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
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should
not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. Circumcision is genital mutilation, and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Such significant body modification should not be performed on minors even if it possibly has prophylactic benefits. Such an important decision should be up to a person after they become an adult. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 25, 7:09�pm, wrote:
Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Reducing deaths from HIV and cervical cancer is a pretty good medical reason. The sexual, social, esthetic, and hygienic benefits are prefectly valid too. Im sure the millions that have died from foreskin- propagated diseases like these would agree with me. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. You want to prosecute a third of the parents on earth??? Now, THERE is recipe for mayhem! Get a grip. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. LOL! Its just a useless, smelly, ugly bit of skin for gods sake! Save your energy for something that really matters, like abortion. Circumcision is genital mutilation, Says who? Actually, its penile enhancement. and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Nonsense. There isnt a shred of scientific evidence for that statement. If circumcision impaired the male sexual organ you can bet your ass that men wouldnt do it or choose it for their sons. Apart from anything else, being cut greatly improves your chances of getting a blow job. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
"WindingHighway" wrote in message ... On Nov 25, 7:09?pm, wrote: Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Reducing deaths from HIV and cervical cancer is a pretty good medical reason. The sexual, social, esthetic, and hygienic benefits are prefectly valid too. Im sure the millions that have died from foreskin- propagated diseases like these would agree with me. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. You want to prosecute a third of the parents on earth??? Now, THERE is recipe for mayhem! Get a grip. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. LOL! Its just a useless, smelly, ugly bit of skin for gods sake! Save your energy for something that really matters, like abortion. Might it just be that the foreskin heightens sexual plasure that give you the twitches? And, incidentally, if yours smells, you can wash it. Circumcision is genital mutilation, Says who? Actually, its penile enhancement. and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Nonsense. There isnt a shred of scientific evidence for that statement. If circumcision impaired the male sexual organ you can bet your ass that men wouldnt do it or choose it for their sons. Apart from anything else, being cut greatly improves your chances of getting a blow job. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 25, 7:09�pm, wrote:
Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. Circumcision is genital mutilation, and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Such significant body modification should not be performed on minors even if it possibly has prophylactic benefits. �Such an important decision should be up to a person after they become an adult. I've actually seen pics of men reversing their circumcisions by stretching out the skin to cover the glans again. I believe I read that it offers the *complete* sensitivity some claim has been stolen from a circumcised man because the glans is no longer exposed on a regular basis. From what I read, they seem pretty pleased with the whole deal. So I'm not so sure one can say that it is irreversible. A slang term attached to the practice is tugging/tuggers. lol. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 25, 6:13Â*pm, WindingHighway wrote:
On Nov 25, 7:09�pm, wrote: Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Reducing deaths from HIV and cervical cancer is a pretty good medical reason. Not given the seriousness and significantness of the body modification. That should be up to an adult. The sexual, social, esthetic, and hygienic benefits are prefectly valid too. Â* No. that should be up to an adult. Im sure the millions that have died from foreskin- propagated diseases like these would agree with me. Cite your sources. Nonetheless, even if you have any, a person should be allowed to review them as an adult and make their own decision. Weighing the cost of the circumcision against whatever small prophylactic benefits there might be from having one. I'm sure few men would choose one, unless the benefits were great. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. You want to prosecute a third of the parents on earth??? Â*Now, THERE is recipe for mayhem! Â* Get a grip. No, once you begin prosecutions and you notify everyone of the new policy, the circumcisions will stop. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. LOL! Â* Â*Its just a useless, smelly, ugly bit of skin for gods sake! That's not true. It is not useless, it has nerves and protects the penis. It is not smelly, and ugly is a personal value in the eye of the beholder. Save your energy for something that really matters, like abortion. This really matters. Circumcision is genital mutilation, Says who? Â* Actually, its penile enhancement. Says anyone who was circumcised against their will as a baby. and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Nonsense. Â* There isnt a shred of scientific evidence for that statement. That's a plain lie. It definitely impairs the male sex organ. The foreskin has nerves, protects the penis, and makes sex easier as it slides back and forth over the head of the penis. It also makes masturbation easier. If circumcision impaired the male sexual organ you can bet your ass that men wouldnt do it or choose it for their sons. I wouldn't choose it for my son. For all you know, half the time it's the women choosing it. Apart from anything else, being cut greatly improves your chances of getting a blow job. Negative. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 25, 8:45Â*pm, Chris wrote:
On Nov 25, 7:09�pm, wrote: Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. Circumcision is genital mutilation, and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Such significant body modification should not be performed on minors even if it possibly has prophylactic benefits. �Such an important decision should be up to a person after they become an adult. I've actually seen pics of men reversing their circumcisions by stretching out the skin to cover the glans again. I believe I read that it offers the *complete* sensitivity some claim has been stolen from a circumcised man because the glans is no longer exposed on a regular basis. No, that's not possible since the removed foreskin has nerves which can never be replaced. Also depending on how horribly they were circumcised, some men may not have enough foreskin to stretch over the head of their penises. Furthermore, why should someone be subjected to a procedure they did not willfully choose as an adult? From what I read, they seem pretty pleased with the whole deal. So I'm not so sure one can say that it is irreversible. It is irreversible. A slang term attached to the practice is tugging/tuggers. lol. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
Stephanie wrote:
"WindingHighway" wrote in message ... On Nov 25, 7:09?pm, wrote: Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Reducing deaths from HIV and cervical cancer is a pretty good medical reason. The sexual, social, esthetic, and hygienic benefits are prefectly valid too. Im sure the millions that have died from foreskin- propagated diseases like these would agree with me. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. You want to prosecute a third of the parents on earth??? Now, THERE is recipe for mayhem! Get a grip. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. LOL! Its just a useless, smelly, ugly bit of skin for gods sake! Save your energy for something that really matters, like abortion. Steph, I couldn't believe my eyes for a minute until I worked out that your quoting wasn't working properly again and only the two lines immediately below these were your words! Might it just be that the foreskin heightens sexual plasure that give you the twitches? And, incidentally, if yours smells, you can wash it. Circumcision is genital mutilation, Says who? Actually, its penile enhancement. and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Nonsense. There isnt a shred of scientific evidence for that statement. If circumcision impaired the male sexual organ you can bet your ass that men wouldnt do it or choose it for their sons. Apart from anything else, being cut greatly improves your chances of getting a blow job. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 26, 4:51Â*am, wrote:
On Nov 25, 8:45Â*pm, Chris wrote: On Nov 25, 7:09�pm, wrote: Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. Circumcision is genital mutilation, and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Such significant body modification should not be performed on minors even if it possibly has prophylactic benefits. �Such an important decision should be up to a person after they become an adult. I've actually seen pics of men reversing their circumcisions by stretching out the skin to cover the glans again. I believe I read that it offers the *complete* sensitivity some claim has been stolen from a circumcised man because the glans is no longer exposed on a regular basis. No, that's not possible since the removed foreskin has nerves which can never be replaced. Â*Also depending on how horribly they were circumcised, some men may not have enough foreskin to stretch over the head of their penises. Furthermore, why should someone be subjected to a procedure they did not willfully choose as an adult? From what I read, they seem pretty pleased with the whole deal. So I'm not so sure one can say that it is irreversible. It is irreversible. A slang term attached to the practice is tugging/tuggers. lol.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - When a penis is flaccid, they have skin on the shaft that apparently stretches just fine. Sure, they've lost nerves in the foreskin, but they still have nerves in the remaining skin. I'm referring to nerves remaining on the glans becoming more sensitive as a result. Have you seen what is entailed in an adult circumcision? Some men are completely happy and thankful that their parents made an educated decision pertaining to the issue for them as infants. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 26, 4:50Â*am, wrote:
