If Mort Divine ruled the world

[Vilden]

It was me you quoted and I mentioned cultural reasons as a bad reason for it, that's why I asken this . I also think ear piercings on babies should be banned.

 

[Baroque]

It was me you quoted and I mentioned cultural reasons as a bad reason for it, that's why I asken this . I also think ear piercings on babies should be banned.

How about, you simply don't have your own children pierced, and not try to tell other people how to live their lives or raise their children?

 

[CiG]

America is the only western nation that circumcision still survives as a cultural norm in and from all the polls I've seen the main reason parents circumcise is because they prefer their baby resemble their father. There's a strong correlation between circumcised fathers and circumcised sons, as there is with uncircumcised fathers and uncircumcised sons.

You bastards need to catch up with the rest of the civilised world on this issue.

(didin't think the day would come were I call HBB sane).

The government should only intervene in extreme cases.

Many would argue that circumcision on an infant is an extreme case.

 

[Serjeant Grumbles]

There's a strong correlation between circumcised fathers and circumcised sons, as there is with uncircumcised fathers and uncircumcised sons.

Fortunately, my parents spared me that fate even though my dad was circumcised. I guess it's because they ceremonially predicted my distress that my prepuce has not been carved with an iron knife. Let no man lay it bare. While the waning moon wanders, let not misled men remove it.

 

[Vilden]

How about, you simply don't have your own children pierced, and not try to tell other people how to live their lives or raise their children?

Yeah that mind set usually works really well... do you have the same opinion on parents beating their children?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

The parents should have the decision to make on circumcision, not the government. The example you chose is obviously far more extreme than circumcision, it's not a fair analogy.

Why should parents have a right to make a permanent surgical decision with lifelong negative consequences to solve a problem that can already be avoided a dozen different ways? Even hardcore libertarians believe in the principle of "My right to swing my fist ends where your face begins".

 

[CiG]

Circumcision on an infant most certainly violates the NAP.

 

[Baroque]

Why should parents have a right to make a permanent surgical decision with lifelong negative consequences to solve a problem that can already be avoided a dozen different ways? Even hardcore libertarians believe in the principle of "My right to swing my fist ends where your face begins".

It is your opinion that the consequences are negative, it is not a fact. And you're supposed to be the model of a healthy sexual individual?

Do you want me to tell you what you should and shouldn't do with your kids? Oh wait you don't have kids yet you want to tell other people about theirs.

There are obviously different standards between a parent and child than between an adult and another adult.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

debates over dick-skin ... lol, you gotta love this place.

 

[Serjeant Grumbles]

The parents should have the decision to make on circumcision, not the government. The example you chose is obviously far more extreme than circumcision, it's not a fair analogy.

Where do you draw the line as to what cosmetic surgeries are acceptable to be performed on non-consenting infants?

 

[CiG]

Sadly I must agree with CIG here

Backhanded compliments are cool.

Do you want me to tell you what you should and shouldn't do with your kids? Oh wait you don't have kids yet you want to tell other people about theirs.

Because this has devolved to utter stupidity at this point that one can't even understand that circumcision should be a choice one makes when you're able to consent to changes with your body.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

It is your opinion that the consequences are negative, it is not a fact. And you're supposed to be the model of a healthy sexual individual?

Do you want me to tell you what you should and shouldn't do with your kids? Oh wait you don't have kids yet you want to tell other people about theirs.

There are obviously different standards between a parent and child than between an adult and another adult.

I'm cut bro, I'm clearly a posterchild of the effects of sexual mutilation. Anecdotally, I have never had pleasurable physical sensation in upper glans penis other than a tiny strip of frenulum that remained after circumcision. You can find many reports of similar from men that were cut; usually done for reasons like phimosis, so it's not like there's a lot of choice, but there's still a significant loss in sensation.

Last I heard you knocked up your insane ex-wife like an idiot and were bitching about child support payments. Did daddy come home and start making big decisions, or is daddy just regretful that he was too uninvolved to prevent his ex from mutilating his son?

 

[Vilden]

Backhanded compliments are cool.

Lol I ment "sadly" as in I'm depressed over alot of peoples stance on the matter here, and you were one of the few reasonable ones. Not in the "I would rather not agree with you but I do" kind of way. Sorry if it was unclear.

 

[CiG]

I was just messing around, it made me laugh though.

