Coragyps

Say what you will, guys, but I sure always thought that my uncut brother really had an ugly penis. Not near as handsome as mine.

tronvillain

Wow, you can see the glans when it's not errect - what a huge benefit.

Corwin

Yeah.... why don't we just cut off your nose and ears? After all... you don't really NEED them and they just break up the lines of your face....

GunnerJ

An unbelievably bad analogy. I'm embarassed for you. Breaking the arm not only has no positive side effects, but definate negative ones. While the positive effects of circumcision may be in dispute, there is some backing for it; would anyone suggest there are any benefits to breaking an infant's arm? Please try harder next time.

...which would probably do an infant more harm than if the circumcision was done without it.

Gory details make good rhetorical points, but carry weight in a rational argument.

A pretty big claim... like to substantiate it? And show why those who disagree are wrong?

You have yet to show that circumcision is such a great harm that it outweighs this good.

Dual arguments from authority and popularity. Is this how you substantiate a claim?

For a brief period of time...

Signifigance? My circumcised cock has plenty of fine orgasms without slime and a few extra nerves, thank you.

You could say the same about breastfeeding. How do we know whether the baby wants to suckle at his mom's teet or use a bottle? There's very little signifigant difference. Whose mouth is it anyway?

GunnerJ

Say frogsmoocher, I'm sorry for being so cruel on your analogies and arguments... after seeing the ignorant crap Corwin spouts, they seem like gold!

Undercurrent

Then, even if we had compelling proof that it prevented some horrible disease with a high rate of incedence, why do we do it to children who can't be anaesthetized rather than waiting until the child is old enough to tolerate anaesthesia? Do we expect that an uncircumized child might die of penile cancer before the age of two?

Unless someone points out a serious illness that circumcision effectively prevents that sets in before the age when circumcision my be done through anaesthesia. I'd have to maintain my opinion that infant circumcision is unnecessarily cruel.

From <a href="http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/" target="_blank">this site</a>

m.

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Michael ]</p>

crackrabbit

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I am personally against circumcision. I think it's barbaric and unneccesary, and any sons I bear will remain uncut unless they choose to be circumcised once they're old enough to make such a decision (and I hope they choose to remain intact.) However, the argument you use here is untrue. The only form of female circumcision that is remotely comparable to the male version is removal of the clitoral hood. It allows the female to retain the capacity for sexual pleasure and does comparatively little damage to sexual function. This type of circumcision, however, is rarely practiced and isn't what people are usually talking about when they speak of female genital mutilation. They're speaking of either clitoridectomy or labial circumcision, neither of which is at all similar to removal of the male foreskin.

Clitoridectomy - removal of the clitoris - makes orgasm difficult to impossible. There are two kinds of labial circumcision: removal of the inner labia, and removal of the inner and outer labia. Although the former is certainly worse, both render intercourse unenjoyable; sex causes intense pain and bleeding.

As I said, I do not think male circumcision is necessary or even justified, but circumcised males are still able to enjoy sex, and the procedure is not specifically designed to control them by stripping away their ablilty to function as normal, sexual adults.

Again, I am not a proponent of male circumcision, but comparing the removal of the foreskin to the removal of the entire external genitalia is comparing apples to oranges.

[ February 11, 2002: Message edited by: Melly ]</p>

frostymama

For what it is worth... circ'ing my son is the worst parenting decision I ever made. I will never repeat that mistake. I made a stupid and uneducated decision. Most of the men in the word are uncut and don't have any problems at all.

Circumcision for preventative reasons never made sense to me. I mean... breast cancer kills a lot of people. Should we be giving all newborn girls double mastectomies as a preventative measure? I'm sure that would have similar benefits.

ickabod

I studied circumcision in University (Rights of the Individual not circumcision specificaly) and a plethora of Jewish scholars and doctors are condeming the act. I has been proven to effect a man's self-respect and self-worth. Also it can make men feel inadequate or abnormal. it has no medical benefit. If cleanliness is a concern, try using soap and water before turning to self-mutilation

Corwin

Ignorant? Sorry, I'll have to pull up the numbers on penises when I'm not at my work computer. There are some things I'd prefer not to have in my browser cache.

In short, name one medical benefit to circumcision please that outweighs amputation of a perfectly normal, functional part of the human body without anasthesia and without consent? Rates of cervical cancer in women? HIGHLY questionable. Penile cancer? The difference is so low as to be not statistically significant.

Now... the drawbacks.... lessened sensitivity of the glans? Yes, that happens when you kill off nerve tissue. (Which happens when you expose the glans to air and clothing constantly. The membranes that normally protect the glans? Dry up. They aren't there anymore.) How about infection and occasional death? Yup. Documented, as with any surgical procedure. Malformation? Yes, it's not unusual for the penis to lean to one direction or the other as a result of an uneven cut. (The skin binds on one side or the other.... this problem ranges from mild to extreme, occasionally causing extreme sexual dysfunction in adulthood.) How about the urethera exiting the penis at an odd angle or otherwise not where it's normally supposed to? Yup. Also documented. Memory of the procedure is much harder to document, but anyone who tells you that a baby can't remember something that extreme is trying to sell you something.

Circumcision is barbaric. We absolutely forbid medical procedures without consent under any other circumstance, even to the point of allowing someone to die if they knowingly and of their own free will refuse treatment. Of course, when it's a baby we're talking about, and a 3000 year old custom, revived to tame the male sex drive (or female in some countries...) THAT'S different. Bullshit. Leave your baby's genitals alone. They grow that way for a reason. If you endorse routine circumcision of either gender you're arguing with several million years of evolution. Smart move no?

Hopefully someone who's at their own, unmonitored computer can dredge up the numbers and pictures sooner than I can get home, but failing that I will.

Oh, and the crack about breastfeeding? Breastfed babies simply do better than formula babies. They're bigger, healthier, and tend to have a higher IQ. (This was documented a few years ago... I'll look for the study...) Again, you're arguing with several million years of evolution. 'Better living through chemistry' is all well and good.... but there are some things we don't understand well enough to duplicate yet, and breast milk is one of them.

-Cor