The good news, when some of us are too tired to stand the good fight

[drugstore cowboy]

no, thats your point darkside, you are the one trying to invalid what people say while claiming its me doing it.....

lack of experience means that opinions are based around personal belief and the beliefs of others...... not hands on experience..... so opinions that are made about what has or has not happened, are often invalid as they are based on what other people say and if the other people got it wrong, then so are the opinions based on the incorrect info

DD's understanding of circumcision is based on her own experiences and what she saw when it happened.... katjas opinion is based around websites and videos..... and if I wanted advice about what happens, I would go to the person with the hands on experience as they know what happens....
cos if I went to katja, she would have to send me to websites and videos

with DD I would ask questions, talk about how things do not match what others post etc etc etc....

My ex partner actually is a nurse and he has worked in hospitals where circumcisions have been done and he's been present when it's happened.

My ex partner is actually a medical professional unlike your girlfriend Duckies Darling and Mikey3000 who are claiming that circumcision causes no trauma at all to the infant, and that it's perfectly fine and a good thing that somehow has to be done.

He has not performed a circumcision at all as he finds them to be disgusting and tells parents he refuses to perform them at all when they ask but he's been around and seen male circumcisions happen.

The baby boys scream, cry, go into shock, and why would they do anything else? This happens even if a general anesthetic is used. In many cases they don't use any sort of anesthetic at all.

Do you think that they'd actually enjoy the sensation of getting one of the most sensitive parts of their body and a very sensitive part of their penis ripped off, torn off, sliced off, and in some cases burned off.

The parents do freak out and many times do regret circumcising their sons, and by then it's too late. There are some hospitals that do not even ask parents if they want their boy circumcised and they just go ahead and do it anyway even if the parents have said beforehand that they do not want it done to their son. Talk about setting yourself up to be sued!

My ex told me how he's seen other nurses lie and tell parents things like, "Your son slept through the entire thing!" when they bring the freshly mutilated boy in shock back to his parents and he's silent and not responsive because of the trauma just inflicted upon him the parents actually think that their son is "asleep".

[Long Duck Dong]

My ex partner actually is a nurse and he has worked in hospitals where circumcisions have been done and he's been present when it's happened.

My ex partner is actually a medical professional unlike your girlfriend Duckies Darling and Mikey3000 who are claiming that circumcision causes no trauma at all to the infant, and that it's perfectly fine and a good thing that somehow has to be done.

He has not performed a circumcision at all as he finds them to be disgusting and tells parents he refuses to perform them at all when they ask but he's been around and seen male circumcisions happen.

The baby boys scream, cry, go into shock, and why would they do anything else? This happens even if a general anesthetic is used. In many cases they don't use any sort of anesthetic at all.

Do you think that they'd actually enjoy the sensation of getting one of the most sensitive parts of their body and a very sensitive part of their penis ripped off, torn off, sliced off, and in some cases burned off.

The parents do freak out and many times do regret circumcising their sons, and by then it's too late. There are some hospitals that do not even ask parents if they want their boy circumcised and they just go ahead and do it anyway even if the parents have said beforehand that they do not want it done to their son. Talk about setting yourself up to be sued!

My ex told me how he's seen other nurses lie and tell parents things like, "Your son slept through the entire thing!" when they bring the freshly mutilated boy in shock back to his parents and he's silent and not responsive because of the trauma just inflicted upon him the parents actually think that their son is "asleep".

your ex partner said..... and how much did you actually see yourself.... ????

I think I would take the word of a person that I can actually talk to, over the word of a person on a forum that never actually witnessed things, but their ex partner said.......

in the same way that you are posting site after site of what other people said..... and I am listening and talking to parents that were actually there when it happened and people that are circumcised, as adults and children.... and talking from my own personal experiences.....

[drugstore cowboy]

your ex partner said..... and how much did you actually see yourself.... ????

