Is there really still a "circumsized is better" culture?

[Dave NoCal]

Oy, it's not the same thing. Having a foreskin removed or left in tact has created a lot of issues for those who were cut and those who were not.

It's a friggin dick. What difference does it make whether it's cut our not? The fact that some grown whiny ass men want to blame their parents for taking their foreskin when they were born. Is a absurd as that screwball 30 yr old man whose parents went to court to have him removed from their home.

It was a common practice, still is fairly common. But to keep insisting that circumcision is genital mutilation is idiotic and childish. My dick was not and is not mutilated. It's perfectly normal to me and at least half of the male population of the US.

While I don't have a son, had I had one he would've been circumcised just like me, my father before me, and his father before him.

I have no idea how common circumcision was in 1890,1932? But it was and still is fairly common when I was born.

Call it a great lie, a hoax whatever the fact remains that it is has and will be around for centuries to come.

It's my opinion and I am unanimous in this. Grown men blaming their parents for having them cut is childish, immature, selfish, and stupid. Get over yourselves already it's a friggin dick. If you are circumcised or not ask yourself these questions about your dick. Can you pee with it? get it hard? ejaculate with it? If you answered yes it works the way it was intended to work.

A couple friend of mine, left their son's foreskin intact. That was their choice. They made that decision for him. Just the same way those that are uncut parents made the decision to leave their son's intact. The same way my parents made the decision to have mine removed.

It's not that big of a deal to me. I have never missed not having a foreskin. If guys weren't looking at other men's dicks, they wouldn't know that there were guys out there whose dick's look different from theirs. But I digress.

Bottom line you guys that are "intact" are that way because your parents made the decision to leave you that way.

Your argument that it's not a parents right to make that decision is as redundant as some of the excuses you expel. You are intact because your parents made that decision. Hello. Ding,ding,ding,ding,ding.
Some one made the decision that left you intact just like someone made the decision to have mine removed.

I'll say it again, I have never put a stigmatism on someone because they were uncut. But it's seems there are plenty of people who want to put a stigmatism on those of us that are cut because we're cut.
It would seem that you want your cake and eat it too.

It is not about your dick. It is about whose dick it is, the child's or the parents'.

 

[Gj816]

It is not about your dick. It is about whose dick it is, the child's or the parents'.

That's pretty redundant. The parents made the child, and are therefore responsible for the decision's of the child. Not me, you, or anyone else. Oy, you've chose not to post pics of your manhood, so whether you are cut or uncut only you know. But if you are uncut your parents made the decision to leave you intact.

The argument that it's the child's decision is ludicrous at best because intact males are intact because that's the decision that was made by their parents. Duh!

 

[1141702]

That's pretty redundant. The parents made the child, and are therefore responsible for the decision's of the child. Not me, you, or anyone else. Oy, you've chose not to post pics of your manhood, so whether you are cut or uncut only you know. But if you are uncut your parents made the decision to leave you intact.

The argument that it's the child's decision is ludicrous at best because intact males are intact because that's the decision that was made by their parents. Duh!

Leaving someone uncut is not the same as having someone cut. How can you say that? Leaving someone uncut is common sense it’s not “someone made that choice for them to be uncut” and that should be compatible to the choice of being cut.

Hard to convey what I mean. Guess it’s like referring to someone as uncut, as it sounds like it’s normal. The word is a joke. Intact should be used.

And it’s not “just a dick,” it’s your dick, and my dick is my dick. Everyone who was circed at birth was robbed of an experience every male on this planet has the right to experience, let’s not distill it to the ignornce of feeling, and physical changes, while they are there, it has nothing to do with that to an extent.

 

[Gj816]

Leaving someone uncut is not the same as having someone cut. How can you say that? Leaving someone uncut is common sense it’s not “someone made that choice for them to be uncut” and that should be compatible to the choice of being cut.

Hard to convey what I mean. Guess it’s like referring to someone as uncut, as it sounds like it’s normal. The word is a joke. Intact should be used.

