Absolute Angel...maybe you can go with the norm...not sure what part of the world your from or currently reside but...yes it's not the norm worldwide but in the united states...its more like 99.999499% that men are... so...ya we here in the USA do some pretty stupid stuff but as for this type of issue...we really do what make sense!!! Religion or No Religion...
From what I've read it's just over 50% in the US.......
its 50ish% now
in the 70's and 80's in america is was 90% cut, considered to be an fad because everyone was doing it.
this is perhaps why many american men on this board are cut.
times change and people think twice about what is the norm. it was started as a way to curb disease and masturbation. disease is no longer assumed to be caused due to an uncut member; so now it is just done for religious purposes designed solely on not playing.
there are advantages to cutting. cleaner is basically the most common answer.
up to you.
any other questions, ask my wife
8/29/00*5/2/03*7/2/03*7/3/03*7/11/03*9/28/04*5/24/06*6/28/08*5/15/10*5/17/10* 10/16/13*10/25/13* 4/28/16*4/28/16*8/5/16*8/7/16 EV 6/15/11 Brad 10/27/02
Well, I can tell you, by 4 boys did nothing close to what they discribe there. Maybe, there are butchers out there that shouldn't be doing it. And, perhaps some babies are more sensitive than others. Regardless, as I said - I don't care what you do, but if you decide to do it, do it within a couple days of birth and not later.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
As I mentioned earlier, I wonder if all the women posting on here would be all in favour of female circumcision, you know, obviously in the name of cleanliness? :roll:
As I mentioned earlier, I wonder if all the women posting on here would be all in favour of female circumcision, you know, obviously in the name of cleanliness? :roll:
I think the female circumcision would be much more than "extra" skin.... being removed.
there is much more involved - I'm not sure what part you would want to remove... just wondering.
As I mentioned earlier, I wonder if all the women posting on here would be all in favour of female circumcision, you know, obviously in the name of cleanliness? :roll:
Georgia O'Keeffe's paintings would have been less interesting if that were to have been popular years ago.
ADD 5,200 to the post count you see, thank you.
*NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
*MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
*Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
*Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
*Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
*VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
*EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
*Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
Uncut, haven't had any problems with the hygiene because I clean the damn thing like you're supposed to even if it was cut.
Except for the occasional yeast infection or dryness it hasn't been a problem. Since it's covered up most of the time I assume it makes it more sensitive too.
As I mentioned earlier, I wonder if all the women posting on here would be all in favour of female circumcision, you know, obviously in the name of cleanliness? :roll:
I think the female circumcision would be much more than "extra" skin.... being removed.
there is much more involved - I'm not sure what part you would want to remove... just wondering.
So what if it's extra skin? If people are seriously going to argue that a circumcised penis is cleaner then surely they must concede that the same would be true for females? Female circumcision involves the removal of all the outer skin (clearly I'm not in favour of any type of circumcision unless for medical/religious reasons - if that wasn't clear.....)
And by the way, foreskin is not just "extra" skin, it has very particular functions.
So what if it's extra skin? If people are seriously going to argue that a circumcised penis is cleaner then surely they must concede that the same would be true for females? Female circumcision involves the removal of all the outer skin (clearly I'm not in favour of any type of circumcision unless for medical/religious reasons - if that wasn't clear.....)
And by the way, foreskin is not just "extra" skin, it has very particular functions.
I have to agree with facepollution here. It's not just extra skin. Unlike the umbilical cord, it does not bleed, dry up, fall off as the child grows. On the topic of female circumcision, it is a practice used in some countries to keep young virgins pure for marriage. The practice is being fought against as it is unnecessary mutilation, which destroys all their sensation.
The only time I would deem circumcision as appropriate is if there is a medical issue and there is no other option available. Otherwise, I am against it.
..
If it's being done for religious reasons thats fine. But unless there is a medical need, why do it?