I think I would take the word of a person that I can actually talk to, over the word of a person on a forum that never actually witnessed things, but their ex partner said.......

in the same way that you are posting site after site of what other people said..... and I am listening and talking to parents that were actually there when it happened and people that are circumcised, as adults and children.... and talking from my own personal experiences.....

What makes you assume that I've never seen an infant's circumcision?

I actually have seen an infant circumcised on more than one ocassion.

It's not something I would like to see again as it was very disturbing and the infant boy screamed in horror.

The mutilation was done under the pointless genital mutilation ritual known as a "Bris" that's done in Judaism.

I also have been present in a hospital where an infant was circumcised and I saw it happen.

What my partner told me about what happens when a boy is circumcised is true. He's witnessed 100's of circumcisions over the decades he has worked as a nurse in the neonatal section of various hospitals.

Even though you and others want to deny it circumcising an infant boy is traumatic to him, and it's a pointless outdated barbaric mutilation.

Here comes the flood of denial...and anger from people who are pro-mutilation.

[Long Duck Dong]

show me where I have denied its traumatic, cos I have posted in this bloody thread how I know surgery is hell, I have been thru it..... so I would suggest that you go to the hospital and have your head removed from your ass...

as for what makes me assume, oh, only the fact that you are pushing websites and your ex partners opinion as gospel,... and suddenly you have personal experience that you never mentioned in any other post.....

I would have mentioned my own experiences before I referred to my ex partners experiences...... but thats just me....

and I know people that have seen 100's of aliens and flying saucers..... but I still rely on what I have seen, cos until I can say definitely I have seen one, then there is only their opinion that they exist and what they say happened, is real and not their own personal twist on something so me saying to other people that they are real cos my friend saw them, is about as good as the 100's of men that Isuckandswallow talked to and who told him that they were pissed off at being cut ( yes, he said 100's of men )

[Darkside2009]

no, thats your point darkside, you are the one trying to invalid what people say while claiming its me doing it.....

lack of experience means that opinions are based around personal belief and the beliefs of others...... not hands on experience..... so opinions that are made about what has or has not happened, are often invalid as they are based on what other people say and if the other people got it wrong, then so are the opinions based on the incorrect info

DD's understanding of circumcision is based on her own experiences and what she saw when it happened.... katjas opinion is based around websites and videos..... and if I wanted advice about what happens, I would go to the person with the hands on experience as they know what happens....
cos if I went to katja, she would have to send me to websites and videos

with DD I would ask questions, talk about how things do not match what others post etc etc etc....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The fact that a person was present in person, does not mean that they were aware of, or understood what was going on. Parents in hospitals often defer to doctors who they wrongly assume know what they are doing. If they did know in every case, their would be no malpractice suits in court, no botched operations, no deaths from circumcision.

Parents on here have even said their baby slept through the whole operation when in fact the baby had gone into a state of catatonic shock. I could give further examples, but there would be little point.

So you believe whomsoever you wish, and I shall believe the consensus of medical opinion throughout the World when it states, there is no need for, or benefit from, routine circumcision.

As to eye-witness testimony, ask any lawyer what the courts think of that without supporting evidence.

With regard to which of us is making more sense in what we say, I'll let others decide that for themselves, I'm all for personal choice.

[Long Duck Dong]

no, thats your point darkside, you are the one trying to invalid what people say while claiming its me doing it.....

lack of experience means that opinions are based around personal belief and the beliefs of others...... not hands on experience..... so opinions that are made about what has or has not happened, are often invalid as they are based on what other people say and if the other people got it wrong, then so are the opinions based on the incorrect info

DD's understanding of circumcision is based on her own experiences and what she saw when it happened.... katjas opinion is based around websites and videos..... and if I wanted advice about what happens, I would go to the person with the hands on experience as they know what happens....
cos if I went to katja, she would have to send me to websites and videos

with DD I would ask questions, talk about how things do not match what others post etc etc etc....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The fact that a person was present in person, does not mean that they were aware of, or understood what was going on. