Why are people so angry about circumcision

[B_cheeselover]

Please don't make hijack this thread by making it about your own personal fetishes. Don't turn my comment into your misreading of it that I meant that boys should be "pushed" into anything. This thread should focus on individual's consent.

If you had phimosis you most likely would be thrilled to know that there is a non-surgical remedy, and very happy to feel that skin gliding up and down your cock when jerking off or getting some action.

So when pro RIC people say that a circumcised penis looks better "to everyone or most people" and that all this skin is disgusting , they just express a "cultural preference" , but when I say that there are people ( like me BUT ALSO OTHERS ) I'm expressing "personal fetishes " ?

As I said before , I prefer a penis as Nature created it , while they prefer a surgically modified penis , which looks to me much more like a perverse sexual fetish .

I also wanted to show through sharing my own sexual experiences that phimosis is not that horrible disgusting thing that absolutly needs to be fixed .

As about how I would react if I had a phimosis myself , I don't know how I would react to it , but I wanted to share that I know several phimotic men who are just fine the way they are and don't feel the need of a "remedy" .

As for individual's consent , I've said it over and over again in several previous posts that " my body , my penis = my decision , my choice ".

But the title of this thread is " why are people so angry about circumcision ?" and being imposed the aesthetic preferences of someone else on your own body is part of the answer , as is the fact of seeing potential sexual partners made "less attractive" through circumcision .

 

[B_cheeselover]

Truly amazing, beautiful intact cocks... Thanks for the links!

I have heard this argument before, that foreskins prevent cockheads from growing to their full capacity. It is a lie.

It's just genetics... many cut men have small heads, the majority of intact cocks that I have had the pleasure of seeing grow hard had large heads.

I thought you were criticising me in your previous post for showing beautiful cock pictures ...?

I'm happy that you like them .

Yeah , I think one of the goals of these endless circumcision threads is to fight ignorance and prejudice against the foreskin and the intact penis .

 

[SirConcis]

While it is true that circumcision is achieved through surgery whilst eye/hair colour is done via genes, the end result is the same. You are born that way and grow up that way.

You only get mad about being circumised when some anti circer starts to make you feel like you have been mutilated etc etc.

The pre-anti-circ gnerations grew up just fine with their circumcisions and had their sons done too. If it had been that bad, the practice would not have continued.

Parents have many decisions that influence their baby. Shoudl you sue your mother because she drank a glass of wine while she was pregnant and you blame this for your low grades at school ?

Your parents create you. They have some power to shape how you will turn out. circumcision is one of those decisions which they have.

They may very well decided to let the baby boy grow up and decide later. Or they may spare him the trouble of spending many years thinking about it and finally get done by having it done at birth.

It all depends on the environment in which he grows up. While many claim that circ rates in the USA have dwindled, I suspect there are areas of the USA where all boys are still cut and uncuts are still a tiny minority, even in California.

 

[Catharsis]

They may very well decided to let the baby boy grow up and decide later. Or they may spare him the trouble of spending many years thinking about it and finally get done by having it done at birth.

You are assuming, of course, that the boy will want to be circumcised at all. Otherwise, the entire argument about the parents making that decision for you is just reinforced by what you just said.

Do circumcised men grow up fine and happy? Perhaps. And so do uncircumcised men (if we're speaking generally, and mind you we definitely are, then we might as well speak for both sides). I've already admitted that being circumcised does not affect my day-to-day life in public. I'm not a miserable sod who's in a severe depression just because I'm circumcised. But that does not automatically mean that it doesn't affect my sexual function once I've become aroused. I've already mentioned I'm tight and it becomes uncomfortable. Unless *gasp* this is actually normal for circumcision?

 

[B_cheeselover]

While it is true that circumcision is achieved through surgery whilst eye/hair colour is done via genes, the end result is the same. You are born that way and grow up that way.

You only get mad about being circumised when some anti circer starts to make you feel like you have been mutilated etc etc.

The pre-anti-circ gnerations grew up just fine with their circumcisions and had their sons done too. If it had been that bad, the practice would not have continued.

Parents have many decisions that influence their baby. Shoudl you sue your mother because she drank a glass of wine while she was pregnant and you blame this for your low grades at school ?

Your parents create you. They have some power to shape how you will turn out. circumcision is one of those decisions which they have.

They may very well decided to let the baby boy grow up and decide later. Or they may spare him the trouble of spending many years thinking about it and finally get done by having it done at birth.

It all depends on the environment in which he grows up. While many claim that circ rates in the USA have dwindled, I suspect there are areas of the USA where all boys are still cut and uncuts are still a tiny minority, even in California.

This thread is about " why are people so angry about circumcision ?".

My answer is : "because someone cut away a part of my body without my consent , for the rest of my ADULT LIFE and it will never grow back ! "

If you think this truth is too hurtful to deal with and prefer to stay in denial , that's your problem .

But if you use your own denial to impose this mutilation on your own children , I think it becomes everybody's problem , as you do NOT have the right to do anything you want with your children , you have no right to cut off their nose , ears or any other bodypart , EXCEPT the foreskin !

WHY ? Because it's always been like this in the past ?

With this kind of reasoning , we would still be at the Stone Age !

 

[Snozzle]

While it is true that circumcision is achieved through surgery whilst eye/hair colour is done via genes, the end result is the same. You are born that way and grow up that way.

You are NOT "born that way". Someone chose to MAKE you that way. Big difference.

You only get mad about being circumised when some anti circer starts to make you feel like you have been mutilated etc etc.

Significantly many of the men who are angry about being circumcised got that way THE MOMENT they knew what had been done to them.

The pre-anti-circ gnerations grew up just fine with their circumcisions and had their sons done too.

Barely one generation. The doctors were doing it without asking well into the mid 20th century.

If it had been that bad, the practice would not have continued.

There is some automatic force for Good in the world? So nobody needs to do anything about any social evil? The abolitionists, suffragettes and so on were just wasting their time because slavery was going to wither away by itself and men would have given women the vote without them asking for it? Somehow I have never noticed the world working the way it does in SirConcisland.

Parents have many decisions that influence their baby. Shoudl you sue your mother because she drank a glass of wine while she was pregnant and you blame this for your low grades at school ? Your parents create you. They have some power to shape how you will turn out. circumcision is one of those decisions which they have.

Yet again, you can compare ANYTHING to male genital cutting, it seems - except female genital cutting. There is no other decision to cut a normal, healthy, functional part off a baby's body forever that is even legal.

They may very well decided to let the baby boy grow up and decide later. Or they may spare him the trouble of spending many years thinking about it and finally get done by having it done at birth.

As the polls here and elsewhere strongly suggest, he's much more likely to be happy with what he's got if he's got all of it - if parents just leave his tiny genitals alone.

It all depends on the environment in which he grows up. While many claim that circ rates in the USA have dwindled, I suspect there are areas of the USA where all boys are still cut and uncuts are still a tiny minority, even in California.

So what? If everyone else was jumping off a cliff....

 

[D_Miranda_Wrights]

SirConcis, this is a mix of bad arguments that have been rebutted before, and some of the scariest stuff I've ever seen you argue...are you serious about any of this, man?

While it is true that circumcision is achieved through surgery whilst eye/hair colour is done via genes, the end result is the same. You are born that way and grow up that way.

And if you blind your kid after birth, the result is the same as if he had been blind from birth. What ethical significance does that have?

You only get mad about being circumised when some anti circer starts to make you feel like you have been mutilated etc etc.

Your argument seems to be that people with different preferences than you must be brainwashed or delusional. Did you only get circumcised because you were deluded into being dissatisfied? Sane people like different things than you -- is everyone deluded but you or what?

The pre-anti-circ gnerations grew up just fine with their circumcisions and had their sons done too. If it had been that bad, the practice would not have continued.

Female Genital Cutting is much worse than male circumcision and yet it persists. Are people in Africa just evil, and American culture perfectly rational? Sometimes bad cultural practices perpetuate until they're questioned. Then again, you basically just admitted you oppose questioning them.

Parents have many decisions that influence their baby. Shoudl you sue your mother because she drank a glass of wine while she was pregnant and you blame this for your low grades at school ?

What ethical argument are you trying to make here?

Your parents create you. They have some power to shape how you will turn out. circumcision is one of those decisions which they have.

