Circumcision on the eighth day

Originally posted by C Hess
Who the hell looks at his/her baby boy and thinks: "You know what? How about we grab a knife and cut part of his dick off? That should be fun, right? Though I wonder what day would be the best day for this kind of thing. Honey, could you go get the bible please?"

I was quite pleased with mine it left me with a 9 inch stump.😀

Originally posted by redbadger
I was quite pleased with mine it left me with a 9 inch stump.😀

To cut off part of your baby's dick is just wrong, even if it is "just" the foreskin. You wanna go through that kind of pain as a grown-up, I've got no issue with it. To each his own, right, but a defenseless baby?

I bet you cried like a choir of soprano babies.

Originally posted by C Hess
To cut off part of your baby's dick is just wrong, even if it is "just" the foreskin. You wanna go through that kind of pain as a grown-up, I've got no issue with it. To each his own, right, but a defenseless baby?

I bet you cried like a choir of soprano babies.

my wife is impressed

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Performing surgery on a helpless child without there being a medical necessity is bad, mmmkay.

As I predicted, is furiously opposing female circumcision but has no problem with the male kind.

Didn't you want gender equality or something? Probably only when it suits you, right?

The two are NOT EQUAL!

Get a clue!

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Mind you, she said "no ill effects". I am very certain that we could find some "good" examples of ill effects that happened during or after this completely unnecessary surgery.

Only if botched. People also get the wrong limb amputated. There is malpractice among any number of medical specialties. It is NOT the norm.

I defy you to find ANYone who 'remembers' the pain of their circumcision.

And almost everyone who is circumcised is glad it was done. I can find examples of uncircumcised males who had to have horribly disfiguring surgeries because their hygiene wasn't up to par. A pretty high price to pay for not snipping it off early. And in Abraham's time, good hygiene was not exactly practiced by everyone.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Circumcision and "female circumcision" are in NO way similar. The first has been done for literally thousands of years and has been shown to have no ill effects and the second is indeed life-threatening mutilation.

For you to say they are similar is just gross ignorance.

Female circumcision has also been practiced for a while and in many parts of the world. How many years should they continue to practice it before it becomes OK? Or must it be certified by your religion first?
As for 'life threatening mutilation' vs 'no ill effect' methinks it is you that is the one exhibiting gross ignorance.
If either practice is carried out by trained surgeons in a hospital, then the prognosis for either is pretty good. If either is carried out by without medical knowledge, as has been common practice in the past, then either practice can, result in death.

I believe your real problem with female circumcision is that it affects the experience of sex, but why not say so, instead of the clearly ridiculous appeal to antiquity?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
I am not sure. Though I do know that circumcision is very prevelant in Muslim societies outside of America.

I just thought it was funny to answer "Americans". Cause there are a lot of them here.

Here you go. Educate yourself. Everything you ever wanted to know about circumcision.

Even though this paper came out in 2007, the only dated info is of course the data on populations and other demographic info.

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241596169_eng.pdf


For comparison, I invite you to read about female circumcision, or, as this wikipedia page shows, they redirect you to the female genital mutilation page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Female_circumcision&redirect=no

Read both and then try to come here and say they are the same.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Only if botched. People also get the wrong limb amputated. There is malpractice among any number of medical specialties. It is NOT the norm.

I defy you to find ANYone who 'remembers' the pain of their circumcision.

And almost everyone who is circumcised is glad it was done. I can find examples of uncircumcised males who had to have horribly disfig ...[text shortened]... ipping it off early. And in Abraham's time, good hygiene was not exactly practiced by everyone.

Yes, there are ill effects only if botched. Only if this COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY PROCEDURE is botched will there be ill effects.

Why risking ill effects on a helpless child who has no say in this when the procedure is COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY?

How often do babies get the wrong limb amputated when there was no reason for the procedure in the first place?

How would you feel if daddy decides to give his one year old a tattoo because he thinks it looks awesome? You okay with that?

How about mommy deciding the little toe of her son has to be amputated because she also misses one toe and she wants to be close to him.

You okay with that?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Here you go. Educate yourself. Everything you ever wanted to know about circumcision.

Even though this paper came out in 2007, the only dated info is of course the data on populations and other demographic info.

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241596169_eng.pdf


For comparison, I invite you to read about female circumcision, or, a ...[text shortened]... emale_circumcision&redirect=no

Read both and then try to come here and say they are the same.

