On September 09 2011 12:15 Torte de Lini wrote: It's not shallow to find something unappealing. If the penis is sexually unappealing, some women won't have sex.
Yes, morally, they should have sex because they love the person. But removing the entire aesthetic interest or desire in love-making is ridiculous. There needs to be a physical attractiveness or acceptance on both parts.
Studies have been pasted all over this thread that show that women prefer whichever type of penis they're most accustomed to. There's no universal beauty standard for penises. (which all look hilariously stupid, by the way.)
If you have a daughter, are you considering taking her for breast implants when she hits puberty? Because, you know, dudes like big bewbs, amirite?
Not sure why you're telling me about studies, how is that relevant to my statement above?
Not all men like big breasts or fake ones.
Not all women like chopped penises. Why is the aesthetic a part of your argument? You don't seem to want to make any other cosmetic surgery choices for your future children.
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
On September 09 2011 11:59 Torte de Lini wrote: In the end, tough luck. It's my child and I get to decide if he gets a circumcised penis or not.
Selfish? You bet? Bullshit? Uh-huh. Completely repulsive? Ask his future girlfriend(s) Unfair? Ha, maybe. Bad parenting? Yes, let's define the entirety of my potential in parenting based on a decision I took away from a barely conscious child.
I'm sure every one of you hate seeing your penis have a head. ):
I gave my rationale, even from the outer perspective its irrational, but I don't care, neither will the child (very likely) and nor will the world because no one will see it (in some rare occasion, they will).
You know those rednecks who give their baby's tattoos or piercings and everyone is disgusted by them? You're unabashedly one of those now. Congratulations, here's your complimentary Insane Clown Posse shirt and "Half-dicked baby on board" car sticker.
Thank you. I'm glad you're able to label someone based on one dimension of their decisions or views. You've done very well being equally as understanding as they very person you're bashing.
Just because there is more than that one aspect to your parenting philosophy, that does not mean that this one given aspect is not incredibly stupid.
It's like how I think it's incredibly wrong and stupid to bring children up believing that there's a God who will send them to Hell if they don't believe in him. I still know plenty of people who do that and are otherwise great parents.
People have flaws. It's people who recognize these flaws and say "Yeah, I know it's a flaw, but fuck it" that I don't understand. Especially when that flaw is affecting other people around you.
The flaw is minor in the grand scheme of things. You guys exaggerate and distort it heavily with general descriptions!
YOURE CUTTING OFF A PART OF HIS PENIS
Yeah, foreskin that plays no actual or significant role in the function of the body
YOURE SO SHALLOW FOR DOING IT FOR COSMETIC REASON
etc etc etc
Yes, it's minor in the grand scheme of things. It's still a flaw. Why not correct it when this correction takes absolutely no effort on your part?
Because I don't feel it'll be a problem for the child. I'm trying to really hard to see where a child might be bothered.
That we made a decision for him? Yeah, so? We do that for a lot of things?
That we took away a part of his penis? I have mine taken away too. It's also a part he's never seen or recognized as significant to be troubled over.
That our intentions do not reflect his own? Mm, yes. This is true, but we had good intentions and given the above, I don't see why he'd throw a fit or tantrum.
He's GOING to have the internet, if he ever hears about what was done to him and reads the studies on desensitivity then he'll probably be pretty pissed off. By the way the foreskin has thousands of nerve endings that all contribute to the pleasure of sex so your argument that it is useless is void.
I read it, I'm not pissed off. In fact, my stance remains almost unchanged (I am surprised that circumcised penises does not prevent or reduce HIV, etc. I can't recall the fact anymore).
How will the child know if the sensation of pleasure is significantly more to brood over the loss of his foreskin.
I hate to use this line, but why would he be troubled by something he never had at the start of his conscious life and sexual introduction?
So how do you know that your child won't be pissed off? Furthermore, I think I'd be pretty fucking pissed off if I read somewhere that someone had lopped off part of my dick and now I'll never be as sensitive. Just because he can't feel it for himself doesn't mean he won't be pissed that now he'll never get to try it. The very fact that he had something good taken away from him and now he'll never get it back is enough
On September 09 2011 12:19 Brutaxilos wrote: why is this such a big deal, nobody cares what your penis looks like. /thread please.
