Circumcision???????

matt121matt121

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Posts
1,360
Media
16
Likes
294
Points
283
Location
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
ok here is the deal im in a human sexuality class and i need to propose and argument about why should a new baby boy get circumcised.

Im not religious and i need 3 arguments explaining why you SHOULD get your baby circumcised?

thanks

How did you get assigned to the pro-circ argument?

I hope someone in your class is doing the "leave the baby intact" argument as well..

I personally wouldn't be able to do a pro argument, as It should definitely be the owner of the penis's decision..

HIS BODY, HIS CHOICE!!
 
S

SirConcis

Guest
With regards to HIV. Circumcision reduces the change of catching HIV via the penis. It does not recide chances of catchig it via anus or needles (drugs).

Since in usa/europe AIDS is mostly a homosexual and drug user disease, circumcision has little impact since homosexuals can still catch it via anus and circumcision has no impact on drug users who catch it wherever they inject themselves.

In Africa, where AIDS is mostly heterosexual, men catch it via their penis, so circumcision has a big impact.
 

matelalique

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Posts
356
Media
0
Likes
204
Points
263
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
hey german guy

I'm a brit guy, uncut, and opposed to RIC. There is a lot of hot air, very little science, and very little statistics.

you can make a very clear engineering argument about disease reduction - cut cocks are keratinised (ie like leather or external skin), uncut cocks are more like internal skin. Foreskin in particular is quite absorbent, and more likely to absorb microbes and viruses. Foreskin also traps sexual juices, providing more opportunity for transmission (this is why uncut guys who have unprotected straight sex contract HIV more than cut guys). This is the basic engineering, and the anti-circ movement loses this one. It's a bit like saying that staining a sponge is easier than a piece of glass.

Then we get to the statistics. For promiscuous men engaging in unprotected sex with promiscuous partners, you can cut transmission rate by 50% but they are going to get infected - it will just take twice as long if they are cut (so 4 weeks vs 2 weeks). Are promiscuous people going to be using condoms, and what is their likelihood of using condoms? Most promiscuous straight people I know use the pill if straight.

The statistics justify circumcision in most cases very poorly. I think an argument can be made in low hygiene conditions (first world war trenches etc), when infections of many sorts are likely.
 

matelalique

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Posts
356
Media
0
Likes
204
Points
263
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Sorry - meant to add in the statistics section that even though uncut cocks will be more transmissible for microbes, you would be lucky to find any meaningful statistics for transmission. Monogamous couples generally don't get diseases, and promiscuous couples get diseases due to the number of partners they have. HPV is very much associated with uncut cocks (but not exclusively), and presumably due to foreskin cell affinity, but most other diseases tend not to care much about foreskin or lack thereof.

In other words, the engineering might support the argument, but the statistics suggest that the effect is so small that it isn;t worth discussing.
 

eurotop40

Admired Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
4,430
Media
0
Likes
977
Points
333
Location
Zurich (Switzerland)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I think the whole cleanliness, STD etc. is pure bullshit.
The only thing I agree upon is that some uncut dicks look weird but not weirder than vulvas. So, to me, circumcision is purely an erotic/cosmetic thing that should be done only on consenting adults. The whole religion thing is crap (religions that require body modifications are nowadays to be considered nothing more than these stupid cults like the one that required castration).
 

cocktailweenie

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Posts
141
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
163
Location
Ontario, Canada
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I don't know why the hysterical ideologues who deny the health benefits simply admit there is a slight advantage to cutting but that we should accept the risk so that we may all enjoy uglier cocks.
 

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,422
Media
6
Likes
318
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
ok here is the deal im in a human sexuality class and i need to propose and argument about why should a new baby boy get circumcised.

Im not religious and i need 3 arguments explaining why you SHOULD get your baby circumcised?

thanks
Well if you want to undermine the case, how about:

15. "Because any child with a foreskin is a pedafile"[SIZE=-1]

20.
[/SIZE]Because "to NOT BE CIRCUMCISED ... [is] ... old-fashioned"

26. To teach him that the world is a painful place / that life hurts / To toughen 'em up for real life / Because "It teaches them that pain doesn't matter."

31. To prevent "psychological trauma due to castration anxiety"

39. Because they told his mother at the hospital if she didn't have him circumcised he wouldn't be able to father children / “Isn’t it true a boy needs to be circumcised if he is going to have children?”

56. Because if he isn't circumcised at birth he won't want to be circumcised later

65. Because it saves him from the embarassment of having to ask for it

68. Because the foreskin will fall off if a baby is put into a hot tub of water for a bath. (One of my favourites.)

82. Because [doctors] would not be able to pull the foreskin back to see if anything is wrong.

86. To make the penis look like that of a kangaroo

92. To control our animal desires

97. To confer a tendency for caring, reasoning and spiritual experience.

98. Because it acts like Shock Treatment (ECT, ElectroConvulsive Therapy) to activate the brain

99. As a prophylactic measure against demons

109. Because Allah wants him to be a Muslim

117. Because the foreskin concentrates negative energy

252. Because "when it is trimmed it looks like it is ALWAYS ready for action."

260. To improve his appetite.

301. Because "If you don't do that they get a rupture"

310. Because "It makes a boy mature faster"

359. To use his foreskin to make a magical lotion, protective against enemies.

365. To enable him to become not just a very fine, but a great actor

366. To prevent him becoming a presidential assassin.

From the full list of 450 circumstitions.

