EPTBut, other than that, foreskin for the win!
;D
Male circumcision: Pro or Con? - Page 2
| Blogs > Mickey |
|
Wuewdoodoo
Mexico127 Posts
But, other than that, foreskin for the win! ;D | ||
|
decafchicken
United States20168 Posts
| ||
|
EscPlan9
United States2777 Posts
On April 22 2009 02:40 Valentine wrote: Torpedodicks look weird. alien like. I think it looks hideous too | ||
|
paper
13196 Posts
On April 22 2009 03:17 Chef wrote: I wonder if I had no lips, would my mouth be cleaner? Or maybe if I didn't have eyelids, I wouldn't get dirt stuck in them? <3 conventional wisdom. Also, you can't get pregnant the first time you have sex. Teenagers said so! well, you're not urinating with your mouth or eyes >__> but yeah, UNCUT HWAITING | ||
|
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
Apparently circumcision was popularised to fight masturbation. | ||
|
Gnojfatelob
Belgium216 Posts
| ||
Kennelie
United States2296 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=60700 for decafchicken's trim. | ||
|
norsK
United States131 Posts
On April 22 2009 03:08 Gnojfatelob wrote: Its a ritual like any other, it once upon a time made sense to do, but is now entirely and utterly useless. Like most rituals that serve no purpose whatsoever i am against it. If it was a completely painless procedure, then i would not care at all about this, but i dont see myself allowing someone to just cut away at my son for no apparent reason. (that is if i ever have one ofc) and i strongly discourage anyone to enforce this on their kids. Just wait a couple of years and see if he himself wants it. I doubt many people would be circumsized if they were old enough to make the decision for themselves. But anyway, its not that big of a deal really, you should find something more compelling to write an article about. "Timmy you turned 4 today, and mommy and I have a very important question. Would you like us to remove the flappy end of your wee wee?" "Whats a flappy momma? I WANT ICECREAM!" | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On April 22 2009 03:13 micronesia wrote: It's a requirement at many Jewish sororities. sororities? | ||
|
norsK
United States131 Posts
QFT | ||
|
FuDDx
United States5017 Posts
| ||
|
chobopeon
United States7342 Posts
On April 22 2009 04:06 FuDDx wrote: All I know is, most girls I've ever been with would rather bite the bullet than the elephant trunk, know what I mean. dunno how many erect uncut penises you've seen, but they don't look like you think they do | ||
|
FuDDx
United States5017 Posts
I thought it was funny. But really most women Ive ever talked to about this prefer cut. | ||
|
Yaqoob
Canada3399 Posts
| ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
| ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On April 22 2009 02:16 Chef wrote: I think all the arguments for circumcision are poor and it's just a useless ritual. Some people will throw statistics at you like 'people with foreskin are more likely to get an infection' but they're too stupid to realise that's only because doctors are pulling it back forcibly, not because it's dirty. If one just stretches their foreskin normally and healthily, they don't have this problem. I'd be more worried about trusting a doctor with a knife around those parts unnecessarily, because the consequences of a slip are much more devastating than a little infection. This post is wrong on so many counts. 1) People with foreskin are more likely to get infections because "doctors are pulling it back forcibly"? I am not sure what you are talking about here. The average man does not have a doctor tugging at his foreskin on a regular basis. 2) "If one just stretches their foreskin normally and healthily, they don't have this problem" and also to address choboPEon's comment about modern levels of hygiene rendering circumcision for health reasons obsolete: this point is irrelevant. Of course if everyone takes immaculate care of their privates (or if they just, say, abstain from sex) they will not have to worry about infections. The problem is that people just don't do this - especially not in developing countries, where STDs are most rampant. The point of a circumcision is not to be a cure-all for STDs, but to decrease the probability of contraction and transmission. 3) "I'd be more worried about trusting a doctor with a knife around those parts unnecessarily": this point is only valid in countries where healthcare is poor enough that there is a significant risk of complications with any surgery. The rate of "failure" for circumcisions is infinitesimally small. 4) "more devastating than a little infection": I can only take this statement to mean that you are unaware of how serious STDs are. HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis - these are deadly diseases which are ravaging entire countries of people. When you compare risk*damage cost of a failed circumcision with risk*damage cost of contracting an STD, the circumcision starts to look quite attractive. -- There is conflicting data about whether circumcision reduces transmission rates for some STDs, but the majority of evidence indicates that circumcision is effective at combating many STDs (recent randomized study shows decrease in HIV transmission of ~55%). Even given this information, it's important to note that circumcision may not be the most appropriate or cost-effective way to combat STDs, especially in countries where competent doctors and sterile environments are hard to come by. However, it's looking increasingly untenable to argue that circumcision has no practical health benefits. Don't read this post as a condemnation of un-circumcised men/penises. Many guys are perfectly capable of hygiene and sexual behaviors which will protect them from STDs regardless of whether their penis is circumcised. But keep in mind, Chef, that the average person is probably much less hygienic and sexually responsible as you, and thus could probably benefit from losing that foreskin. | ||
|
Wotans_Fire
United Kingdom294 Posts
Pros: 1. decreased risk of stds (if you participate in hasty endeavours) 2. possibilty of bathing less Cons: http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
1) People with foreskin are more likely to get infections because "doctors are pulling it back forcibly"? I am not sure what you are talking about here. The average man does not have a doctor tugging at his foreskin on a regular basis. When a child's foreskin isn't going back as quickly as a physician would deem normal, they used to force it back. Eight weeks after fertilization, the foreskin begins to grow over the head of the penis, covering it completely by 16 weeks. At this stage, the foreskin and glans share an epithelium (mucous layer) that fuses the two together. It remains this way until the foreskin separates from the glans.[5] At birth, the foreskin is usually still fused with the glans.[5] As childhood progresses the foreskin and the glans gradually separate, a process that may not be complete until late puberty.[6] Thorvaldsen and Meyhoff reported that average age of first foreskin retraction in Denmark is 10.4 years.[7] Wright argues that forcible retraction of the foreskin should be avoided and that the child himself should be the first one to retract his own foreskin.[8] Premature retraction may be painful, and may result in infection. Yeah, you pretty much don't know what you're talking about, so I'm not going to read the rest of your post. | ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On April 22 2009 04:46 Chef wrote: When a child's foreskin isn't going back as quickly as a physician would deem normal, they used to force it back. Yeah, you pretty much don't know what you're talking about, so I'm not going to read the rest of your post. haha amazing, I'm so glad I honored your post with a thought-out and lengthy reply. Thanks (really) for clearing up that point, though. Do you have any evidence that forcibly pulling back the foreskin is what causes problems with uncircumcised penises+disease transmission? Also, in the quote above I am pretty sure "result in infection" is referring to an infection that occurs at the time of the premature retraction, not transmission or contraction of STDs sometime down the line. | ||
micronesia
United States24797 Posts
To get in their pants. | ||
| ||
