When did you realise that the end of your penis was missing?

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
How many circumsised men have died of AIDS in the US?

The point of this post was my amazement at the comment that being circumcised means that you have virtually no chance of catching an STD.

Surely people aren't peddling this lunacy?

To answer my own question, over half a million people have died of aids in the US, with over a million having contracted the virus. There are over one million reported cases of chlamydia each year (true figure nearer 1.5 M as men aren't screened), and over a third of a million cases of gonorrhoea.

I remember the old AIDS adverts - DON'T DIE OF IGNORANCE.
 

Lampwick

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Posts
363
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
163
Gender
Male
If I have sons they will almost certainly be circumcized while very young so that it's over and done with before they're old enough to stress about it. I will also make other choices for them, such as immunization shots, proper nutrition, and investments to assure their financial future. It is something parents do, for either health or religious reasons, and it has no negative effects unless it is poorly done (EXTREMELY rare) or the "victim" is gullible enough to give any credence to this very strange crusade that has recently arisen.
Have you thought about getting them an appendectomy while you're at it? It's a lot more likely to give them trouble over the course of their life than their foreskin. Over eight percent of males will have appendicitis over the course of their lives, and "Overall, an estimated 36 incidental procedures are performed to prevent one case of appendicitis".

THE EPIDEMIOLOGY OF APPENDICITIS AND APPENDECTOMY IN THE UNITED STATES -- ADDISS et al. 132 (5): 910 -- American Journal of Epidemiology

Compare that to circumcision, where the incidence of a UTI for an uncircumcised boy in the first year of life is 4.1%, and after the first three months of life, UTIs are actually more common in baby girls than in baby boys.

This information on UTIs, by the way, is by that wacky and radical group the American Academy of Family Physicians:

Urinary Tract Infections in Children: Why They Occur and How to Prevent Them - May 15, 1998 - American Academy of Family Physicians

One article in [SIZE=-1]Archives of Disease in Childhood calculates longer odds on a circumcision preventing a UTI; this article suggests that "[/SIZE]Given a risk in normal boys of about 1%, the number-needed-to-treat to prevent one UTI is 111". So, you're much more likely to be effective with preventing appendicitis with an appendectomy than you are in preventing a UTI with circumcision.

Circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infection in boys: a systematic review of randomised trials and observational studies -- Singh-Grewal et al. 90 (8): 853 -- Archives of Disease in Childhood

Oh, and those crazy Australians actually calculated that if you circumcise 1000 baby boys, you prevent eight UTIs but CAUSE 20 complications from the circumcision itself:

The Children's Hospital at Westmead - Parents - Circumcision

So, given the evidence, perhaps we should start advocating for RIA (Routine Infant Appendectomies). I hope that you make sure that BOTH your girl and boy babies get appendectomies "while very young so that it's over and done with before they're old enough to stress about it."

There are much better uses of their time then worrying whether men should have a say in their own circumcisions.
Other than for medical reasons, who BETTER to have a say in their own circumcision than the person that the penis is attached to?
 

simcha

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Posts
2,173
Media
0
Likes
26
Points
268
Location
San Leandro, CA, USA
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Have you thought about getting them an appendectomy while you're at it? It's a lot more likely to give them trouble over the course of their life than their foreskin. Over eight percent of males will have appendicitis over the course of their lives, and "Overall, an estimated 36 incidental procedures are performed to prevent one case of appendicitis".

...

Other than for medical reasons, who BETTER to have a say in their own circumcision than the person that the penis is attached to?

Blah, blah, blah... As usual, the leap in logic on the anti circ side would require you to jump the Grand Canyon to follow the argument from one side to the other...

You are comparing apples to oranges, and I suspect you know this or you wouldn't have bothered trying to bait the other side. Dignifying this drivel with a point by point response is a waste of time because the content doesn't even match up. Hmmm... Let me see... An internal surgery requiring general anesthesia where the patient must go completely under and must be monitored for vital signs compared to a skin surgery that is usually done with topical anesthesia.... Sorry there's no comparison... Try again.
 

ManiacalMadMan

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
1,073
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
183
Age
68
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
How many circumsised men have died of AIDS in the US?

The point of this post was my amazement at the comment that being circumcised means that you have virtually no chance of catching an STD.

Surely people aren't peddling this lunacy?

To answer my own question, over half a million people have died of aids in the US, with over a million having contracted the virus. There are over one million reported cases of chlamydia each year (true figure nearer 1.5 M as men aren't screened), and over a third of a million cases of gonorrhoea.

I remember the old AIDS adverts - DON'T DIE OF IGNORANCE.
Actually your alleged facts are undoubtedly wrong and the proof was in your own opening post where you said that circumcisionninvolved cutting the end of the penis off. You know so little about circumcision how in the name of all that's sexual are we to believe you can find legitimate facts any where? A circumcision does not, I repeat for your sake since you are far too stupid to get it the first time, CIRCUMCISION DOES NOT slice off the end of the penis. It removes the foreskin. There are nerves in the foreskin and so some sort of sensitivity is removed but the head of the penis is still there. If the head of the penis, or as you so eloquently put it, the knob was sliced off then the circumcised man would probabaly never have sex since it would be far too deformed.

