Wed, May 27, 2009
What is a trollcat? I totally agree, it is child abuse. Even worse, sexual abuse.
Whoa, what are you talking about?
* Circumcision is desirable because it promotes cleanliness and prevents disease.
* The foreskin is unnecessary and can be removed with no adverse effects.
* Intact penises are less cosmetically desirable.
* It is important for a boy to look like his father.
Just because the child Does NOT remember it does NOT mean that it DID NOT hurt.
To many “not’s”
IT hurt he may not remember it but it hurt.
admin, you are completely incorrect. a foreskin protects the sensitive areas of the penis. by saying its unnecessary is like saying your arm is unnecessary. a foreskin serves a very much needed purpose, specifically with male infants. CIRCUMCISION DOES NOT PREVENT DISEASE!!! i cannot stress this enough because it is the biggest lie that people use and buy into in favor of circumcision. the cleanliness issue results from a misunderstanding of what the foreskin is. when a girl cleans her genitals, she gently pulls back the labia. cleaning underneath the foreskin is very much the same: the foreskin is gently rolled back and the penis is gently cleaned. the biggest reason for that our society favors circumcision is exactly as you pointed out: we are taught that circumcised penises are more attractive. personally, i find circumcised penises to be awkward and wondered how painful the healing process was for the man. this circumcised equals a more attractive penis concept is culturally conditioned and has very little to do with attraction to a penis. if you want to talk about attraction, a foreskin makes it significantly easier and more effective when masturbating, protects the head of the penis from constant contact with rougher surfaces such as cotton boxes, and makes giving my boyfriend oral sex one hell of a sensual experience. TAKE THE WHOLE BABY HOME!!!
Right, right. I see what you’re saying. But have you considered that circumcision prevents disease? Or that the foreskin is, you know, unnecessary?
And sorry to hear that your boyfriend isn’t cut. If you provide me with an address I will sent him my condolences.
Circumcision does NOT prevent disease (as long as proper hygiene is performed) – IN FACT, IT HELPS SPREAD IT!!!
I cannot stress this enough – When the tip of the penis is left unprotected, it rubs against the clothing and other fabrics, which cause unnoticed microtears. These ‘micro-tears’ increase a man’s risk of contracting a disease born by bodily fluid by providing a pathway into the body.
END FRAKKING TRANSMISSION!
Med student… or sci-fi writer?
Admin, I understand your need to defend your own sad foreskinless member. Once it is gone it is gone.
I prefer to keep the extra thousands of nerve endings the uncut penis has. Being whole is also a lot more attractive to the majority of the world. Yes it is what you are used to. Gratefully being intact is cool.
If you are going to use health pros and cons, please site facts, numbers and references instead of opinions that make you look as knowledgeable as a potato.
Well my dearest darling RaedlyAnteaterishLookingPal,
and furthermore that
It’s “cite”. C-I-T-E. CITE.
OK you are correct. Cite. Next time cite. I’ll wait here and enjoy my foreskin.
In countries where FGM occurs it is usually the women who perpetuated it onto their daughters, they often don’t feel it was a violation. Heck in Indonesia it’s done on neonates, just like males here. So how do they know what is missing? What reason would they have to stop it, they’re fine. It’s the same dance just a different tune. Female circumcision is a term applied to a variety of procedures performed on the female genitalia, involves the removal of the clitoral hood and some of the labia This is the same parts that becomes the foreskin on a male at 10 weeks gestation. So the question is a good one. Why are we vehemently opposed to one, in even it’s mildest form, and not the other. gender no object. “Cut is cut, mutilation is mutilation.” Circumcised women choose to have their daughters circumcised, citing how it’s cleaner, good sexually, reduces secretions and smegma and is generally hygienic, and also mentioning studies showing circumcised women have lower infection rates. Basically the same reasons that people use to defend male circumcision. It’s just a cultural difference. Are you aware that the USA also used to practice female circumcision? It was never anywhere near as popular as male circumcision, There are frequent references to the practice in medical literature up until the 1950’s. Most of them point out the similarity with male circumcision, and suggest that it should be performed for the same reasons. Blue Cross/Blue Shield covered clitoridectomy till 1977. A woman’s vaginal opening contains about 3,000 erotic nerves her largest concentration of erotic nerves is in her clitoris approximate 8,000 erotic nerves. In men the head or gland of the penis has 4,000 erotic nerves his largest concentration of erotic nerves is in the foreskin approximate 20,000 circumcision removes 83% of the erotic nerves it would be stupid to think a circumcised penis with only 4,000 erotic nerves would have the same amount of feeling as a uncircumcised one with 24,000 erotic nerves A woman with her clitoral hood and the labia removed can still have a orgasm just like a man with his foreskin cut off can still cum but he has to take long hard strokes to do it ware a uncircumcised man takes shorter gentile strokes No national health organization in the world recommends routine circumcision. 80% of the men in the world are not circumcised. Dr. Morris Sorrels, M.D. said in my preliminary study on penile touch sensitivity, comparing circumcised and normal men. A man who was circumcised as an adult has complained that it now feels “like having sex with an elbow” so little of feeling compared to what he had before circumcision. Another one said sex before circumcision on a scale of 1 to 10 felt like 11 after circumcision it barely made a 3 Decreased penile sensitivity and increased erectile dysfunction were the most frequent complaints reported by men who were circumcised. In reality both MC and FC began as a way to reduce the sexual sensitivity. In the late 1800s cutting off the most sensitive part of the penis (the foreskin) MC was introduced to stop masturbation. When it was found not to stop masturbation the claims of medical benefits arose Some research suggests that circumcised infants may have a lower incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI).baby boys uncircumcised or circumcised have less then (1.