 

mandoman

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Posts
3,454
Media
0
Likes
324
Points
148
Location
MA
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
It looks better

You never have to worry about your foreskin not retracting

It does not look like a ant eater

I could go on forever

You already have.
Any other normal body parts you are bigoted against?
Some people are ashamed to show their ignorance.
You seem rather proud of it.
 

mandoman

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Posts
3,454
Media
0
Likes
324
Points
148
Location
MA
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
I certainly do not disagree; however, that is assumption rather than scientific proof...the kind of proof most intactivists consider biased crap.
(as though their own point of view is totally unbiased)

Is this scientific enough for ya?
Foreskin not a factor in American rates of HIV, HPV, STDs:
Prevalence of male circumcision and its association with HIV and sexually transmitted infections in a U.S. navy population.

or Africa:
How the circumcision solution in Africa will increase HIV infections | Van Howe | Journal of Public Health in Africa

University of Washington study shows no significant difference in the rate of HPV infections:
Circumcision and Acquisition of Human Papillomavirus Infecti... : Sexually Transmitted Diseases

Frisch et al. evaluated penile cancer rates in Denmark and found that Danish men (who are predominantly not circumcised) had an incidence of 0.9-1.0 per 100,000.
Falling incidence of penis cancer in an uncircumcised po... [BMJ. 1995] - PubMed - NCBI
 

mandoman

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Posts
3,454
Media
0
Likes
324
Points
148
Location
MA
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
With regards to HIV. Circumcision reduces the change of catching HIV via the penis. It does not recide chances of catchig it via anus or needles (drugs).

Since in usa/europe AIDS is mostly a homosexual and drug user disease, circumcision has little impact since homosexuals can still catch it via anus and circumcision has no impact on drug users who catch it wherever they inject themselves.

In Africa, where AIDS is mostly heterosexual, men catch it via their penis, so circumcision has a big impact.

Except that your words don't hold up to medical scrutiny.
Why do the Europeans who rarely circumcise get 1/10 the HIV of the Americans, or Israelis? Why did 6 of 9 of the African studies show that men with foreskins have a lower rate of infection?
 

mandoman

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Posts
3,454
Media
0
Likes
324
Points
148
Location
MA
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
I don't know why the hysterical ideologues who deny the health benefits simply admit there is a slight advantage to cutting but that we should accept the risk so that we may all enjoy uglier cocks.

What is it about a scar, that makes a cock prettier to you?
 

Mmillz81

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Posts
19
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
38
Location
Deerfield Beach, FL
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Except that your words don't hold up to medical scrutiny.
Why do the Europeans who rarely circumcise get 1/10 the HIV of the Americans, or Israelis? Why did 6 of 9 of the African studies show that men with foreskins have a lower rate of infection?

By the way your facts are totally bias and don't take into account many factors, such as population, homosexual vs heterosexual stigma of the area, ethnicity, etc. There are plenty more articles and cases of evidence avaunt your findings.

It comes down to a matter of opinion. You like anteaters, but some of us don't.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
If you are interested in the debate there are lots of old threads about this.

Except that your words don't hold up to medical scrutiny.
Why do the Europeans who rarely circumcise get 1/10 the HIV of the Americans, or Israelis? Why did 6 of 9 of the African studies show that men with foreskins have a lower rate of infection?
a year or two ago when I amused myself entering into this debate, someone kindly posted refs to the various studies and the evidence given about rates of HIV being reduced in africa by circumcision were nonsense. The studies were rubbish. When examined closely I recall one even demonstrated the opposite despite the claims published by its authors.

Honestly, the best reason for circumcision at birth seems to be fashion. That if you will feel out of place in a society where many are circumcised, then better get it done and over with at birth. This is an absolutely crap reason for doing it and is even becoming invalid because circumcision rates are falling anyway. It also seems to be very questionable that one of the reasons for doing it at birth is that the baby is unlikely to sue or give evidence in court about how painfull it was. It should be noted that circumcison is fashion predominantly in the US, not elsewhere in the world except for the religious groups.

A second reason which seems to have some justification is it makes masturbation a little more difficult or unintuitive. So helpful to prevent nasty habits in little boys. That is, assuming you believe masturbation is evil. This too seems to be somewhat undermined in modern society where boys do not usually have to find out about masturbation for themselves.

A third reason is it helps keep doctors employed. nice little regular extra on the fees.
 
Last edited:
S

SirConcis

Guest
AIDS in western world has little to do with the penis, it has more to do with drug use (needles) and anus. So differences in AIDS rates in USA vs Europe would have more to do with availability of clean needles for drug users and use of condoms by gays for anal sex.

AIDS in africa is caught by the penis via vaginal sex and the epidemic covers teh whole population, not a small subset of drug users or gays.

So instituting circumcision in europe would not change much because it would not change the most common method there (drug users and gays).
 

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,422
Media
6
Likes
318
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
It looks better
Says you. Not according to Michaelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Caravaggio, etc. etc. etc. (who even portrayed Jewish characters such as David, the boy Jesus, etc. as intact).

You never have to worry about your foreskin not retracting
I never have.

It does not look like a ant eater
The day I am standing naked next to an anteater and someone (or another anteater) is in danger of confusing us, is the day that will be of the slightest concern to me.

I could go on forever
Or you could go on here.
 

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,422
Media
6
Likes
318
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
AIDS in africa is caught by the penis via vaginal sex and the epidemic covers teh whole population, not a small subset of drug users or gays.
Actually, since in a country like Uganda, it can mean death to admit being gay, the amount of gay sex - and hence the amount of HIV contracted through gay sex - goes greatly underrreported.
 

LPSGeezer

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Posts
86
Media
0
Likes
6
Points
153
Location
America
Sexuality
Pansexual
Gender
Male
Maybe you could simply state that:
1. Parents no longer feel the need to follow like a flock of sheep based on what a doctor has to say in order to add another cost to the hospital bill.
2. All baby boys are born with foreskin, it is as natural as breathing so there is no need to cut off what god gave him.
3. It is an unnecessary surgery made popular in an age when the so called experts were hostile to masturbation.