People are mutilating babies at birth. That is a problem.
Since when? Is it a social problem? Or a minor personal one? It doesn't sound like a social one, so the personal issue should be decided on case by case basis by those involved.
Since circumsision started. Yes. No it is not minor. No, the idea of cutting baby dick in an agonizing procedure should not be decided on a case by case basis. A blanket "I'm calling child services you sick fuck" would suffice better.
On September 09 2011 11:59 Torte de Lini wrote: In the end, tough luck. It's my child and I get to decide if he gets a circumcised penis or not.
Selfish? You bet? Bullshit? Uh-huh. Completely repulsive? Ask his future girlfriend(s) Unfair? Ha, maybe. Bad parenting? Yes, let's define the entirety of my potential in parenting based on a decision I took away from a barely conscious child.
I'm sure every one of you hate seeing your penis have a head. ):
I gave my rationale, even from the outer perspective its irrational, but I don't care, neither will the child (very likely) and nor will the world because no one will see it (in some rare occasion, they will).
You know those rednecks who give their baby's tattoos or piercings and everyone is disgusted by them? You're unabashedly one of those now. Congratulations, here's your complimentary Insane Clown Posse shirt and "Half-dicked baby on board" car sticker.
Thank you. I'm glad you're able to label someone based on one dimension of their decisions or views. You've done very well being equally as understanding as they very person you're bashing.
Just because there is more than that one aspect to your parenting philosophy, that does not mean that this one given aspect is not incredibly stupid.
It's like how I think it's incredibly wrong and stupid to bring children up believing that there's a God who will send them to Hell if they don't believe in him. I still know plenty of people who do that and are otherwise great parents.
People have flaws. It's people who recognize these flaws and say "Yeah, I know it's a flaw, but fuck it" that I don't understand. Especially when that flaw is affecting other people around you.
The flaw is minor in the grand scheme of things. You guys exaggerate and distort it heavily with general descriptions!
YOURE CUTTING OFF A PART OF HIS PENIS
Yeah, foreskin that plays no actual or significant role in the function of the body
YOURE SO SHALLOW FOR DOING IT FOR COSMETIC REASON
etc etc etc
Yes, it's minor in the grand scheme of things. It's still a flaw. Why not correct it when this correction takes absolutely no effort on your part?
Because I don't feel it'll be a problem for the child. I'm trying to really hard to see where a child might be bothered.
That we made a decision for him? Yeah, so? We do that for a lot of things?
That we took away a part of his penis? I have mine taken away too. It's also a part he's never seen or recognized as significant to be troubled over.
That our intentions do not reflect his own? Mm, yes. This is true, but we had good intentions and given the above, I don't see why he'd throw a fit or tantrum.
He's GOING to have the internet, if he ever hears about what was done to him and reads the studies on desensitivity then he'll probably be pretty pissed off. By the way the foreskin has thousands of nerve endings that all contribute to the pleasure of sex so your argument that it is useless is void.
I read it, I'm not pissed off. In fact, my stance remains almost unchanged (I am surprised that circumcised penises does not prevent or reduce HIV, etc. I can't recall the fact anymore).
How will the child know if the sensation of pleasure is significantly more to brood over the loss of his foreskin.
I hate to use this line, but why would he be troubled by something he never had at the start of his conscious life and sexual introduction?
So how do you know that your child won't be pissed off? Furthermore, I think I'd be pretty fucking pissed off if I read somewhere that someone had lopped off part of his dick and now he'll never be as sensitive. Just because he can't feel it for himself doesn't mean he won't be pissed that now he'll never get to try it. The very fact that he had something good taken away from him and now he'll never get it back.
How do you know the child will be pissed off? I'm really glad to hear your anecdotal view. It's very difficult to feel extreme pain or dislike with the idea of your circumcised penis because you never got to see how it feels uncircumcised.
As if missing a chance for greater sexual pleasure is the end all, be all. I'm sure the child will be so repulsed by the idea of his penis being circumcised that he will become asexual by choice and rebellion of his changed penis.
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
On September 09 2011 12:01 RockIronrod wrote: [quote] You know those rednecks who give their baby's tattoos or piercings and everyone is disgusted by them? You're unabashedly one of those now. Congratulations, here's your complimentary Insane Clown Posse shirt and "Half-dicked baby on board" car sticker.
