Why do parents keep doing this?

Jake Waskett wrote in message .uk...

The foreskin, of course, is broadly speaking a fold of skin, under which is
a warm, moist environment. The fold traps dead cells, urine, sweat, and -
significantly - bacteria. Of course, the warm, moist environment is the
perfect breeding ground for bacteria, and so they multiply, contributing to
the foul smell of smegma as they do.

Honestly, you should promote female circumcision instead, because men
have an easier time cleaning their warm, and moist environment, than
women, who happen to produce smegma as well.

(decurian) wrote in message . com...
Jake Waskett wrote in message .uk...
Igor van den Hoven wrote:

Not being cut Is gross women can get hepatitis C and clamitia,but you
gay smelly foreskin men think It's great well as a women 100 percent
of white women don't want to be with a smelly dirty uncircumcised
prick. TO keep IT clean and not smelly and creamy cheese smeeling you
would have to clean It about 6 times a day .Plus most Black men smell
any way and so do their women all smelly priks& pussys wors the men
give every one desases even you fag's and closet QUEENS.Love
uncircumcised men nice and clean you don't throw up giving them
head.....ninee1959


The above post was not written by me.

My experience is that those who promote the foreskin are shocking liars.

Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?

Are you also going to support those who want to legalize sex with
children ... they are also in the minority.

Are you also going to support those who believe that domestic rape is
not a crime ... they are also in the minority.

Or are you going to just jump to support those who support the foreskin
for wild psychosexual reasons?

Ok... now that is just the off the wall response that i find eerily typical.
Somehow linking someones desire for intactness to pedaresty and rape.....
Frankly sexual realationships with children is downright disgusting at the
most basic level, and is rightly illegal in almost everyplace in the world,
its a terrible trauma to the child that has horrible costs in long term
health to the child. I personally have a cousin that was sexually abused as
a child by her dad, she had psychological and developmental issues her whole
life because of what that sick ******* did to her, even now, tho she had
kids of her own, and a reasonably stable home, she is constantly plauged by
what that sick son of a bitch did to her. So why in the HELL do you think
an intactist would support such an idea, we have the childs health and
integrity as a chief concern.

Lets also jump on the whole rape idea, what in the HELL does rape have to do
with circumcision? People that rape other people have something wrong in
their heads other than being whole or cut. I don't know the psychological
reasoning behind why a person commits rape so i won't jump into that, but I
am 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% sure that circumcision
or noncircumcision plays absolutely no part in the issue. (in fact i am
willing to bet that psychological scars left by childhood rape may play a
significant part in some instances!, but nowhere near all) Weather a rape
happens in a dark alleyway, or in the bed of a married couple is
insignificant, rape is rape, and is perpetuated by people that have other
issues than being cut or intact. Rape is justifiably immoral and illegal,
and has a horrible cost to victems over a lifetime.

Wild psycosexual reasons?
Look in the mirror buddy, why are you so millitant on cutting people?
Perhaps the same reason I am so millitant on letting people choose weather
they want to be cut?
Your fantasy for wanting someone cut can only be explianed by an innate
sexual desire, wow... isn't that the same accusation you make against
intactivists? Sure you bring scientific evidence that supports your belief,
and so do we, we choose to ignore your science, you choose to ignore our
science. Frankly we arent much different (and yes i know you are dying to
type "yeah but we're not ****wits" a typical response from people who don't
like to be questioned).

In message , Briar Rabbit
writes
Amy wrote:
"nooneimportant" no.spam@me wrote in message
news:RmyTc.123970$8_6.43841@attbi_s04...

Long rant here, and i know its gonna draw fire, but i've
had enough. 87% of all statistics are made up on the spot 76% of the
people

believe those statistics without question. Why don't you be one of
the
other 24%?
I promised myself I wouldn't respond to this thread, but I think
this is
actually the most sensible post I've seen on the issue.



My experience is that those who promote the foreskin are shocking liars.

In what way?

Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?

No. To be one of the uncircumcised, regardless of whether that's the
minority or the majority, because it avoids unnecessary harm and
discomfort.

Are you also going to support those who want to legalize sex with
children ... they are also in the minority.

Nope.

Are you also going to support those who believe that domestic rape is
not a crime ... they are also in the minority.

Nope.

Or are you going to just jump to support those who support the foreskin
for wild psychosexual reasons?

I don't know, as I haven't heard the wild psychosexual reasons. Of
course, I've heard from several men who support keeping the foreskin
because sex is more pleasurable with a foreskin, but making sex more
pleasurable doesn't strike me as a wild reason.


All the best,

Sarah

--
"I once requested an urgent admission for a homeopath who had become depressed
and taken a massive underdose" - Phil Peverley

nooneimportant wrote:

My experience is that those who promote the foreskin are shocking liars.


Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?

Are you also going to support those who want to legalize sex with
children ... they are also in the minority.


Are you also going to support those who believe that domestic rape is
not a crime ... they are also in the minority.

Or are you going to just jump to support those who support the foreskin
for wild psychosexual reasons?


Ok... now that is just the off the wall response that i find eerily typical.
Somehow linking someones desire for intactness to pedaresty and rape.....


What did you suggest in your original post?

That people should should side with the minority. Not for any reason
other that they are the minority.

I just exposed how absolutely stupid such an attitude is ... and to
think you thought you were being cute and clever?

Are you really this stupid or just feeling defensive about your hideousness?

Igor van den Hoven wrote:

Briar Rabbit wrote in message ...


Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?


Actually, circumcised men are a minority worldwide. Freaky, isn't it?


Did you read his post? Did you understand the context?

Igor van den Hoven wrote:

Jake Waskett wrote in message .uk...


The foreskin, of course, is broadly speaking a fold of skin, under which is
a warm, moist environment. The fold traps dead cells, urine, sweat, and -
significantly - bacteria. Of course, the warm, moist environment is the
perfect breeding ground for bacteria, and so they multiply, contributing to
the foul smell of smegma as they do.


Honestly, you should promote female circumcision instead, because men
have an easier time cleaning their warm, and moist environment, than
women, who happen to produce smegma as well.


If you were heterosexual you would be aware that the problem odour which
some women have a problem dealing with is vaginal. That means it comes
from within and is useually caused by some infection or other. Women
seem to have no problem in dealing with the external elements of their
genitals, so why do men?

Igor van den Hoven wrote:

(Lyle Benson) wrote in message . com...

I'm a teen-ager and since the moment I found out what happened to me I
felt angry about it. Once I found what goes on during the procedure
and what is lost, I felt sick.

I know I was robbed of something special, and I'll never know what sex
is really supposed to feel like.

Why the hell do parents keep letting their baby boys get cut even if
they know there are no real health benefits? Why? Does it matter to
them whether or not their son *wants* to be that way? Does the risk of
death, infections and disfigurement matter? Isn't the fact that there
are tons of men ****ed off about it and stuck that way for the rest of
their lives reason enough not to do it?

I'm really curios as to why. Could any parent who has or is going to
have their little boy cut clue me in?


See Briar's response, part of it is social conditioning: uncut =
unclean, ....


Oh so it was you then?

I wondered when you (or some other skin freak) would try to pull that
trick. Post as someone seeking advice, then reply to yourself to sell
your line to the unsuspecting. People have got wise to you skin freaks
and your tactics.

Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Briar Rabbit


My experience is that those who promote the foreskin are shocking liars.


In what way?



There is a general rule that if you scratch a little at the surface of
what they say you will 10 to one open up a can of worms. Just watch how
this thread develops.



Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?


No. To be one of the uncircumcised, regardless of whether that's the
minority or the majority, because it avoids unnecessary harm and
discomfort.



Harm? What harm would that be?

The discomfort of the post circumcision period is minor and should not
be exaggerated ... unless you have an agenda?