 

[Einherjar86]

Just to be clear, because I feel like this may have gotten lost in this clusterfuck of a discussion:

I don't feel like I have enough information one way or another when it comes to circumcising a male child. All I know is the information I've read in the past, and what I've verified based on web searches. I haven't consulted any doctors about this or looked any deeper into the matter. I've only been providing information associated with the CDC, WHO, etc. (which I don't simply take for granted). No one else provided any kind of data on widespread negative effects or risks of circumcision, when it is performed by a health professional (which it overwhelmingly is in the U.S.).

I simply object to the simplicity of the example when debating something like male privilege vs. female privilege. The concept of bodily autonomy raises many questions for me, such as what constitutes a "complete body" and when the sense of the body begins (many theorists would say that our sense of the body as a gestalt doesn't begin until much later in life, after circumcision is performed on infants - meaning that circumcised adults don't experience their bodies as somehow lacking, or incomplete).

I'm not convinced that circumcision constitutes an example of female privilege, or that it makes the point that women enjoy more privileges in our country today. Maybe this can direct the discussion back to the original topic...

 

[SentinelSlain]

Absent important political influence from religious groups in the future I don't see male or female circumcision lasting all that long. I remember being about 14 and going through the rights and wrongs of male circumcision myself. It was, at certain points, in certain parts of the world, done specifically to desensitize the penis and seeing that as desirable is obviously a kind of anti male sexuality point of view.

 

[CiG]

Just to clarify; I never provided any information pertaining to health pros/cons of circumcision because it wasn't really my point. It's not really debatable that circumcision can have some health benefits. It can and does.

I just don't think the negatives are outweighed by the positives. It would also be very hard for a circumcised male to judge how they feel about their bodies in my opinion, because they never experienced the choice to begin with. It's not really possible for a man to experience both being circumcised and uncircumcised unless you leave their genitals alone while they're a baby.

America is the only western nation where circumcision is normalised, it's surely worth considering this. Also for anybody that cares, the overwhelming majority of feminists are against male circumcision and intactivism makes up a decent chunk of the feminist movement, I find it interesting is all.

 

[Einherjar86]

I just don't think the negatives are outweighed by the positives. It would also be very hard for a circumcised male to judge how they feel about their bodies in my opinion, because they never experienced the choice to begin with. It's not really possible for a man to experience both being circumcised and uncircumcised unless you leave their genitals alone while they're a baby.

America is the only western nation where circumcision is normalised, it's surely worth considering this. Also for anybody that cares, the overwhelming majority of feminists are against male circumcision and intactivism makes up a decent chunk of the feminist movement, I find it interesting is all.

Then by way of apology, I'll just say that I understand your point about allowing the choice vs. foreclosing it. And I think you make a good point that removing the responsibility of that choice has an effect on how males experience their bodies. I would have to add to this, however, that this occurs all the time in other respects with infants and young children. Many choices are taken out of their hands in the name of public and personal health, one being vaccines and immunizations. Additionally, many very young children have body parts or tissues removed for health reasons. Currently, in the U.S., there is a general consensus among doctors (that is backed by the CDC and WHO) that male circumcision has health benefits that outweigh risks; and to be honest, I'm still foggy on what the risks actually are. But of course, general consensus in medicine has been misguided in the past, so I'm fine admitting that this attitude could change over the next hundred years. Unfortunately, I'm not a doctor, nor do I feel capable of assessing this issue confidently beyond soliciting some medical perspectives.

Ultimately, I'm having trouble reconciling this with female privilege. The opportunity to experience one's body as a whole isn't necessarily more valuable than concerns of public and private health, or even more valuable than other cultural traditions (if we're going with the "uncivilized" tack). I can't agree with this because, the way I see, there are more factors operating in this scenario than simply the right (or privilege) to a "complete body."

 

[CiG]

Apology accepted, though it wasn't needed.

Honestly just Google search "botched circumcisions" but beware, it's fairly horrific stuff.

I would have to add to this, however, that this occurs all the time in other respects with infants and young children. Many choices are taken out of their hands in the name of public and personal health, one being vaccines and immunizations.

Point taken, of course. I suppose I just wouldn't think circumcision is on the same level with vaccines and immunisations. Most of the studies I see merely suggest that babies are circumcised because fathers prefer their sons look like them.

Health concerns seem to be quite low on the list of reasons for circumcising. Unless anybody can show me something else?

It may be hard for Americans to truly understand this topic, in the same way non-Americans often can't understand why gun rights are such a controversial issue. Here it's just a given that you don't circumcise, for the most part. Same in England.

 

[CiG]

This is also something any/everybody might want to check out.

http://www.circinfo.org/USA_deaths.html