%) chance However, female infants have a higher incidence of UTI than circumcised or intact boys (5.%). Penile cancer is an extremely rare disease with less than 1 case per 100,000 men and a median age of diagnosis of 64 years. Advocates of circumcision found more ammunition recently when it was reported that uncircumcised heterosexual males were more likely to contract HIV/AIDS than their circumcised counterparts So how do you go about conducting a randomized, controlled intervention trial looking at HIV infection in circumcised adult men? Probably not the way that these researchers did. First, to be included in the study, men had to be HIV-negative and uncircumcised. The men also had to consent to “avoid sexual contact (except with condom protection) during the 6 weeks following the medicalized circumcision.” The experimental group which underwent the circumcisions was given the following instructions”When you are circumcised you will be asked to have no sexual contact in the 6 weeks after surgery. To have sexual contact before your skin of your penis is completely healed, could lead to infection if your partner is infected with a sexually transmitted disease… If you desire to have sexual contact in the 6 weeks after surgery, despite our recommendation, it is absolutely essential that you use a condom. “So the males in the study that underwent circumcision were not only told to abstain from sex for a significant time period after the operation — reducing their exposure time by six weeks compared to the uncircumcised (control) group — but told to use condoms, taught how to use them, and educated about their benefits. During this six week period, the men in the uncircumcised group did not have the same restrictions. There also doesn’t seem to be any mention of the researchers calling up the circumcised men after six weeks to say, “Okay, time’s up. Ease up on the condom use from here on.” The possibility that many of these men might have become accustomed to using condoms, armed with knowledge about their benefits, didn’t seem to be much of a concern. And the stopped the study one third of the way throw before the circumcised men cot up with the uncircumcised. The American Academy of Pediatrics has found that newborn infants feel pain as much if not more then adults. Infants experience excruciating and traumatic pain during the 6 to 10 minute circumcision and for weeks afterwards some go in to a shock type coma. If you can stand to hear a baby scream in pain you can watch a baby being circumcised most are done with out anesthesia for fear it mite kill the baby http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQqOEylGW7k
RE: Above-referenced YouTube video.
TOO LONG DID NOT LISTEN GOOD BYE
Circumcision “promotes cleanliness” like cutting off your lips promotes oral hygiene.
For stupid people I suppose it might be hard to remember, but most
people around the world have no trouble remembering to clean their teeth, even when they can’t see them without opening their mouths.
Circumcision does not prevent any diseases. “Studies” have shown that it “reduces the odds of” HIV, Penile Cancer, and UTI, all of which still happen, just slightly less frequently to the circumcised. And it only effects UTI’s in the 1st year of life, after that they even out. Penile cancer effects only about 00.00001% of men anyway. A little less than 1 in 100,000.
There are many unnecessary body parts. Like breasts. Preemptive double mastectomies reduces the odds of breast cancer in women to next to nothing, I don’t see you doing that to your little girls. There are usually no adverse effects for those, except maybe a lifetime of not feeling whole I guess… but that doesn’t count for much to you I’m guessing.
And there are so adverse effects, like feelings of not being whole, feelings of betrayle towards parents, and diminished capacity to feel sexual pleasure. (Not saying you and your girl don’t think what you’re feeling is great, just saying it could feel a lot better.) And the sexual pleasure continues to diminish over a lifetime, because the glans is exposed all the time, so the longer you live, the less pleasure you’ll feel from sex, possibly leading to eventual impotency, and a need for Viagra just to get it up.
Also, the surgery itself often leads to complications, including more than 200 infant deaths each year in the United States.
* Intact penises are less cosmetically desirable.
Lol. What do you know about cosmetically desirable members, you’re circumcised! It’s like someone who’s been looking at and driving a wrecked up 1955 car his whole life looking at an 1987 in mint condition and saying it doesn’t look as good because the 1955 is homey and familiar to him!
And even if you do prefer looking at mutilated penises instead of intact ones, you shouldn’t have cosmetic surgery done on infants.
What if when he grows up, he decides he doesn’t want to look like you? He’ll have a hard time relocating part of his penis and having that ugly tattoo you got him so he’ll look like his father removed.
He’s going to look like his father, because he has his father’s DNA. Cutting off part of his penis may make him look mutilated like his father, but by that logic, are you planning to carve all your scars into him too?
To you sir, I lol.
“There are many unnecessary body parts. Like breasts.”
You, are wrong there. The breasts are not even remotely unnecessary, they’re meant to feed your offspring, so don’t say that they’re “unnecessary”. Sure, in todays society people have turned to baby formulas, but breastfeeding has been shown to improve child development. (Cue “Breastfeed or Die” trollcat.)
:3 And now one key part of your arguement has been deemed FALSE
You clearly do not have the faintest idea what the purpose of the foreskin is. Get educated and visit:
A recent book, Circumcision, the Hidden Trauma by Ronald Goldman, Ph.D., discusses many subjects that may be associated with circumcision. These include:
* low male self esteem and an inferiotity compled for being incomplete
* avoidance of intimacy in male-female relationships
* attitudes toward pain and stimulation
* reduced empathy
* antisocial behaviors – adult male violence, domestic violence, rape, child sexual abuse, suicide, and theft.
That is over and above the physical scars,bridges, tags, varicose veins and malapposition.
Circumcision originated in primitive and barbaric customs and rituals. 82% of the world’s males are intact, and the only “civilized” country where it is still routinely practised for non-religious reasons, is the USA. There it was promoted by dr Kellogg, who introduced it as a prevention for masturbation.
Jen. I assume you have no dick on the matter, so shut the fuck up.
Well I am a circed guy. While I would not call it sexual abuse, infant circ is wrong because every guy should have the right to control their own body. (Especially when it comes to the penis :p)
Nicely put! I think if someone wants to be circumcised that’s fine, but it’s not something that should be pushed or forced on anyone, let alone infants!
The foreskin is natural and essential for natural sexual function, it’s not a birth defect. It has 20,000 nerve endings crucial for sensitivity and cutting them off will remove the penis to loose the mechanical function of the gliding effect which is the most sensual part of the male anatomy.
So if the father is lacking an ear, should the boy look like his father?
The appendix is “natural” too, and equally inconsequential. Anyone ever spoken to you about the design of the human eye? Complete disaster.
If you bother to read the 2008 (latest) study of Krieger et al., you will find it clearly stated in the findings that “Adult male circumcision [is] not associated with sexual dysfunction. Circumcised men [report] increased penile sensitivity and enhanced ease of reaching orgasm.”
>> …to loose [sic] the mechanical function of the gliding effect which is the most sensual part of the male anatomy.
The “gliding effect” canard is exactly that. A story propagated by the likes of Taylor in his 1996 report (http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor2/) based on a flawed and one-eyed interpretation of the data.
>> So if the father is lacking an ear, should the boy look like his father?
If an ear were a useless part of the anatomy, and every male member of the community into which the boy was born had had theirs removed, then sure. Why not.
then we should all be removing the apendix at birth…
Sounds like a great idea, if a little costly for the expected health benefit ROI. Maybe you should get right on that and right off baby boy penises.
I’m a circ. male and not once have I ever thought, “GEE it sure would have been nice to have some dirty gross flesh hang over my cock, I’m sexually abused.” I’ve never zipped my junk in my pants. Never had a UTI, never had a MRSA infection. The problem with the internet is too many stupid women such as yourself feel empowered justifying shit no one cares to worry about.
Circumcision will never go away in the US. Law makers have better shit to do than worry about the personal choice of parents and their babies weener skin. “Most women prefer the circumcised penis for appearance, hygiene and sex.” NUFF said.
If you want your babies dick to look droopy like a kid in his dads overcoat then so be it. No circumcised male is going to tell you what to do. So just shut the fuck up and quit pushing your dumbass agenda.
What? Circumcision is like, totally evil and bad! Duder!
* It is rarely medically necessary.
* It causes pain and distress and is usually unfairly imposed on an infant who has no choice in the matter.
* When performed unnecessarily, it increases the chances of penile infection as any open wound would, especially if the procedure is done in an environment (such as a hospital) which already tends to have a lot of pathogenic organisms and weirdo wound-munching malcontents about.
Routine circumcision, especially of infants is a cultural or cosmetic procedure, with little justification on the grounds of hygiene!
One argument often heard in North America is “I want my son to look like his father”. Alternatively, “Other boys will notice and he’ll look funny”.
These are unreasonable lines of logic, though. If your child’s eyes were a different colour from his dad, would you pluck the boy’s eyes outs? Me too! And if your child had white skin and went to a mostly black school, would you insist that he spend a lot of time in the sun or blacken his face up, just to fit in? Right! EXACTLY!
Therefore that hi, serendipity, and a mountain of smegma-laden foreskinny goodness.
I feel this image is the best way to summarize my position on this super-interesting and totally-worth-pissing-your-life-away-on issue:
you need to chill out with the insults. i can understand that you are upset because someone is coming along and telling you that you were sexually abused, you have been mutilated, etc because you were circumcised but try not to confuse it with feminist agendas. if you are happy with your penis, awesome. no one should try to make you feel as if your penis is somehow messed up. circumcision on the whole is not medically necessary nor is having a foreskin gross. would you tell a girl that having her labia is gross? these are very analogous organs. the issue with undergoing circumcision is that during the healing process, a male infant is statistically more likely to contract a UTI and/or bacterial infection. this is a BIG concern for parents. one could say that this is only a concern during the brief healing process that is not remembered by a child once he is older. look, love your penis for what it is and most likely what it does for you but don’t dismiss these comments about circumcision just because you are upset. you have every right to be, but realize this is not directed specifically at you.
How in the world can one remove the majority of penile nerves and there be an INCREASED sensation and sensitivity..stupid studies = stupid conclusions.
Not up to date on the appendix? It is a useful part of the immune system..
Gliding mechanism is a myth? Obviously you have never seen a real penis.
the ear IS less useful than the foreskin.
Circumcision IS associated with both earlier and more prevalent ED AND PE.
Hey Robert, please, keep on pointlessly arguing with the established facts and putting forward your own wild, whimsical, unsubstantiated theories. I guess if you scream your lies for long and loud enough they’ll transmogrify into truth.
I mean, you know. Maybe I’ve seen plenty of penises! Maybe I’ve got one in my mouth right now, as I’m typing! How would you know?
Yeah, Bob. Come back when you’re willing to debate the issue on its merits. Come back when you’re tired of empty polemic and want to knuckle down and thrash this issue out based on the evidence.
I’ll be waiting.
Kinda hard to debate with someone when you ignore the studies that have been done showing that both circ is harmful/foreskin has specific function and only buy into the ones that have been done by American fetishist…
Sounds like you feel threatened at the idea that you don’t have a whole penis???
My husband and sons are intact and I can tell you there IS a function. You won’t hear reason though so I’m not going to waste my time talking to a wall. Let me know if you really want to hear about functions of foreskin and harms of circ.
I’m not the one poo-pooing all the legitimate scientific studies done on the subject. I’m not the zealot building websites and holding my hands over my ears.
Btw, all your claims:
“Circumcision is desirable because it promotes cleanliness and prevents disease.
* It is important for a boy to look like his father.”
Those are the same ones they use in other cultures to justify removal of the female foreskin.
Compare like with like, please. There’s a world of difference between female genital mutilation as practiced (where the REAL object is to impair sexual enjoyment in the hopes of inculcating sexual fidelity) and circumcision (where, religious arguments notwithstanding, the objectives are those I have described.)
. In the late 1800s cutting off the most sensitive part of the penis (the foreskin) MC was introduced to stop masturbation. When it was found not to stop masturbation the claims of medical benefits arose Some research suggests that circumcised infants may have a lower incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI).baby boys uncircumcised or circumcised have less then (1.%) chance However, female infants have a higher incidence of UTI than circumcised or intact boys (5.%). Penile cancer is an extremely rare disease with less than 1 case per 100,000
They are like. MGM may or may not be slightly less harsh, but it’s the same act as FGM, and was originally for the same reasons, to inhibit sexual enjoyment for one reason or another. Circumcised females can usually still produce the typical lubricants, and can usually still have orgasms, it’s just not as good, and not as easy.
They don’t have the problem of increased premature ejaculation though I’ve heard.
Regardless, like is like, even if it’s slightly less extreme, if you’ve been brainwashed to see some difference, or if it’s preformed on someone of a different race or gender.
this image = nuff said!
In fact, it’s not a matter of hygeine. That’s an urban myth. In fact, it’s safer to keep “it” intact because of surgical accidents. The thing can get infected, there’s a risk of transmitting blood diseases, the doctor can accidentally cut too much off, and I think I’ve even heard of cases where an accident turned fatal.
Also, I can personally attest to the fact that the foreskin is *extremely* useful.
Thirdly, it almost certainly did develop as a custom to keep male sexual pleasure at a minimum, just like female circumcision.
Also, whether or not you like the way an intact penis looks is a really bad argument. If I thought a kid was ugly as hell, would I advocate cutting his head off?
Anyway. The bottom line is, if anyone should decide to circumcise a kid, it should be the kid himself. Molesting him when he’s too old to fight back is wrong in several ways. Let him make the choice.
Lastly. Do you realize doctors get paid to perform circumcisions? It’s the quickest buck they’ll ever make. You claim kids should look like their fathers? In many cases, their fathers look like that because the doctor persuaded his parents to go along with the nonsense.
It’s not an urban myth. It’s an established fact backed up by numerous studies and medical surveys over the course of DECADES. Don’t take my word for it, educate yourself: http://tinyurl.com/285do5 (http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Health/health11.htm for an overview of that one.)
All your other comments are partisan, conjectural and speculative and don’t deserve serious engagement.
I cannot stress this enough – When the tip of the penis is left unprotected, it rubs against the clothing and other fabrics, which cause unnoticed microtears. These ‘micro-tears’ increase a man’s risk of contracting a disease born by bodily fluid by providing a pathway into the body.
These “studies” are by published doctors, usually paid to release a certain opinion on the subject. Ask doctors from any other country, where it is not as widespread, and they will tell you what I just said.
I had discussed this issue with a good 10 or so different doctors when I was pregnant. Many supported circumcision, but even those (YES, EVEN THEM) wanted to make sure I was absolutely clear that the only purpose of this surgery was aesthetic – so your kid doesn’t look any different in the locker room. HIV is more risky when you cannot guarantee that the surface skin of the head of the penis is intact.
Do you know anything about how HIV is transmitted? – through sores and tears, EVEN IN THE GENITALS! Micro-tears in the vaginal wall, head of the penis, etc. Micro-tears are unpreventable in women and very common, but if you could take that disease entry vector for HIV away from your kid by leaving the foreskin intact, wouldn’t you???
There are no “established facts” on this matter. Did you actually read and understand that site you linked?
There are claims and counter claims and claims and counter claims.
Circumcision does “assist with hygiene” because it exposes the glans, reminding the simpleton to wash it. If it was closed, he would be unable to remember to open it and clean inside; which is coincidentally the same reason he’ll likely lose most of his teeth before he’s 40. (Unfortunately the parents weren’t kind enough to remove his lips.)
Yes! Foreskins are unnecessary and I also believe a son should look like his father. Unfortunately, his father didn’t stick around. So that’s why I went ahead and had his WHOLE penis removed. I figured not having a penis would decrease any sex drive, premarital sex, the whole uncomfortable need for the birds and bees talk, and certainly he’ll never get a std that way. Besides, he looks more like me now. And he sits to pee so I don’t have to constantly clean pee from the base of the toilet. I highly recommend all parents have the entire penis removed!
I’m next planning on having my son’s upper left eye tooth removed. I lost mine in a drunken fight when I was 19. I believe in matching but I can’t find a doctor to remove my son’s tooth. I’m hoping he’ll fall off his bike or something to lose it so our smiles will match too!
Finally, a sensible and considered response to this trollcat.
I find myself agreeing with you on all bullet point issues, though I’d suggest you go a step further and have all his (and your own) teeth removed. It’s a great way of preventing tooth decay and that disfiguring “chin jutting out” problem that so many people have nowadays. Think about what you’ll save on his dental bills! Think about all the tedious brushing and flossing he’ll avoid!
