If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ree: Why do parents keep doing this?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Dan wrote:
On the contrary, it is the wiser pro-intact folks who study the insanity of medical profession in detail. But Dan, didn't you recently argue that your position was that of the major medical organisations? How can you turn around and say the opposite? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Wouldn't it be wiser just not allow this surgery as a parents choice unless there was a pre-existing condition that made it necessary? Parents cannot choose any other unnecessary surgery for their child, so why should circumcision be any different? Of coarse you can. I have the option of having my daughters accessory thumb removed and that would be totaly unnecessary. The extra thumb does not effect her hand control or anything. if nothing else I guess you could make the arguement that the extra nail on her hand makes it more likely that she could scratch herself. I WOULD have had this removed if we could have done it before she turned 1. As time went on every dr suggested a later and later age and by the time she can have it done I would rather just let her make up her own mind about this one. She is now 2 1/2 and would hate to do anything to make her hand unusable for any amount of time.. Tori |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
karen hill wrote:
No. From what I understand, it is to protect children from unnecessary surgery. In an adult male, it seems obvious that the foreskin is sexualized because it is on a sexual organ, in the same way a clitoral hood is. Far from it. I'm a gay man, and I can tell you that, while I've *heard* of the foreskin being sexually responsive, I've never seen it in real life. As for the foreskin being useless, I'm not a doctor or male so I cannot comment on its usefullness. But I do know that medical doctors have changed their minds on certain principles in the circumcison debate. For example, they said that babies cannot feel pain, but now the AAP says they feel incredible pain. There were studies done that said men who were circumcised practiced a wider variety of sex acts, including anal sex. I doubt many women want anal sex. Oh, my dear, I think you ought to talk to some women of the younger generation - or perhaps give it a try! :-) Then there is the issue of sensitivity. You cannot remove tissue without losing sensitivity. The foreskin has sensation because it is skin, and I wouldn't want to lose my clitoral hood, after all isn't it just a piece of useless skin? It's true that what sensitivity there is - despite not being particularly erogenous - is lost, but what is gained is access to - and improved stimulation of - the far more erogenous glans. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Tori M." wrote in message ...
Wouldn't it be wiser just not allow this surgery as a parents choice unless there was a pre-existing condition that made it necessary? Parents cannot choose any other unnecessary surgery for their child, so why should circumcision be any different? Of coarse you can. I have the option of having my daughters accessory thumb removed and that would be totaly unnecessary. The extra thumb does not effect her hand control or anything. if nothing else I guess you could make the arguement that the extra nail on her hand makes it more likely that she could scratch herself. Please don't be stupid. An extra thumb is not normal. A foreskin is normal. See the difference? I never said abnormalaties like cleft palate or hypospadias should not be fixed. I WOULD have had this removed if we could have done it before she turned 1. As time went on every dr suggested a later and later age and by the time she can have it done I would rather just let her make up her own mind about this one. She is now 2 1/2 and would hate to do anything to make her hand unusable for any amount of time.. Of course you did the right thing. A foreskin is normal, an extra thumb, a cleft palate or any other medical condition should be treated. A healthy foreskin should not be removed. Tori |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
karen hill wrote:
"Tori M." wrote in message ... Wouldn't it be wiser just not allow this surgery as a parents choice unless there was a pre-existing condition that made it necessary? Parents cannot choose any other unnecessary surgery for their child, so why should circumcision be any different? Of coarse you can. I have the option of having my daughters accessory thumb removed and that would be totaly unnecessary. The extra thumb does not effect her hand control or anything. if nothing else I guess you could make the arguement that the extra nail on her hand makes it more likely that she could scratch herself. Please don't be stupid. An extra thumb is not normal. A foreskin is normal. See the difference? I never said abnormalaties like cleft palate or hypospadias should not be fixed. I WOULD have had this removed if we could have done it before she turned 1. As time went on every dr suggested a later and later age and by the time she can have it done I would rather just let her make up her own mind about this one. She is now 2 1/2 and would hate to do anything to make her hand unusable for any amount of time.. Of course you did the right thing. A foreskin is normal, an extra thumb, a cleft palate or any other medical condition should be treated. A healthy foreskin should not be removed. Tori Yes and why bother with shots? After all there is no current medical requirement at the time of the shots. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Jake Waskett wrote:
Dan wrote: On the contrary, it is the wiser pro-intact folks who study the insanity of medical profession in detail. But Dan, didn't you recently argue that your position was that of the major medical organisations? How can you turn around and say the opposite? Well is it not another example of the skin freaks ability to, say anything, do anything, use anything in order to serve their dubious cause? Dan is no different. A sad pathetic individual who hangs weights from his dick. Have pity. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Jake Waskett wrote:
Dan wrote: On the contrary, it is the wiser pro-intact folks who study the insanity of medical profession in detail. But Dan, didn't you recently argue that your position was that of the major medical organisations? How can you turn around and say the opposite? Well is it not another example of the skin freaks ability to, say anything, do anything, use anything in order to serve their dubious cause? Dan is no different. A sad pathetic individual who hangs weights from his dick. Have pity. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Basic Rights of Foster Parents | [email protected] | Foster Parents | 5 | December 20th 03 02:37 PM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Spanking | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Foster Parents | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |