• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 00:36
CEST 06:36
KST 13:36
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202552RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams9Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? [G] Mineral Boosting Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 655 users

San Fran May Propose Banning Circumcision - Page 6

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4 5 6 7 8 21 Next All
lac29
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
United States1485 Posts
November 29 2010 05:32 GMT
#101
On November 29 2010 14:28 matjlav wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:27 lac29 wrote:
Why make a big deal out of something that ultimately is inconsequential compared to the million of other bigger issues in the world?


Yes, because public policy should never deal with anything except for the very most pressing and dire issues. /sarcasm


Yes? The problem I see with the world at large is that there is a serious lack of prioritization on world issues.
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44300 Posts
November 29 2010 05:32 GMT
#102
On November 29 2010 14:27 Krigwin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
So 1 out of a million babies lose their penis. That's pretty bad, although I wonder how many penises are saved because of the lowered risks of the following: UTIs, penile cancer, HIV, balanitis, posthitis, phimosis, and prostate cancer. (This list came from your Wiki controversies list.)

Do not straw man, circumcision does not in any way prevent any of those (except for phimosis), it only reduces the risks, and you have no way of proving how many people were saved from those diseases because they were circumcised.

edit: forgot about phimosis


I never said it had to prevent it. Lowering risk isn't as good as automatic prevention, but when you're comparing multiple "lowered risks" to a possible "1 in a million chance" anyway, you may consider getting the operation.
It's true that you may not have gotten those diseases anyway, but then again it's true that you may have if it weren't for the circumcision. That's why the AMA says that there are potential benefits to the operation, not "absolute benefits, definitely get it!" or "no chance of it being helpful, it's useless!"

That's why we're having this discussion
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
adeezy
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States1428 Posts
November 29 2010 05:32 GMT
#103
On November 29 2010 14:28 Ferrose wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:20 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:13 Ferrose wrote:

AMA's stance on circumcision (also from same article):
"The AMA supports the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which reads as follows: Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided."

Even the AMA doesn't think we should circumcise children.


From what I read... it seems that they dont recommend for it or against it. Says that their is potential benefits but not enough to say it should be done. Ultimately they say its the choice of the parents....

I dont really see how thats saying it doesn't think they should circumcise, it doesnt say either.


I'm sorry, I guess I phrased it wrongly. D:

To me, it seems like the AMA is acknowledging that there are benefits, but they feel that it's better to let the parents decide, and that it's not beneficial enough to directly encourage it.


Yeah and because of that.... I am saying... really san francisco trying to stop circumcision. It's really taking the parents right to decide away and giving that right to the child. Wellt hat's how I approach it
I asked my friend how the ratio at a party was, he replied. "Let's just say for every guy there was two dudes."
Roe
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
Canada6002 Posts
November 29 2010 05:33 GMT
#104
On November 29 2010 14:25 Jibba wrote:
Children don't have full rights, and even if it's based in ignorance or misinformation, parents do have the rights to fuck up their children in a myriad of ways and I'd still rather have them doing it than incompetent ex-business owners and school board members who became city council people.

why do you think that?
BrickTop
Profile Joined May 2009
United States37 Posts
November 29 2010 05:33 GMT
#105
On November 29 2010 14:20 adeezy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:13 Ferrose wrote:
AMA's stance on circumcision (also from same article):
...
Even the AMA doesn't think we should circumcise children.


From what I read... it seems that they dont recommend for it or against it. Says that their is potential benefits but not enough to say it should be done. Ultimately they say its the choice of the parents....

I dont really see how thats saying it doesn't think they should circumcise, it doesnt say either.


That's true, but I think a very large percentage of American parents don't know that, and they think circumcision IS significantly beneficial. This results in a lot of children being circumcised due to simple misinformation.
Deleted User 3420
Profile Blog Joined May 2003
24492 Posts
November 29 2010 05:34 GMT
#106
On November 29 2010 14:32 adeezy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:28 Ferrose wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:20 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:13 Ferrose wrote:

AMA's stance on circumcision (also from same article):
"The AMA supports the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which reads as follows: Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided."

