confused guy

Discussion in 'Show Off' started by ericbear, Dec 22, 2004.

  1. ericbear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,117
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    238
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Santa Ana (CA, US)
    If you see the "mushroom" head while the penis is soft and at rest, it is probably circumcised. In an intact penis, the head is covered by the foreskin, unless it is retracted by holding it back. When the penis becomes erect, the lengthening of the penis generally causes the foreskin to retract. This link has some information about circumcision, and clinical pictures of an intact penis:

    http://net.indra.com/~shredder/intact/anatomy/
     
  2. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    carolinacurious: Well it's possible that you are uncircumsized and just don't have much foreskin but if you look like the picture on the right but not the one on the left 99 to 1 says you're circumsized.

    Do you have a scar (ring of pronuncedly different color) where they mutilated your penis? Not everyone scars the same but if you have one, case closed.

    Read some of the stuff on that link, it's hard to imagine that you could read that page and still not know for sure. The answers to your questions about whether "most" people are circumsized or not are all there.
     
  3. Ineligible

    Ineligible Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Most guys in the US are cut, though the rate is dropping. It is also done for religious reasons among Jews and Muslims, and is traditional in some other cultures. It is not common in Europe.

    If you never have that extra skin over your head, you are cut.
     
  4. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    In the U.S., the Middle East, and parts of Africa, yes. In the world at large, no. By far, the vast majority of guys who are cut are Muslim.

    In the U.S., there are also differences by region (less in the Far West and South; more in the Northeast and Midwest), race (most in whites; less in Latinos and indigenous peoples), genertion (more in Boomers and X'ers), economic class (more among the rich), and generations in this country (more as number of generations increases).
     
  5. BobLeeSwagger

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Are you an asshole for considering a routine medical procedure a mutilation? One which you only avoided by the luck of the draw and not through any moral superiority of your own? Yes, case closed.
     
  6. Mr._dB

    Mr._dB New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    Sometimes the truth hurts...

    This absurd barbaric practice can't be stopped as long as we pussyfoot around the issue and try to make the mutillated feel good about themselves.
     
  7. txquis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Wow.
    I'm circumcised and had nothing to do with that choice.
    Truthful or not, i prefer to use more prudent language than "mutilated".
    I dont use that word when i meet an amputee, or when
    my mom had a double mastectomy either.
    "Hi mom, when were you mutilated? Sorry if the truth hurts, mom"
    just didn't seem appropriate or kind.
     
  8. mindseye

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    5,685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Hear, hear!

    The word 'mutilate' connotes an intent to do harm. Parents who made the decision to have their sons circumcised did not have that intent.

    Using the word 'mutilation' to describe routine circumcision is as inflammatory as accusing parents of mutilating minds who teach their children that some guy managed to fit two of every known species of land animal aboard a tiny ark in order to survive a flood that covered the whole world. The ignorance is present, but the intent isn't.
     
  9. ericbear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,117
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    238
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Santa Ana (CA, US)
    I am circumcised, and was probably almost 20 before I saw an intact penis, simply because in the time and place where I was born the procedure was quite routine, and was done with little thought. At least I have a well done circumcision. I have seen others which are so poorly done that they regrettably can be called nothing but mutilations.

    When I was in my mid twenties, one day my mother approached me and quite unexpectededly and bluntly apologized about my circumcision. I was somewhat embarassed by her direct approach, and tried to change the subject. However, she was insistent on saying everything on her mind. She was obvioulsy deeply upset, and had been wating some time to have this discussion.

    It became clear that from what she feels today, she would never have a child circumcised. She tried to explain that at the time (1961, in the US Northeast) the practice was so common as to be performed almost automatically when a male baby was delivered in a hospital. She explained that a nurse, followed by a rabbi (which astonished her, as I was delivered in a catholic hospital) entered the room, and announced that it was time for the circumcision. She wasn't asked if she wanted a circumcision to be performed; it was simply one of the automatic steps in delivering a male child. She was not asked to give specific authorization, but presumed if she had protested, the circumcsion would not have been performed, athough it never occured to her that there was any reason to say no. After all, my father was circumcised, the medical teaching of the day was that it was a good thing, etc. She was also alone at the time, so my father's views, if any, were not available for consideration. Looking back on the way it was done, it appears that the hospital never imagined that anyone would not want to be circumcised.

    When I was in my teens, I remember visiting friends of the family to see their newborn daughter. They were tight on money, and joked about when they were going over the bill with the hospital. They said the hospital representative looked at the bill and said "Oh! It's a girl! You saved there!" Clearly, circumcision was still just about automatic and expected in the medical establishment.