I was just wondering while reading the everlasting cut/uncut debate, whether there is a moment that cut guys suddenly realise that someone has cut the end of their knob off?

If so, do you remember your feelings about it?

Mine's still in it's original wrapper btw, which is why I ask.
You ask because you are an idiot. Again, circumcision is removal of the foreskin it is not the cutting off of the end of the penis Even a 5 year old knows this. I have been sexually active for years Probably more than you've been alive and have seen many circumcised and many uncircumcised and have yet to see a circumcised man missing the penis head. I still have my foreskin but if I push it back and hold it covered with my hand and look at it there is no difference in appearance between it and a circumcised man The sexual feelings may be different and probably are but not being in need of a circumcision or having had one I do not know what those differences are.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
The point of this post was my amazement at the comment that being circumcised means that you have virtually no chance of catching an STD.

Surely people aren't peddling this lunacy?

To answer my own question, over half a million people have died of aids in the US, with over a million having contracted the virus. There are over one million reported cases of chlamydia each year (true figure nearer 1.5 M as men aren't screened), and over a third of a million cases of gonorrhoea.

I remember the old AIDS adverts - DON'T DIE OF IGNORANCE.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases symptoms, treatments, facts and statistics

Chill Maniac - sit down, understand that you don't have a sense of humour, that you are not always right and that you should read the thread before making a complete ass of yourself.
 

ManiacalMadMan

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
1,073
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
183
Age
68
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Some seriously deranged people are so devoted to cutting the end of everyone's knob off, that they appear happy to allow propaganda to spread that will kill people.

Your country has the highest percentage of circumcised men in the Western world. You have rampant STD's, half a million dead of Aids, half a million more with the virus. I really don't think that anyone should be advocating circumcision because it will stop you (or make your chances infinitesimal) of contracting an STD.

Do you?
 

SteveHd

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
3,678
Media
0
Likes
79
Points
183
Location
Daytona
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
ManiacalMadMan, please read the following from page three:
OK, the title was a bit tongue in cheek, but when I gaze admiringly and in awe at my best friend, the end of him is the foreskin. I consider it as much a part of my pride and joy as any other bit. Of course if you don't have one any more, it is easy to think of it as not being part of the penis, but it is or was, and would be the end if you hadn't parted company.
 

ManiacalMadMan

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
1,073
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
183
Age
68
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Some seriously deranged people are so devoted to cutting the end of everyone's knob off, that they appear happy to allow propaganda to spread that will kill people.

Your country has the highest percentage of circumcised men in the Western world. You have rampant STD's, half a million dead of Aids, half a million more with the virus. I really don't think that anyone should be advocating circumcision because it will stop you (or make your chances infinitesimal) of contracting an STD.

Do you?
Once again, when you grow up and realize that a circumcision is removal of a foreskin and does not involve disembowlment or slicing off the penis head, I may take you seriously. Your original post was "When did you realize the end of your penis was missing" It did not mention AIDS You have managed to railroad your own topic into a canyon.

Next up "your country has..." I have not said what country I live in. I have indicated I am intact (that means I have my foreskin, I feel it's necessary to tell you since you probably are unfamiliar with the term INTACT). I could be living in Uruguay or Cyprus for all you know.
 

ManiacalMadMan

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Posts
1,073
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
183
Age
68
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
ManiacalMadMan, please read the following from page three:
I'd rather not


Reading it is more b.s. nonsense of Drifterwood's part. The fact is he has probably never seen a live penis If Drifterwood knew anything about a penis he would stop saying the end has been cut off. Foreskins do not always completely cover the penis not even every flacid penis is completely covered, If Driftwood knew any thing he would know this. Foreskins come in varying textures some are smoother some are rougher some are paper thin some are thicker some droop some do not.
 

B_ScaredLittleBoy

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2007
Posts
3,235
Media
0
Likes
19
Points
183
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
I just laugh at this stage in a circ thread.

The foreskin is the covering of the 'end' of a penis. In circumcised this part of the penis is missing or at least greatly reduced. Try not to take the title too literally.

IMO circumcision is very cruel and I fail to see how someone, particularly if they "love" their children could do something like that. Would you cut their hands off to stop them masturbating? You'd be locked up.

AIDS was mentioned because one of the current 'pro circ' fads is that circumcision reduces your chances of contracting AIDS. Yeah right. If people are stupid enough to think being cut or having their children cut will stop them getting AIDS, they deserve to contract it.

Circumcision is one of the cruelest, most unnecessary forms of child abuse in the world and it should be stopped. The only thing stopping it being recognised as child abuse is the fact that a "doctor" does it and not the child's parents. But the parents are still indirectly responsible; THEY have to consent for a surgery to be carried out on a body which is not their own.