Even the AMA doesn't think we should circumcise children.


From what I read... it seems that they dont recommend for it or against it. Says that their is potential benefits but not enough to say it should be done. Ultimately they say its the choice of the parents....

I dont really see how thats saying it doesn't think they should circumcise, it doesnt say either.


I'm sorry, I guess I phrased it wrongly. D:

To me, it seems like the AMA is acknowledging that there are benefits, but they feel that it's better to let the parents decide, and that it's not beneficial enough to directly encourage it.


Yeah and because of that.... I am saying... really san francisco trying to stop circumcision. It's really taking the parents right to decide away and giving that right to the child. Wellt hat's how I approach it


well, if there is no actual benefit to circumcision then of course it should be stopped. should you be allowed to strip off some of your babies skin, causing temporary pain? the baby won't remember it when it grows up, and it will surely heal... but what's the point? it's still unnecessary pain. very barbaric.
AJMcSpiffy
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States1154 Posts
November 29 2010 05:36 GMT
#107
I don't think it should be completely unlawful for a person to get a circumcision, but I am all for making it illegal for a parent to decide until the person is 17/18/a legal adult. It seems that the general argument for it is that it has been shown to possibly reduce the risk of STDs, but how many STDs would an infant really come in contact with (assuming they were circumcised at birth)?

All the possible benefits of being circumcised wouldn't really come into effect until the child/man was sexually active, at which point he would be prepared to make the decision on his own. Leave it up to the guy whether or not he wants to change his own genitalia.
If the quarter was in your right hand, that would've been micro
Jibba
Profile Blog Joined October 2007
United States22883 Posts
November 29 2010 05:37 GMT
#108
On November 29 2010 14:30 travis wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:25 Jibba wrote:
It's a bit of a cruel practice but so are braces and chicken pox and MMR needles, and nearly anything depending on your perspective.



braces and chicken pox (i dunno what mmr needles are) have very direct observable effects in today's society

circumcision.. none whatsoever. other than changing how your penis looks and making it less sensitive

Yes, but up until very, very recently the same argument was made for circumcision. When the information is that raw and non-extensive (no pun intended), you don't legislate off it.
ModeratorNow I'm distant, dark in this anthrobeat
NicolBolas
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States1388 Posts
November 29 2010 05:37 GMT
#109
On November 29 2010 14:01 Dali. wrote:
Do any of us support female genital mutilation? I assume not. Then why are we in favour of the male counterpart?


Because the "male counterpart" is in no way a counterpart to female circumcision.

Male circumcision generally has no negative consequences. Or if there are negative consequences, they aren't well understood. Circumcised males do not have a lack of sex drive or ability to orgasm compared to uncircumcised males (though I've often wondered if circumcision affects how long men last. Someone should do a study on that). As far as we can tell, it is quite innocuous.

Female circumcision is not. Female circumcision almost always carries with it many negative effects.

The two are in no way comparable. They are only similar because they use similar names. The term "female circumcision" isn't even anatomically correct, because the "circumcision" in that case removes the clitoris (the external part, at any rate). The closest equivalent to that in men would be the removal of the penis.

Which I'm sure you'll agree would have substantial negative consequences. Consequences that male circumcision does not have.

As for outlawing circumcision, I'm against the law on general principle. I'm fairly neutral on circumcision, but I really don't think that a city-wide ban on the practice is a good idea.

This is just a political move. It is nothing more and nothing less than opening up a new front in the Culture Wars. For no reason other than to score cheap political points.
So you know, cats are interesting. They are kind of like girls. If they come up and talk to you, it's great. But if you try to talk to them, it doesn't always go so well. - Shigeru Miyamoto
shawster
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Canada2485 Posts
November 29 2010 05:38 GMT
#110
stop comparing circumcision to things like shots or stuff like that. there is pretty much no health benefits from circumcision, whereas shots and braces obviously do something. i was never cut and i don't want to be, kids should be able to make a decision. i still don't think it matters that much anyways

imagine if you had pubes as a kid and your parents controlled whether they would be shaved or not, and they can't grow back. basically it doesn't matter much but i would like to have control of what i do with my body when it doesn't really affect my well-being.
Ferrose
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States11378 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-29 05:40:50
November 29 2010 05:40 GMT
#111
On November 29 2010 14:33 BrickTop wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:20 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:13 Ferrose wrote:
AMA's stance on circumcision (also from same article):
...
Even the AMA doesn't think we should circumcise children.


From what I read... it seems that they dont recommend for it or against it. Says that their is potential benefits but not enough to say it should be done. Ultimately they say its the choice of the parents....

I dont really see how thats saying it doesn't think they should circumcise, it doesnt say either.


That's true, but I think a very large percentage of American parents don't know that, and they think circumcision IS significantly beneficial. This results in a lot of children being circumcised due to simple misinformation.


Which is exactly why the article stated that parents should be fully informed before going through with the operation.

Even so, I think it should still be up to the kid. I haven't been circumcised, but maybe after reading up on it one day, I would say, "Hey, this doesn't sound like a bad idea," and get circumcised.

Even if it doesn't do anything beneficial, it would still be better than being circumcised as a baby, and being told that it's best for me and not having a say in the matter, and possibly growing up to be say, "FUCK WHY WAS I CIRCUMCISED?!"
@113candlemagic Office lady by day, lonely woman at night. | Official lolicon of thread 94273
Jibba
Profile Blog Joined October 2007
United States22883 Posts
November 29 2010 05:40 GMT
#112
On November 29 2010 14:33 Roe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:25 Jibba wrote:
Children don't have full rights, and even if it's based in ignorance or misinformation, parents do have the rights to fuck up their children in a myriad of ways and I'd still rather have them doing it than incompetent ex-business owners and school board members who became city council people.

why do you think that?

Which part? That children don't have full rights? Because they don't. That most city council people are unqualified for real work? Because in New York and Detroit and Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti and Albion, they aren't. Or that parents fuck up their kids in a myriad of ways? That's just basic socialization.
ModeratorNow I'm distant, dark in this anthrobeat
proxY_
Profile Joined July 2010
United States1561 Posts
November 29 2010 05:41 GMT
#113
I honestly don't understand the parallel that people are drawing to abortion here. The focal point of the abortion debate, at least for me, is a person's right to control what is going on with their own body. Whether or not the fetus has rights, they shouldn't override the right of the woman carrying it to have full control of decisions that affect her body and well being.

As far as the circumsicion debate is concerned, I don't really have a problem with a ban. There's no compelling evidence that circumsicion has any really tangible health benefits so the entire practice revolves around needlessly lopping off part of the baby's body. Some people might have a problem with that language but that's literally what's going on. It's not like the person in question couldn't make an educated decision later on in life to have one.
adeezy
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States1428 Posts
November 29 2010 05:41 GMT
#114
On November 29 2010 14:34 travis wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:32 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:28 Ferrose wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:20 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:13 Ferrose wrote:

AMA's stance on circumcision (also from same article):
"The AMA supports the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which reads as follows: Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided."

Even the AMA doesn't think we should circumcise children.


From what I read... it seems that they dont recommend for it or against it. Says that their is potential benefits but not enough to say it should be done. Ultimately they say its the choice of the parents....

I dont really see how thats saying it doesn't think they should circumcise, it doesnt say either.


I'm sorry, I guess I phrased it wrongly. D:

To me, it seems like the AMA is acknowledging that there are benefits, but they feel that it's better to let the parents decide, and that it's not beneficial enough to directly encourage it.


Yeah and because of that.... I am saying... really san francisco trying to stop circumcision. It's really taking the parents right to decide away and giving that right to the child. Wellt hat's how I approach it


well, if there is no actual benefit to circumcision then of course it should be stopped. should you be allowed to strip off some of your babies skin, causing temporary pain? the baby won't remember it when it grows up, and it will surely heal... but what's the point? it's still unnecessary pain. very barbaric.


