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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!