...
are you kidding me??? God decides that all, yes ALL human boys will be born with a foreskin and then man decides its icky and must be removed for religious purposes?? fuck that bullshit. i dont care if the guy im with is a hooded terrorist or a stormtrooper.. its all about knowing what to do with it and how to take care of yourself. there is NO reason to remove a foreskin... NONE! and yes my son is still fully intact.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...On the topic of female circumcision, it is a practice used in some countries to keep young virgins pure for marriage. The practice is being fought against as it is unnecessary mutilation, which destroys all their sensation...
female circumcision is a barbaric practice and it is one that is imposed by men. i say fuck men most of the time.. what they do is about control and im tired of it. i am not here for your amusement or even for your approval. if you want me to get you off im all for that BUT quid pro quo, i want you to get me off.. if i do not have a clitoris then that aint gonna happen is it?? so fuck you with your primitive manipulative control freak ideas of sexuality... and when i say it is your loss, trust me.. it is.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Circumcision is a barbaric practice that should only be used in cases of medical necessity. Otherwise it is the mutilation of the genitals of a helpless child and no amount of excuses be it for cleanliness or religious reasons can hide that fact.
As I mentioned earlier, I wonder if all the women posting on here would be all in favour of female circumcision, you know, obviously in the name of cleanliness? :roll:
I think the female circumcision would be much more than "extra" skin.... being removed.
there is much more involved - I'm not sure what part you would want to remove... just wondering.
So what if it's extra skin? If people are seriously going to argue that a circumcised penis is cleaner then surely they must concede that the same would be true for females? Female circumcision involves the removal of all the outer skin (clearly I'm not in favour of any type of circumcision unless for medical/religious reasons - if that wasn't clear.....)
And by the way, foreskin is not just "extra" skin, it has very particular functions.
no you are wrong.. female circumcision involves the removal of the clitoris.. the clitoris IS NOT extra skin. im assuming youve seen or at least touched one.. by which case youd know this.
for many many women, the stimulus of the clitoris is the only way in which they can orgasm.. remove it and you remove an ultimate pleasure... and really when it comes to female circumcision thats what its all about isnt it??? the loss of male control that comes with female masturbation as well as the pleasure she recieves from her lover... both out of the control of men to varying degrees.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
..
If it's being done for religious reasons thats fine. But unless there is a medical need, why do it?
...
are you kidding me??? God decides that all, yes ALL human boys will be born with a foreskin and then man decides its icky and must be removed for religious purposes?? fuck that bullshit. i dont care if the guy im with is a hooded terrorist or a stormtrooper.. its all about knowing what to do with it and how to take care of yourself. there is NO reason to remove a foreskin... NONE! and yes my son is still fully intact.
I am not going to start condemning those who do it for religious reasons. I am not religious myself but understand that it is very important to some people.
Female circumcision - involves the removal of skin, the clitoris and in many many cases the area is stitched closed, leaving a very small entrance. It's a barbaric procedure, which has led to the unnecessary deaths of many women.
..
If it's being done for religious reasons thats fine. But unless there is a medical need, why do it?
...
are you kidding me??? God decides that all, yes ALL human boys will be born with a foreskin and then man decides its icky and must be removed for religious purposes?? fuck that bullshit. i dont care if the guy im with is a hooded terrorist or a stormtrooper.. its all about knowing what to do with it and how to take care of yourself. there is NO reason to remove a foreskin... NONE! and yes my son is still fully intact.
I am not going to start condemning those who do it for religious reasons. I am not religious myself but understand that it is very important to some people.
Female circumcision - involves the removal of skin, the clitoris and in many many cases the area is stitched closed, leaving a very small entrance. It's a barbaric procedure, which has led to the unnecessary deaths of many women.
i have no problem condemning barbaric practices in the name of religion and shame on you for having such a problem. how are you with stoning??
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
..
If it's being done for religious reasons thats fine. But unless there is a medical need, why do it?
...
I am not going to start condemning those who do it for religious reasons. I am not religious myself but understand that it is very important to some people.
Female circumcision - involves the removal of skin, the clitoris and in many many cases the area is stitched closed, leaving a very small entrance. It's a barbaric procedure, which has led to the unnecessary deaths of many women.
Sorry but are you saying that if female circumcision is done for religious reasons then it is okay? Or is it okay only when done to boys for religious reasons?
Religious reasons are bullsh*t! What else should we allow people to get away with then under the guise of religion?
