Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gotta love how this erupted into a big argument over how serious of a mistake this was. I'm gonna go with: It could have been ALOT worse.
But jeez, seeing how often this kind of mix up occurs, if ever scheduled for surgery I'd be inclined to put a large sign on my chest indicating desired operation before submitting to sedation.
We have rehab patients who still have magic marker on their thigh that indicated which leg an amputation was to be on. They start things like that because mistakes were/are made more than we might think, a very scary thought. I have read about women getting the wrong breast removed, people getting the wrong foot amputated, etc.
Results Summary "In the overwhelming majority of studies, women expressed a preference for the circumcised penis. The main reasons given for this preference were better appearance, better hygiene, reduced risk of infection, and enhanced sexual activity, including vaginal intercourse, manual stimulation, and fellatio"
Scroll down to the specific results for the United States.
Those are some bs reasons. First, erect penis looks similar to each other, as the skin retracts during an erection, exposing the head. Vaginal intercourse is actually probably worse, as most more expensive dildos, for example, simulate a more 'ribbed' look of an erect uncircumsized penis with the head exposed. Manual stimulation/masturbation is definitely worse, as the whole original religious point of circumcision is to stop/make it harder to masturbate and reduce sexual gratification, similar to female genital mutilation practices. This is also not even a subjective point, since objectively not having your penis head covered deadens the nerves and reduces sensitivity in your penis. Penis head is supposed to be one of the most sensitive organs on a male body, even more sensitive than the tongue (which is also covered from the outside). The whole hygiene point is bizarre. It may apply in Africa, but in a modern first world country like the US we have ready access to soap and water. There is nothing special about skin that covers the head of the penis compared to any other skin (such as ballsack for example).
Those are some bs reasons.
.... Manual stimulation/masturbation is definitely worse, as the whole original religious point of circumcision is to stop/make it harder to masturbate and reduce sexual gratification, similar to female genital mutilation practices
Pardon me. In Old Testament law the Jews were required to circumcise their baby boys. However there is no reference in the text to imply this had any bearing on reducing gratification or inhibiting masturbation. Such an idea is purely your own projection.
There are no passages in the Bible suggesting that men or women should not masturbate.
There have been some man-made religious organizations that have made up their own doctrine that masturbation was 'bad' [like the eugenicist, John Harvey Kellogg].
Pardon me. In Old Testament law the Jews were required to circumcise their baby boys. However there is no reference in the text to imply this had any bearing on reducing gratification or inhibiting masturbation. Such an idea is purely your own projection.
There are no passages in the Bible suggesting that men or women should not masturbate.
There have been some man-made religious organizations that have made up their own doctrine that masturbation was 'bad' [like the eugenicist, John Harvey Kellogg].
?? It is unequivocally prohibited in the Torah, as part of the commandment not to commit adultery, and has been documented and interpreted as such by rabbis for thousands of years, including explicitly written in the Mishnah. This is also the modern interpretation as well, among the religious Jews, which did not change for the last two+ thousand years.
Masturbation for women is also prohibited, but it is not considered as big of a sin compared to men. Same thing when it comes to lesbianism vs gay relations.
Lol point is the man had an intact, functional body part removed against his will. If he wanted to. If he wanted to be circumcised for whatever reason, he’d have had it done, willingly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
