Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

View Poll Results: How do you feel about circumcision?
For 11 26.19%
Against 31 73.81%
Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-02-2011, 10:26 AM   #61 (permalink)
Unrepentant Ass-Mod
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Il Duce View Post
female "circumcision" is practised here, but only to the extent of taking a "nick" on their clitoris, which again, also makes the Muslim girls hornier, and is not the total mutilation practised in the fundamentalist countries
Still subjects women to unnecessary increased risk of obstetrical problems. What's the purpose for it as a religious rite? To piss women off when they try to gratify themselves?
__________________
first.am
lucifer_sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 10:26 AM   #62 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucifer_sam View Post
What I would like to know is are there any people who were sexually active prior to circumcision that can reflect on how sex changed for them? These are the only people who can have subjective knowledge of both sides of the argument (objective knowledge, in this situation, is indeterminate).
obviously I can't get my father to type this here but his penis was shorter than average prior to circumcision and he couldn't really penetrate far enough into the vagina, but after circumcision, it lengthened considerably

i have contemplated circumcision myself on this fact alone

i have watched enough porn of circumcised Malay men entering Malay girls, and the girl is not any less excited about the coitus and neither was the man

and the only negative thing about male circumcision that i can think of is that when during the Holocaust, many Jews were trying to pass off as gentiles and escape Nazi Germany, but their circumcised penises tipped off the SS or the Gestapo (they conducted exams on their sexual organs)
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 11:26 AM   #63 (permalink)
Juicious Maximus III
 
tore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 5,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Il Duce View Post
the only negative thing about male circumcision that i can think of is that when during the Holocaust, many Jews were trying to pass off as gentiles and escape Nazi Germany, but their circumcised penises tipped off the SS or the Gestapo (they conducted exams on their sexual organs)
Then you don't know much about circumcision and neither have you been reading the prior posts in the thread.

Take a look at what Evangelica posted f.ex :

Quote:
Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA View Post
About urinary tract infections:
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says that the absolute risk of developing a urinary tract infection (UTI) in an uncircumcised male infant is low (at most ~ 1%) (1999 Circumcision Policy Statement), and UTIs are usually successfully treated with antibiotics.

Thom, why should people cut off part of children's genitalia simply because parents may fail to teach children proper hygiene, especially when urinary tract infections are treatable and the harm caused by urinary tract infections is much less than the permanent damage caused by circumcision? Perhaps if parents were threatened with the loss of part of their genitalia, they'd do a better job teaching their kids about proper hygiene!

About sexually transmitted diseases:
Studies in the U.S. have found that intact males do not have an increased risk of STD infection, including HIV (Laument, E.O., et al. (1997) JAMA, 277:1052-1057 and Thomas, AG, et al. (2004) International AIDS Society).

I think you are referring to recent studies of African men who were circumcised in their late teens and adulthood. Although three studies in Africa found that men had approximately a 50% reduced risk of HIV infection in the year following circumcision, over 1% of the circumcised men still became infected with HIV (Bailey, R.C., et al. (2007) Lancet, 369: 943-656). One out of 100 circumcised men still got HIV in just one year!!!

Rather than circumcising babies, who are not sexually active, parents who fear that their child may contract a sexually transmitted disease can teach him about the most effective STD prevention techniques: abstinence, safer sex (which includes consistent use of condoms, fidelity to one's partner, and reduction in the number of partners), and genital hygiene (retracting the foreskin and washing and drying the penis shaft daily and after sexual activity).

About cancer of the penis:
The American Medical Association states that since penile cancer is so rare (0.9 to 1 per 100,000 men) and occurs late in life, circumcision as a preventive practice is not justified. One of the rarest cancers, penile cancer is even less common than male breast cancer! Known penile cancer risk factors are smoking cigarettes and having unprotected sexual relations with multiple partners.

If adults (18 years old and older) want to be circumcised, that is their right, but in my opinion newborn and older children should have a legal right to their intact, healthy bodies. Newborn and older kids should be allowed to grow up intact so that as adults they can decide for themselves if they wish to undergo cutting of their most private of body parts.


That's a really good question.

The organization Doctors Opposing Circumcision writes that "if we circumcise 100,000 boys we allegedly prevent 900 transient, curable UTIs (urinary tract infections) and one penile cancer case, in an 80-year-old (American Cancer Society Statistics). We have also caused between 1,000 complications (1 percent, AAP statistics) or 5,000 to 7,000 complications (5 to 7 percent, British Urology Statistics), including hundreds of permanent, sexually cripping, botched circumcisions and at least one death. The STD studies are murky and inconclusive and do not suggest prophylaxis worth even the immediate risk, let alone the lifetime losses."

Also consider the functions of the foreskin that are lost to the child forever due to circumcision. The foreskin has protective, sensory, and sexual functions. A baby boy's intact foreskin, which is almost always fused to the glans at birth much like the fingernail is fused to the nail bed, protects it from urine and fecal matter during the diaper stage, contains numerous erogenous, fine-touch sensory receptors similar to those in the lips, and matures into a natural sliding and gliding mechanism that enables non-abrasive sexual activity.

Three of the most sensitive areas of the natural, intact penis are (1) the specialized foreskin structure called the "ridged band," (2) the tip of the foreskin, and (3) the frenulum, which attaches the foreskin to the glans, all of which are removed by circumcision. A recent study found that "five locations on the uncircumcised penis that are routinely removed at circumcision were more sensitive than the most sensitive location on the circumcised penis," which is the circumcision scar on the ventral side (Sorrells, M.L., et al. (2007) Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis, BJU International, 99: 864 - 869).
__________________
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.
tore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 11:47 AM   #64 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Paedantic Basterd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 5,126
Default

I'm not sure that how porn appears qualifies as a scientific sample base for a claim.

That story a couple of pages back absolutely horrified me. I didn't know that sort of thing happened.
__________________
Paedantic Basterd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 11:55 AM   #65 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,028
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Il Duce View Post
look, man, do you even know what procedures are involved?

male circumcision is just removing a useless piece of skin that sheathes the head

female "circumcision" involves removing the clitoris entirely, which is a bit like cutting off the shaft of the penis

2 totally different things

please do get your facts right

some men have circumcision even when there's no religion involved

no woman would have "circumcision" for the sake of science, unless there's cancer of the clitoris

edit:- my father had circumcision because the foreskin was actually inhibiting his erectile muscles

i had friends who are circumcised purely because of hygiene and feel, who are neither Muslims nor Jews, as doome guys on this board

and about masturbation, it doesn't make them any less horny, in fact, my Muslim friends learn to wank earlier than me, purely because of applying soap on their penis and as it's more sensitive, masturbate at an earlier age BECAUSE of circumcision

female "circumcision" is practised here, but only to the extent of taking a "nick" on their clitoris, which again, also makes the Muslim girls hornier, and is not the total mutilation practised in the fundamentalist countries

can you see now how i can be indifferent about one, and against the other?
You have provided me with exactly zero new information here. My comparison was that both forms of circumcision involve unnecessary surgery performed for cultural reasons rather than medical ones. And my comparison still stands.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by P A N View Post
i'm not gonna spend my life on music banter trying to convince people the earth is flat.
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die


last.fm
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 11:57 AM   #66 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,028
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
This guy, or so they say:

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucifer_sam View Post
Nope.
Yes, it is actually what they say, whether any of us agree or not.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by P A N View Post
i'm not gonna spend my life on music banter trying to convince people the earth is flat.
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die


last.fm
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 11:59 AM   #67 (permalink)
Facilitator
 
VEGANGELICA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Where people kill 30 million pigs per year
Posts: 1,993
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Il Duce View Post
look, man, do you even know what procedures are involved?

male circumcision is just removing a useless piece of skin that sheathes the head

female "circumcision" involves removing the clitoris entirely, which is a bit like cutting off the shaft of the penis

2 totally different things

please do get your facts right
Duce, are you sure YOUR facts are right?

The facts:

(1) The male foreskin is *not* just a "useless piece of skin that sheathes the head":

Quote:
Cold, C.J. and Taylor, J. R. (1999) The Prepuce, British Journal of Urology (1999), 83, Suppl. 1. 34-44
http://www.mgmbill.org/theprepuce.pdf

"The prepuce is a specialized, junctional mucocutaneous tissue which marks the boundary between mucosa and skin; it is similar to the eyelids, labia minora, anus and lips. The unique innervation of the prepuce establishes its function as an erogenous tissue."
(2) Male circumcision in which the foreskin is removed parallels Type I Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

One variation of Type I FGM is when the female foreskin (prepuce or clitoral hood) is removed, using definitions of FGM given by the American Academy of Pediatrics:

Female Genital Mutilation -- Committee on Bioethics 102 (1): 153 -- AAP Policy

Different degrees and variations of genital cutting exist for both males and females. All are a human rights violation, in my opinion, when done on an underaged individual.

(3) Some studies have found apparent medical benefits to female gentital mutilation. You wrote earlier that "there are no benefits to female circumcision."