The fact that the benefit is arguable and there is no definite yes or no leaves it to the parents to decide for themselves.

Religion and tradition aside.... And if there were no health benefits then I could understand why people would say no to it. But like in the OP what's behind circumcision backers is : POSSIBLE benefits, religious and/or cultural traditions. This is what makes me say... oh okay, Parents just need to decide.

Honestly, they should work on banning malnutrition, forgetting to feed your baby, or shaking your baby, or something of the sort that is actually relevant pain before we call things like this barbaric. Maybe I am going a different route but seriously... the way i see this issue is like this quote from Black Jack earlier

"I need to move to San Francisco. Life there must be pure bliss if lawmakers have run out of real problems to tackle and they have moved on to happy meal toys and foreskin."

However, there are real problems. Living near there there's a ton. I understand this is just a proposal for a future bill in 2011 but if this becomes a fullblown issue, it'll end up being a Science vs Religion debate.
I asked my friend how the ratio at a party was, he replied. "Let's just say for every guy there was two dudes."
Krigwin
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
1130 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-29 05:47:05
November 29 2010 05:41 GMT
#115
On November 29 2010 14:32 lac29 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:28 matjlav wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:27 lac29 wrote:
Why make a big deal out of something that ultimately is inconsequential compared to the million of other bigger issues in the world?


Yes, because public policy should never deal with anything except for the very most pressing and dire issues. /sarcasm


Yes? The problem I see with the world at large is that there is a serious lack of prioritization on world issues.

...This is just one of many issues being discussed as a potential law to consider by one board in one city, man, how do you think they should go about tackling world issues?

On November 29 2010 14:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:27 Krigwin wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
So 1 out of a million babies lose their penis. That's pretty bad, although I wonder how many penises are saved because of the lowered risks of the following: UTIs, penile cancer, HIV, balanitis, posthitis, phimosis, and prostate cancer. (This list came from your Wiki controversies list.)

Do not straw man, circumcision does not in any way prevent any of those (except for phimosis), it only reduces the risks, and you have no way of proving how many people were saved from those diseases because they were circumcised.

edit: forgot about phimosis


I never said it had to prevent it. Lowering risk isn't as good as automatic prevention, but when you're comparing multiple "lowered risks" to a possible "1 in a million chance" anyway, you may consider getting the operation.
It's true that you may not have gotten those diseases anyway, but then again it's true that you may have if it weren't for the circumcision. That's why the AMA says that there are potential benefits to the operation, not "absolute benefits, definitely get it!" or "no chance of it being helpful, it's useless!"

That's why we're having this discussion

The way you phrase it pretty much implies that circumcision in some way "saves penises", that definitely implies some level of prevention there.

It really comes down to whether you think the possible benefits (which can be nonexistent to very minor depending on where you get your information) outweighs the drawbacks, many of which are definitely real and can be outright proven, like the permanent loss of neurosensitivity.
Dance.
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States389 Posts
November 29 2010 05:42 GMT
#116
Am I the only one who doesn't mind that I'm circumcised?
It is what it is...
RowdierBob
Profile Blog Joined May 2003
Australia13005 Posts
November 29 2010 05:42 GMT
#117
On November 29 2010 14:34 travis wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:32 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:28 Ferrose wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:20 adeezy wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:13 Ferrose wrote:

AMA's stance on circumcision (also from same article):
"The AMA supports the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which reads as follows: Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided."

Even the AMA doesn't think we should circumcise children.


From what I read... it seems that they dont recommend for it or against it. Says that their is potential benefits but not enough to say it should be done. Ultimately they say its the choice of the parents....

I dont really see how thats saying it doesn't think they should circumcise, it doesnt say either.


I'm sorry, I guess I phrased it wrongly. D:

To me, it seems like the AMA is acknowledging that there are benefits, but they feel that it's better to let the parents decide, and that it's not beneficial enough to directly encourage it.