I don't know, as I haven't heard the wild psychosexual reasons. Of
course, I've heard from several men who support keeping the foreskin
because sex is more pleasurable with a foreskin, but making sex more
pleasurable doesn't strike me as a wild reason.




These several men? They were circumcised as adults and now are able to
make a valid comparison? If that is the group (you are talking about)
then the findings are the opposite of what you claim. You are not
deliberately trying to deceive people are you?

Read this one for starters then:

==========================

Conference Abstract number: TuPeB4648

Adult male circumcision in Kenya: safety and patient satisfaction

C J O Opeya1, B O Ayieko1, A Kawango1, M O Onyango1, S Moses2, R C
Bailey3, J O Ndinya-Achola4, J N Krieger5
1UNIM Project, Kisumu, Kenya; 2University of Manitoba, Winipeg,
Canada; 3University of Illinois, Chicago, United States; 4University
of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya; 5University of Washington, Seattle, United
States


Background: There is growing interest in male circumcision as a method
of reducing HIV transmission. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of
male circumcision (MC) to reduce HIV incidence is underway in Kenya.
If MC is found to be efficacious in reducing HIV incidence, then the
rates and severity of complications must still be weighed against
benefits of the procedure. We report frequency of adverse events (AEs)
and satisfaction resulting from circumcisions performed during the
initial phase of the RCT.


Methods: Healthy, 18-24 year-old, consenting men are randomized to
circumcision and control arms. Those in the circumcision arm undergo
surgery using local anesthesia (maximum 15 ml 2% lidocaine). They are
followed up at 3, 8, 30, and 90 days post operatively, or whenever
they need to return to the clinic.


Results: Among the first 380 circumcisions, there were
14procedure-related AEs (3.6%) from 13 participants: 4 bleeding; 3
post-operative site infections; 3 other infections; and 4 other
complications. Nine AEs (2.4%) were definitely related, 3 probably
related and 2 possibly related to the surgery. All were mild or
moderate and resolved within hours or several days of detection. Most
AEs occurred in the first 3 months of the study. At 30 days
post-surgery, 99.3% of men reported being very satisfied and 0.7%
somewhat satisfied with circumcision. None were dissatisfied. Men
reported returning to work after a median of 3 days (range 0-21) and
to general activities after a median of 1 day (0-3 days). All sexual
partners who were aware of the man's new circumcision status were very
satisfied with the results.


Conclusions: Circumcisions can be performed safely in this setting
with no serious or lasting complications and with high levels of
patient satisfaction. Lessons learned from this trial will be useful
if MC is to be introduced widely as an intervention.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unasha...rc/message/419

"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
Sarah Vaughan wrote:


No. To be one of the uncircumcised, regardless of whether that's the
minority or the majority, because it avoids unnecessary harm and
discomfort.



Harm? What harm would that be?

The discomfort of the post circumcision period is minor and should not be
exaggerated ... unless you have an agenda?

No more than your own, sir. In the study you quote, please note that the
participants were consenting adults who chose to have surgeries. Their
post-surgical discomfort was within tolerable ranges, and they were pleased
with their choice. Presumably, there were also men who chose not to have the
surgery, and remained intact.

If post-surgical discomfort is minor, then why should not consenting adults
choose it if they wish?

It seems to me that the dissatisfaction of that minority who now, having
been altered at birth, discover they must go to years(!) of effort in order
to re-create a facsimile of what other men take for granted....matters. It
matters to *them*. And neither you nor I may tell them that they should just
be happy with what they don't have, because they're not. Conversely, for all
the millions of men who are perfectly happy with their altered state, we
must accept that they are happy.

It is not our place, as a society, to decide that all men will or should be
happy being altered, and that the few who won't be are irrelevent - and
anyway, even if they are unhappy, they shouldn't be and there's something
wrong with them - and cut all male infants anyway. The cost to those who
will be unhappy afterward is too high. To those who wish to be altered
later, as you say......the discomfort is minor and should not be
exaggerated.

--angela