circumcision...ugh

[Oliver Clozoff]

I wonder if circumcision affects the cock size of the man?

Yes.

And that would be the only reasonable reason to outlaw it.

 

[Calamity Jane]

I'm talking about the *removal of a flap of skin*, and the rights (or lack of rights) that babies have. If I cut off flaps of skin on some newborn kittens, and word got around to the wrong people, then I'd bet that the law would look into charging me with animal cruelty. So my point is that animals sometimes have more rights than humans. But you're saying that's it's not true, and we can cut off whatever we want. So, nevermind. I guess you shot down my point.

and, yet, animal cruelty laws still exist.?

Of course they do. To prevent the intentional and unjustified harm to the 'defenseless'. Just as child abuse laws exist.

But you're going to have a very hard time comparing circumcision by a trained and licensed physician who is using anesthetic and proper surgical techniques, to cutting the ears off of kittens in your basement for the sheer enjoyment of it.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Why are you so exorcised about the amount of skin that's being snipped off?

I'm not sure I follow you.

 

[smy3th]

the eternal to shave or not to shave debate.

Shave? Are you kidding? Cut off what God gave us? That would be obscene! I am going to start a campaign to ban shaving of any kind. Just say no to razors! What is the cultural obsession people have with removing hair. It is there for a purpose. Other cultures don't do that. It is some puritanical thing, probably related to religious mis-conceptions. Taking children to the barber is child abuse! Have you ever seen a poor child on his first trip to the barber? It is traumatic! They cry, they scream, they beg, they have to be restrained. Books have been written to try to calm children's fears of this awful event, but still it is one of the most awful days in their young lives, as their own mother surrenders them to this guy in a white coat (the predecessors to the surgeons that remove foreskins, by golly - keep that in mind).

I tell you it is disgusting what mothers will do to their children, purely in the name of fashion. Oh, yeah, they'll make some lame excuse about needing to keep their children's hair short for hygenic purposes, but heck, just teach them how to wash! No scientific study has shown any significant benefit from getting your hair cut.

Did you know that barbers can spread disease? It's true! Shocking, I know, but those are the facts.

Where will it end?

 

[tealsphynx]

I don't think mother's really remember the pain. If they did, everyone would be an only child. I think the mother blanks a lot of it out. And the overwhelming feeling afterwards is almost always joy.

Actually nowdays, they mostly give epidurals. Not that it eliminates labor pains, but it does make it a lot less painful.

I didn't have an epidural..actually the only drugs I had was the local anesthetic for the episiotomy...and I still dont remember the pain...and that was only 2 weeks ago!! I remember feeling outside my body, euphoric even..like being drunk or stoned..I remember hearing my body,but not feeling it.
got my son snipped..they did it with a plastibell..it cuts off the blood to the foreskin and it falls off, I thinjk less traumatic than cuttting...once the blood is cut off it onlky hurts a little while until the tissue goes numb,then it heals as it falls off...no raw skin period.

 

[TumbledLove]

Of course they do. To prevent the intentional and unjustified harm to the 'defenseless'. Just as child abuse laws exist.

But you're going to have a very hard time comparing circumcision by a trained and licensed physician who is using anesthetic and proper surgical techniques, to cutting the ears off of kittens in your basement for the sheer enjoyment of it.

So, by that logic, anything is ok as long as it's justified and done by someone who's trained to do it.?

so I guess it was ok to exterminate Jewish people, because it was done in a controlled manner, by trained killers, and it was justified as cleaning up society.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

So, by that logic, anything is ok as long as it's justified and done by someone who's trained to do it.?

so I guess it was ok to exterminate Jewish people, because it was done in a controlled manner, by trained killers, and it was justified as cleaning up society.

Fallacious Rhetorical Device #452: Attacking the straw man.

 

[Calamity Jane]

So, by that logic, anything is ok as long as it's justified and done by someone who's trained to do it.?

so I guess it was ok to exterminate Jewish people, because it was done in a controlled manner, by trained killers, and it was justified as cleaning up society.