Thank you. I'm glad you're able to label someone based on one dimension of their decisions or views. You've done very well being equally as understanding as they very person you're bashing.
Just because there is more than that one aspect to your parenting philosophy, that does not mean that this one given aspect is not incredibly stupid.
It's like how I think it's incredibly wrong and stupid to bring children up believing that there's a God who will send them to Hell if they don't believe in him. I still know plenty of people who do that and are otherwise great parents.
People have flaws. It's people who recognize these flaws and say "Yeah, I know it's a flaw, but fuck it" that I don't understand. Especially when that flaw is affecting other people around you.
The flaw is minor in the grand scheme of things. You guys exaggerate and distort it heavily with general descriptions!
YOURE CUTTING OFF A PART OF HIS PENIS
Yeah, foreskin that plays no actual or significant role in the function of the body
YOURE SO SHALLOW FOR DOING IT FOR COSMETIC REASON
etc etc etc
Yes, it's minor in the grand scheme of things. It's still a flaw. Why not correct it when this correction takes absolutely no effort on your part?
Because I don't feel it'll be a problem for the child. I'm trying to really hard to see where a child might be bothered.
That we made a decision for him? Yeah, so? We do that for a lot of things?
That we took away a part of his penis? I have mine taken away too. It's also a part he's never seen or recognized as significant to be troubled over.
That our intentions do not reflect his own? Mm, yes. This is true, but we had good intentions and given the above, I don't see why he'd throw a fit or tantrum.
He's GOING to have the internet, if he ever hears about what was done to him and reads the studies on desensitivity then he'll probably be pretty pissed off. By the way the foreskin has thousands of nerve endings that all contribute to the pleasure of sex so your argument that it is useless is void.
I read it, I'm not pissed off. In fact, my stance remains almost unchanged (I am surprised that circumcised penises does not prevent or reduce HIV, etc. I can't recall the fact anymore).
How will the child know if the sensation of pleasure is significantly more to brood over the loss of his foreskin.
I hate to use this line, but why would he be troubled by something he never had at the start of his conscious life and sexual introduction?
So how do you know that your child won't be pissed off? Furthermore, I think I'd be pretty fucking pissed off if I read somewhere that someone had lopped off part of his dick and now he'll never be as sensitive. Just because he can't feel it for himself doesn't mean he won't be pissed that now he'll never get to try it. The very fact that he had something good taken away from him and now he'll never get it back.
How do you know the child will be pissed off? I'm really glad to hear your anecdotal view. It's very difficult to feel extreme pain or dislike with the idea of your circumcised penis because you never got to see how it feels uncircumcised.
As if missing a chance for greater sexual pleasure is the end all, be all. I'm sure the child will be so repulsed by the idea of his penis being circumcised that he will become asexual by choice and rebellion of his changed penis.
If my dad told me "No sex won't ever feel better because fuck you that's why" I'd be fairly pissed off.
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
On September 09 2011 12:19 Brutaxilos wrote: why is this such a big deal, nobody cares what your penis looks like. /thread please.
People are mutilating babies at birth. That is a problem.
Since when? Is it a social problem? Or a minor personal one? It doesn't sound like a social one, so the personal issue should be decided on case by case basis by those involved.
Since circumsision started. Yes. No it is not minor. No, the idea of cutting baby dick in an agonizing procedure should not be decided on a case by case basis. A blanket "I'm calling child services you sick fuck" would suffice better.
Any bills or decisions made by the government to regulate this or offer an alternative?
Show me how it is not a minor issue. I can't figure it out.
How do you how agonizing it is? Do you recall? Can a baby describe it to you?
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
Can you elaborate
Breast-feeding
Protection of the Glans and sexual pleasure.
Penises function without the extra protection. Sexual pleasure is relative.
This is so much fun ;D! I haven't done these back and forths since college!
On September 09 2011 12:19 Brutaxilos wrote: why is this such a big deal, nobody cares what your penis looks like. /thread please.
People are mutilating babies at birth. That is a problem.
Since when? Is it a social problem? Or a minor personal one? It doesn't sound like a social one, so the personal issue should be decided on case by case basis by those involved.
