Lets ban circumcision (male too)

[Whaleboy]

I have, which isn't surprising, since circumcision done later in life has a much higher chance of infection, urinary problems, tenderness and looking weirddue to slight botching.

Hence why it is a better idea to perform the procedure before the end of adolescence.

Personally I would ban it until the child decides for themself. It is mutilation, and I don't think that's right unless the person chooses it, like with ear piercing or cosmetic surgery.

The benefits are best when the op is performed when young, and it is a parents perogative how they treat their child unless you can make an argument for abuse, which I do not believe is viable in this case. Was I abused because I was circumsized at 8 days old? I hardly think so, and with something as subjective as the consideration of abuse, I, and those like me, are in a far better position to define it as abuse or not.

You couldn't make the argument for assault by consequence since, when performed young, there are no perceptible negative effects later in life, unlike female circumsision which is better described as grievous bodily harm. As for assault by intent, if you consider that smacking your child is a viable exercise of parental power, taking physical measures with no long term effects for the child's future well being is legitimate by that logic too.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Geronimo
Why not just ban it for people under the age of consent and allow adults to get it done if they think it's important to have parts of their genitals sliced off?

Cause its more painful and slower to heal as an adult. I have a friend (born in the USSR) who was circumsized as an adult, cause it was illegal in the USSR. He would much rather have had it done as an infant, and he had HIS son circumsized as an infant. Basically when you DONT circumsize a son, youre taking away an option, the option to be circumcized without having to go through a more serious procedure as an adult. In a community where circumcision is near universal, like the Jewish community, it makes perfect sense to circumsize in infancy.

[Heresson]

or not circumcising at all

[Geronimo]

But what does the kid do when he decides he doesnt want parts of his genitals sliced off? grow them back?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Heresson
no, circumcision

Oh, btw. We should ban ritual killings of animals in Jewish and Muslim religions too

why not ban all killing of animals for food?

[Whaleboy]

Says who?

Suffice that I'm in a better position to know

Not if you're not a total slob about it.

Clean regularly and often, cut is cleaner than uncut given the same hygiene.

Says who? Not if you're not a total slob about it.

I believe there was a study in East? Africa that showed that circumsized men have about a quarter of the risk of contracting an STI than non-circumsized men. The proportions are similar with Jews, I read an article somewhere that we have 5 times less HIV/AIDS transmission.

And doesn't circumsizees (I doubt that's a word) lose a lot of sensitivity and so on?

Not a great deal, but since it is relative to each individual it doesnt matter in any case. As a result however, like-for-like a cut man has greater endurance and less likely to suffer from premature ejaculation.

[Heresson]

Have You watched "Europe, Europe" by A. Holland?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Heresson
or not circumcising at all

See, thats the agenda. It isnt about choice, but about abolishing the practice. A weird practice, cause its not native to European Christian culture.

[Asher]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Cause its more painful and slower to heal as an adult. I have a friend (born in the USSR) who was circumsized as an adult, cause it was illegal in the USSR. He would much rather have had it done as an infant, and he had HIS son circumsized as an infant. Basically when you DONT circumsize a son, youre taking away an option, the option to be circumcized without having to go through a more serious procedure as an adult. In a community where circumcision is near universal, like the Jewish community, it makes perfect sense to circumsize in infancy.

The vast majority of people do not need to be circumcised as an adult. In fact, it's extremely rare to do that now, there are alternate treatments that don't even involve cutting -- just creams (I speak from personal experience -- don't ask). 10 years ago they'd require circumcision, now you just apply cream for a month and voila...no slicing and dicing.

My BF is cut, and thought being uncut was "weird" initially. He now says he's "envious" because I still have my foreskin.

Foreskin makes sex more fun, period.

Circumcision is a useless activity with higher risks than potential benefits. And they look worse after. They only look 'better' to people because that's what they're used to seeing. The only difference in an erect penis, is the circumcised penis has an ugly ring-scar, while the uncircumcised doesn't (and the circumcised guy feels less and has more friction).

[Whaleboy]

But what does the kid do when he decides he doesnt want parts of his genitals sliced off? grow them back?

I, personally, have never encountered such an individual, in my personal life or through knowing people at the three (two liberal, one reform, not in that order) synagogues that my family have been members of.

This is all good, but I hope that if you were a parent you wouldn't automatically assume your child would grow up to share your view on this matter. Let everybody decide for themselves what they think of this weird practice and stop forcing it on unconsenting kids.

On the contrary, assuming the mother consented I would want my son circumsized. No matter those who had the op done later, every guy I've known that had it done as an infant was proud of the fact. As for unconsenting kids, that'll only work with an argument of abuse, which this is not, see my above post.

[Gangerolf]

I hear France is banning circumcised penises in schools

[Heresson]

See, thats the agenda. It isnt about choice, but about abolishing the practice. A weird practice, cause its not native to European Christian culture.

I refer You to the first post of this thread

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Geronimo
But what does the kid do when he decides he doesnt want parts of his genitals sliced off? grow them back?

Sue his parents? Like I said, whichever way you go you eliminate an option. So you let the parents decide. NOT THE STATE.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
On the contrary, assuming the mother consented I would want my son circumsized. No matter those who had the op done later, every guy I've known that had it done as an infant was proud of the fact.

Textbook psychological defense mechanism.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Hence why it is a better idea to perform the procedure before the end of adolescence.

Yes, the period when I think it's morally wrong, due to it being forced upon them. Chopping a part of a child off is wrong, IMHO, since that child may not share the view that it is better. I believe it is a person's choice, not their parents. The same as removing your appendix at birth. Unless there's a medical necessity, it should be the choice of the person themself. There are no long term medical problems with branding either, but I'd still class it as abuse unless it was the choice of that person.