"It's legal" is not the same thing as "it's right."

They may very well decided to let the baby boy grow up and decide later. Or they may spare him the trouble of spending many years thinking about it and finally get done by having it done at birth.

...Are you actually arguing that it's better to remove people's freedom of choice because decisions might take effort? You don't actually believe that, do you?

It all depends on the environment in which he grows up. While many claim that circ rates in the USA have dwindled, I suspect there are areas of the USA where all boys are still cut and uncuts are still a tiny minority, even in California.

Sure. I don't remember what the circumcision rate in my affluent Seattle suburb was. I don't care. I'm not going to surgically alter my son's penis to avoid the possibility he's teased. What kind of bizarre lesson does that teach? You want me to tell my kid to ignore taunting about race, or height, or whatever, after I medically altered his penis to avoid the unlikely possibility of teasing?

 

[332823]

These threads just make me feel even worse about being cut :|

 

[ActionBuddy]

That's sad... don't read them anymore.

 

[Snozzle]

These threads just make me feel even worse about being cut :|

Sorry to hear that. Do look into foreskin restoration. Men who do it say it has not only physical and sexual benefits, but psychological benefits, as you take back some of the power and control that was taken from you.

 

[wallaboi]

These threads just make me feel even worse about being cut :|

Don't feel bad, just take the time to consider the options if you have a son, or if the topic comes up amongst friends and family.

 

[gymfresh]

These threads just make me feel even worse about being cut :|

On an individual level I'm sorry you feel bad about your own circumcision, but on a collective level mass disappointment or even anger is a necessary component to ending an unethical practice. Circumcision grew widespread and persisted in the US precisely because of a lack of information and sharing of stories, coupled with a disregard for individual rights, but this is changing rapidly.

 

[Hoss]

On an individual level I'm sorry you feel bad about your own circumcision, but on a collective level mass disappointment or even anger is a necessary component to ending an unethical practice. Circumcision grew widespread and persisted in the US precisely because of a lack of information and sharing of stories, coupled with a disregard for individual rights, but this is changing rapidly.

Information. That is what is most needed. If your child is about to become a parent for the first time, or if a sibling is, then talk.

As far as sharing stories, I've rarely brought up the topic of circumcision with anybody. When 1 of my daughters became pregnant and the first grandchild was to be brought into the world, I discussed the matter briefly with her soon to be husband(they married soon after the baby was born). He had very little knowledge of the topic, I placed him in front of a computer, after that we talked and he asked me my status. I explained it to him. Then when discussing circumcising or not he wondered if a person could really be that f'ed up about it (his words) and said he wasn't at all bothered by his status (he's circumcised).

I asked how he felt when he saw men who hadn't been circumcised and he told me he never gave it a second thought. When my other daughter became pregnant I sent my son-in-law in to talk to the soon to be father and from what I was told, my 2 daughters talked with each other as well about the circumcision matter.

The entire extent of my giving direction was with the first guy and I suggested he let the child make the decision. He then asked me would I have done that considering the fact that I had needed a circumcision for medical reason when I was younger. I assured him that I would still let the decision be left to the boy child.

As far my son is concerned I really have no idea if he was circumcised or not.

http://www.lpsg.org/242083-certainly-didnt-see-that-coming.html Maybe I'll give him a holler later and inquire. He seems well adjusted so whatever the status I doubt it consumes all his time and energy with anger or disappointment.

In the years where I shared large open shower and locker and changing areas with men, there were both circumcised and uncircumcised and even with those I was closest to the subject of the foreskin never came up as an item for being sad in life. The only times a foreskin was mentioned was when a fellow had to have the cut.....and there are times when it really is medically necessary. In those cases it was just a matter of calling them at home as they recuperated before they were ready to return to work and talking about things we knew would get them turned on sexually.:biggrin1: before they were supposed to go there. After they returned to the workplace we never discussed it further.

Anyway I am a big proponent of giving information to soon to be parents and of having the doctor who is expecting to deliver the baby talk to the parents as well.

 

[deleted15807]

Please tell me why this is BS instead of judging my sexual fetishes ...

Because you have no scientific proof circumcision affects sexual satisfaction. And don't bother giving me restorer Sorrels or his compatriots 'proof'.