For just a moment, could you NOT be stupid? There's no comparison between circumcision and animal cruelty, and there's certainly no connection between circumcision and the holocaust.

The drama queen style of debate just isn't going to work very well on this forum.

 

[overthebow]

Maybe it's just an obsession on Lit. Right up there with Judaism, declawing cats, and the eternal to shave or not to shave debate.

To cut or not to cut, that was the rumble on Usenet, 15 years ago. It is still the issue.

 

[TumbledLove]

I'm not sure I follow you.

You said, "a bit of skin". as in, a tiny bit. a little bit. a small, insignificant amount. Why does the amount of skin matter more than the fact that it's healthy skin being cut off of a baby, without it's consent?

 

[EarnestImp]

Sorry, still missing your supposed irony.

Irony is that you said you agreed with Freud, when Freud said that circ is driven by a psychological need for symbolic castration. So I pointed out what your agreement with Freud entails. I find it amusing that a self-proclaimed psychologist would so completely misapprehend Freud.

Why are you so exorcised about the idea that some people snip a bit of skin off boys' penises?

I don't do excorcisms. That's for priests.

But I think that it is rather sick that society has managed to turn a Victorian anti-masturbatory religious kink into a social custom.

And I am disgusted by the double standard - do any cutting on a girl, any at all, and you get 5 years in jail, but for a boy all you have to is check a box on a form. Hell, you can support any standards you want, but just be sure that they apply equally to everyone.

 

[smy3th]

I didn't have an epidural..actually the only drugs I had was the local anesthetic for the episiotomy...and I still dont remember the pain...and that was only 2 weeks ago!! I remember feeling outside my body, euphoric even..like being drunk or stoned..I remember hearing my body,but not feeling it.

Ask your husband if his recollection matches yours.

Apparently from Dolf's reaction to my statement, not all women are alike in forgetting the pain, but I'm sure that many, like you, do not remember it as being as bad as it seemed at time.

 

[TumbledLove]

To prevent the intentional and unjustified harm to the 'defenseless'. Just as child abuse laws exist.

let's see... a baby? Defenseless. Check.
intentional? Check.
unjustified? Check.

You seem to agree with me that there should be laws against baby cruelty.

 

[ReBeLBeLLe]

Considering how well a man wipes his ass after he takes a shit the idea of wrapping my lips around an uncircumcised dick that takes a little more diligence to clean makes me want to gag.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Irony is that you said you agreed with Freud, when Freud said that circ is driven by a psychological need for symbolic castration. So I pointed out what your agreement with Freud entails. I find it amusing that a self-proclaimed psychologist would so completely misapprehend Freud.

Actually a psychiatrist. I'm a MD, but close enough.

I actually hadn't read that bit from Freud though, so I'm duly chastised. It's the self-righteousness and clear emotion in arguments about circumcision that I'm talking about, though. They're clearly motivated by some very deep and conflicting passions.

The point remains though, that these arguments end up being unbearably lame because 99% of the time they're disguised arguments between guys for whose cock is better. No one with an uncut cock ever passionately defends circumcision and visa versa. So I find the excercise generally futile.

But the analogy between male circumcision and female circumcision is ridiculous. The glans clitoris and the glans penis are derived from the same embryological tissue. The equivalent of female circumcision wouldn't be removing the foreskin, but removing the glans...

which I would not endorse, incidently.

See? No double standard.

 

[TumbledLove]

There's no comparison between circumcision and animal cruelty, and there's certainly no connection between circumcision and the holocaust.

sure there is. It's called "justifiable". I'm just listing some other things that are justifiable. and my point? (yes I do have one), is that saying something is justifiable, does not mean that's it ok to do. Even the righteous are wrong sometimes.

 

[Calamity Jane]

let's see... a baby? Defenseless. Check.
intentional? Check.
unjustified? Check.

You seem to agree with me that there should be laws against baby cruelty.

It's unjustified TO YOU. That doesn't make it unjustified. And there ARE laws against baby cruelty, you idiot.

 

[TumbledLove]

Considering how well a man wipes his ass...

I'll have you know, that I wipe *very* thoroughly. In fact, I even wet the tissue, and keep wiping until nothing's left. Plus, I usually keep things shaved back there, just to make sure no danglies get left hanging around.

 

[TumbledLove]

It's unjustified TO YOU. That doesn't make it unjustified. And there ARE laws against baby cruelty, you idiot.

Exactly. and you don't see the double-standard here?? The fact is that history condones some cruelty, as long as there's some kind of justification, and as long as enough people look the other way.

 

[Calamity Jane]

Considering how well a man wipes his ass after he takes a shit the idea of wrapping my lips around an uncircumcised dick that takes a little more diligence to clean makes me want to gag.

Not to mention the studies that seem to point to a higher incidence of cervical cancer in women whose partners are uncut. And the higher risk for the uncut man of contracting aids from a woman, and an uncut man is much more likely to contract and pass on HPV (genital warts).

But, the moron is right. It's completely unjustified and should be outlawed. Or the ears should be cut off the kittens of the parents. Or the parents should be gassed in a work camp. Or something.

 

[TumbledLove]

If you were killed by someone, wouldn't that be justified, just to shut you up?

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Exactly. and you don't see the double-standard here?? The fact is that history condones some cruelty, as long as there's some kind of justification, and as long as enough people look the other way.

There has been some sort of painful body modification of nonconsenting children in virtually all societies from piercing to stretching of necks, earlobes, lips (both types), male circumcision, female circumcision to tatooing, and on and on.

Would you make them all illegal?

Is there no room for cultural self-determination of what's permissible?

 

[Calamity Jane]

If you were killed by someone, wouldn't that be justified, just to shut you up?

I'm sure the person who killed me could justify it. Unless it were you, and then I'm pretty sure you'd fail as miserably at that as you have at making even one coherent point in this entire thread.

But anything can be justified to an individual. Justifying it to society is a different matter. And clearly, American society has decided that if the parents choose to circumsize their baby boys, that's their decision to make.

 

[smy3th]

I'll have you know, that I wipe *very* thoroughly. In fact, I even wet the tissue, and keep wiping until nothing's left. Plus, I usually keep things shaved back there, just to make sure no danglies get left hanging around.

That proves something, but I'm afraid to say what.

 

[EarnestImp]

The point remains though, that these arguments end up being unbearably lame because 99% of the time they're disguised arguments between guys for whose cock is better. No one with an uncut cock ever passionately defends circumcision and visa versa.

Bullshit on visa versa. Lots of men with cut dicks oppose circ. And it is not a debate on better vs worse. It is a debate on individual autonomy, and double standards, and the right to modify someone else's body for reasons of one's own preference. If you see this as a dicksize war, you are way, way, way off.

But the analogy between male circumcision and female circumcision is ridiculous. The glans clitoris and the glans penis are derived from the same embryological tissue. The equivalent of female circumcision wouldn't be removing the foreskin, but removing the glans...

That's why I said any cutting of the female genitalia, and didn't compare clitoridectomy to male circ. Read what I wrote, please. I think you're a smart guy, and you can do better than this sort of strawman argument. FGM differs widely by geographical location. For example, I read a letter to a journal by female MDs working in a refugee camp, who said that relatively mild Eritrean FGM is a good analogy to male circ. And there has been a movement in some medical circles to allow FGM among immigrants but attenuate it in a medical setting to a form that is acceptable to Westerners - but this has gotten nowhere thanks to the blanket opposition to any FGM, even a symblic nick, among Americans.

So, yes, there is a double standard. I would not be allowed to trim a daughter's labia (a standard cosmetic procedure nowadays, with claims of no sexual damage) though I would be allowed to trim a son's foreskin. So, YES, there are double standards, in the form a 5 year jail sentence.