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 |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
How do uncircumcised men get laid?
Jake Waskett wrote:
Bob wrote: Jake Waskett wrote: Bob wrote: wrote: What is this obsession with pain!? Can you find me one child who has gone through life unscathed!? Does a child's life end, simply because he scrapes his knee in a playground!? LOL! Skin is also removed, remember!? Yes, life would be wonderful, if we could all eliminate pain. LOL! Unfortunately, life itself is painful! We all experience pain (physical & emotional) - no matter what the age - with or without circumcision! Believe me, circumcision doesn't have the market cornered on pain! LOL! DOH! So you argue that it's acceptable to hurt children, violent sexual mutilation, because all children will be hurt sometime during their life? Bob, we're not talking about violent sexual mutilation; we're talking about a simple, beneficial operation. Pleas don't try to confuse the issue. Jake. Your lies don't make a sows ear into a silk purse. You are talking about the violent sexual mutilation of innocent little children. No, Bob, I'm not. I'm sorry that you have this delusion, but you are sadly mistaken. No, Jake, you're a psychosexual pervert who wants to cut up the sex organs of little children. You are sadly mistaken. Your lies don't disguise the heinous malevolence of the thing you want to do. Why is it that you feel the need to create such an apocalyptic take on such a simple, straightforward operation? Why is it that you feel the need to do such violent sexual torture to innocent little children? -- When did we divide into sides? "As president, I will put American government and our legal system back on the side of women." John Kerry, leading Democratic candidate for President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/ |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
How do uncircumcised men get laid?
Bob wrote:
Jake Waskett wrote: Bob wrote: Jake Waskett wrote: Bob wrote: wrote: What is this obsession with pain!? Can you find me one child who has gone through life unscathed!? Does a child's life end, simply because he scrapes his knee in a playground!? LOL! Skin is also removed, remember!? Yes, life would be wonderful, if we could all eliminate pain. LOL! Unfortunately, life itself is painful! We all experience pain (physical & emotional) - no matter what the age - with or without circumcision! Believe me, circumcision doesn't have the market cornered on pain! LOL! DOH! So you argue that it's acceptable to hurt children, violent sexual mutilation, because all children will be hurt sometime during their life? Bob, we're not talking about violent sexual mutilation; we're talking about a simple, beneficial operation. Pleas don't try to confuse the issue. Jake. Your lies don't make a sows ear into a silk purse. You are talking about the violent sexual mutilation of innocent little children. No, Bob, I'm not. I'm sorry that you have this delusion, but you are sadly mistaken. No, Jake, you're a psychosexual pervert who wants to cut up the sex organs of little children. You are sadly mistaken. Your lies don't disguise the heinous malevolence of the thing you want to do. Well, at least you have a sense of humour, Bob. Why is it that you feel the need to create such an apocalyptic take on such a simple, straightforward operation? Why is it that you feel the need to do such violent sexual torture to innocent little children? I don't feel such a need, Bob. Do you? Jake. |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
How do uncircumcised men get laid?
"Chotii" wrote in message ...