Sorry but are you saying that if female circumcision is done for religious reasons then it is okay? Or is it okay only when done to boys for religious reasons?
Religious reasons are bullsh*t! What else should we allow people to get away with then under the guise of religion?
:thumbup:
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
A new study published yesterday in Thymos: Journal of Boyhood Studies estimates that more than 100 baby boys die from circumcision complications each year, including from anesthesia reaction, stroke, hemorrhage, and infection. Because infant circumcision is elective, all of these deaths are avoidable.
So 100 deaths a year of baby boys is acceptable to you for religious reasons? :x
Stoning is a whole different kettle of fish and you know it. There are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes, they are wrong.
No I'm not saying that. Male circumcision is by no means as dangerous as female circumcision.
If you write anything else and I don't reply, it's not because I haven't got more to say, I've got to go to work now.
hows it different??? theyre both done in the name of religion. and both are delivered due to a male oppressive society. you say there are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes theyre wrong BUT you cant condem female circumcison done in the name of religion?? im sorry claire but im not understanding your logic.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"The CDC data, reported by the New York Times, showed that the incidence of circumcision declined from 56 percent in 2006 to 32.5 percent in 2009. According to these statistics, non-circumcision or genital integrity has become the normal condition among newborn boys in the United States."
Thankfully, this practice of mutilating a poor lil' baby's penis is in decline in the US.
All this talk about hygiene (especially in the western world) is ridiculous. Also, being circumcised desensitizes the penis. Circumcised men will never know what they could be missing!
Stoning is a whole different kettle of fish and you know it. There are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes, they are wrong.
No I'm not saying that. Male circumcision is by no means as dangerous as female circumcision.
If you write anything else and I don't reply, it's not because I haven't got more to say, I've got to go to work now.
hows it different??? theyre both done in the name of religion. and both are delivered due to a male oppressive society. you say there are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes theyre wrong BUT you cant condem female circumcison done in the name of religion?? im sorry claire but im not understanding your logic.
I can and am condemning female circumcision, not sure why you didn't get that. Whether it's done for religious reasons or not, it threatens the life of women.
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Stoning is a whole different kettle of fish and you know it. There are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes, they are wrong.
No I'm not saying that. Male circumcision is by no means as dangerous as female circumcision.
If you write anything else and I don't reply, it's not because I haven't got more to say, I've got to go to work now.
hows it different??? theyre both done in the name of religion. and both are delivered due to a male oppressive society. you say there are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes theyre wrong BUT you cant condem female circumcison done in the name of religion?? im sorry claire but im not understanding your logic.
I can and am condemning female circumcision, not sure why you didn't get that. Whether it's done for religious reasons or not, it threatens the life of women.
So you have one standard for the girls and another for the boys? Female genital mutalation = not okay under any circumstances. Male genital mutatalion = okay if done in the name of religion, is that what you are saying?
Check the link I posted before. Baby boys also die from circumcision. Its not like cutting fingernails.
Heres the thing. Its MY body. A choice was made FOR me without my consent.
What we have here is a part of the anatomy that is covered by skin. Once that skin is removed , the underlying skin is exposed and toughens up due to friction. Thereby losing some sensitivity.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
...On the topic of female circumcision, it is a practice used in some countries to keep young virgins pure for marriage. The practice is being fought against as it is unnecessary mutilation, which destroys all their sensation...
female circumcision is a barbaric practice and it is one that is imposed by men. i say fuck men most of the time.. what they do is about control and im tired of it. i am not here for your amusement or even for your approval. if you want me to get you off im all for that BUT quid pro quo, i want you to get me off.. if i do not have a clitoris then that aint gonna happen is it?? so fuck you with your primitive manipulative control freak ideas of sexuality... and when i say it is your loss, trust me.. it is.
I am agreeing with you. I am sorry if wasn't being clear. My friend had actually traveled to some of the countries that do it. Barbaric doesn't even begin to describe what she witnessed.
I disagree with circumcision of any kind on any person, male or female. The only time i would feel different is if there is a serious life-altering condition that requires it to be done.
hows it different??? theyre both done in the name of religion. and both are delivered due to a male oppressive society. you say there are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes theyre wrong BUT you cant condem female circumcison done in the name of religion?? im sorry claire but im not understanding your logic.
