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.
I'm not sure where I stand on the whole circumcision issue, but this thread reminded me of a situation long ago.
At one time, I was a young man who had moved off to the big city. I met a girl the first week and we began dating. She was everything I wasn't -- fashionable and very trendy. But she promised to help me with my wardrobe. She told me that we were going to start with the basics. "First", she said, "you need to get a quality wallet. You just stuff all of your money in your pocket, and that's not very fashionable. It's all in how you carry yourself, and it starts with your wallet."
So off we went to a VERY trendy store that had everything a guy could want. She led me by the hand to the back of the store where there was an enormous display of wallets. I had never seen so many in one place.
I nervously asked the sales clerk when I saw one I liked, "How much is that one?"
"It's $80", she replied. "It's made from real alligator skin, and is extremely durable."
Before that price settled in, I had located another one I liked. "Can you give me a price on this one in the front row?"
"Sure", she replied with a smile. "That one is $130. It's hand-sewn aged ostrich skin. You'd make quite an impression with that wallet."
"Oh my god," I thought to myself, "I had no IDEA a nice wallet would be so expensive. But I want to make a good impression on my girlfriend, so I probably need to decide on one."
"One last one, if I may?" I then pointed to one that I HOPED would be cheaper than $80. "How about that one in the back row."
"That's a fine choice", she said. "It's $375, and......"
I cut her off before she could even finish. "THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE DOLLARS? What on Earth is it made out of that would make it so expensive? Plutonium?"
The sales clerk composed herself, and replied, "Actually, the reason it's so expensive is that it it's what we call dual-purpose."
"Dual-purpose?" I said.
"Yes, dual-purpose," she replied. "It's made out of foreskin, and when you rub it, it turns into a suitcase."
If my wife had breast cancer? Removal of the breast is what they often do in that case, I believe.
My question was if your wife had the gene would you then take off your daughters breasts with no cancer to prevent her from having a lower risk in the future. Women with the cancer gene do take off their breasts, like Ang Jolie.
As a form of prevention, however, you are fixating on necessity of the procedure whereas I'm looking also at the necessity of the body part. That's why removal of the breast or ovaries as prevention wouldn't make near as much sense to me, because they serve much bigger functions than the foreskin of the penis.
I understand, that's why I mentioned organs we deem as useless as an example. Although I hear foreskin isn't useless. lol I'm a woman though so I don't have first hand knowledge.
"Female circumcision", ha! Wyndsong71 responded to this comparison in post #336 with a quoted link but it isn't active anymore so I will try to reiterate for him. Removing part or all of the clitoris is not akin to removing a man's foreskin. You would have to stop at the prepuce. And you know what? If that was the extent of it, and if that small an operation showed comparable benefits to male circumcision, I wouldn't be against it either. But that's not the case.
Well regardless of the differences, you've already answered my question. You'd go for it if the benefits were the same.. So, that opens up quite a box of chocolates because where do we stop in the future if we do this? Just curious. I understand parents being protective of their kids but where does the protection stop?
It's stated here that, unlike male circumcision which studies are finding to help reduce a man's risk of contracting HIV, female "circumcision" might actually increase the woman's risk of getting it.
And the WHO states that in female "circumcision" there are "No health benefits, only harm", listing many, including infertility which comes close to putting it with removal of the ovaries.
I really don't want to get in a tit for tat but there are stats and stories for each side. Not all FGM is the same. Just as with boys, some are sterile some not so sterile (that's why some of the Jewish boys are getting staph infections).
However, circumcision is nowhere near as effective as condoms in preventing STIs. If used correctly, condoms are 98% effective in preventing STIs. More than being circumcised.
Cancer of the penis
Research has shown that men who are circumcised in childhood are three to four times less likely to develop penile cancer than men who are uncircumcised. This is because many cases of penile cancer develop in the foreskin.
This is how they explain these risks in the NHS for England's health care system:
550 cases of penile cancer a year, it's rare in uncircumcised men.
However, cancer of the penis is very rare. On average, 550 new cases are diagnosed each year in the UK. It would, therefore, be very difficult to justify routine circumcision as a method for preventing penile cancer.
However, in some rare cases a person may be more at risk, for example if they have a family history of penile cancer or a weakened immune system. In such cases, circumcision is recommended as a preventative measure.
(Sexually transmitted diseases
Sexually transmitted diseases that cause ulcers on the genitals (syphilis, chancroid, herpes simplex) are more common in uncircumcised men.
However, urethritis or inflammation of the tube that carries urine through the penis (caused by gonorrhoea and non-gonococcal urethritis) is more common in circumcised men, as are penile warts.
Yeast infection (caused by candida or thrush) is equally common in circumcised and uncircumcised men, although circumcised men are less likely to have symptoms with this infection so they are more likely to unknowingly pass on thrush to their sexual partners.
Far more effective and reliable methods than circumcision exist to reduce the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, such as the use of condoms and adoption of safer sexual practices. Thus circumcision cannot be recommended to prevent these infections.)
Medicaid covers it in Texas...well 18 states now don'thttp://www.circleofmoms.com/parenting-debates-hot-topics/medicaid-stops-paying-for-circumcision-in-18-states-650759....
Hehe, you never know! No, seriously, I think at all times benefit and necessity should be weighed against harm and risk. But odd as it may be, this is both why some people are against circumcision and why I am for it.
That's what I'm saying, you can find both sides backed by stats and data. When it comes down to it it's a personal religious choice or just a personal choice of the parent. You read through one and the horrors that sell it really make you believe it's the best of the two. lol Oh well, I guess it will live on as a great debate for years to come. Eventually we will either remain the circumcised America or give into the uncircumcised world beyond.
It wasn't until the 1980s that the fact that babies can feel pain was even widely accepted in the medical field. This extended way beyond circumcision as well. Even surgeries were thought to not cause infants pain.
The Doctors of today look back and think that it was a low time for the medicinal industry and they will look back to it and realize how barbaric it truly was.
I find it interesting that circumcision is "barbaric" but murdering unborn babies is not.
If the parents have the right to murder their unborn child, why not allow them the right to have the baby boy circumcised?
Which is more "barbaric"? think about it.
I find it interesting that circumcision is "barbaric" but murdering unborn babies is not.
If the parents have the right to murder their unborn child, why not allow them the right to have the baby boy circumcised?
Which is more "barbaric"? think about it.
Not only that, but it's seems to be ok for parents to decide that the child wants to be another sex and facilitate that but not this?????
I don't see the point of bringing up other heavily debated issues to contradict the issue at hand. Abortion and changing the sex of a baby have nothing to do with a choice to circumcise your boy.
On the topic: I wonder why countries like Japan, Cuba, have the lowest circumcision rate in the world and yet also have the lowest rate of HIV? America has a high rate of HIV but yet we circumcise here. Doesn't make any sense if circumcision prevents HIV.
I wouldn't go as far as to say it is abuse but in 50 years or so I think people will look at circumcision as just another form of unnecessary genital mutilation-only lasting through religious beliefs and traditions. It may even be outlawed as some Nordic countries are currently discussing.
It is "their" child but children still have rights.
I wouldn't go as far as to say it is abuse but in 50 years or so I think people may look at circumcision as just another form of unnecessary genital mutilation.
It is "their" child but children still have rights.
Just like they will find out that sex changes of young children will be considered genital mutilation too.
Just like they will find out that sex changes of young children will be considered genital mutilation too.
Yes, of course it should be. Is that common anywhere?
It's sad that people can't be content with the life and body they are blessed with.
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.
Although I hear foreskin isn't useless. lol I'm a woman though so I don't have first hand knowledge. 