A Tanzanian study found that circumcised women had a significantly lower risk of HIV infection: Stallings, R. Y., and Karugendo, E. (2005) Female Circumcision and HIV Infection in Tanzania: For Better or For Worse, International Aids Society Conference

http://ww4.aegis.org/conferences/ias...5/TuOa0401.pdf

(4) Even when the exposed clitoris is cut off, in the severe form of Type I FGM, this is not as severe as cutting off a man's penis as women can still experience orgasms.

The reason this is true is that FGM leaves enough of the unexposed arms of the clitoris, which run on either side of the vulva, intact for women to still achieve orgasm.

See Clitoris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for structure of clitoris: the clitoral glans (what you see on the outside) is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.

See Catania et al. (2007) Pleasure and orgasm in women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C), J Sex Med, Nov;4(6):1666-78, for evidence that females whose genitals are altered by clitoral head removal can still experience orgasm: Pleasure and orgasm in women with Female Genital M... [J Sex Med. 2007] - PubMed - NCBI

None of these issues above gets rid of the underlying human rights violations when people alter children's healthy, functional genitalia. Changing children's ability to experience sexuality as they would have if they had been allowed to retain their natural bodies is wrong.

People should not be pricking, cutting, ripping, crushing, or removing parts of healthy children's genitalia! Also, I feel it is extremely wrong to subject children to unnecessary and severe pain through genital cutting.

* * * * *

As for the question of what a man's sexual experiences might be like if he had not been circumcised as a baby:

I imagine that a male who lacks his foreskin is a little like a person who has had his outer ear (the auricle) removed. He can still hear (he can have an orgasm), but he is missing some of the sensitivity (no sensitive earlobes; can't gather as much sound), and the way he moves to hear (achieve orgasm) is altered to compensate for the losses.

I have read that circumcised men, in order to reach orgasm, need bigger motions, which can sometimes have negative ramifications for both the circumcised men and their partners. I want to get the full article of this, but here is an interesting abstract:

Quote:
Frisch et al. (2011) Male circumcision and sexual function in men and women: a survey-based, cross-sectional study in Denmark, International Journal of Epidemiology.
Male circumcision and sexual function in men and women: a survey-based, cross-sectional study in Denmark

"Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfilment."
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan:
If a chicken was smart enough to be able to speak English and run in a geometric pattern, then I think it should be smart enough to dial 911 (999) before getting the axe, and scream to the operator, "Something must be done! Something must be done!"

Last edited by VEGANGELICA; 10-02-2011 at 12:17 PM.
VEGANGELICA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 12:04 PM   #68 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Paedantic Basterd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 5,126
Default

Do you think that female circumcision decreases likelihood of HIV, in that it decreases a woman's overall desire for sex?
__________________
Paedantic Basterd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 12:44 PM   #69 (permalink)
Unrepentant Ass-Mod
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA View Post
(3) Some studies have found apparent medical benefits to female gentital mutilation. You wrote earlier that "there are no benefits to female circumcision."

A Tanzanian study found that circumcised women had a significantly lower risk of HIV infection: Stallings, R. Y., and Karugendo, E. (2005) Female Circumcision and HIV Infection in Tanzania: For Better or For Worse, International Aids Society Conference

http://ww4.aegis.org/conferences/ias...5/TuOa0401.pdf

As for the question of what a man's sexual experiences might be like if he had not been circumcised as a baby:

I imagine that a male who lacks his foreskin is a little like a person who has had his outer ear (the auricle) removed. He can still hear (he can have an orgasm), but he is missing some of the sensitivity (no sensitive earlobes; can't gather as much sound), and the way he moves to hear (achieve orgasm) is altered to compensate for the losses.

I have read that circumcised men, in order to reach orgasm, need bigger motions, which can sometimes have negative ramifications for both the circumcised men and their partners.
These two are bullshit.

First, correlation =/= causation; don't try to establish baseline similarities between FGM and HIV incidence. How many partners do you think devout Muslim women have in their lifetimes? See what the incidence of HIV is in married Muslim women vs. unmarried. There's your cause.

Second, you really must be confused if you think that about circumcised men. The glans is the most sensitive part of the penis, you aren't aware that its increased exposure amounts to more unusual forms of stimulation? There are more accessible ways to bring circumcised men to climax than uncircumcised, I imagine.
__________________
first.am
lucifer_sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2011, 12:47 PM   #70 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
midnight rain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,662
Default

I'm confused, I thought the foreskin retracts during erections so that it doesn't even come into play during sex?
__________________
last.fm
midnight rain is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.