I can and am condemning female circumcision, not sure why you didn't get that. Whether it's done for religious reasons or not, it threatens the life of women.
So you have one standard for the girls and another for the boys? Female genital mutalation = not okay under any circumstances. Male genital mutatalion = okay if done in the name of religion, is that what you are saying?
Check the link I posted before. Baby boys also die from circumcision. Its not like cutting fingernails.
I personally wouldn't want my son circumcised and he isn't. I can understand why a lot of people do it for religious reasons, understanding why someone does something on a religious basis is different from saying that what they are doing is right. A religious argument isn't what this thread is about.
I did find your link really interesting and informative, I am not entirely sure why both you and cate both picked out specifics of what I posted. When in previous posts I stated that I belived it was an unnecessary procedure and the suggestion that an uncut man was somehow dirtier was completely outrageous. Did you actually read the whole thread? Possibly not.
Wow, some really militant anti-circumcision people here. It's not the same as female circumcision, which is clearly a barbaric violation.
We had it done for my son. He was anesthetized. It's just what we do here, you know. Looked like there were some small medical advantages according to the articles people posted here - i.e. slightly lower cancer rates & STD rates, stuff like that. I think we made the right decision. If the next one is a boy we will do it again; kind of committed to it at this point.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; WF Center 10/21/13; WF Center 10/22/13; Baltimore 10/27/13; WF Center 4/28/16; WF Center 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; WF Center 9/7/24; WF Center 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Comments
http://www.circumcision.org/response.htm
its 50ish% now
in the 70's and 80's in america is was 90% cut, considered to be an fad because everyone was doing it.
this is perhaps why many american men on this board are cut.
times change and people think twice about what is the norm. it was started as a way to curb disease and masturbation. disease is no longer assumed to be caused due to an uncut member; so now it is just done for religious purposes designed solely on not playing.
there are advantages to cutting. cleaner is basically the most common answer.
up to you.
any other questions, ask my wife
Well, I can tell you, by 4 boys did nothing close to what they discribe there. Maybe, there are butchers out there that shouldn't be doing it. And, perhaps some babies are more sensitive than others. Regardless, as I said - I don't care what you do, but if you decide to do it, do it within a couple days of birth and not later.
I think the female circumcision would be much more than "extra" skin.... being removed.
there is much more involved - I'm not sure what part you would want to remove... just wondering.
Georgia O'Keeffe's paintings would have been less interesting if that were to have been popular years ago.
*NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
*MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
*Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
*Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
*Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
*VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
*EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
*Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
Except for the occasional yeast infection or dryness it hasn't been a problem. Since it's covered up most of the time I assume it makes it more sensitive too.
So what if it's extra skin? If people are seriously going to argue that a circumcised penis is cleaner then surely they must concede that the same would be true for females? Female circumcision involves the removal of all the outer skin (clearly I'm not in favour of any type of circumcision unless for medical/religious reasons - if that wasn't clear.....)
And by the way, foreskin is not just "extra" skin, it has very particular functions.
I have to agree with facepollution here. It's not just extra skin. Unlike the umbilical cord, it does not bleed, dry up, fall off as the child grows. On the topic of female circumcision, it is a practice used in some countries to keep young virgins pure for marriage. The practice is being fought against as it is unnecessary mutilation, which destroys all their sensation.
The only time I would deem circumcision as appropriate is if there is a medical issue and there is no other option available. Otherwise, I am against it.
are you kidding me??? God decides that all, yes ALL human boys will be born with a foreskin and then man decides its icky and must be removed for religious purposes?? fuck that bullshit. i dont care if the guy im with is a hooded terrorist or a stormtrooper.. its all about knowing what to do with it and how to take care of yourself. there is NO reason to remove a foreskin... NONE! and yes my son is still fully intact.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
female circumcision is a barbaric practice and it is one that is imposed by men. i say fuck men most of the time.. what they do is about control and im tired of it. i am not here for your amusement or even for your approval. if you want me to get you off im all for that BUT quid pro quo, i want you to get me off.. if i do not have a clitoris then that aint gonna happen is it?? so fuck you with your primitive manipulative control freak ideas of sexuality... and when i say it is your loss, trust me.. it is.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
no you are wrong.. female circumcision involves the removal of the clitoris.. the clitoris IS NOT extra skin. im assuming youve seen or at least touched one.. by which case youd know this.
