Im definitely against it,see why
www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/
www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/
are you pro or against circumcision?
- Thread starter Q25
- Start date
there is a thread in ethics forum about this
Well it is a bad choice for some simply because circumcision causes a significant lack of sensation (well that also might be a good choice for some too).
Guyute...welcome dude.
Guyute...welcome dude.
As I have been circumcized for nearly all my life, I have no idea if it causes any lack of sensation. All I know is that what I get seems like more than enough for me. (though I guess you can't really have too much) What I do know is that, having been in enough locker rooms, the uncircumcized penis is one of the ugliest things imaginable. I wouldn't pee out of one if I had the choice.
Additionally, I had an uncle who had to be circumcized at the age of 45 because of periodic infections. Because it was done so late in life he had to get a whole lot of stitches and had a lot of pain afterwards. He certainly wished he had it done at birth.
Additionally, I had an uncle who had to be circumcized at the age of 45 because of periodic infections. Because it was done so late in life he had to get a whole lot of stitches and had a lot of pain afterwards. He certainly wished he had it done at birth.
Evolutionarily, is it even conceivable that the foreskin could be a disadvantageous trait? :bugeye:
That's not what I mean, dude.
As in... how could it even exist today if it were a disadvantage?
Wouldn't it have been bred out long ago if it were biologically harmful, e.g. causing chronic infection?
As in... how could it even exist today if it were a disadvantage?
Wouldn't it have been bred out long ago if it were biologically harmful, e.g. causing chronic infection?
why is hitler quoted on that site?
Where?
The message you have entered is too short.... blah...
The message you have entered is too short.... blah...
Wouldn't necessarily breed out any faster than, lets say, the appendix or anything else. Remember that the human body only had to stay fully functional for 35 years and after that it was free to crap out. Now, everyone wants to get to at least 75.
It no doubt had a purpose in the days before underwear. It probably protected the glans and kept it from getting caloused. We don't need that today.
It no doubt had a purpose in the days before underwear. It probably protected the glans and kept it from getting caloused. We don't need that today.
Ahhh... calluses... makes sense!
Nebuchadnezzaar
Registered Senior Member
Can i ask how you found that site? what were you looking for and why?
I'm neither pro nor against, i don't have kids yet.
I'm neither pro nor against, i don't have kids yet.
Against! The only reason against it is possible infections, but hey, lack of maintenance is just not an issue for most guys.
that was a shameless reaction based site designed solely to convince you of one point of view.
i'm ashamed to say it worked on me. but really i've been on the fence for a while leaning towards against but mostly at 'who cares'. finally taking a standpoint. there's no need to go around mutilating perfectly healthy babies.
would it get locked if i started a poll asking who is and who isn't?
i'm ashamed to say it worked on me. but really i've been on the fence for a while leaning towards against but mostly at 'who cares'. finally taking a standpoint. there's no need to go around mutilating perfectly healthy babies.
would it get locked if i started a poll asking who is and who isn't?
Without medical reason, I'm against. I have had it done though, but I needed it, as mine was too small, and it was constricting the flow of urine through my penis (I discovered this aged four). Two other friends have also had the same problem, one needed circumcising too, and the other just needed a bit of alteration.
As to loss of sensitivity, well, what I've got works fine, so I have no grumbles.
I don't think it should be done to children on religious grounds, or just because the parents prefer it. It's not their right to deny the child the chance to make that decision for themselves, and I don't think you'd get many adults choosing to do it for no good reason.
As to loss of sensitivity, well, what I've got works fine, so I have no grumbles.
I don't think it should be done to children on religious grounds, or just because the parents prefer it. It's not their right to deny the child the chance to make that decision for themselves, and I don't think you'd get many adults choosing to do it for no good reason.
John Connellan
Valued Senior Member
I've got a condition called phimosis where the opening of my penis is very small when erect but it looks quite normal when flaccid. I probably should get circumcised or get some kind of surgery but I just don't want to. I never get infections down there and it is as easy to clean as a normal penis when flaccid.
One thing always bothers me though. If there are any women out there, what would u really think if your new date had a phimotic penis like me
??? I have gotten differing views off women in the past.
One thing always bothers me though. If there are any women out there, what would u really think if your new date had a phimotic penis like me
??? I have gotten differing views off women in the past.I'm entirely against circumcision, especially when it's done at a young age and without the consent of the individual being circumcised. It's nothing but a bizarre ritualistic mutilation of a boy's genitals and that's that. According to most medical sources I've consulted phimosis is pretty much the only medical problem that one needs to worry about if they keep their foreskin. Don't worry though, John Connellan, it is apparently very easy to treat with a topical steroid, getting circumcised to treat phimosis is like cutting off your fingers to prevent carpel tunnel syndrome. I’ll post some links to back up my position on that a little later, I’m in the computer commons of my university right now and I worry that people might freak out a bit if they catch me looking at websites with diagrams of big throbbing uncircumcised members.
Being a gay man I’ve handled quite a few peni in my time. Indeed I doubt that there’s a better authority short of actual medical training on the subject of penises than a gay man. We use them for business and pleasure, and never leave home without one! I myself was circumcised at a very young age, and of course have no memory of a foreskin, and was a bit confused the first time I saw one. Though I’ve been even more disheartened to learn that the flesh of the head of my penis shouldn’t be so damn rough, as it stands it’s a bit closer to being like the skin of the arch at the bottom of my foot, when it is in fact supposed to be moist and soft, not entirely unlike your tongue. We who have been circumcised are missing out on a lot of feeling down there, and it’s a damn shame!
Being a gay man I’ve handled quite a few peni in my time. Indeed I doubt that there’s a better authority short of actual medical training on the subject of penises than a gay man. We use them for business and pleasure, and never leave home without one! I myself was circumcised at a very young age, and of course have no memory of a foreskin, and was a bit confused the first time I saw one. Though I’ve been even more disheartened to learn that the flesh of the head of my penis shouldn’t be so damn rough, as it stands it’s a bit closer to being like the skin of the arch at the bottom of my foot, when it is in fact supposed to be moist and soft, not entirely unlike your tongue. We who have been circumcised are missing out on a lot of feeling down there, and it’s a damn shame!
ugh! disgusting new development on the circumcision front. kim cattrall uses a face cream made out of human foreskin. naomi campbell uses a placenta cream. what?!