On Nov 25, 6:13Â*pm, WindingHighway wrote: On Nov 25, 7:09�pm, wrote: Given that circumcision is nonreversible body modification, it should not be performed on minors under the age of 18, except for true medical reasons just as any other operation. Reducing deaths from HIV and cervical cancer is a pretty good medical reason. Not given the seriousness and significantness of the body modification. Â*That should be up to an adult. The sexual, social, esthetic, and hygienic benefits are prefectly valid too. Â* No. that should be up to an adult. Im sure the millions that have died from foreskin- propagated diseases like these would agree with me. Cite your sources. Â*Nonetheless, even if you have any, a person should be allowed to review them as an adult and make their own decision. Weighing the cost of the circumcision against whatever small prophylactic benefits there might be from having one. Â*I'm sure few men would choose one, unless the benefits were great. Non-medically necessary circumcision on minors under age 18 should maybe be prosecuted as mayhem. You want to prosecute a third of the parents on earth??? Â*Now, THERE is recipe for mayhem! Â* Get a grip. No, once you begin prosecutions and you notify everyone of the new policy, the circumcisions will stop. And since circumcision is nonreversible, perhaps there should be a waiting period for anyone to get circumcised even as an adult, just as there is a waiting period for a sex change. LOL! Â* Â*Its just a useless, smelly, ugly bit of skin for gods sake! That's not true. Â*It is not useless, it has nerves and protects the penis. Â*It is not smelly, and ugly is a personal value in the eye of the beholder. Save your energy for something that really matters, like abortion. This really matters. Circumcision is genital mutilation, Says who? Â* Actually, its penile enhancement. Says anyone who was circumcised against their will as a baby. and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Nonsense. Â* There isnt a shred of scientific evidence for that statement. That's a plain lie. Â*It definitely impairs the male sex organ. Â*The foreskin has nerves, protects the penis, and makes sex easier as it slides back and forth over the head of the penis. Â*It also makes masturbation easier. If circumcision impaired the male sexual organ you can bet your ass that men wouldnt do it or choose it for their sons. I wouldn't choose it for my son. Â*For all you know, half the time it's the women choosing it. Apart from anything else, being cut greatly improves your chances of getting a blow job. Negative. I've talked to some men on the issue and all have said your claim of subsequent impairment is completely false. They've said they couldn't handle any more of this so-called sensitivity. lol. Like it or not, the statistics do reveal there are potential medical benefits, albeit not for an immediate newborn when the procedure is normally performed; thereby meaning that parents (moms AND dads) can and are in fact making an educated decision, even if it is not the same decision you make for your children, just as they do on many fronts throughout that child's life. Just curious, are you able to provide the numbers pertaining to the numbers of botched circumcisions broken into the frequency of occurrence to location, by what sort of professional performing the procedure, etc.? Also a very big factor. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Circumcision should not be performed on minors under 18
On Nov 26, 4:50�am, wrote:
On Nov 25, 6:13�pm, WindingHighway wrote: Reducing deaths from HIV and cervical cancer is a pretty good medical reason. Not given the seriousness and significantness of the body modification. �That should be up to an adult. You really think death is less serious than "body modification"? My, my! Its better to be dead with a foreskin than alive without one, huh? The sexual, social, esthetic, and hygienic benefits are prefectly valid too. � No. that should be up to an adult. Not necessarily. Parents make all kinds of sexual, social, esthetic and hygienic choices for their children. I dont like some of their choices, you dont like some of their choices, but thats their job. Butt out. Im sure the millions that have died from foreskin- propagated diseases like these would agree with me. Cite your sources. � O for heavens sake, have you been living under a rock? There are more than scientific 30 studies showing foreskinned men are more likely to get and spread HIV, including three widely reported random controlled trials that showed circumcision reducing HIV transmission by around 60% Also foreskinned men are more likely to harbor HPV which is the main cause of cervical cancer in women. Nonetheless, even if you have any, a person should be allowed to review them as an adult and make their own decision. Weighing the cost of the circumcision against whatever small prophylactic benefits there might be from having one. Small? You need to familiarize yourself with the research on this. I'm sure few men would choose one, unless the benefits were great. If you check out some recent African studies cited in alt.circumcision in the last couple of months you will see than most of the subjects were quite favorable to the idea. So were their womenfolk, of course. You want to prosecute a third of the parents on earth??? �Now, THERE is recipe for mayhem! � Get a grip. No, once you begin prosecutions and you notify everyone of the new policy, the circumcisions will stop. Quite the totalitarian, arent you? I assume you will also prosecute abortionists and women who have abortions? After all, a potential human life is at stake, which is much more important than a piece of skin, dont you agree? Anyway you will have your dictatorial work cut out for you. There are about 30 muslim