If you can’t find a dentist to do it (some of them have peculiar “ethical” hangups), I’d suggest just punching your son in the mouth until they all fall out. And don’t forget to follow up with a energetic bout of self-mouth-punching so you can proudly mirror his new condition (perhaps you could get Dad back on a temporary basis to help out?).
It’d obviously be optimal if you could arrange to have similar bruising patterns, but Lord knows we none of us are perfect. Just do the best you can.
Yours with alarming and present sincerity,
-the Trollcats Team
yeah the clitoral hood or labia minora are not necessary either Lana, let’s cut it off. BTW we should all give our daughters a boob job as soon as they are born so they can match their mommies… 1`
I think you’re finally starting to get it, latinamomof3. Good show.
LET ME CUT OFF MY DICK AND EVERBODY ELSE DO THE SAME SO WE CAN ALL BE EQUAL
THE POWER IS YOURS
Some says it’s a breach of fundamental medical ethics principles but to me, it’s more like of a choice. Cirumcised or not, no big deal.
I’m almost certain it’s the biggest deal of anything ever in the history of all time and human endeavor and sanity and furtive chocolate ambushes. One should be especially concerned if one doesn’t have a penis oneself, because shit, someone’s getting away with something here and I don’t like the tactile sensation or smooth gliding effect of it AT ALL.
And hey, look. An ASCII dick.
8================D <– (Cut.)
8=========================================> <-(Not cut)
The problem is Reactor, that it is okay for adults to consent to this. we are not against circumcision, heck if you like it and you are fine with it, that’s great! But leave the effing babies alone!
Well, if an individual wants to be circumcised that’s true. I fully respect the right of an adult or even a 13-14 year old to choose circumcision, and I understand that it’s occasionally necessary to remove it for REAL medical reasons.
However, I don’t think it’s the parents place, just like it’s not the parents place to give their kids a bunch of tattoos so that father and son have matching tattoos before the son can decide or even say whether he’d like to have them or not.
It’s a human rights issue.
I am cut. Just conforming with the norms. This should not be taken as biggie. Cut or uncut, let live and make love =)
Would female circumcision be accepted as a measure to help reduce HIV infection if shown to do so? I’m sure those above were not aware that it has been shown to do exactly this.
“Researchers bent on proving that female circumcision heightens HIV risk in women could not explain away numbers that argued the opposite.”
“large survey of Tanzanian women netted the vexing conclusion that female circumcision halved their risk of HIV infection.”
“Scarifying (female circumcision), appeared to protect women from viral intruders”
3rd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, July 24-27-05, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
But the obvious gut response to this is that female circumcision removes her ability to feel pleasure, or to orgasm. Does that explain why these two science reports state otherwise?
Female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity
12:30 24 September 2002
NewScientist news service
“Circumcised women experience sexual arousal and orgasm as frequently as uncircumcised women, according to a study in Nigeria.”
Pleasure and Orgasm in Women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C).
1: J Sex Med. 2007 Nov;4(6):1666-78.
Group of 137 women, affected by different types of female circumcision.
86% have orgasms
69.23% always have orgasms
91.23% of the younger women have orgasms
14 out of 15 infibulated report orgasms
Infibulated women showed the same desire, arousal, & satisfaction
No differences observed between circumcised and not regarding pain
Of course, this does NOT make FGM acceptable. It’s still a human rights issue! The question remains, why is MGM being justified for this reason when FGM has been shown to do the same? The answer is simple… those promoting male circumcision to curb HIV have an agenda, and are not in any way interested in honest discussion.
Before speaking of benefits of an amputation, you must look at the risks and losses. Very rarely (if ever) will you see the risks and losses discussed along with the the so-called benefits in the media. Fairly easy to see why when you look at who writes the article (virtually always a circumcised male, or a female from a male circumcised culture).
Considering that 80-85% of the worlds men are intact, including doctors… why don’t we find ANY intact male doctors in favor of the procedure? Because circumcision isn’t driven by science, health, or otherwise… but completely by personal agenda.
If you take a look at L. Sorrells (2007) Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis
BJU International 99 (4) , 864–869 doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x it’s clear that the foreskin is not only the most sensitive part of the entire penis, but also virtually the only location on the entire penis that contains fine touch (meissners corpuscle) nerve receptors… leaving the circumcised penis virtually without any sense of fine touch at all. No non-biased doctor would be in favor of circumcision after reading the results of this study.
With this data, it should make one reconsider… but people don’t easily change their minds on things like this, because it would require an admittance that something is wrong with their penis, or the penis of said persons son.
Food for thought…
As a non-American I am completely fascinated by the circumcision debate whenever it rears its head. I hope you are all aware that outside north America, such a debate is as non-sensical as “let’s castrate all blue-eyed boys at birth”.
Why would anyone consider removing something mother nature has provided to be the “natural” thing to do? If it was as unnecessary as some claim, primates (including hominids) would have outgrown foreskins millenia ago. Unlike the appendix, it’s external and thus fairly easy to have been lost if there was any evolutionary benefit.
Throughout Europe (and most of the rest of the world), routine circumcision has been off the medical and social agenda for decades and nobody has been able to make the slightest dent in that perception.
European men are no less sexually healthy than north Americans and contrary to what some north Americans seem to claim, no less hygienic. As a gay man who sucks about 4 different cocks a week, the least hygienic ones I ever encounter are cut. I have yet to have an encounter with a dirty or smelly English, French or German cock. I have however, had ecnounters with completely filthy cut ones (perhaps because their owners seem to think that being cut absolves from the responsibility of washing?)
This whole debate is just so much misiniformation and buillshit, kept alive from a pretty odd congruence of social and religious beliefs and supersititions, and a medical profession which seems to want to keep an unnecessary procedure on the books.
Ya know what else is unnatural? Brushing your teeth. Wearing clothing. Having air conditioning. Wearing deodorant. Eating food that isn’t just killed and harvested fresh. Having a life long monogamous sexual relationship.
All of which I’m sure you don’t do/have.
LOL, great reply.
(Yes, I’m aware that it’s got that, “Lets not say anything, but the American’s are freaks” feel to it outside America. Can’t say I’m ashamed to be American, since I’m proud, but I’m ashamed of many of the things my fellow American’s do. Most of those stupid things I’d defend to the death their right to do, but this is not one of those things, because their not doing the stupid thing to themselves, their doing it to defenseless infants.)
“The problem is Reactor, that it is okay for adults to consent to this. we are not against circumcision, heck if you like it and you are fine with it, that’s great! But leave the effing babies alone!”
If an adult wants to get it done, fine. But don’t force it on babies and kids. Especially not on very dubious religious grounds.
Safe, effective neonatal female circumcision prevents vulvar cancer, which is actually more common than penile cancer. Removing the useless clitoral hood prevents the buildup of smegma, which smells atrocious. An uncircumcised vagina looks funny – ewww! There’s no medical study proving that uncircumcised women have more sexual sensation. It has been performed for thousands of years – almost exclusively by women – so if it were really harmful it wouldn’t have persisted. It’s a parental right, and everybody knows it’s healthier.
I’m sick of these labia-fetish women who think there’s something wrong with being circumcised. I’m not missing anything. I’m glad my parents had me cut, and I plan to give the same benefit to my daughter.
WELL PLAYED SIR. ONE SHINY INTERNET FOR YOU.
That’s a girl……..
Don’t lie to admin cat. Girls don’t use the internet.
“Girls don’t play wow”
-Astrey, Lunch Lady of Bladefist
i honestly think that this is a matter of personal taste and preference. all these hygiene issues can be resolved: REGULARLY CLEAN YOUR GENITALS.
Yes, because full-time soccer moms like the author ARE the best source for medical information. And I can’t help but notice the re-occurring “micro-tear” cut n’ paste…
Micro-cuts are the number #3 cause of death in America.
Right below caceAIDSokemenphloenza at #2, and having your entire dick cut off as an infant during a circumcision at #1 cause of death.
(Then the doctor lies and says it was a cold or something outrageous!)
bollocks! all males should have that disgusting looking bit of useless skin taken off.
The thing I find horrible is that a person can hold a child down and with out anesthesia cut off 83% of their erotic nerves the foreskin contains approximate 20,000 erotic nerves the head or gland of the penis has 4,000 erotic nerves it would be stupid to think a circumcised penis with only 4,000 erotic nerves would have the same amount of feeling as a uncircumcised one with 24,000 erotic nerves
Whether or not it’s disgusting is in the eye of the beholder. But useless? TrollCat disagrees!
I prefer uncut for some odd reason. I love raw!
All I have to say is – it is up to each parent to decide. We all do what we think is best for our babies. C-section or vaginal birth, circumcision or not, breast or bottle, disposable or cloth, solo sleeping or co-sleeping. Someone is always going to vehemently disagree with our choice and pull out all kinds of facts and research. Truth is, I don’t think either is better than the other when it comes to any of these issues, because they are all such individual decisions that depend on personal circumstance and situation.
Everyone needs to butt out and stop trying to push their agendas onto others. Parenting is hard enough as it is without having strangers criticise every choice we make.
The thing I find horrible is that a person can hold a child down and with out anesthesia cut off 83% of their erotic nerves of their genitals while they scream in pain or go into shock from the pain http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQqOEylGW7k leaving them with lose of sexual feeling and not call it genital mutilation the foreskin contains approximate 20,000 erotic nerves the head or gland of the penis has 4,000 erotic nerves it would be stupid to think a circumcised penis with only 4,000 erotic nerves would have the same amount of feeling as a uncircumcised one with 24,000 erotic nerves
The only thing is that most of those decisions will have little to no irreversible effects on the life of the victim… err child. Circumcision is the only one that will be a permanent thing that stays with him his entire life.
Also, sometimes babies die from circumcisions.
An estimated 229 babies die per year from circumcision in the United States. http://tinyurl.com/yb9waxz #omgfacts #i2
‘Zackly, MellyKitten. Keep on cuttin’ those vulvas in Africa! Tell you what. You come around my door, and I’ll do you like they did me: grab you, tie you down to a Circumstraint (TM), sign the Informed Consent papers, and start cutting. I’ll be sure to give you enuf Date Rape pills so you’ll feel all the pain but won’t remember a thing. That’ll make it okay.
Then you can tell the world about it being an “individual decision” that depends on personal circumstances.
They cut off my umbilical chord and ya don’t see me whining about it. Though I probably threw a screamin ass fit at the time. I think I managed fine without it. No guy I know who’s been cut has any issue. I think this one’s a seriously unworthy debate to be having considering all the better things out there to be flipping out over. They didn’t like my answer on YT either but personally, cut looks sexier and no, “hygene” is not an urban myth.
This one really strikes me as something for whiners to whine about. If not cut dick, they’re probably find something else to whine about. Two different things. Take it easy.
Lets copy & paste fun and smrt soundin thangs to argue wiff trolls!
k? sound like a plan? LET’S DO IT…
Oh wait. I was late to the party. DANG IT.
Im circumcised and my penis works just fine. Personally I like that my penis looks like a penis and not a worm with a turtleneck.
You would think differently if you had ever experienced sex with a foreskin.
Then you’d be like these guys, “http://circumcision.org/adults.htm”
But I mean, they’re men, so if they have a problem they should just stop whining and grow a pair, right?
But seriously, if you had the chance to have one, and chose to have it removed, that’s fine. But give the babies a choice.
Hmm, I am really glad there are so many uncut supporters out there. Some things I took away from this:
– 20,000 nerve endings in the foreskin (I’m uncut and am really glad now)
– If having a foreskin was a medical danger, then in the process of evolution, it would have gone away.
– The majority of the world considers circumcision barbaric and unnecessary (thank you gay man from Europe)
The main problem I have with circumcision is the alienation and self-consciousness I felt growing up uncut. I felt like I was fundamentally different, and while in high school seriously considered having a circumcision. When your dick looks different from everyone else, it immediatly makes you a mark for criticism, and when your 12 or 13, its really important that you fit in. I’ve heard it been referred to as a droopy dick, a worm with a turtleneck (thanks mercerman), or an anteater, and the moments in health class when the teacher was obligated to spend several minutes instructing those “uncircumcised” students how to clean themselves, while the rest of the class roared with laughter, were painfully embarrassing. After that, it felt like everyone just assuemed that anyone with an uncut penis was disgusting. It’s true, you have to clean yourself, it gets dirty, your skin is constantly regnerating, and when your old cells shlef off, you need to get them out before bacteria starts making your dick smell. But thats why everyone smells, thats why you clean your armpits, or your toes, why should your dick be any different?
I used to think that my ‘differences’ would make it impossible to have normal sexual relations. But I’ve been in quite a few sexual relationships, and it has never ever been an issue. If anything, its a slight novelty, but only a slight one (i’ve never gotten laid because of it). Usually, it’s about a 30 second conversation.
As for how it affects me sexually, I truly believe that sex is better when your uncircumcised. The foreskin acts as a protective shell for your very sensitive head. I need to stress how sensitive the tip of my dick is; when I’m in the shower, having a blast of water on my head with the foreskin peeled back is uncomfortable and a little painful. When you put an uncut dick into a vagina, the foreskin peels away and the most sensitive part of your penis enters the vagina. As the foreskin folds back, it reveals even more nerve endings on the reverse side, all of which are being covered in the warm lubricating wonderfulness of the vagina. Thats when you realize that all those showers, all the feelings of embarrassment, the self-consciousness, all of it, becomes totally worth it. I’m no doctor, but the only purpose I can think of for the foreskin, is for increased sexual pleasure. You know, I actually feel sorry for people with cut dicks, because they will never be able to experience the way sex was meant to be experienced. It must be like, always having a condom on.
HA HA HA @ admin’s follow-ups with pics. Wait… HA HA HA HA HA
Ok I’ve never seen a real man circumsized..only in pics. I’m from Europe. Oh my goodness the pictures are horrifying. Especially for babies. It looks red, raw and very disturbing. Why would anyone do this???????????????
How is it attractive? Now that I’m in the U.S. I don’t know how I would feel dating circumsized men. I can definitely see ppl are conditioned to see foreskins as birth defects. A naked glans does not look normal to me, it’s horrifying how thinking is skewed here..some even say that uncircumcised is ugly..how warped is that? It’s a normal penis, how you are born with! A rough, desensitized naked glans isn’t normal.
I’m circumcised and my penis works just fine. I got bored so I started restoring my foreskin. Now my penis works even better. My restored foreskin is not gross and smelly yet, but it really feels great when masturbating and having sex. And, my wife really loves the way it feels. She cannot get enough of me, now.
It would feel even better if it had never been gone. There were specialized nerves and mucus membranes in it that aren’t restored in the process, and some of the callous and nerve damage wont ever go away with todays restoration techniques, like “tugging”
Decreased penile sensitivity and increased erectile dysfunction were the most frequent complaints reported by men who were circumcised.
I can attest from personal experience…. The more complete and caring man has that part intact. Men who on the other hand have no emotional self..are missing a big part of their manhood.
Having something god gave you makes more sense than having some guy in a hospital lop with a knife
cut off the most sensitive part of your manhood
before you can even speak.
THIS MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL.
If you disagree. I don’t care. you’re still wrong.
p.s. Admin. if you’re not a man. then you’re for female circumcision?
How this does not make you a sadistic feminazi.i don’t know…
or maybe you’re just poking fun at people’s kneejerk reactions. as expected, for the lulz.
.-= HoodiesDoItDeeper´s last blog ..Healing the Worlds Sick =-.
For the lulz? Good God man, what are you talking about. Trollcats.com is deadly serious with regard to opinions espoused on every hot-button political issue, even when expressing diametrically-opposed viewpoints within the context of the same discussion.
And of course I’m for female circumcision. And slavery. And, oh I don’t know. A higer-grossing sequel to the Holocaust.
Y’know, all this talk of circumcision has made me wonder, if MGM is the parents right, why aren’t FGM and castration the parents rights? I mean even though their frowned on by the society as a whole, shouldn’t an individual be allowed to do it to their own kids, as their right?
OH GOD STOP FIGHTING.
My opinion is that circumcising an infant is wrong.
If a man wants to get circumcised, he can if he wants.
The infant has no choice in the matter.
You may not agree with the Admin, but what is the name of the website? TROLLcats.
Jesus, they’re just trolling. I don’t have a problem with it. Some of their stuff is deliberately offensive.
Yeah, but I’m trolling too, and it’s fun. o_O Why else would I even be on this site?
KEEP ON TROLLIN’.
LATE REPLY IS LATE.
Some jerk up there, namely Jacob Duchaine, in an effort to sound smart, called the foreskin as unnecessary as breasts. Breasts are used to feed babies. Breastmilk is unarguably the healthiest thing you can give newborns and babies. Sure, there’s formula, but it’s nothing compared to breastmilk.
Analogies: you suck at them.
Clearly I disagree.
While the foreskin doesn’t produce anything that you should feed your baby, it is an important part of the male anatomy with a number of “non-vital” functions. Similar to, you know, breasts.
You don’t have to feed your baby breast milk. It won’t DIE if you don’t. Similarly you don’t have to have most of the feeling in your genitals. You won’t DIE from having numb junk and impaired genital function.
I’m not saying that breasts are unnecessary, I’m saying that circumcision is bad like preemptive mastectomies.
No Fat Chicks or Uncut Dicks, plzthx.
Cut is sexy.
Firstly, seriously admin, do you have nothing better to do than look up all these dumb cat pics to use instead of a valid argument?
Secondly, circumsision is rubbish. Everything is better with a foreskin
I have spoken.
I don’t know as much as you guys on circumcision, but have read it does not help with premature ejaculation. I’d have to agree with Jacob in this thread, I don’t think it’s right. It’s some outdated concept of mutilation.
And If you do agree with it, I can say that I remember hearing a story about twins who while infants were circumsised but one of operations when wrong and the electronic cutting device literally blew the penis off one of the two boys, so the doctor in his infinate wisdom said to the parents, “I can operate to turn him into a girl”
This was a time when the belief that male and female brains were identical and all that was different was upbringing and body.
The poor child grew up not knowing why he didn’t want to play with girl things and after a few decades knew the truth and underwent surgery to restore his penis.
Now that’s a horror story I didn’t make up.
I’m not circumcised by the way and love my foreskin. Oh and thanks for everyone telling me to wash under it I didn’t know I had to! (english sarcasm for you) Next you’ll be telling me to wash my bum.
And as Jacob mentioned, if you want to read real horror stories, just look up female circumcision. That in some religions is the ultimate form of oppression.
0_o also, how the hell has slum_goddess not had her say in this?
fight all you want. it won’t solve anything. whatever your reasons are, you must let the child choose because it’s his. he’ll choose when he’s the right age. curative or not, preventive or not, cosmetically preferred or not, clean or not, can spread disease or not, must look like father or not, IT’S HIS CHOICE NOT YOURS TO DECIDE.
of course as a mature adult, you need to provide all the necessary, matter-of-fact, unbiased information that will guide him in his decision
the end. =D
Nice one! But if you have said that circumcision is “good” why did you put in some message about “anti”?
Holy shit-tits. Admin trolled about 75% of the people who commented on this. Well done.
@most of the butthurt fags who whine about circumcision: Tl;dr.
I don’t agree with that. there are many health benefits from circumcision.
I totally agree with you it helps against infections, it is scientifically proven.
castration and circumcision are very different. and I don’t think circumcision is applicable to animals.all I know is only human under go circumcision while animals under go castration.
Currently, there is no scientific evidence that supports the fact that circumcision prevents diseases or is better; however, circumcision reduces the chance that a male experiences premature ejaculation
I gotta say that circumcision has its benefits, contrary to what many people say. It promotes hygiene.
Adult circumcision is “worse” than infant circumcision, some pro-circumcision advocates contend that adult circumcision is painful, traumatic and dangerous, and that for this reason most adult men who are intact choose to remain uncircumcised.
Listen, my mother was with me when i was cut, now, while i am anti, she is still pro, but she said that it takes awhile for the penis to heal, and also that it requires some special care afterwards, also there is some blood expected., and its so painful that the babies commonly go into neurological shock.
and all in all, it takes about the same amount of care for a baby then an adult undergoing the procedure, although i will give you that there is the fact that an adult is more able to touch himself and possibly rip stitches, but babies (even fetuses) masturbate as well, and as an adult you have to consciously get through the healing process.
now as for the “scientifically proven” part: it has been detailed many times why the study supporting the STD claim is bullshit, it was rigged, unrepeated, and they didn’t even finish conducting it, they stopped it halfway through, there’s also this vital thing called “peer-review”, which the study didn’t even pass, instead the people in charge of the study (who were Jews) went directly to the media with this, rather then the actual scientific community, something that screams “we really don’t have a scientific case” and is more centered around promoting an agenda then establishing facts.
The reason the national health orgs don’t ban child circumcision outright, and instead merely recommend against it, is because its such an impassioned issue, when a large, neutral organization is in the middle of a controversy, they tend to chose the golden mean despite how much of a case both sides have, you see this with evolution vs creationism, this is to avoid “our rights are being taken away” etc. and the garnering of mistrust from the people who they’ve pissed off.
and republicans are more likely to support circumcising infants as a catering maneuver to the more traditional Christian communities.
also, parents are all incompetent fucking morons, i really don’t give a shit about this argument but here’s some of my info.
Tl;Dr enough for you?
Hello, I just wanted to say, you’re dead wrong. Your post doesn’t make any sense.
Click here to cancel reply.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Notify me of followup comments via e-mail
You can add images to your comment by clicking here.
© 2009 Trollcats.