Yeah and because of that.... I am saying... really san francisco trying to stop circumcision. It's really taking the parents right to decide away and giving that right to the child. Wellt hat's how I approach it


well, if there is no actual benefit to circumcision then of course it should be stopped. should you be allowed to strip off some of your babies skin, causing temporary pain? the baby won't remember it when it grows up, and it will surely heal... but what's the point? it's still unnecessary pain. very barbaric.


I understand what you're saying but coming from someone who has had it done, it's really not that big a deal.

Unless of course it goes horribly wrong. At the end of the day though it's just an inconsequential piece of skin. I think people make way too much out of circumcision..
"Terrans are pretty much space-Australians" - H
Ferrose
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States11378 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-29 05:43:21
November 29 2010 05:42 GMT
#118
On November 29 2010 14:40 Jibba wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:33 Roe wrote:
On November 29 2010 14:25 Jibba wrote:
Children don't have full rights, and even if it's based in ignorance or misinformation, parents do have the rights to fuck up their children in a myriad of ways and I'd still rather have them doing it than incompetent ex-business owners and school board members who became city council people.

why do you think that?

Which part? That children don't have full rights? Because they don't. That most city council people are unqualified for real work? Because in New York and Detroit and Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti and Albion, they aren't. Or that parents fuck up their kids in a myriad of ways? That's just basic socialization.


You're kidding; Monica Conyers is the perfect example of competence from a city council member.

On November 29 2010 14:42 Dance. wrote:
Am I the only one who doesn't mind that I'm circumcised?


I'm sure that most people wouldn't mind it as much if they actually had a say in the matter.
@113candlemagic Office lady by day, lonely woman at night. | Official lolicon of thread 94273
njnick
Profile Joined August 2010
United States176 Posts
November 29 2010 05:42 GMT
#119
On November 29 2010 14:37 NicolBolas wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 29 2010 14:01 Dali. wrote:
Do any of us support female genital mutilation? I assume not. Then why are we in favour of the male counterpart?


Because the "male counterpart" is in no way a counterpart to female circumcision.

Male circumcision generally has no negative consequences. Or if there are negative consequences, they aren't well understood. Circumcised males do not have a lack of sex drive or ability to orgasm compared to uncircumcised males (though I've often wondered if circumcision affects how long men last. Someone should do a study on that). As far as we can tell, it is quite innocuous.

Female circumcision is not. Female circumcision almost always carries with it many negative effects.

The two are in no way comparable. They are only similar because they use similar names. The term "female circumcision" isn't even anatomically correct, because the "circumcision" in that case removes the clitoris (the external part, at any rate). The closest equivalent to that in men would be the removal of the penis.

Which I'm sure you'll agree would have substantial negative consequences. Consequences that male circumcision does not have.

As for outlawing circumcision, I'm against the law on general principle. I'm fairly neutral on circumcision, but I really don't think that a city-wide ban on the practice is a good idea.

This is just a political move. It is nothing more and nothing less than opening up a new front in the Culture Wars. For no reason other than to score cheap political points.

Hello

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98f3IavuEgQ



Goodbye


User was warned for this post
Tarbosh
Profile Joined October 2010
United States127 Posts
November 29 2010 05:42 GMT
#120
On November 29 2010 14:42 Dance. wrote:
Am I the only one who doesn't mind that I'm circumcised?


No, I'd be pissed if I was uncircumcised.
Prev 1 4 5 6 7 8 21 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 6h 24m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 309
Livibee 104
ProTech49
StarCraft: Brood War
Nal_rA 3020
Zeus 382
Sharp 260
HiyA 109
Sexy 73
Icarus 7
Noble 7
Britney 0
League of Legends
JimRising 753
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K271
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox514
Other Games
summit1g11884
shahzam915
ViBE243
RuFF_SC2106
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 58
Other Games
BasetradeTV19
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta48
• practicex 22
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota2313
League of Legends
• Rush656
• Stunt437
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
6h 24m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
9h 24m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 5h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 9h
CSO Cup
1d 11h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 13h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.