countries where your circumcision edict wont go very far, and many other countries from Philippines to Madagascar where the benefits of male circumcision are universally appreciated. Moreover, governments of several uncut African countries are now starting programs to encourage circumcision. And the UN has recommended circumcision for countries with high rates of heterosexual HIV transmission. LOL! � �Its just a useless, smelly, ugly bit of skin for gods sake! That's not true. �It is not useless, it has nerves and protects the penis. � It evolved to protect the penis when our species was running naked through grass, thorns, and clouds of insects. Our social evolution has far outstripped our biological evolution. We wear clothes now. We make love in the comfort and convenience of our own bedrooms. Our sex isnt a nasty, brutish, short rut in the field any more. Its a long, lingering, sensual experience in which, among other things, the penis is commonly taken into the mouth. The foreskin has outlived its evolutionary purpose. Its not just useless now -- its a goddam nuisance. It is not smelly, LOL! You dont suck them, do you? They generally stink because they collect **** and produce smegma, leaving a smell of rancid cheese and ammonia. They are no sooner washed than they start stinking again -- and a lot of them still smell right after washing. and ugly is a personal value in the eye of the beholder. Nope, some things are objectively beautiful (a waterfall) and objectively ugly (a toad). In any beholders eye, a foreskin looks like a shapeless garden slug on a boy and an wrinkled aardvaarks snout on a man, and the older the man gets, the more gruesome it appears. Foreskins are absolutely hideous. If foreskins grew in your garden you would take weedkiller to them immediately, if not a flame thrower. You dont seem to know much about foreskins. Why dont you google some foreskin images and see what they really look like? Circumcision is genital mutilation, Says who? � Actually, its penile enhancement. Says anyone who was circumcised against their will as a baby. Anyone? There is no scientific evidence for that claim at all. Most men are quite happy with their penis (except for its size, of course) whether its cut or uncut. Most cut men choose the same for their sons, all over the world. For my part, I know hundreds of circumcised men and all but one were delighted to be cut as babies. The exception was somebody who said he would have chosen to be cut but wished he could have made the choice himself. I know several uncut men who wish they were cut. and impairs the abilities of the male sexual organ. Nonsense. � There isnt a shred of scientific evidence for that statement. That's a plain lie. OK, lets have the scientific evidence then. �It definitely impairs the male sex organ. �The foreskin has nerves, protects the penis, and makes sex easier as it slides back and forth over the head of the penis. � It doesnt make sex easier. It makes it harder. People are reluctant to give uncut men oral sex because of the likelihood of unpleasant smell and the nasty flap of skin hanging off the end of the penis. On many men, it hangs off the end even when they are erect. The sliding back and forth within the skin actually makes for lousy sex for the other person -- they want the penis sliding back and forth within THEM, not inside somebody else's tube of skin. Plus they have to worry that the guy is gonna give them some foreskin disease. It also makes masturbation easier. Huh? If circumcision impaired the male sexual organ you can bet your ass that men wouldnt do it or choose it for their sons. I wouldn't choose it for my son. Maybe you wouldnt, but societies throughout history and all over the world have been hostile to foreskins and have junked them with gusto -- even though the operation was typically performed without anesthetic. (If circumcision was painless, there would be hardly a foreskin around!) Circumcision is and always has been the most common surgical procedure on the planet. Now, why do you think that is? Simple. People dont like them and are satisfied they are better off without them -- so much so that about a third of the worlds population goes to all the trouble of cutting them off! They dont routinely cut off any other body part. Its foreskins they detest. �For all you know, half the time it's the women choosing it. Im sure it is. Its mostly women who are on the receiving end the penis. No wonder women so often choose circumcision! Unfortunately in the US, many women have never experienced an uncut male so out of ignorance they sometimes leave their sons uncut. But the majority opt for the snip, to the gratitude and benefit of their sons and their sons partners. Apart from anything else, being cut greatly improves your chances of getting a blow job. Negative. Id like to see you go down a few foreskinned males. Unless you are a fetishistic homosexual smegmaphile, you would change your tune pretty quickly! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vaginal CAM performed by OBs | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | April 17th 05 01:50 AM |
Is there such a law against pimping minors? | [email protected] | Solutions | 7 | December 3rd 04 01:20 AM |
Circumcision, yes or no ? | melis | Pregnancy | 141 | November 28th 04 09:57 PM |
Episiotomy: 'nice' violence against women performed by 'nice' MDs (I'm speaking of ROUTINE episiotomy, of course.) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 7 | April 17th 04 09:40 PM |