for many many women, the stimulus of the clitoris is the only way in which they can orgasm.. remove it and you remove an ultimate pleasure... and really when it comes to female circumcision thats what its all about isnt it??? the loss of male control that comes with female masturbation as well as the pleasure she recieves from her lover... both out of the control of men to varying degrees.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I am not going to start condemning those who do it for religious reasons. I am not religious myself but understand that it is very important to some people.
Female circumcision - involves the removal of skin, the clitoris and in many many cases the area is stitched closed, leaving a very small entrance. It's a barbaric procedure, which has led to the unnecessary deaths of many women.
i have no problem condemning barbaric practices in the name of religion and shame on you for having such a problem. how are you with stoning??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Sorry but are you saying that if female circumcision is done for religious reasons then it is okay? Or is it okay only when done to boys for religious reasons?
Religious reasons are bullsh*t! What else should we allow people to get away with then under the guise of religion?
:thumbup:
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
No I'm not saying that. Male circumcision is by no means as dangerous as female circumcision.
If you write anything else and I don't reply, it's not because I haven't got more to say, I've got to go to work now.
http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circ ... ear-in-us/
So 100 deaths a year of baby boys is acceptable to you for religious reasons? :x
hows it different??? theyre both done in the name of religion. and both are delivered due to a male oppressive society. you say there are many barbaric practices done in the name of religion and yes theyre wrong BUT you cant condem female circumcison done in the name of religion?? im sorry claire but im not understanding your logic.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/
"The CDC data, reported by the New York Times, showed that the incidence of circumcision declined from 56 percent in 2006 to 32.5 percent in 2009. According to these statistics, non-circumcision or genital integrity has become the normal condition among newborn boys in the United States."
Thankfully, this practice of mutilating a poor lil' baby's penis is in decline in the US.
All this talk about hygiene (especially in the western world) is ridiculous. Also, being circumcised desensitizes the penis. Circumcised men will never know what they could be missing!
learn something new everyday
and what is considered 'normal' at the time can influence a parents decision
but times they change.
I can and am condemning female circumcision, not sure why you didn't get that. Whether it's done for religious reasons or not, it threatens the life of women.
This might be a good thing. If they were any more sensitive, a lot of us would be in sexual addiction recovery classes.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
So you have one standard for the girls and another for the boys? Female genital mutalation = not okay under any circumstances. Male genital mutatalion = okay if done in the name of religion, is that what you are saying?
Check the link I posted before. Baby boys also die from circumcision. Its not like cutting fingernails.
What we have here is a part of the anatomy that is covered by skin. Once that skin is removed , the underlying skin is exposed and toughens up due to friction. Thereby losing some sensitivity.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I am agreeing with you. I am sorry if wasn't being clear. My friend had actually traveled to some of the countries that do it. Barbaric doesn't even begin to describe what she witnessed.
I disagree with circumcision of any kind on any person, male or female. The only time i would feel different is if there is a serious life-altering condition that requires it to be done.
I personally wouldn't want my son circumcised and he isn't. I can understand why a lot of people do it for religious reasons, understanding why someone does something on a religious basis is different from saying that what they are doing is right. A religious argument isn't what this thread is about.
I did find your link really interesting and informative, I am not entirely sure why both you and cate both picked out specifics of what I posted. When in previous posts I stated that I belived it was an unnecessary procedure and the suggestion that an uncut man was somehow dirtier was completely outrageous. Did you actually read the whole thread? Possibly not.
We had it done for my son. He was anesthetized. It's just what we do here, you know. Looked like there were some small medical advantages according to the articles people posted here - i.e. slightly lower cancer rates & STD rates, stuff like that. I think we made the right decision. If the next one is a boy we will do it again; kind of committed to it at this point.
WF Center 4/28/16; WF Center 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; WF Center 9/7/24; WF Center 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16