia-does-it-really-help-the-pain"

Dude... Where are you finding these crappy links? Wow. Tin foil hat too?

"https://cpj.sagepub.com/content/25/8/412.abstract"

So babies are stressed because of that? As far as I know they are stressed from the birth process in general. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Stress doesn't equal pain. These arguments... so bad. People worry me these days... badly.

[Jager66]

https://www.circumcision.org/colic.htm
https://www.cirp.org/library/psych/
link.springer.com/.../978-1-4757-3351-8_12#page-1
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.../...CD47E868CDA0.f04t04
epublications.bond.edu.au/.../viewcontent.cgi
https://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/
www.psychologytoday.com/.../circumcision-s-psychological-damage
www.amsciepub.com/.../pr0.2001.88.3c.1105
https://hpq.sagepub.com/content/7/3/329.short

plenty more out there

[Jager66]

www.nocirc.org/statements/breastfeeding.php#n25
https://www.cirp.org/library/birth/marshall2/
https://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/fleiss.html
https://www.cirp.org/library/pain/gunnar/
https://www.cirp.org/library/pain/anand/
https://www.cirp.org/library/pain/howard/
https://www.cirp.org/library/birth/emde/
https://www.tau.ac.il/~sadeh/baby/stress.htm

a few more, these all have sources cited so don't be shy about clicking those.

[Jager66]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_zkKciuIpA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSJG2QS4mvI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbiq2-ukfhM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRaNwIdrKuc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIDvdzjzSto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S16EHfKRLfc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=px_BWoezt2A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sf7uq9NUOnY

some supporting videos, very well made.

[Jager66]

Ok so what is your reasoning for cutting an infants penis instead of letting them decide when they are old enough to decide?

[Jager66]

You also seem to be struggling with the distinction between these two things. Emotional appeal: An emotional appeal uses the manipulation of the emotions rather than valid logic to win an argument. Ethics: that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions. Philosophy: the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "You also seem to be struggling with the distinction between these two things." I'm not struggling with any of that. I'm aware of all of it. The only person struggling is you. I've also read over many of those links as you just basically copied and pasted them from before if I'm not mistaken. Due to the fact that this is boring me now I'll tell you that after another quick glance many/most of those links were dissenting OPINIONS, bias, or None of which takes away from ANYTHING I've said. I have no idea why you aren't able to keep up. If you are attempting to use emotion to prove a point like this then you using an appeal to emotion. It depends on the nature of your claim. So I say again the only person confused is you. And you link youtube videos... Dude. Really? Okay I think we're starting to waste my time now. As I mentioned before I don't care if you people want to avoid vaccinations, keep your append, tonsils, wisdom teeth or whatever but keep your own craziness.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Ok so what is your reasoning for cutting an infants penis instead of letting them decide when they are old enough to decide?" That it has (AT LEAST POTENTIAL) medicinal benefits, also VERY low risk. Why aren't you able to remember this? You seem to think that philosophy is absolutely true or something. You do realize it isn't necessarily right? There are MANY different schools on it. ESPECIALLY when it comes to morality.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "a few more, these all have sources cited so don't be shy about clicking those." Lol you just gulp down the propaganda OR you actually believe this stuff. Either way... dude. I feel bad. But this is boring me now. Most of those links are from advocacy groups. The bias is reeking its way through.

[ComDom]

"Due to the fact that this is boring me now I'll tell you that after another quick glance many/most of those links were dissenting OPINIONS, bias, or just bad"**** whoops typo

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "I do not believe in painfully mutilating the genitals of a nonconsenting minor" And? That doesn't make your belief fact. I'm not sure why you think otherwise. It also isn't painful necessarily. Stress DOES NOT equal pain. I'd suggest you learn about pain responses it manifests itself different. "they could elect to have the procedure of their own free will." This is true. It doesn't have to be compulsory. I'd just prefer that people with your mentality be kept elsewhere like Europe . Along with people who don't believe in the death penalty for serial killers/rapists, anti-vaccines, anti-gun radicals, etc. It's among the dangerous mentalities to have. "yet paradoxically you do not support mandatory circ. because free choice" It isn't a paradox you just aren't grasping it for some reason. I'd prefer things LIKE that be mandatory but I wouldn't want to impose it on EVERYONE. The same way I wouldn't want murder and things like that to be illegal for EVERYONE.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 as long as it isn' affecting my family, country, or people I'm obligated to protect it isn't relevant to me what Europe or other areas do. I honestly couldn't care less. Let their bad decisions manifest themselves. I think it's a pretty interesting experiment tbh. I just don't want their malignant mentality spreading and infecting where I am.

[Jager66]

I don't think philosophy is absolutely truth at all, that is totally counter the nature of philosophy anyway, Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric and all that. I am simply pointing out that is has nothing to do with emotional appeal. What I think, that I have been saying since the very start, is that the world authorities on this subject, infant circ, do not agree with the practice, especially in first world countries, because of a combination of factors. Including, health risks, somewhat questionable health benefits and Ethics. That is the expert logical opinion based on all the science. I post to those advocacy sites because they compile information with references in an orderly manner, I don't have hours and hours to track down every single study and analysys. The research is not made bad just because someone puts it on an advocacy cite, or news article etc.. Europe has a shit load of problems they have created for them self's to be sure! but so does the U. S.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "the world authorities on this subject, infant circ, do not agree with the practice" here we disagree and rightfully so. The real world authorities are probably American. I'm not sure how you came up with your view. Besides even most of Europe isn't opposed to it, as far as I know. They just don't think it should be compulsory and neither do I. "That is the expert logical opinion based on all the science." Lol "expert logical opinion" ... I don't even know how to respond to that other than to say "sigh." I weep for the future. "I post to those advocacy sites because they compile information with references" No you posted there because you're bias, obviously. Like heavily bias, ridiculously so. "Europe has a shit load of problems they have created for them self's to be sure! but so does the U. S." Agreed and our problems grew worse when we adopted political and economic ideas from Europe . We should be going further away from Europe ... not closer.

[Jager66]

"here we disagree and rightfully so. The real world authorities are probably American. I'm not sure how you came up with your view. Besides even most of Europe isn't opposed to it, as far as I know. They just don't think it should be compulsory and neither do I." The authorities from nearly ever first world country, including the U. S. have stated as much. I will not repeat or educate you, do your own leg work. " I don't even know how to respond to that other than to say "sigh." I weep for the future. " Ignore the facts all you want, it won't change them even if you cry about it. "No you posted there because you're bias, obviously. Like heavily bias, ridiculously so." No i posted because , as I've said from the start I will not do the leg work for you. If you want to claim bias you have to make a logical argument. All you have done is make a satement and I am to take it as fact. I have refuted your sources and accepted that parts that are true. You have not, you are projecting.

[Jager66]

Circ. is not a political issue, it is a medical and ethical issue. The fact you can't discern that rather large difference is exposing a massive lack of logical ability on your part. Every source of information that does not fit your ideology is ignored. You confuse politics, ethics, medical issues, emotional appeal and then interchange them seemingly at random. This makes it glaringly obvious that you don't even understand the basics of logical thought, let alone argument. This issue is not a dichotomy yet that is exactly what you are arguing for, this further exposes your ignorance of the issue. You will only agree with experts if their opinion is in alignment with your own. This is a perfect example of emotional bias. You have provided no counter arguments except for the arbitrary statement about your feelings on politics as "evidence" that your right. I am done, feel free to have the last wor

[ComDom]

@Jager66 Lol you don't even understand logic but you think you do. It's actually quite amusing. Of course it's a political issue. Are you high? Do you even understand what politics are? What bias is? You haven't refuted anything. You brought AT BEST dissenting opinions. Most European countries recognize the potential benefits of doing circumcision. You don't have arguments, you have bias and it bores me. "Every source of information that does not fit your ideology is ignored." I never said I wasn't bias. I am. You have a very poor attention span. I acknowledged one of your sources. The rest were bad. Have a nice day! tl;dr you have not educated anyone nor have you done viable research. Your views are poor and it shows through. You don't understand logic and you exemplify a poor educational system. I'd suggest you bother someone else with your nonsense but your views are tedious, unfounded and nothing more.

[ComDom]

@Jager66 "Ignore the facts all you want, it won't change them even if you cry about it." This was my favorite part of the entire discussion. Well your misuse of logic was actually my favorite part but this came in a close second lol You have no facts. You have [dissenting] opinion. Weak ones in all honesty. As I mentioned before I don't care what you guys do but keep your emotional/irrational filth to yourself.

[Seppel]

It's good for nothing

[JackKerouac77]

Gosh, as if Meson couldn't be more of a circumcision celebrity!

[clhcountry]

Circumcision is not as popular as it used to be. It's mainly done in the Americas. Jewish community still perform circumsion. And others for hygiene purpose.