And it’s not “just a dick,” it’s your dick, and my dick is my dick. Everyone who was circed at birth was robbed of an experience every male on this planet has the right to experience, let’s not distill it to the ignornce of feeling, and physical changes, while they are there, it has nothing to do with that to an extent.

Of course it is. It's a decision made by the child's parents either prior to or at the time of birth. I wasn't robbed of anything. The fact that I am circumcised doesn't make me any less a man. Nor does being intact make anyone else more of a man. I'm glad I was cut. That's all I've ever known.

Yea I've known guys that are intact, uncut whatever you prefer to call it. Some of them have said they like rolling the skin around over their head, glands whatever you'd like to call it.

I can't miss something I didn't know I had, or have never felt on my dick. Neither can anyone else who was cut at birth.

For those who have a foreskin they can't imagine what it's like to be cut, circumcised.

Bottom line infants, children, don't have any rights or say about how they are raised. There's a reason for that as well.

For those uncut that think there is a stigmatism to their being uncut. I'd say that that stigmatism lies solely in their minds because it's not in my mind. You didn't have anymore of a say in being left uncut than I did in being cut. Be happy with yourself what you have, and live and let live.

 

[IntactMale]

Stud, Well Amy is Jewish and that is why she make so many jokes about it !!

I guess, I'm not sure that changes my point. She was also just the first comedian I could think of who I know has made that type of joke, there is a long list, I just don't want to quote names that I'm not certain of.

I don't really think he being Jewish is a reason to mock foreskin, describing it as disgusting, saying that there should be a warning before someone is forced to see it. I've known many Jewish people who were not circumcised because they recognize that it is a flaw in their religion, similar to how many Jewish people no longer keep kosher, or adjust what kosher actually means. Circumcision isn't a requirement of Judaism in modern times.

 

[IntactMale]

Of course it is. It's a decision made by the child's parents either prior to or at the time of birth. I wasn't robbed of anything. The fact that I am circumcised doesn't make me any less a man. Nor does being intact make anyone else more of a man. I'm glad I was cut. That's all I've ever known.

Yea I've known guys that are intact, uncut whatever you prefer to call it. Some of them have said they like rolling the skin around over their head, glands whatever you'd like to call it.

I can't miss something I didn't know I had, or have never felt on my dick. Neither can anyone else who was cut at birth.

For those who have a foreskin they can't imagine what it's like to be cut, circumcised.

Bottom line infants, children, don't have any rights or say about how they are raised. There's a reason for that as well.

For those uncut that think there is a stigmatism to their being uncut. I'd say that that stigmatism lies solely in their minds because it's not in my mind. You didn't have anymore of a say in being left uncut than I did in being cut. Be happy with yourself what you have, and live and let live.

Glans, not glands.

More or less of a man, no, but if you have been circumcised then you have less of your penis than you would had you not been circumcised.

Anyone can imagine being in any state, the question is the accuracy. I think someone with the ability to roll back and hold their foreskin in that position is more able to imagine being circumcised than a circumcised person could imagine the opposite as they don't have skin to roll over their glans.

Bottom line, we do have basic human rights, and while it might not currently be the case, a lot of people think that subjecting an infant to an unnecessary surgery that will affect them for the rest of their life is in violation of what those rights should be. Obviously, you do not agree but that doesn't make you right.

That stigma exists and I provided examples of it above. Just because you don't look down on the intact doesn't mean that there aren't others who do. I don't hate gay people, but that fact that I don't hate gay people doesn't mean that there is no stigma against homosexuality. Same basic thing.

 

[1141702]

Glans, not glands.

More or less of a man, no, but if you have been circumcised then you have less of your penis than you would had you not been circumcised.

Anyone can imagine being in any state, the question is the accuracy. I think someone with the ability to roll back and hold their foreskin in that position is more able to imagine being circumcised than a circumcised person could imagine the opposite as they don't have skin to roll over their glans.

Bottom line, we do have basic human rights, and while it might not currently be the case, a lot of people think that subjecting an infant to an unnecessary surgery that will affect them for the rest of their life is in violation of what those rights should be. Obviously, you do not agree but that doesn't make you right.

That stigma exists and I provided examples of it above. Just because you don't look down on the intact doesn't mean that there aren't others who do. I don't hate gay people, but that fact that I don't hate gay people doesn't mean that there is no stigma against homosexuality. Same basic thing.

Totally agree.

 

[1141702]

Of course it is. It's a decision made by the child's parents either prior to or at the time of birth. I wasn't robbed of anything. The fact that I am circumcised doesn't make me any less a man. Nor does being intact make anyone else more of a man. I'm glad I was cut. That's all I've ever known.

Yea I've known guys that are intact, uncut whatever you prefer to call it. Some of them have said they like rolling the skin around over their head, glands whatever you'd like to call it.

I can't miss something I didn't know I had, or have never felt on my dick. Neither can anyone else who was cut at birth.

For those who have a foreskin they can't imagine what it's like to be cut, circumcised.

Bottom line infants, children, don't have any rights or say about how they are raised. There's a reason for that as well.

For those uncut that think there is a stigmatism to their being uncut. I'd say that that stigmatism lies solely in their minds because it's not in my mind. You didn't have anymore of a say in being left uncut than I did in being cut. Be happy with yourself what you have, and live and let live.

“Live let live”. - lol - do you understand the meaning of that phrase?

 

[Gj816]

“Live let live”. - lol - do you understand the meaning of that phrase?

I said it didn't I?

 

[1141702]

I said it didn't I?

Well, sir. Taking about half of your dick skin away, turning an internal organ into an external one, and performing that procedure on an infant, is not “live and let live.” Seems pretty life changing if you ask me.

 

[deleted15807]

@Dave NoCal

Here is my "official contribution"...

 

[Gj816]

Well, sir. Taking about half of your dick skin away, turning an internal organ into an external one, and performing that procedure on an infant, is not “live and let live.” Seems pretty life changing if you ask me.

It didn't change my life. Just accept the fact that nothing you or I say is going to change the fact, that parents made and make those decisions every day for every male child that is born. To either circumcise their child or not.

We can have this discussion until we're blue in the face. But it doesn't change the facts that it's within a parents rights to make those decisions. It's their child and their decision to make.

If you have a son it's not my decision to say he needs to be circumcised. It's your decision to either circumcise him or not.

Complaining about something you and I have no control over is futile. It serves no purpose. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a decision that parents make.

 

[1141702]

It didn't change my life. Just accept the fact that nothing you or I say is going to change the fact, that parents made and make those decisions every day for every male child that is born. To either circumcise their child or not.

We can have this discussion until we're blue in the face. But it doesn't change the facts that it's within a parents rights to make those decisions. It's their child and their decision to make.

If you have a son it's not my decision to say he needs to be circumcised. It's your decision to either circumcise him or not.

Complaining about something you and I have no control over is futile. It serves no purpose. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a decision that parents make.

Glad we established the root of the problem.

 

[Dave NoCal]

That legal right may change. It has in much of western Europe.

 

[IntactMale]

It didn't change my life. Just accept the fact that nothing you or I say is going to change the fact, that parents made and make those decisions every day for every male child that is born. To either circumcise their child or not.

We can have this discussion until we're blue in the face. But it doesn't change the facts that it's within a parents rights to make those decisions. It's their child and their decision to make.

If you have a son it's not my decision to say he needs to be circumcised. It's your decision to either circumcise him or not.

Complaining about something you and I have no control over is futile. It serves no purpose. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a decision that parents make.

I think you are missing some pretty major points. You have no idea what would have been different in your life had you not been circumcised, so you can't say that it didn't change your life because you have no way of knowing. Here's one thing it changed about your life, your involvement and position in this discussion. I bet there have been a lot of other things that are different as a result of your circumcision, but we can never know.

Part of the debate is the "right" of parents to make this kind of decision. There are many who think it is not within their rights to elect unnecessary surgery that affects their childs life without their childs consent, whether or not you believe it has any impact. I put the word right in quotes, because its not defined as a right anywhere, its just something that is done. There are people who think we shouldn't be doing that and until the frequency of circumcision decreases significantly those people will continue to make their points.

