Circumcision poll - ladies too

IrishGuy wrote:

Cheers

to you as well. Just a bit of perspective reminder we are ALL speaking from our beliefs, no matter how wrong everyone elses is!!!

IrishGuy wrote:

The foreskin isn't a deformity and other than Jews and Muslims cutting it because their imaginary friend in the sky told them to, the rest of the world outside the US manages to get by without chopping off normal bits of healthy tissue from newborn babies.

Yes, they can get by... if they choose to. I don't see the problem here.

JaneNY wrote:

IrishGuy wrote:

The foreskin isn't a deformity and other than Jews and Muslims cutting it because their imaginary friend in the sky told them to, the rest of the world outside the US manages to get by without chopping off normal bits of healthy tissue from newborn babies.

I agree with this. Again, why not let each human being decide for themselves, when they are capable of making the decision *for themselves*, actual choose whether or not to be circumcised. I just don't see why people feel they must make this decision for others.

While it is not really comparable, I know many people pierce their kids' ears when they are infants. We waited till our girls asked to have it done, as I felt it needed to be their decision - it is the same principle - acknowledge the right of people to make decisions about their own bodies.

My mom had my ears pierced when I was 6 months old actually. And I'm really glad she did so I didn't have to be scared about doing when I was an older kid. Infant circumcisions are not traumatizing, as those who have seen babies right after it was done have attested. The baby has no idea what's going on. Again, vaccinations hurt too - babies kick up no more fuss when they get their shots than with this procedure. It is parents' jobs to make decisions on behalf of their children until their children are able to make their own. It is totally within the rights of parents to make these choices. I think it's kind of crazy to suggest that parents should just leave all decisions that affect their kids to the children when they're old enough. It just doesn't work that way. Parents make choices for their kids everyday that will affect them later in life (religion, education, discipline, world views, etc etc etc). I see no reason why parents shouldn't make this decision if they want to.

IrishGuy wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

My mom had my ears pierced when I was 6 months old actually. And I'm really glad she did so I didn't have to be scared about doing when I was an older kid. Infant circumcisions are not traumatizing, as those who have seen babies right after it was done have attested. The baby has no idea what's going on. Again, vaccinations hurt too - babies kick up no more fuss when they get their shots than with this procedure. It is parents' jobs to make decisions on behalf of their children until their children are able to make their own. It is totally within the rights of parents to make these choices. I think it's kind of crazy to suggest that parents should just leave all decisions that affect their kids to the children when they're old enough. It just doesn't work that way.

Again, there is no good reason to circumcise a newborn baby and as for it not being traumatizing well as you might have read earlier there are a number of babies that actually die each year from this uncessary procedure. Why put them through the risk of infection by cutting oof perfectly healthy skin? It makes no sense.
You are offering no benefits such as those given by vaccinations yet opening up your newborn child to a risk of infection and even further side effects.

I believe that there are lots of benefits to it, and it makes sense to me, as my initial posts outlined. I understand that you disagree and don't think there is benefit, but I do, and obviously lots of other people do too. Again, it is a matter of opinion and choice. You keep saying there is no benefit and it's unnecessary. I don't agree with you. As for the tiny risk... I'm just one of those people who are more comfortable with minimal risks. I mean, I would put my child in a car, and that is WAY more dangerous than circumcision.

IrishGuy wrote:

Oh you believe it but none of the doctors organisations do. I guess you know better than the medical community then.

The American Academy of Pediatrics stated in 1999: ‘Existing scientific evidence … [is]
not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision.’26 The American Medical
Association endorsed this position in December 1999 and now rejects circumcision for
medical/preventative reasons. The AMA further states: ‘parental
preference alone is not
sufficient justification for performing a surgical procedure on a child’.

There are tons of doctors who have no problem at all with it. I've paid attention to the issue too, and have heard and read lots and lots of material where doctors find no problem in the procedure. There are two sides to it, and you're ignoring one whole side.... as most opponents of circumcision do, I've noticed. They also make up bullshit theories, like how it reduced sexual performance, etc., and tend to ignore medical evidence that is contrary to their views:

Here are just a few links from a very quick Google search to point out that many doctors do not make anti-circumcision claims. I could offer many others, but don't see the point:

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2011/0 ... sc0822.htm

http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/

http://mandatorycircumcision.blogspot.c ... -anti.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2422990/

So as you see, there is another side to the coin. I realize it's a contentious issue (oddly - not sure why folks can't just leave it alone as a personal family decision), but there is very clearly two sides to take. There is a lot of reason to believe that circumcision is medically beneficial. You're on one side of the fence along with many others. I'm on the other side of the fence, along with many others. Given that there are two valid viewpoints from the medical community, and medical evidence that both supports and devalues the procedure, I think it is very reasonable to leave the decision up to the parents, as long as they are well-informed of the benefits and risks involved.

