Clamping something so that it dies because of lack of blood flow after 24 hours in no way resembles clamping something and then cutting it off. OK.

Sorry if I was unaware that the new age practice differs from what I witnessed first hand. Twice.

And Frowny, do you even spend a few seconds trying to comprehend my points? Or do you simply just hop on the keyboard and put on your snarky hat?

A pot shouldn't call a kettle black.

Isborn: The only point I was trying to make is that other than my own ballpark frank - which I see on a regular basis - the only other franks I see are via porn. And 99% are snipped. A trend is a trend is a trend.

The original conversation here steered towards trying to link male circumcism with female genital mutilation as if to equate the two to make a point about unapproved violation. That wasn't my doing. I'm just commenting on the absurdity of that.




My frank is freaking beautiful BTW. At least Linny thinks so. And she's spent a ton more time up close and personal with it than I have. :p:

The only link was to point out that one is legal and one isn't, nobody arguing against MGM was equating the seriousness of either. Though it's fair to say that both are barbaric practices.

Except it wasn't.. We aren't trying to equate the two, we are arguing that both are violations of human rights.

Like I said earlier, murdering and breaking the speed limit are BOTH breaking the law, even though they are not closely related. Circumcisions and FGM are BOTH violations of human rights, even though they are not equal. It's really not that complicated.

Fair point, blah

And likewise, I've never seen a circumzised schnapper irl :p:

While I don't agree with you on everything you've said, you're right about the absurdity of equating the two types of circumcision. Someone had to bring some nuance to the discussion.

The first time I saw porn the men were circumcised. I thought I was deformed. I only realised I was normal when I was like 17/18.

It's not really a preferable method, although I'm sure there's some whacko out there who promotes it, but an umbilical cord will objectively fall off without intervention. A foreskin does not.

This is actually why anecdotal evidence is not evidence in the slightest. Your--no, NOBODY's experience is an accurate reflection of reality since it's such a tiny cross section of what is actually out there.

Please explain where I misunderstood. It would be beneficial to both of us.

We're discussing the ethics of circumcision, so when you come in with something like this it really really sounds like you value aesthetics over ethics. It also sounds like you think the popularity of something justifies it because you keep bringing up how common it is. Do either of these reflect how you feel? Because that is what it reads like.

I probably would've thought the same if it wasn't for my country's relatively early sexual education. I could criticize it, but compared to the sex ed stories I've heard from people in the US, Norwegian sex ed seems pretty far ahead.

At what point does a newborn baby have "human rights"? Circumcision is usually performed when a baby is less than a week old. Did I have human rights when I was 3-4 days old?

FGM is done anywhere between birth and young teenhood.

In the first case they cut off a little bit of useless skin that serves no purpose whatsoever. In the second, they cut off the clitoris. THE CLITORIS. And the majority of the vulva.

The decision by a father to have his daughter endure FGM is based on religious fanaticisim and female suppression.

Goofle and DWV, do me a favor: Go to Wiki and search "Human Rights Violation". Take ten minutes to read. Then come back and explain to me why snipping the foreskin off of a 3 day old baby brings you down so much.

You have rights before youre born, hence abortion laws. If you didn't have rights at 3-4 days then does that mean I could have legally drown you?

It doesn't bring me down.. I already said, I'm snipped, I don't care that I'm snipped, and it's really not that big of a deal(to me). That doesn't have any bearing on the fact that I should have been given the option and it was a violation of my person.

Are these genuine questions?

Stop equating male and female masturbation. Steering a conversation about male circumcision towards FGM is doing exactly that.

So the existence of a worse issue makes lesser issues non-issues? F. Ex. petty theft is not a crime because grand theft is worse. Or how on earth can anyone call Caitlyn Jenner brave when SOLDIERS exist?

It was very basic when I was in school and we only had about three lessons (aged 11/12) it was basically describing how babies are born and that's it. No advice on how to use condoms properly or the facts regarding STIs.

Were you able to answer questions at 3-4 days old?

PS: If you send me a pic of yours, I'll send you a pic of mine. (mine will be more manly looking. I have an awesome hood.)

Stop posting while drunk. If you can do it for three days I'll try detox.

I'm not drunk. Actually address my points please. If your stance has any validity it should be no issue.

Especially address this

Please explain where I misunderstood. It would be beneficial to both of us.

I don't know why I bother...

Thank god you escaped religion.

Again, I'm not in high school. I don't give a **** about trying to win a debate with your pretensious ****. Post your crap and I'll post mine. Maybe try being less one on one confrontational????