"karen hill" wrote in message m... "Chotii" wrote in message ... "karen hill" wrote in message om... There is all this talk about the foreskin being a harbinger of disease with the studies to back it up. Cites, please? And you know that word...harbinger? I do not think it means what you think it means. --angela http://www.medicirc.com/meditopics/medicirc_topics.html http://www.medicirc.com/medicirc_references.html I do not find his arguments convincing. In fact, his examples of 'proof' that the anti-circumcision activists are all misguided look....gee, pretty sane to me. Some of those quotes were even from peer-reviewed medical journals, claiming no health benefit to routine infant circumcision....and yet somehow the author of the web site uses them as proof that anti-circ folks are all misguided. And he also has a disclaimer for his 'data' "Disclaimer: The contents of MediCirc as furnished by Dr. Schoen are for informational purposes only. Do not rely on this information for diagnoses or treatment. It is recommended that you visit a qualified health care professional for individual and personal attention. Links to third party websites are provided solely as a convenience and do not apply any association, sponsorship, endorsement, approved of or responsibility for the linked site or its content. The opinions of Dr. Schoen do not represent the position or policy of any organization." In other words, he wants to sell you a circumcision. You also might want to look at the other side of the argument. http://207.68.164.250/cgi-bin/linkrd...6835192604 18 "INFANT BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE Advocates This aspect of circumcision is not discussed by advocates. Critics Various studies have found that short-term effects of circumcision include changed sleep patterns, activity level, and mother-infant interaction, more irritability, and disruptions in feeding and bonding [2]. " What, advocates of circumcision don't want to discuss how this affects babies? Why not? "URINARY TRACT INFECTION (UTI) Advocates According to a meta-analysis, circumcision reduced the risk of developing UTI in the first year of life by a factor of 12, and the absolute risk of an intact (not circumcised) boy developing UTI was approximately 1 in 100 [10]. Critics The methodology for studies claiming that circumcision reduces the risk of UTI complicates making any conclusion [11]. They do not account for confounding variables such as breastfeeding [12], urine collection method [13], definition of UTI [14], and rooming in [15]. For a rate of 1%, 100 boys would have to be circumcised to prevent one UTI, which might be prevented by breastfeeding or rooming in. A Japanese study of 603 boys who were not circumcised did not find one case of UTI [16]. This further suggests methodological problems with attempts to claim a strong association. UTI is easily treatable with antibiotics [17]. PENILE CANCER Advocates Reports of several case series noted a strong association between lack of circumcision and penile cancer [18]. Advocates believe that "invasive penile cancer could be virtually eliminated in the United States by routine newborn circumcision" (p. 621) [19]. Critics There are no American studies of the incidence of penile cancer and its association with circumcision status. Penile cancer is rare, and the estimated American incidence is about 1 per 100,000 [20]. In other developed countries where circumcision is rare, such as Denmark and Norway, the incidence of penile cancer is lower than the estimated American rate [21, 22]. Penile cancer occurs generally in elderly men [20]. Therefore, a male may make a decision to be circumcised when he is older without losing this claimed benefit. SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES Advocates Based on a meta-analysis of published studies, intact men had approximately 3 times the relative risk for HIV infection and increased risk for genital ulcer disease [23]. (Many HIV studies were done in Africa.) A review article concluded that intact men were 2 to 8 times more likely to become infected with HIV [24]. Circumcision reduced the risk of genital ulcer disease, including syphilis and chancroid [23]. Critics Studies are conflicting for each sexually transmitted disease [25]. Sexually transmitted diseases and circumcision involve behavior, hygiene practices, culture, and religion, and it is impossible to control all the confounding variables that affect sexual behavior and circumcision status. Circumcision may increase the risk of developing gonorrhea and chlamydia. "Based on the studies published to date, recommending routine circumcision as a prophylactic measure to prevent HIV infection in Africa or elsewhere, is scientifically unfounded" (p. 16) [26]. In a study on transmission rates of HIV from infected males to uninfected females and from infected females to uninfected males in Uganda, the authors found that circumcision status was not a significant factor in the risk of transmission [27]. Sexually transmitted diseases obviously cannot be transmitted until an individual engages in sexual activity. Therefore, a male may make a decision to be circumcised when he is older without losing this claimed benefit. " Hmmm. And what of condoms? Properly used condoms keep circumcised and uncircumcised men from getting stds. Circumcision alone, of couse, will not. "SEXUAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS Advocates In a national survey, circumcised men reported less sexual dysfunction than intact men [28]. Women prefer circumcised sexual partners [29]. Psychological effects are not recognized. Critics The difference in reported sexual dysfunction above is not statistically significant [30]. The Williamson study consists of young, Midwestern, 98% white mothers. They live in an area of the country with the highest circumcision rate, and 78% of the group had no experience with intact men. In a more recent survey, women with longer dual experience preferred anatomically complete men overwhelmingly to circumcised men [31]. Without the foreskin to provide a movable sleeve of skin, intercourse with a circumcised penis resulted in decreased vaginal secretions, more vaginal discomfort, harder and deeper thrusting of the partner, less chance of having an orgasm, less frequent orgasms, less frequent multiple orgasms, and shorter duration of coitus." Well, well, well. "Circumcision results in a significant loss [32]. The foreskin is an integral, normal part of the penis. It protects the head of the penis and is comprised of unique zones with several kinds of specialized nerves that are important to optimum sexual sensitivity. Investigators found that circumcision removes about one-half of the erogenous tissue on the penile shaft. The foreskin on the average adult male is about 12 square inches of highly erogenous tissue [33]. Men circumcised as adults reported a significant loss of sensitivity [34]. A description of the complex nerve structure of the penis explains why anesthetics provide incomplete pain relief during circumcision [35]. Cutting off the foreskin removes many fine-touch receptors from the penis and results in thickening and desensitization of the glans outer layer. The complex anatomy and function of the foreskin dictate that circumcision should be avoided or deferred until the person can make an informed decision as an adult. In a national survey, circumcised men reported they were more likely to engage in masturbation, heterosexual oral sex, and anal sex than intact men [28]. The result suggests that circumcised men seek alternative forms of stimulation to compensate for reduced sensitivity. A poll of circumcised men described adverse outcomes on men's health and well-being [36]. Findings showed wide-ranging physical, sexual, and psychological consequences. Some respondents reported prominent scarring and excessive skin loss. Sexual consequences included progressive loss of sensitivity and sexual dysfunction. Emotional distress followed the realization that they were missing a functioning part of their penis. Low-self esteem, resentment, avoidance of intimacy, and depression were also noted. Male satisfaction with circumcision depended on knowledge about circumcision. The more men knew, the more likely they were to be dissatisfied. They wished they had a choice. Circumcision is traumatic, and the long-term psychological effects of circumcision are similar to the long-term effects of trauma [37]. Using four case examples that were typical among his clients, a practicing psychiatrist presented clinical findings regarding the serious and sometimes disabling long-term somatic, emotional, and psychological consequences of infant circumcision in adult men [38]. These consequences resembled complex post-traumatic stress disorder and emerged during psychotherapy focused on the resolution of perinatal and developmental trauma. Adult symptoms associated with circumcision trauma included shyness, anger, fear, powerlessness, distrust, low self-esteem, relationship difficulties, and sexual shame. ETHICS Advocates Ethical issues are not discussed by advocates. " Again, babies don't have rights that should be debated as to whether this is ethical or not? Why not? Critics When circumcision is performed, it does not treat any disease, injury, or other health problem. Since there is no urgency to do it, it must be delayed until the child is old enough to make the decision for himself [39]. Circumcision violates a major principle of medical practice: First, do no harm. It also violates all seven principles of medical ethics [40]. Some doctors and nurses refuse to perform or assist with circumcisions because of ethical considerations [41, 42]. They have organized to form Doctors Opposing Circumcision and Nurses for the Rights of the Child [43, 44]. The AAP Committee on Bioethics report states, "Pediatric health care providers. . . have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses. . . .[T]he pediatrician's responsibilities to his or her patient exist independent of parental desires or proxy consent" (p. 315) [45]. See also General Circumcision Information and Response to American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Statement. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think my doctors probably check your singular doc, don't they. Try again. K |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
How do uncircumcised men get laid?
kavking wrote:
"Chotii" wrote in message ... "karen hill" wrote in message m... "Chotii" wrote in message ... "karen hill" wrote in message om... There is all this talk about the foreskin being a harbinger of disease with the studies to back it up. Cites, please? And you know that word...harbinger? I do not think it means what you think it means. --angela http://www.medicirc.com/meditopics/medicirc_topics.html http://www.medicirc.com/medicirc_references.html I do not find his arguments convincing. In fact, his examples of 'proof' that the anti-circumcision activists are all misguided look....gee, pretty sane to me. Some of those quotes were even from peer-reviewed medical journals, claiming no health benefit to routine infant circumcision....and yet somehow the author of the web site uses them as proof that anti-circ folks are all misguided. And he also has a disclaimer for his 'data' "Disclaimer: The contents of MediCirc as furnished by Dr. Schoen are for informational purposes only. Do not rely on this information for diagnoses or treatment. It is recommended that you visit a qualified health care professional for individual and personal attention. Links to third party websites are provided solely as a convenience and do not apply any association, sponsorship, endorsement, approved of or responsibility for the linked site or its content. The opinions of Dr. Schoen do not represent the position or policy of any organization." In other words, he wants to sell you a circumcision. Slight problem: Dr Schoen is retired. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
baby boys | Taulmaril | Pregnancy | 99 | November 27th 03 04:10 AM |