They are both the same in that the procedure is completely unnecessary. And that the patient has no say in it.

Are you really angry when I cut off your arm yet are fairly okay with me cutting off your thumb?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Female circumcision has also been practiced for a while and in many parts of the world. How many years should they continue to practice it before it becomes OK? Or must it be certified by your religion first?
As for 'life threatening mutilation' vs 'no ill effect' methinks it is you that is the one exhibiting gross ignorance.
If either practice is carri ...[text shortened]... he experience of sex, but why not say so, instead of the clearly ridiculous appeal to antiquity?

Let me ask you, then. Would you rather have just your foreskin snipped off or would you rather have the entire glans removed (or, depending on who's doing the cutting, the entire penis)?

Why don't you educate yourself on exactly what is the horror of FGM before trying to come in here and tell me it's "OK"? How many of the estimated 80% of girls in central Africa who get mutilated in this fashion are in hospitals? If you're lucky, maybe the blade will be sharp that day and maybe you won't bleed to death. Analgesics? Anesthesia? Antibiotics? Forget it.

Compared to FGM, getting male circumcision is like getting a haircut.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Only if botched. People also get the wrong limb amputated. There is malpractice among any number of medical specialties. It is NOT the norm.

I defy you to find ANYone who 'remembers' the pain of their circumcision.

And almost everyone who is circumcised is glad it was done. I can find examples of uncircumcised males who had to have horribly disfig ...[text shortened]... ipping it off early. And in Abraham's time, good hygiene was not exactly practiced by everyone.

Here's an extract of data from the 'Circumcision Reference Library', it's a wonder what a quick Google search will find, which is rather substantial.

Ramos and Boyle (2001) investigated the psychological effects associated with medical and ritual "operation tuli" circumcision procedures in the Philippines. Some 1577 boys aged 11 to 16 years (1072 boys circumcised under medical procedures; 505 subjected to ritual circumcision) were surveyed to see if genital cutting led to the development of PTSD(Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). Interestingly, Mezey and Robbins (2001) estimated the incidence of PTSD as 1.0% to 7.8% in the general British population where circumcision is not very prevalent. On the other hand, using the PTSD-I questionnaire (Watson et al., 1991) in a predominantly circumcised population, Ramos and Boyle observed an incidence of PTSD of almost 70% among boys subjected to ritual circumcision, and 51% among boys subjected to medical circumcision (with local anaesthetic). Long-term follow-up would be needed to gauge the extent to which PTSD persists over the lifespan of these circumcised boys.

http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/boyle6/

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Yes, there are ill effects only if botched. Only if this COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY PROCEDURE is botched will there be ill effects.

Why risking ill effects on a helpless child who has no say in this when the procedure is COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY?

How often do babies get the wrong limb amputated when there was no reason for the procedure in the first ...[text shortened]... putated because she also misses one toe and she wants to be close to him.

You okay with that?

Tell that to the World Health Organization. Circumcision has reduced the transmission of HIV in central Africa where it was pushed starting in the 80s.

Did you read the WHO paper at all?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Here's an extract of data from the 'Circumcision Reference Library', it's a wonder what a quick Google search will find, which is rather substantial.

Ramos and Boyle (2001) investigated the psychological effects associated with medical and ritual "operation tuli" circumcision procedures in the Philippines. Some 1577 boys aged 11 to 16 years (10 ...[text shortened]... ver the lifespan of these circumcised boys.

http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/boyle6/

I was talking about the VAST majority who are circumcised as newborns.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I was talking about the VAST majority who are circumcised as newborns.

There's more -

Hammond's (1997) sample of circumcised men reported emotional harm (83% ), physical harm (82% ), general psychological harm (75% ), and low self-esteem (74% ). The circumcised men frequently reported feeling mutilated (62% ), unwhole (61% ), resentful (60% ), abnormal/unnatural (60% ), that one's human rights had been infringed (60% ), angry (54% ), frustrated (53% ), violated (50% ), inferior to genitally intact males (47% ), impeded sexually (43% ), and betrayed by one's parents (34% ). Similar findings emerged from a larger sample of 546 circumcised men studied by Hammond (1999).

How does this data marry with your that claim that 'almost everyone who is circumcised is glad it was done'? Throwing it back at ya, here you go. Educate yourself.

http://www.noharmm.org/bju.htm

Originally posted by redbadger
my wife is impressed

Well, you know, as long as your wife's happy, it's okay then.