 

[dccane]

Because it's an unneccesary procedure done to you as a baby when you have no say in the matter. It's archaic and it's only purpose is to make sex less enjoyable.

 

[Hoss]

Because it's an unneccesary procedure done to you as a baby when you have no say in the matter. It's archaic and it's only purpose is to make sex less enjoyable.

If sex is less enjoyable for me then by all means let it stay this way because I couldn't handle it if it were any more pleasurable than it currently is.:smile:
The 'sex less enjoyable' argument is all a matter of perspective and there have been several men who have been circumcised well into their sex lives as adults who have discussed the matter on these boards with a fairly even split down the middle as far as whether sex is better or less enjoyable sans skin.

 

[Fuzzy_]

I agree that infants can't provide informed consent. Parents can. I'd be out of a future job if I didn't agree :tongue: I'm not arguing that parents don't or shouldn't have this power and responsibility. But there are limits -- ethical, and even legal -- on guardianship. I'm arguing, ethically, that guardianship is a responsibility. (If you don't agree, I can explain why guardianship is logically incoherent unless it's partially a responsibility.) Part of that responsibility is to consider your kid's future autonomy and preferences in the decision. This is why it's wrong and illegal to contract away your kid's labor for life. If there was a clear, rational justification to preempt one's kid decision and do RIC, I'd be OK with it. But there just isn't.

Fuzzy gave you several examples of decisions parents have to make that permanently alter their child's future: if they don't put them through a good school. their child might not get a good job; if they don't feed them well, their child might not be big and strong; if they don't take folic acid during pregnancy, their child might get spina bifida. The parents have the moral and legal responsibility to consider all of these. The same goes for circumcision.

Again, Fuzzy has seen some very nice-looking uncircumcised dicks and has heard plenty of uncircumcised guys say how happy they are to be uncut. Fuzzy has no problem at all with uncircumcised cocks.

The ethics for the demented are complicated, since as a guardian, their future autonomy isn't relevant. Dementia is not curable. A better analogy would be a temporarily insane or comatose person, or something. I think most people would be uncomfortable allowing their guardian during a coma unlimited license to do whatever to them.

Luckily, we live in an altruistic society where we [for the most part] take care of our own. One reason why Fuzzy posts in circ threads is because some anti-circ folk imply that parents and doctors are lined up with butcher knives to start a blood orgy. As with a demented person, an infant needs a legal and moral agent who shouldn't be maligned for their decisions. If a baby can hold an itty-bitty pen and sign on the dotted line after rationally considering their options, Fuzzy wouldn't be posting here.

When there are bizarre social factors like in Africa, it complicates things. There are cultures where I'd have to advise my kid to hide hid orientation if he were gay. There are cultures where I'd have to put my kid through horrible stuff to have him not tortured much worse. I get that. It also sucks -- I'd rather help practices like these end than perpetuate them. I'm not saying circumcision is as bad as African rites. But "culture forces us to inflict this"...ay man, wouldn't you rather avoid this?

Besides, this is America. Kids can be awful, but I doubt being uncircumcised is a big issue in this day and age. Even if it were...what kind of screwed-up message is that? I perform surgery on my kid's penis to avoid him being teased. What do I tell him when someone comes and teases him for being 3/8ths Native American? "Well, son, if I had an irreversible surgical means of fixing that, I would have"?

This is a bit of a digression from my core ethical argument, but man, don't you think that's messed up?

You claim that you would advise your child to stay in the closet in a very bigoted society to save them from being teased. You then claim that it's screwed up to circumcise a boy to avoid him being teased. These statements seem a bit conflicting. Fuzzy is glad that you acknowledge that emotional scarring can be torturous, though. Many parents probably decided to circumcise their infant just to avoid him being teased, which is seen as a "stupid" reason by some members of this site. Diversity is awesome (especially being 3/8ths Native American, FTW), but our behaviors must asribe to the homosocial cultural norm to avoid social sanctions.

In high school, a friend of mine decided to not shave her armpits for a month just to see what would happen. She got the shit kicked out of her. Today, she's a granola girl, but she shaves her armpits. Yes, it's messed up, but we can only rock the boat so much.