    But, over the course of the next few years, it became clear that most of the "medical" evidence presented to justify circumcision was in fact false, or highly exagerated. Most of these things had more to do with bad hygene than with the foreskin itself. Others had to do with people having certain moral predispositions manipulating data to support their beliefs. Still other justifications came from using circumcision as an differentiator of socioeconomic status. (Afluence of a society is measurable to some extent by how many unnecessary things are done.)

    Thus, even my mother, a very conservative woman, came to believe that circumcision was very wrong, and was obviously very disturbed that she had allowed it to happen. In fact, I think she is more upset over it than I am. However, given the times I was born in, I cannot fault her for what happened.
     
  10. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well, it depends on whether or not abortion is murder, I guess. We can all agree abortion is voluntary manslaughter, but the term "murder" depends on malicious intent.

    So is circumcision quackery? Yes. Unnecessary surgery? Yes. Mutilation? That might be a bit harsh, but I will point out that the HRAF microfiche refers to circumcision as "male genital mutilation".
     
  11. D_Roderick Beresford Stiffington IV

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    544
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think any person outside another's culture can say what it common practice and what is mutilation. As a circumsized individual, I have nothing wrong with the practice.

    In other parts of the world, female circumcision is highly practiced. In that proceedure the clitoris and sometimes other parts of the female anatomy are removed so the woman will not enjoy sex. When I look at this I think of that as mutilation as I'm sure many of you feel it is too, but in their culture this is not a big deal.

    I forgot where I was going with this, but the point is if you're not circumsized I don't think you have a say in whether its a ritual or a mutilation. If you are and you still decide to call it mutilation I think you need to find another word to describe it.
     
  12. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well, cultural relativism doesn't mean not asking questions. And it's irrelevant to the medical issue of circumcision.
     
  13. txquis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    I'll admit my PC was showing, but whether it is medically correct terminology or not, I just find different words for mutilation more pleasing and less hurtful on a personal level...that's all. Names can hurt, along with sticks and stones.
     
  14. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Oy, political correctness. Taking offense at the term "slave unit" really went too far.
     
  15. txquis

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,831
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    :p The reason I apologized for my PC attitude is because i usually dont agree with changing things we've always said to suit a passing fad or fancy. But...perhaps mine isn't a PC attitude...perhaps it is just a kind attitude.
    Ah...who knows? We choose words to suit our own comforts, and "mutilated" didnt suit mine today. LOL.
     
  16. ashlar

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,013
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Harrisburg, Pa.
    Jeff you just like causing trouble, admit it! :p Hehehehe.

    Nowdays I think circumcision is just another way for Dr's to get more money out of new parents. It's like Microsoft forcing you to pay money to update a program, where as the update only has more new stuff that no body ever wanted in the first place. Like that stupid goddamned paperclip in MS word.
     
  17. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    Basically, that's how it works. Circumcision actually began in Western medicine as a cure for paraplegia, tuberculosis, asthma, and many other illnesses I can't remember. Later, it was thought to keep boys from masturbating. Then it was thought to prevent syphilis. And then it was thought to be cleaner. Then came the one about uterine cancer and UTIs. Most recently, it's AIDS. What I have noticed, in all these cases, is that the risk of complications from circumcision is generally greater than the risk from dying from these diseases, and always greater than any degree of prevention.
     
  18. Freddie53

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    7,285
    Likes Received:
    60
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The South, USA
    All curcumcisions are not alike. Both my brother and I were circumcised. They removed nearly all of my brother's foreskin. In my case, I don't know the percent since I don't remember back that far, but much of the foreskin was left. Enough that when flaccid, the forskin almost covers the entire glans of the penis.

    My boys were circumcised as that was still the "routine" procdure. I was shocked when I saw how much foreskin each of them had before the circumcision. I did tell the doctor to not remove too much as my brother did have some problems with too much foreskin removed. I suspect my mother told the doctor not to remove too much of mine either, but we will never know now.

    The issue that I have with circumcision which I didn't know when my boys were born is that this a a procedure in which there is no anesthetic. The boys won't remember it so it won't matter. (I have been told.) Yes it does, I am sure it hurts like hell. What a way to introduce an infant boy into the world. I can imagine how much it would hurt if they were to remove foreskin on me right now and how many days it would hurt.

    You can bet that a grown man would have a local anesthesia given first. Why put our newborn boys through this kind of pain with no pain killers at all? This is my issue with circumcision. If the procedure is not really needed. why make little infant boys hurt like hell for the first week of their lives?
     
  19. Imported

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    56,713
    Likes Received:
    55
    BluECliQ: I'm not a doctor but drugging up your new born on pain killers doesn't seem like a good way to start life either...I suppose theres no harm done since as adults we don't remember the actual circumcision...well I don't at least, not sure if any of you have memories reaching that far back.
     
  20. jonb

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,308
    Likes Received:
    2
    But harm can be done. Quite a few circumcisions have complications. And if the boy's a hemophiliac, it's potentially fatal.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted