Do I come across as a fanatic like you do I? It's not my intention.
Last edited by a moderator:
Am I the only one who likes being circumcised ?
- Thread starter Matt Cohen
- Start date
Do I come across as a fanatic like you do I? It's not my intention.
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
?
Why is male prepucectomy a matter of unquestioned parental discretion, while female prepucectomy is fanatical?
Do I look female to you?
Is female circumcision performed in the western world or western hospitals?
Is it performed for the same reasons male circumcision was or is?
Do I come from a culture where I would consider a procedure like this? (I'll help you with that one) No.
Would I allow a procedure be done on my daughter that I had never undergone myself, with no knowledge of knowing someone ever having it done? No fucking way. And even if I had it would probably make me choose no. Since this keeps coming up here.
Is there anyone on here that can share their experience with this having been done to them personally?
Last edited by a moderator:
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
No...the removal of the clitoral hood isn't really done in Western cultures, although it's not really physiologically that different from male circumcision. I mean, I'm not sure why it matters if it's popular or if you have personal experience since there's medical information about its impact. It's occasionally performed out of medical necessity. You seem to have been reacting to male circumcision by going "well, it may not be reasonable, but it's not for me to judge what other parents do to their children," and now this is like a 180 reversal. I'm not sure why you see them as so distinct...besides tradition, I don't see a big moral distinction.
There is no 180. It is a procedure that never came into question, ever. Because it is a totally different practice carried out for totally different reasons by a totally different peoples and culture.
Do I personally find the procedure benificial in any way whatsoever? No
Do I personally find circumcision benificial in any way from my perspective as a male who has had a healthy procedure as an infant? Yes.
But off-course there are differing opinions on that one. Obviously.
Do I personally find the procedure benificial in any way whatsoever? No
Do I personally find circumcision benificial in any way from my perspective as a male who has had a healthy procedure as an infant? Yes.
But off-course there are differing opinions on that one. Obviously.
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
But other than cultural tradition, I'm not sure what makes them so different for you. Is this really just a matter of one being traditional and familiar to you and one not? That's really what makes one morally acceptable and one morally prohibitive?
I am very disapointed that the second presidential debate in the USA did not include a question on circumcision. Would have been good to know each candidate's opinion on the matter.
Would it have been a heated debate or would Romney and Obama so violently agreed that they would have demontrated their circumcised masturbation techniques on live TV ?
Would it have been a heated debate or would Romney and Obama so violently agreed that they would have demontrated their circumcised masturbation techniques on live TV ?
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
that is probably one of the weirdest things i've ever seen here. congrats.
I am very disapointed that the second presidential debate in the USA did not include a question on circumcision. Would have been good to know each candidate's opinion on the matter.
Would it have been a heated debate or would Romney and Obama so violently agreed that they would have demontrated their circumcised masturbation techniques on live TV ?
You want the federal spending cut thread...don't you?
I think it's pretty clear what I said, aside from the cultural issues.
I suggest you read it again.....
Do I personally find the procedure benificial in any way whatsoever? No
Do I personally find circumcision benificial in any way from my perspective as a male who has had a healthy procedure as an infant? Yes.
But off-course there are differing opinions on that one. Obviously.......
My foreskin was not left intact at birth, if that upsets you or causes you sadness then there is nothing I can do about that. Yes I am glad everything went ok, I'm one of the vast majority of lucky ones. I am glad also I had the procedure done as an infant because my body has grown and stretched with it.
I'm not out to change the world in these areas, you are. When circumcision is all gone, you will be finally able to rest. Hopefully.
Me? whether it goes or stays, I'm happy either way.
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
Right, but there are both differing opinions and readily-accessible information about the results of both procedures...so why default to personal experience alone? If I were doing that, I would be claiming that circumcision is awful and obviously undesirable, but I know personal preferences vary. I don't see the point of willingly blinding yourself to available evidence when making a decision.
Hey, man, not sure where you're going with this. I think RIC is wrong, and I've explained in logical terms why I think that. It's just one of the few issues that I've thought through extensively, and have a very well-formed opinion on (gay marriage is another.) I won't say that it doesn't bother me when things I see as wrong go on, but it doesn't make me an unhappy person or whatever. It's not a crusade or anything, but it makes me feel good that I'm advocating for what I think is right.
Last edited:
I was circumcised at birth and am very thankful. Doctors now are recommending circumcision and are pushing insurance companies to pay for it. Research done now favors circumcision for many reasons. Hygiene is one of many reasons.
Willingly blinding myself? Me? You have to be kidding right?
The fact someone has a differing point of view to you, that you need to go to great pain to convince them that you are right, but not everyone will, or is going to agree with your way of thinking, or even care about what you think. Does not translate into that they are "Willingly blinding themselves" It translates into "That is the way of the world".
I agreed with you that offering people all the information on the subject, make it difficult for them with paperwork etc..., as you said you were going to do, and let them decide. You said that you wish to keep emotion out of it and be "logical". But this is not something, (you think) you are not only logical about, it is something you are deeply passionate about. And I don't think you would be happy in the long run at just stopping or opting at offering people all the information.
I have gone to some effort to try to explain to you that as far as circumcision goes from my experience, my history, and those that I have come into contact with through my life. I have not come across anyone who has had problems. I have come across a few though that have had problems not being circumcised.
I have not had experience with someone having problems until I started visiting lpsg, and I have said that if I had to make a decision today it is possible I may not circumcise. But again you are not happy with that answer, you want a definite, no, I will not do it.
As far as female circumcision goes, I answered that clearly as well. I see no benefit whatsoever from the procedure. Is that not what you want? A logical answer. If there is no benefit, it is not warranted is it?
With male circumcision as far as I am concerned there is. Thats where we differ, as I will say again, I am happy with what a parent decides for their child either... yes or no, from where I am standing.
So from where I stand, I can see where you are coming from, I agree with you here, I disagree with you there and so on. It's pretty obvious though you are not happy with that. As I have said, that is the way of the world.
Last edited by a moderator:
FALSE. One group - the AAP - says they are NOT recommending it but that the benefits may outweigh the risks so parents should decide. But in that policy statement they go on to say the risks are not understood, and that they ignored deaths, penile amputations, and procedures so botched that they required touch-up surgery. So by their math X is unknown but Y is definitely greater than X. ? ? ?
They also base the slight policy revision on the new evidence which consists entirely of foreign studies on adult STIs. Informed adults can decide for themselves how to deal with STIs, and also whether evidence - like the fact that in half of African nations it is the circumcised who have markedly higher HIV incidence - really supports the AAP's conclusion. Other medical associations look at the same evidence and see that infant circumcision has "an absence of medical benefits and danger of complications."
Not really. For example Wawer / Gray reported in 2009 that cutting Ugandan men increased HIV risks to their female partners by 50%.
Whatever you think of the mixed evidence and whether to be cut yourself, the only person whose opinion matters is the penis owner.
Really? Depends which research you read I suppose. Some researchers say it can lead to it being spread. Again, so many conflicting stories and research.
I suppose in the end it is the same as with male circumcision, it comes down to personal experiences with who and what they know, what oneself experiences, basically what you actually know to be fact, and good ol' intuition. It's never 100% right at times either, but I'd rather trust it, than some opinions I hear.
I don't know a whole lot about female circumcision, but enough to know that the reasons for having the procedure done have very little to do with the reasons of male circumcision.
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
Woah, dude, I'm not accusing you of "willingly blinding yourself." I was clarifying, under the presumption that a miscommunication was going on. I was asking why anyone would take a certain set of information (personal anecdote) and exclude all other sets of information (empirical study, the anecdotal experience of others outside their personal friend groups, etc.) You were (apparently) saying female prepucectomy is obviously bad and wrong to do, and when I asked why, you basically said because you didn't have any first-hand experience with it. Except there's more/better information out there...so why exclude that?
You can only deal and make decisions with the information you have today. I get that. No one wants to give an absolute answer if they haven't exhaustively thought through an issue, and I'm not asking for one. But just because no information is perfect doesn't mean one decision is not better than another decision, based on the information available. My only problem is with, "I don't have a better argument for it, but I'm going to do this anyway." Since you're not arguing that, I don't have a problem.
It confuses me , though, that you seem to get pissed that I'm willing to judge other parents' decision on this. Why? If you haven't thought through this well enough to have an opinion, why are you so certain that my infant circumcision isn't unreasonable? You seem to want to simultaneously hold that I can't judge other parents' opinions, and argue that you haven't thought it through analytically enough to endorse or reject my position. It's like you don't want me to judge something as unethical, but you also don't want to argue that it's not unethical. I have no idea how you can argue both at once.
I don't understand why you think caring about something and being logical about it are mutually exclusive. I didn't decide this was wrong because I was passionate about it -- outside of ethics, circumcision is a pretty boring thing. I'm passionate about it because I decided it's wrong.
Huh? Where did you get the idea I was pissed off? Do I have an issue with anything here other than I think it's a parents decision to make. As far as I am aware, no I don't. Whether they decide to have their son circumcised or not, I have no issue with. You said you would supply parents with the info and make it difficult with forms etc. Didn't you? So really, I have no issue.
How do you interpret the following, my answer to your question to me regarding female circumcision.
Do I personally find the procedure benificial in any way whatsoever? No
To this?
You were (apparently) saying female prepucectomy is obviously bad and wrong to do, and when I asked why, you basically said because you didn't have any first-hand experience with it. Except there's more/better information out there...so why exclude that?
It's an internet discussion forum. I save getting pissed off for the real world.
Last edited by a moderator:
D_Miranda_Wrights
Account Disabled
"Pissed" was probably the wrong word; you didn't really come across as angry or even that outraged. Let's go with "disapproving" instead. I'm not sure why the verbiage matters to answeirng the point I was making.
I'm totally capable of understanding simple concepts (I'm really not a dumb guy), but you've stacked several simple statements that are, together, confusing to me. Maybe it's a communication problem. Here, let me collect the statements I've been inferring.
1. We shouldn't judge male circumcision, but the analogous procedure on women is "fanatical."
2. You're opposed to judging male circumcision because of your personal experience and cultural tradition.
3. You don't believe that empirical evidence and anecdotes from other people should enter your personal judgment.
4. You don't support RIC, but you're not ready to reject it as unethical, because your personal experience does not conclusively point to it being unethical.
5. Although you're not willing to endorse infant circumcision, you are willing to endorse the idea that calling RIC unethical is unreasonable.
Are those all right?
Similar threads
