Support Grows for U.S. Ban on Male Circumcision

[Chuck64]

Big chunk of his dick ? Who the f*** are you kidding ?
How can anyone miss something they never had ?
Can you remeber when you were 1 week old ??

Jake -

#1 - Calm down.
#2 - I can't remember when it happened, but that doesn't change the fact that I wish I wasn't cut.

 

[KinkGuy]

...I don't understand why U. S. doctors even mention this to new parents...

$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

[KinkGuy]

Female circumcision (genital mutilation) is wrong, abhorrent and should be internationally mandated against..............
BUT, unwarranted, unnecessary and barbaric mutilation of the male penis..........is somehow, okee-dokee?

 

[B_Stronzo]

Female circumcision (genital mutilation) is wrong, abhorrent and should be internationally mandated against..............
BUT, unwarranted, unnecessary and barbaric mutilation of the male penis..........is somehow, okee-dokee?

Of course not but by comparison it pales in both the mutilation department and the political/social implication department.

When I compare two I do so with a sense of proportion.

 

[KinkGuy]

Of course not but by comparison it pales in both the mutilation department and the political/social implication department.

When I compare two I do so with a sense of proportion.

Just because you/we are "used" to it doesn't make it any less of a mutilation. Try watching a video of an infant being circ'd and then address this issue.

 

[KinkGuy]

Yes, but I for one decided to circumsize my son( not personally) mostly for
health reasons . And I didn't mind paying. Although most company benefit
packages will cover the cost.

And now they don't even have to cut it, they just tie a string around it.
After inserting a small plastic bell between the foreskin and the head.

1) Teach him to bathe and clean himself.
2) If it's so easy....why don't all grown, intact men opt for the procedure?
3) Go ahead and mutilate my son, as long as my HMO foots the bill????

 

[B_Stronzo]

Just because you/we are "used" to it doesn't make it any less of a mutilation. Try watching a video of an infant being circ'd and then address this issue.

I have witnessed the male variety personally. I've also seen significant footage of the female version.

Apples and oranges.

 

[Dr Rock]

Big chunk of his dick ? Who the f*** are you kidding ?
How can anyone miss something they never had ?

he's gonna start to wonder when he notices his dick is different from all the other kids', genius

 

[EFH33]

Parents shouldn't be allowed to make this sort of permanent decision for their children.

I'm not especially happy with how mine turned out, but I have nothing to compare it to, sensation-wise.

If you turn 18 and want to be circumcised... go for it.

Ok so what should our parents be allowed to do? Next you're going to say it's a violation of our civil rights for our parents to potty train and teach us to talk. I mean, why should they decide when I stop wearing diapers? Most parents do what they think is right for their child in all aspects of development. Circumcision, at the time a lot of us were circumcised, was done for medical reasons. I know there is a higher rate of penile cancer in men with foreskin. Not to say this it the reason to have it done, but that's a fact. My father isn't circumcized, but he went on the advice of the doctor to have it done to me. I function normal sexually and feel pleasure, and nothing is wrong with my penis, so who did it hurt? (besides me as a baby)

Most of you are right. The fact there is an organization looking into this is scary.

 

[Freddie53]

Ok so what should our parents be allowed to do? Next you're going to say it's a violation of our civil rights for our parents to potty train and teach us to talk. I mean, why should they decide when I stop wearing diapers? Most parents do what they think is right for their child in all aspects of development. Circumcision, at the time a lot of us were circumcised, was done for medical reasons. I know there is a higher rate of penile cancer in men with foreskin. Not to say this it the reason to have it done, but that's a fact. My father isn't circumcized, but he went on the advice of the doctor to have it done to me. I function normal sexually and feel pleasure, and nothing is wrong with my penis, so who did it hurt? (besides me as a baby)

Most of you are right. The fact there is an organization looking into this is scary.

Such wisdom. I feel so cheated. You are absolutely right. Children should stay in diapers until age 18. Then they can make the choice whether to continue to wear diapers or if they wish they can enroll in a potty training class. Some colleges might even require this course as part of the curriculum if you want to say that you graduated from Anywhere University.

 

[JamesPM]

... so who did it hurt? (besides me as a baby)

This is what I have real difficulty getting to grips with. Why is inflicting pain on an infant not morally, even legally, child abuse ?

There can be no defence, in the UK at least, that it is for health reasons with both the National Health Service and British Medical Association clearly stating that there is no clear clinical evidence of benefit. The fact that the parent believes it to be a benefit is irelevent.

It's an operation that requires a general anaesthetic as soon as the risk of giving the anaesthetic is acceptable. Implies that the local [FONT=&quot]anaesthetic [/FONT]used for infants is inadequate and pain is inflicted.

Inflicting unnecessary pain on an infant -> child abuse.

As an aside to my main topic / rant (and for a bit of a stir):

http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/en.aspx?articleId=649&sectionId=8392

"Countries with the highest rate of circumcision, such as America, also have the highest rate of penile cancer."

---
James

 

[rawbone8]

Why is it that when people who organize to lobby the government for change or work to spread knowledge to educate others, they are so easily labelled as "crazy" or "dangerous" or a waste of effort?

Isn't it the very essence of active democracy to assert those truths you feel are right to improve the social condition or to engage in meaningful healthy debate?? My view of the group that is lobbying is that they are well meaning activists engaged in an unselfish pursuit.

I highly doubt that these people are going to be successful getting legislation passed any time soon. The press release that started this post may give the impression that everyone's rights as parents is about to change, but if you read the article it is not imminently so. It's a press release. They are spreading the word that normal is better, and that choice on the part of the penis owner must be HIS and his only.

If it was currently fashionable (I'm being facetious here for argument's sake) to amputate the newborn infant's earlobes for aesthetic reasons that followed an established tradition, so the child is to look just like the parents' clipped ears, would this tribal lobectomy rite be as vigorously defended as circumcision? Or would it be obviously labelled as ridiculous? Would there be people asserting their rights as parents to (mis)treat their beloved offspring just like their boxer or doberman?

An earlobe may be a relatively useless piece of flesh to remove when compared to the foreskin. (Though an accupuncturist might have something contrary to say about that).

The foreskin has a huge concentration of nerve endings and reports are that it is a source of pleasure for most guys who have em. The current practice of cutting it off has everything to do with misguided roots approx. 150 years ago to make sex less enjoyable and assert some social order on the sinful masses. Recent motivations have little connection to that and are all about hygiene and aesthetics and fear of change.



And on a somewhat thematic note

First woman to her friend:

"What is that thing called, you know, the name for that useless piece of flesh that's attached to the end of a penis?"



Second woman:

"It's called a man hon." :wink:

 

[RideRocket]

I find it interesting that so many people here have stated it's a violation of the child's civil rights to be circumcised at birth and how horrible it is, yet we have thousands of abortions every year - what about the civil rights of those children?

Legislating morality isn't necessarily the answer, but society must have a framework of laws and standards to abide by. One of those 'standards' is that parents are considered the legal guardians of their children and to act on their behalf. Do all parents make the right choices? Of course not. Parents make bad decisions. But they also make good decisions. Sometimes you have to take the bad for the common good.

If you want to legislate anything, legislate who gets to be parents in the first place and that should resolve a lot of problems.

__________________
By the way, if you look at the statistics, the number of circumcisions in the United States has steadily declined over the years.

 

[madame_zora]

I find it interesting that so many people here have stated it's a violation of the child's civil rights to be circumcised at birth and how horrible it is, yet we have thousands of abortions every year - what about the civil rights of those children?

Legislating morality isn't necessarily the answer, but society must have a framework of laws and standards to abide by. One of those 'standards' is that parents are considered the legal guardians of their children and to act on their behalf. Do all parents make the right choices? Of course not. Parents make bad decisions. But they also make good decisions. Sometimes you have to take the bad for the common good.

If you want to legislate anything, legislate who gets to be parents in the first place and that should resolve a lot of problems.

__________________
By the way, if you look at the statistics, the number of circumcisions in the United States has steadily declined over the years.

Legally, a fetus is still part of the woman, it is not a "person" under the law until it is outside the woman's body and functioning on it's own (umbilical cord cut). Once born, it has protections under tha law as a separate person but not prior to birth. Regardless of how anyone feels personally, that is how the law works. A Jewish friend could jump in here, but I believe Jews don't consider a baby to receive it's "soul" until 30 days after birth.

It does matter how invasive we allow a parent's rights to me. We don't allow for total domination of a parent over a child, They are not free to impose sex on a child, for example, even if they "believe" it is in the child's best interest. There are limits to what society views as right and just. Circumcision is up for grabs right now. Some don't see it as a big deal, but some are outraged. You have to admit, those who are passionate about HAVING circumcision are a lot creepier than those who are passionate about being left alone. I can understand the concept of wanting someone to get the fuck away from your dick with a knife much better than someone trying to enforce their right to lop the thing off. Kinda creepy, if you ask me.

What's going on in America right now (that's right-wake up- America is not the world, this has already been handled by other cultures by now. We are the slow learners) is that we are SOOOOOOOOOO fucking ego driven, and every man alive this that HIS particual penis is the greatest thing since sliced bread, so if MY dick is circumcised, it HAS to be a great thing. This is an emotional opinion that has nothing to do with medicine or science. There is NO compelling evidience to suggest that every healthy penis should be circumcised because perhap 1.5% MAY POSSIBLY develop SOME FORM of difficulty in the future.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, but for crying out loud, stop telling us ridiculous reasons why it SHOULD be done. It's a body modification, not a health decision, and that point is not really up for grabs unless your doctors *happen* to be fundies.

 

[GottaBigOne]

Aborted fetuses are not children, they are fetuses.

Yes parents have a right to make decisions for their kids, and that includes making bad decisions. They do not however have the right to abuse their kids, i.e. by actively modifying their bodies for non-medical purposes. Where you draw the line is something to be debated. I will sya this though. I do not think circumcision is a big deal, it is not a matter of whether or not it is cruel to the baby or not, it is a matter of the baby's body being its own and its right to have its body remain the way it is unless there is a medical problem that needs fixing.

 

[Dr Rock]

We are the slow learners) is that we are SOOOOOOOOOO fucking ego driven, and every man alive this that HIS particual penis is the greatest thing since sliced bread, so if MY dick is circumcised, it HAS to be a great thing.

this is the whole fucking problem. this argument wouldn't even be happening if it wasn't for all the hopelessly insecure pantywaists who immediately seize upon any attack on neonatal circumcision as a personal attack on their entire manhood. that is the underlying motivation behind all the pseudoscience bullshit and medically-bankrupt theories that they fling around - these twits automatically interpret "neonatal circumcision is not acceptable" as meaning "being circumcized makes you less of a man/person/whateverthefuck." the stark fact that it is simply not excusable, by any moral or logical standard you care to apply, to routinely circumcize newborn kids, is not important compared to their need to bolster their own fragile egos against any perceived threat.

 

[RideRocket]

My point was that an abortion takes the life of someone who didn't have a say in the matter much like those stating it was a violation of a child's civil rights in the case of circumcision. Mdme Z is correct in that that's how the laws currently are. Whether you choose to call it a fetus, embryo, whatever - it's semantics - it's still a life. Personally I am against abortions, but I still support the option of having the choice to have one.

I also agree with "There are limits to what society views as right and just." At some point though, a line does have to be drawn for the good of society.

I personally don't see a reason to circumcise, but I can see why parents would choose too. Not because of religious reasons, but because of "what emotional trauma will my son endure when he's the only one in the locker room that looks like that?" Let's not forget that the vast majority of boys in the US are still circumcised and that kids in high school can be cruel.

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

Aborted fetuses are not children, they are fetuses.

12 entries found for child.

child Audio pronunciation of "child" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (chld)
n. pl. chil·dren (chldrn)

1. A person between birth and puberty.
2.
1. An unborn infant; a fetus.
2. An infant; a baby.
3. One who is childish or immature.
4. A son or daughter; an offspring.
5. A member of a tribe; descendant: children of Abraham.
6.
1. An individual regarded as strongly affected by another or by a specified time, place, or circumstance: a child of nature; a child of the Sixties.
2. A product or result of something specified: “Times Square is a child of the 20th century” (Richard F. Shepard).

 

[B_Stronzo]

- these twits automatically interpret "neonatal circumcision is not acceptable" as meaning "being circumcized makes you less of a man/person/whateverthefuck." the stark fact that it is simply not excusable, by any moral or logical standard you care to apply, to routinely circumcize newborn kids, is not important compared to their need to bolster their own fragile egos against any perceived threat.

but, but, but, but, wait Dr. Rock!

I LIKE my cut dick! I think it's pretty. I dun wanna use no "Handiwipes". :no: Yucky.:wink:

 

[B_Stronzo]

Aborted fetuses are not children, they are fetuses.

Oh hell. I agree with you.

Dammit all!