If it doesn't make a difference like you say, then why do it? It's almost never necessary to cut off a foreskin, and there is a possibility of causing damage without any potential for benefit.

 

[1141702]

I think you are missing some pretty major points. You have no idea what would have been different in your life had you not been circumcised, so you can't say that it didn't change your life because you have no way of knowing. Here's one thing it changed about your life, your involvement and position in this discussion. I bet there have been a lot of other things that are different as a result of your circumcision, but we can never know.

Part of the debate is the "right" of parents to make this kind of decision. There are many who think it is not within their rights to elect unnecessary surgery that affects their childs life without their childs consent, whether or not you believe it has any impact. I put the word right in quotes, because its not defined as a right anywhere, its just something that is done. There are people who think we shouldn't be doing that and until the frequency of circumcision decreases significantly those people will continue to make their points.

If it doesn't make a difference like you say, then why do it? It's almost never necessary to cut off a foreskin, and there is a possibility of causing damage without any potential for benefit.

You are my wordsmith, sir. Totally agree.

I know that I have been psychologically damaged because of this, so in my case, I can surely say that my life was affected.

 

[Gj816]

I think you are missing some pretty major points. You have no idea what would have been different in your life had you not been circumcised, so you can't say that it didn't change your life because you have no way of knowing. Here's one thing it changed about your life, your involvement and position in this discussion. I bet there have been a lot of other things that are different as a result of your circumcision, but we can never know.

Part of the debate is the "right" of parents to make this kind of decision. There are many who think it is not within their rights to elect unnecessary surgery that affects their childs life without their childs consent, whether or not you believe it has any impact. I put the word right in quotes, because its not defined as a right anywhere, its just something that is done. There are people who think we shouldn't be doing that and until the frequency of circumcision decreases significantly those people will continue to make their points.

If it doesn't make a difference like you say, then why do it? It's almost never necessary to cut off a foreskin, and there is a possibility of causing damage without any potential for benefit.

I know this that not every intact males foreskin retracts over the glands and surgery is required to have our removed. I know this because I worked with a woman who had to have her teen son circumcised because it was causing him a great deal of pain and stress. Not having a foreskin hasn't kept me from using my dick.

Nor have I had to worry about having Posthitis, or Balanitis because I don't have a foreskin.

 

[1141702]

I know this that not every intact males foreskin retracts over the glands and surgery is required to have our removed. I know this because I worked with a woman who had to have her teen son circumcised because it was causing him a great deal of pain and stress. Not having a foreskin hasn't kept me from using my dick.

Nor have I had to worry about having Posthitis, or Balanitis because I don't have a foreskin.

Nor do you need to worry about less invasive fixes to those issues. Circumcision is not necessary in most cases. I feel bad for her son, who was mislead into believing circumcision was the answer.

 

[IntactMale]

I know this that not every intact males foreskin retracts over the glands and surgery is required to have our removed. I know this because I worked with a woman who had to have her teen son circumcised because it was causing him a great deal of pain and stress. Not having a foreskin hasn't kept me from using my dick.

Nor have I had to worry about having Posthitis, or Balanitis because I don't have a foreskin.

You are talking about phimosis, and its pretty rare. We don't know exactly how rare because so many people get their foreskins cut off before there is any indication of the condition. Proactively removing a part of the body because there is some small chance that there might be a medical problem with it is foolish. You might get glaucoma, would you choose to remove your eyes to avoid it?

I have all of my body parts, literally every single one of them is susceptible to some disease or condition and yet I don't sit around worrying about all of the various diseases I could potentially get. That includes the conditions you mentioned regarding the foreskin, none of which have affected me. To force surgery on the unwilling to avoid something that probably will never affect them is foolish. If you don't agree then lets start removing the eyes from our newborns.

 

[Dave NoCal]

@Dave NoCal

Here is my "official contribution"...

View attachment 1123830

Having to resort to name calling is the surest sign of a weak argument. I will point out, again, you just can't stay away. You have a compulsion to participate in a discussion you claim should not be happening. Why is that?