I spent a lot of time trying to figure out a topic for a argumentative paper I have assigned for my English 101 class. I was thinking of doing something relating to video games and violence, but I remembered I did something similar for my Social Science 102 class last semester. I was also thinking to something relating to poverty, but I couldn't find something specific I was really interested in.
So I was browsing Digg, and I found this Article. I have to say that it really got me curious.
Question
1.Do you guys think that Circumcision among males is ethical or unethical? 2.What about it's implications? 3.Do you think that a individual has the right to make that decision for a child, or should the procedure be done when the child is older, and willing? 4. Do tangible health benefits override other factors to you personally?
There has been 2 teamliquid discussions before, but one of them was mainly about female circumcision in Africa, and the other one is rather old (about 3 years). So I kind of want a fresh debate. I'm curious to see what people think, and what arguments you guys will use for Pro and cons. Also, it would definitely help my paper.
So what do all of you guys think? Eatme recommended this documentary. This is part 1, part 3 is also up, but I don't think part 2 is =/
I don't like it. 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.
If you wanna talk about FGM, that's obviously unethical and results in immense pain for the woman. They only do it so that sex won't be enjoyable and she'll be monogamous.
pros : you apparently last longer (shouldn't be a problem to start with) more hygienic ( wtf? you should be washing anyway) cons: a slice of your manliness is taken it hurts for ages? i guess it might look worse?
Just to throw out the cleanliness factor - this was true when, you know, people were terrible with hygiene. In 2009, with showers and soap, it is really really not an issue - I promise.
second, as far as girls preference, it is totally cultural. different girls like different things and most get over that preference the second they really want to fuck a guy.
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.
I think the ethics part of this lies in that parents will make this decision. Are parents making the right choice when sending their babies to the chopping block? Sure, the babies don't remember it, but I'm certain at the time they feel pain unknown to most adults. Statistics do show that circumcised men are less likely to get infections and even that it reduces the risk of getting HIV. So it can't be all bad. Personally I like my "hat". Without it, I'm sure it would be pretty desensitised when it matters the most. All the cleaning and scrubbing in the world is worth that.
On April 22 2009 02:18 Zurles wrote: pros : you apparently last longer (shouldn't be a problem to start with)
I will not even comment on the stupidity and complete irrelivance of this comment, instead think about this: if removing your foreskin would improve your stamina, then that would mean that the stimuli you receive would be flattened and less intense (the intenser the stimuli, the closer you are to come). So removing your foreskin would actually lessen your sexual experience and sensations. Why on earth would you want to accomplish that????
On April 22 2009 03:01 choboPEon wrote: Just to throw out the cleanliness factor - this was true when, you know, people were terrible with hygiene. In 2009, with showers and soap, it is really really not an issue - I promise.
Unless it's going to prevent complications (not too uncommon tbh) I don't really see the point.
It should really just be viewed as a medical procedure.
On the other hand I guess it would prevent any embarrassing foreskin problems that could arise later in life that couldn't be predicted earlier (inability to retract it etc.)
come to think of it i don't care. And I don't really think it's unethical, just stupid.
Just to throw out the cleanliness factor - this was true
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!
EPT