If we ever met face to face I'm seriously not sure if I'd hug you or simply punch you in the face.

Firm hand shake to assert dominance or you can just whip it out and see who's bigger.

http://westsidetoastmasters.com/reso...age/chap2.html



Book of Body Language

You started participating in a discussion the second you respond. If you really don't care, why are you even following up your points? This really just smells like you are incapable of defending your own stance when a light is shone on it.

I don't pick apart your posts just because I am a dick, I also do it partially because of how consistently idiotic your posts are.

http://www.smashthehsc.com/uploads/3...07724_orig.png

There. That's clearly all that you want from this thread. Now leave the discussion to those with functioning mental capabilities. Sorry to hurt your thinky cap with all these confusing and different words. I thought that maybe because you are a regular on a discussion forum, you might be interested in discussion. Please forgive me.

con·de·scend·ing

ˌkändəˈsendiNG/Submit
adjective

having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority.

"she thought the teachers were arrogant and condescending"
synonyms:

patronizing, supercilious, superior, snobbish, snobby, disdainful, lofty, haughty;

If that's what the word means, then when you're around I'm condescending as ****!

ftfy


I wish we disagreed more often, you'd be much more entertaining to argue against.

The decades age difference is really hurting the discussion here. I want it to be fun, but the age thing makes it hard.

Have a great evening. Drive safe.

I agree when the two are made out to be comparable it seems dishonest, but I don't think using one as an example to justify why the other should also be illegal does that. It's just consistency of reason.

:laughing:

Last few posts >>>

Ftr I think it can be very fun, you just have to learn not to view everything as a personal confrontation.

banging thread

Baby dicks ain't no joke.

i've sucked enough to know

I understand that sometimes it's easier to put on the blinders than holding your parents accountable for consenting in the mutilation of their own child.

Jesus Christ. Just how melodramtic can you be?

Your're beyond ridiculous at this point. Just stop.

There's some pretty serious **** going on in the world. A ****ing snipped foreskin is WAY DOWN on the ladder.

Grow up.

I can't think of many things worse than widespread acceptance of mutilating babies. Genocide, thousands dying in wars... starts to get a bit hard after that.

I've heard tale of more than one issue existing at once. Must've been a hoax, hang on let me check Snopes.

EDIT: They say that there have always been several issues all occurring at once for as long as we've been recording history and that none of them invalidate others.

The real mutilation here is the fact that it's been shoehorned into the "men's rights" thread -
a not so subtle "thread mutilation" (in the accurate sense of the term).
Apparently, "social justice warriors" are verboten, but the ridiculous, over-the-top circle jerk
that breeds "men's justice warriors" seems to be just fine.

Floyd the Barber: Mutilator

http://amayberrystateofmind.com/atta...ge/Floyd11.jpg

If this is a serious response I'm done. You are so out of touch. Circumscision = mutilation????

Are you ****ing serious? Are you ****ing serious??????

My brain just exploded. This is almost on par with the fugue I suffered recently. A senior member of this forum considers a normal medical procedure that happens to more than 8 out of 10 male babies born in the US as mutilation.

Goof: Google mutilation. Your brain needs work dude.

If only we could get rid of both and teach logic/debate on a widespread scale.

Advocating for human rights of Men isn't an ideology, It's just something morally sound people should naturally be inclined to do. Same with advocating for the rights of Women.

I sure do.

Are you saying that the popularity of the procedure has a bearing on whether or not it counts as mutilation?

I took your advice and googled it. Here is the definition:
mu·ti·late
ˈmyo͞odlˌāt/
verb
inflict a violent and disfiguring injury on.

It's not violent on any kind of large scale, so that's out. Now, does it qualify as a disfiguring injury? Let's see:
dis·fig·ure
disˈfiɡyər/
verb
past tense: disfigured; past participle: disfigured
spoil the attractiveness of.

So I guess that makes mutilation subjective, since attractiveness is inherently subjective.

You're technically right. The issue is that passionate advocates, much like SJWs, don't accomplish much except for jacking themselves off with self-congratulatory statements like:

It seriously gets tiring after awhile.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...37/529/211.gif

So it goes with tired arguments.

Circumcision = mutilation. Infuriating
Babies dont have rights because they cant ask questions. Logic
And youre the tired one? Lol


Mutilation is a subjective term.

I'm a dullard and you are a genious. Please enlighten me.

Spell it out for me. Be specific.