And in a baby, unless there is some abnormality, the foreskin ALWAYS covers the entire penis. Only if it has been retracted or cut off will it not cover the glans. The foreskin shouldn't really be retracted until the baby is at least a few years old since at birth and for some time after the foreskin is still fused to the penis head.

As for circumcision, I'm glad it worked for you but would you not rather have a choice? Give your children a choice?
 

SteveHd

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
3,678
Media
0
Likes
79
Points
183
Location
Daytona
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
ManiacalMadMan, he said "the title was a bit tongue in cheek" ... so that's good enough for me. But I'll say he could have phrased it better.

Others have drilled him about the title. Why is there so much anger about the title?
 

Lampwick

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Posts
363
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
163
Gender
Male
Blah, blah, blah... As usual, the leap in logic on the anti circ side would require you to jump the Grand Canyon to follow the argument from one side to the other...

You are comparing apples to oranges, and I suspect you know this or you wouldn't have bothered trying to bait the other side. Dignifying this drivel with a point by point response is a waste of time because the content doesn't even match up. Hmmm... Let me see... An internal surgery requiring general anesthesia where the patient must go completely under and must be monitored for vital signs compared to a skin surgery that is usually done with topical anesthesia.... Sorry there's no comparison... Try again.

OK. I'm sorry if my post was over your head. I'll try to reduce the analogy to its simplest elements.

Of course, I am not suggesting that anyone prophyllactically remove a perfectly healthy and non-problematic appendix just because it MIGHT cause its owner a problem some day.

By analogy, I am suggesting that it is a bad idea to prophyllactically remove a perfectly healthy, non-problematic foreskin just because it might cause its owner a problem some day.

Yes, removing a foreskin is a less complicated medical procedure than removing an appendix. On the other hand, a problematic foreskin is less likely to kill you than a malfunctioning appendix. If there is a MEDICAL problem with the foreskin, then it should be treated if possible, and removed if necessary.

OK, and how about this simple point from my earlier post that doesn't even require delving into analogies: infant circumcision MAY prevent 8 UTIs per thousand, and with it comes a complications rate of 20 per thousand. What makes THAT a good idea, medically?

And by the way, Sincha, you never DID answer my simple question posted earlier. Was that one over your head too, or did you just not have a good answer about what universal medical pathology across-the-board infant circumcision addresses?

So, as a man of science, perhaps you would agree that the medical indication for circumcision would be a little more than not having proved universal harm. I would hope that the MEDICAL indication for circumcision of anyone other than an adult would be that circumcision addresses a medical condition. What universal medical pathology does across-the-board routine infant circumcision address?
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Maniac, I think you are in denial. Why are you presuming that when I say the end of the penis, I mean the head?

In your natural state the foreskin covers the head of the penis, that is one of it's purposes. In a natural penis, the foreskin is part of the penis and it is at the end. It is very rare that a natural foreskin will not cover the head. I have spent thirty years in all male environments in cultures where they don't cut. I have seen thousands and thousands of uncut cocks.

It is interesting to me that you have made the cut cock the norm, that you can't grasp the reality that an unadulterated cock has a foreskin that is at the end of the penis. Do they start this indoctrination with school biology books?
 

simcha

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Posts
2,173
Media
0
Likes
26
Points
268
Location
San Leandro, CA, USA
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I'll try to reduce the analogy to its simplest elements.

And you failed... :stupid2:

And by the way, Simcha, you never DID answer my simple question posted earlier. Was that one over your head too, or did you just not have a good answer about what universal medical pathology across-the-board infant circumcision addresses?

It's not worth a response, because it's a :lame: -ass question.

Maniac, I think you are in denial. Why are you presuming that when I say the end of the penis, I mean the head?

Because... :tool:


A picture is worth 1000 words... :biggrin1:
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Grow up Simcha. Some people want to discuss these issues above the level of the school yard.

I come from a non RIC culture as do most of the people in the world and soon you will be in a minority in the States.

I have read all the pro arguments for circ. Some are downright dangerous, like leading people to believe that it will make them immune to STD's, the rest are pretty laboured.

The rest of the world has a simple POV - why bother to have a procedure that is known to be 99% unnecessary on medical grounds.

We are spectators to the heated debate mainly in the US. If you have serious points to make, why don't you make them. "You're too stupid to understand" won't do - you become irrelevant to the discussion.
 

simcha

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Posts
2,173
Media
0
Likes
26
Points
268
Location
San Leandro, CA, USA
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
We are spectators to the heated debate mainly in the US. If you have serious points to make, why don't you make them. "You're too stupid to understand" won't do - you become irrelevant to the discussion.

When your side has something intelligent to say, then you'll get an intelligent response, until that time.... :bling1:
 

Lampwick

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Posts
363
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
163
Gender
Male
When your side has something intelligent to say, then you'll get an intelligent response, until that time.... :bling1:

And thank you, Simcha, for illustrating the level of your intelligence. Your response demonstrates both the level of your intelligence and the level of your civility quite well.