I think this quote from Dr. Douglas S. Diekema, a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics task force on circumcision, wraps it up nicely (keeping in mind that there are many proponents who would argue the medical benefits are greater than he claims here):

“There’s no compelling medical reason to do it. There’s also no compelling reason that it’s not a valid choice for families to make. There are some small benefits, and these need to be weighed against the risks.”

And I'd like to point out this quote is recent, not from 1999 like your source.

Not to mention people's non-medical reasons to do it, like hygienic, religious, cosmetic, and cultural.

Informed choice is good!

faceintheclouds wrote:

Both my kids are done. It's just better for health reasons. This dude I worked with got it done a few years ago cause it was causing him issues. And he was in a world of hurt after it. So I'm pro hood cutting

stfu! i bet that would be out of the mind pain
fuck that

what do you think some of his issues were did he ever say?

things like... ya know, i have an anteater
or
ya know, my junk stinks sometimes quite a bit

PJ_Soul wrote:

Adults outside of the porn industry usually do it because there is something wrong with the structure of the foreskin. As I mentioned before, a somewhat common condition is where the foreskin won't open enough to allow the head of the penis to clear it, and that can cause lots of problems, both sexually and medically. And I've heard that a less common one is that it attaches itself to the penis and can't retract.

From what I've learned from noticing it in some porn video and then looking it up out of curiosity, when an adult gets it done you can tell. It leave a well-defined change in colour. The base is darker, and 1/4 to 1/2 way down, it suddenly changes to a lighter colour.

i've saw this guy perform. his john roger is two different colors just as you describe. birthmark or circumcised as an adult.

PJ_Soul wrote:

chadwick wrote:

faceintheclouds wrote:

Both my kids are done. It's just better for health reasons. This dude I worked with got it done a few years ago cause it was causing him issues. And he was in a world of hurt after it. So I'm pro hood cutting

stfu! i bet that would be out of the mind pain
fuck that

what do you think some of his issues were did he ever say?

things like... ya know, i have an anteater
or
ya know, my junk stinks sometimes quite a bit

Adults outside of the porn industry usually do it because there is something wrong with the structure of the foreskin. As I mentioned before, a somewhat common condition is where the foreskin won't open enough to allow the head of the penis to clear it, and that can cause lots of problems, both sexually and medically. And I've heard that a less common one is that it attaches itself to the penis and can't retract.

From what I've learned from noticing it in some porn video and then looking it up out of curiosity, when an adult gets it done you can tell. It leave a well-defined change in colour. The base is darker, and 1/4 to 1/2 way down, it suddenly changes to a lighter colour.

I couldn't find any current research on this. All of the articles I found were from 13+ years ago, none pertained to intractable foreskin. I'm wondering what the stats are of men who do experience this, but couldn't find any current research. I did find one article from 1999 that said circumcision helps prevent the spread of HIV in rural Uganda...not sure if that's relevant for most of the guys on this board

comebackgirl wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

chadwick wrote:

stfu! i bet that would be out of the mind pain
fuck that

what do you think some of his issues were did he ever say?

things like... ya know, i have an anteater
or
ya know, my junk stinks sometimes quite a bit

Adults outside of the porn industry usually do it because there is something wrong with the structure of the foreskin. As I mentioned before, a somewhat common condition is where the foreskin won't open enough to allow the head of the penis to clear it, and that can cause lots of problems, both sexually and medically. And I've heard that a less common one is that it attaches itself to the penis and can't retract.

From what I've learned from noticing it in some porn video and then looking it up out of curiosity, when an adult gets it done you can tell. It leave a well-defined change in colour. The base is darker, and 1/4 to 1/2 way down, it suddenly changes to a lighter colour.

I couldn't find any current research on this. All of the articles I found were from 13+ years ago, none pertained to intractable foreskin. I'm wondering what the stats are of men who do experience this, but couldn't find any current research. I did find one article from 1999 that said circumcision helps prevent the spread of HIV in rural Uganda...not sure if that's relevant for most of the guys on this board

The WHO support the procedure in Africa because of the HIV thing.
I've personally met a guy with the foreskin not retracting problem, and he told me all about it - he said his doctor told him it's fairly common (i.e. 1/100 kind of thing). And when I looked it up after that out of curiosity, I found some posted on Yahoo! Answers with the same problem (and ashamed to go to the doctors, largely).

PJ_Soul wrote:

The WHO support the procedure in Africa because of the HIV thing.
I've personally met a guy with the foreskin not retracting problem, and he told me all about it - he said his doctor told him it's fairly common (i.e. 1/100 kind of thing). And when I looked it up after that out of curiosity, I found some posted on Yahoo! Answers with the same problem (and ashamed to go to the doctors, largely).

Yes - that makes sense, considering they wouldn't necessarily have the same access to prophylaxis in Africa . I heard 10% as well regarding retracting problems, but couldn't find any documented research on this, just anecdotal accounts. Do you have any links to research articles?