Since circumsision started. Yes. No it is not minor. No, the idea of cutting baby dick in an agonizing procedure should not be decided on a case by case basis. A blanket "I'm calling child services you sick fuck" would suffice better.
Any bills or decisions made by the government to regulate this or offer an alternative?
Show me how it is not a minor issue. I can't figure it out.
How do you how agonizing it is? Do you recall? Can a baby describe it to you?
It's a major issue because it's wide spread. Do I need someone to tell me how getting my dick FUCKING CUT UP would hurt? Can a baby remember being raped? No, WELL I GUESS IT DOESN'T MATTER THEN A HURR HURR
On September 09 2011 12:19 Brutaxilos wrote: why is this such a big deal, nobody cares what your penis looks like. /thread please.
People are mutilating babies at birth. That is a problem.
Since when? Is it a social problem? Or a minor personal one? It doesn't sound like a social one, so the personal issue should be decided on case by case basis by those involved.
Since circumsision started. Yes. No it is not minor. No, the idea of cutting baby dick in an agonizing procedure should not be decided on a case by case basis. A blanket "I'm calling child services you sick fuck" would suffice better.
Any bills or decisions made by the government to regulate this or offer an alternative?
Show me how it is not a minor issue. I can't figure it out.
How do you how agonizing it is? Do you recall? Can a baby describe it to you?
Some countries have regulated on circumcision. But obviously there are huge political ramifications considering two of the three largest religions in the world practice it.
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
Can you elaborate
Breast-feeding
Protection of the Glans and sexual pleasure.
Penises function without the extra protection. Sexual pleasure is relative.
This is so much fun ;D! I haven't done these back and forths since college!
On September 09 2011 12:11 Cedstick wrote: I wouldn't consider it a flaw, I'd consider it a -- in my case -- medical decision.
Quick, chop out the kid's appendix, doesn't serve any real purpose and could cause health complications down the road.
Yeah, there are medical justifications for it. But when else do people perform permanent disfigurements as a pre-emptive medical procedure? If the foreskin is causing some problem, by all means, remove it. I still haven't seen any rational reason why it should happen otherwise in the developed world.
Appendix has no religious significance. Has no aesthetic change if removed. Has no traditional sense established. Costs a lot, achieves nothing if removed.
If you can prevent the foreskin causing problems, why not do it before-hand when the child cannot retain the memory or the potential (if any) pain.
It's hypothetical, not my stance (or is it?)
All surgery has risk. And removing foreskin is not exactly preventative medicine -- that's sort of like, removing boobs to prevent breast cancer.
Except breasts have a bigger significant role than foreskin of a penis.
Can you elaborate
Breast-feeding
Protection of the Glans and sexual pleasure.
Penises function without the extra protection. Sexual pleasure is relative.
This is so much fun ;D! I haven't done these back and forths since college!
Removing extra protection because it can function without it is stupid. You don't need seatbelts, cars function without those after all. Circumcised sex is objectively less pleasurable.
On September 09 2011 12:19 Brutaxilos wrote: why is this such a big deal, nobody cares what your penis looks like. /thread please.
People are mutilating babies at birth. That is a problem.
Since when? Is it a social problem? Or a minor personal one? It doesn't sound like a social one, so the personal issue should be decided on case by case basis by those involved.
Since circumsision started. Yes. No it is not minor. No, the idea of cutting baby dick in an agonizing procedure should not be decided on a case by case basis. A blanket "I'm calling child services you sick fuck" would suffice better.
Any bills or decisions made by the government to regulate this or offer an alternative?
Show me how it is not a minor issue. I can't figure it out.
How do you how agonizing it is? Do you recall? Can a baby describe it to you?
It's a major issue because it's wide spread. Do I need someone to tell me how getting my dick FUCKING CUT UP would hurt? Can a baby remember being raped? No, WELL I GUESS IT DOESN'T MATTER THEN A HURR HURR
Yeah, show me how widespread everyone making it. Give me numbers, I'm genuinely interested because I have no idea how widespread or important this crucial issue is.
Yes, you do. Because I doubt you recall at all.
The intentions are different. Rape is not circumcision.
An outtake from Christopher Hitchens book 'God is not Great" detailing the tradition of Circumcision still performed by Hasidic fundamentalists, and how the safety of children is at risk due to inaction for fear of insulting faith and tradition.
EPT