The Aborigine issue bolsters Fuzzy's point about culture and rights. Outlawing the Sun Dance is an example of the majority eliminating a practice of a minority culture because they found it distasteful. As you know, the Sun Dance involves skin piercing (huge piercings!) and fasting until near-death. It's dangerous, bloody and painful, but it's part of their culture and tradition. Who has the right to deny them their heritage? On the flip side, there may be some practices that seem to cross the line... but where exactly is this line? If there is a cultural pocket in the US where infant boys are routinely circumcised, who are we to say that they are not a valid culture, or that their culture is ignorant, or that their systemic cultural practices should be outlawed because we don't like them?

 

[Catharsis]

The glans becomes more exposed and sensitive from circumcision, but having it done as a child may roughen it up a bit because of this (due to the lack of protection from a foreskin). Keep in mind that the glans can just as easily be fully exposed on a circumcised penis (if the foreskin is not too tight), however, while the nerve endings in a foreskin are maintained. If pleasure were a measured as a value, it would only make sense for an uncircumcised penis to have a higher predicted value than it would for a cirumcised penis. This is not the rule of thumb and there will always be deviants on both sides in this scenario.

I believe the reason why people say that your penis becomes less sensitive from cirumcision is because of the removal of all these nerve endings contained in that foreskin. Saying that is not the same as saying that a cirumcised penis has absolutely no sensitivity and sex is completely unenjoyable from it.

 

[Catharsis]

Fuzzy gave you several examples of decisions parents have to make that permanently alter their child's future: if they don't put them through a good school. their child might not get a good job; if they don't feed them well, their child might not be big and strong; if they don't take folic acid during pregnancy, their child might get spina bifida. The parents have the moral and legal responsibility to consider all of these. The same goes for circumcision.

I thought we were talking about parents trying to do what they think is best for their children? I fail to see how putting them in a sub-quality education or not feeding them well is a decision purposely made by the parent with good intentions, unless economic issues came into play (they couldn't afford good education or healthy food, for example). Otherwise, they clearly don't give a shit about their child, and sadly I've seen this happen.

You claim that you would advise your child to stay in the closet in a very bigoted society to save them from being teased. You then claim that it's screwed up to circumcise a boy to avoid him being teased. These statements seem a bit conflicting. Fuzzy is glad that you acknowledge that emotional scarring can be torturous, though. Many parents probably decided to circumcise their infant just to avoid him being teased, which is seen as a "stupid" reason by some members of this site. Diversity is awesome (especially being 3/8ths Native American, FTW), but our behaviors must asribe to the homosocial cultural norm to avoid social sanctions.

In high school, a friend of mine decided to not shave her armpits for a month just to see what would happen. She got the shit kicked out of her. Today, she's a granola girl, but she shaves her armpits. Yes, it's messed up, but we can only rock the boat so much.

I'm sorry to hear that, but other people are more likely to see armpit hair than they are to see the foreskin on a penis. Yes, I do think having a foreskin is a stupid reason to be bullied, but I also think bullying in general for any reason whatsoever is stupid. I just don't see why parents would think that's soemthing that their child would be made fun of...

If you don't want to compare it to heritage, then you might as well compare it to hair color or facial features - or anything else that's based on your genes. Would you seriously consider surgery (or continually use hair products, in this case) to try to change how you look just to avoid being bullied? People usually do these to abide by their own preferences because they are unsatisfied with how they currently feel. Whether that's a result of bullying as a kid or not is another question - it might be, after all. Then again, these are things that would be seen so much more often than an uncircumcised penis would, unless you just walk around naked everywhere.

Yes, trust me, I know that other kids will find whatever reason they can to make fun of someone if they wanted to. As I said, I've been the victim of that. I've also heard these very same people admit to my face that they have no idea why they're so mean to me, except that I took it in and I was an easy target.

 

[B_cheeselover]

Because you have no scientific proof circumcision affects sexual satisfaction. And don't bother giving me restorer Sorrels or his compatriots 'proof'.

The critically acclaimed documentary on male circumcision by Chicago filmmaker Eli Ungar-Sargon :

look at 0.37.07


LINK REMOVED
It is a serious violation of the LPSG Terms of Service to post links contain any image to persons under the age of 18. This post is under discussion by the moderators and the link should not be reposted.