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've never to this day heard of any man complaining or making a lawsuit that their circumcism caused them loss of sensation. If you can round up a healthy group of men who can argue that point w/validity, you may have a case.
My case isn't one about degree or how much "mutilation" is done by one form of physical alteration compared to another. I'm fully aware that most circumcised men don't have an issue with it. My "case" is one of principle.
Again I'll ask: What medically-unnecessary, permanent physical alterations should parents be allowed to do, without consent, to their children and which ones should not be allowed (criminalized)?
It's hard to miss something if you never had it. I agree female circumcision is much more extreme, but would a women who had her clitoris removed at 4 really know what she was missing when she started have sex at 20?
And there are many anti-circumcision lobby groups (who have filed plenty of lawsuits). Many of their members are men who are upset at having been circumcised in childhood with no input. Here's one: National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers
Ok, but again....w/male circumcism, there is no loss of sensation. With females, there is. So, I really don't understand the whole point of this discussion we're having. There is no comparison. Period.
Wait, I know. Why don't we do a study & have a group of men who have never been circumsized & have a group of men who have been circumsized. Then, make them have an orgasm & then they can tell us the feelings they felt while they had the orgasm. Then, if the group who hasn't been circumcised has an obvious point lead on the other group, then maybe we have a case. Would that help?
Again I'll ask: What medically-unnecessary, permanent physical alterations should parents be allowed to do, without consent, to their children and which ones should not be allowed (criminalized)?
Who makes that decision? How is that line drawn?
And like I said earlier, it looks prettier. Although, how would I know, I've never been w/an uncircumcised guy....I'll base my assumption on the reports of others.
Ok, but again....w/male circumcism, there is no loss of sensation. With females, there is. So, I really don't understand the whole point of this discussion we're having. There is no comparison. Period.
Wait, I know. Why don't we do a study & have a group of men who have never been circumsized & have a group of men who have been circumsized. Then, make them have an orgasm & then they can tell us the feelings they felt while they had the orgasm. Then, if the group who hasn't been circumcised has an obvious point lead on the other group, then maybe we have a case. Would that help?
Circumcision Decreases Sexual Pleasure
A questionnaire was used to study the sexuality of men circumcised as adults compared to uncircumcised men, and to compare their sex lives before and after circumcision. The study included 373 sexually active men, of whom 255 were circumcised and 118 were not. Of the 255 circumcised men, 138 had been sexually active before circumcision, and all were circumcised at >20 years of age. Masturbatory pleasure decreased after circumcision in 48% of the respondents, while 8% reported increased pleasure. Masturbatory difficulty increased after circumcision in 63% of the respondents but was easier in 37%. About 6% answered that their sex lives improved, while 20% reported a worse sex life after circumcision. There was a decrease in masturbatory pleasure and sexual enjoyment after circumcision, indicating that adult circumcision adversely affects sexual function in many men, possibly because of complications of the surgery and a loss of nerve endings.
Kim, D. and Pang, M., "The Effect of Male Circumcision on Sexuality," BJU International 99 (2007): 619-22.
Circumcision Removes the Most Sensitive Parts of the Penis A sensitivity study of the adult penis in circumcised and uncircumcised men shows that the uncircumcised penis is significantly more sensitive. The most sensitive location on the circumcised penis is the circumcision scar on the ventral surface. Five locations on the uncircumcised penis that are routinely removed at circumcision are significantly more sensitive than the most sensitive location on the circumcised penis.
In addition, the ***** (head) of the circumcised penis is less sensitive to fine touch than the ***** of the uncircumcised penis. The tip of the foreskin is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis, and it is significantly more sensitive than the most sensitive area of the circumcised penis. Circumcision removes the most sensitive parts of the penis.
This study presents the first extensive testing of fine touch pressure thresholds of the adult penis. The monofiliment testing instruments are calibrated and have been used to test female genital sensitivity.
Sorrells, M. et al., “Fine-Touch Pressure Thresholds in the Adult Penis,” BJU International 99 (2007): 864-869.
Again though, my issue is not with the degree or severity of the physical alteration. Even if you could convince me that circumcision were purely cosmetic, it doesn't change the principle that the only person who should make non-medical decisions about permanent physical alterations of my body is me.
Republicans can't stomach the thought of an embryo being killed, but if the genitals of helpless, you know, actual human beings are ritualistically mutilated, that's an issue of freedom.
Republicans are so dumb it's actually cute. I want to pat them on the head sometimes and just say "awwww shucks. Thanks for trying, at least. Keep reading!"
Do you understand what an embryo is?
It is a human fertilized egg - A fertilized egg is considered an embryo for 8 weeks - That is, 2 months of pregnancy.
If you think about it...That's how you, me and everyone on this board started out.
So, if anyone feels that they would like to give an embryo a chance of life, I would say that there is nothing dumb about them being upset with the "killing" of it.
How can you, or anyone else like you criticize people that respect life?...Is killing kittens or puppies not a problem to you. Do you think that is the same level as killing an embryo?..An embryo is a living thing also...Ask someone if you can attend their sonogram to see for yourself.
The study included 373 sexually active men, of whom 255 were circumcised and 118 were not. Of the 255 circumcised men, 138 had been sexually active before circumcision, and all were circumcised at >20 years of age.
Again though, my issue is not with the degree or severity of the physical alteration. Even if you could convince me that circumcision were purely cosmetic, it doesn't change the principle that the only person who should make non-medical decisions about permanent physical alterations of my body is me.
I have known guys on both sides, some with some without circumcision, the only ones I have heard complain (just my own experience) were uncicumcised, they commented on the whole "being different" thing in the locker room in high school, that it freaked a few girls out (to be fair a lot of girls I know have or had never seen it) and elderly men in the hospital talking about the urinary tract infections they get because the foreskin is a breeding ground for bacteria unless meticulously cleansed. I don't have an opinion either way unless it would be the hygeine factor but as was stated earlier with proper teaching that could be taken care of.
I didn't neglect it - you quoted it. There is absolutely no way a person can judge whether his circumcision in infancy affected his penile sensitivity (that's obvious right?) What would you ask: "Was sex more pleasurable to you 3 days old, or now that you're 19?" It's a fact, though, that circumcision removes some of the most sensitive (most nerve endings) parts of the penis.
Again though, my issue is not with the degree or severity of the physical alteration. My issue is one of personal liberty: the only person who should make non-medical decisions about permanent physical alterations of my body is me.
Again I'll ask: What medically-unnecessary, permanent physical alterations should parents be allowed to do, without consent, to their children and which ones should not be allowed (criminalized)? Who makes that decision? How is that line drawn?
You've responded to like 8 of my posts? Why can't you answer these simple, direct questions?
Last edited by denverkid; 03-04-2010 at 10:10 PM..
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, how would I know, I've never been w/an uncircumcised guy....I'll base my assumption on the reports of others.
Maybe you are not thinking completely about it?
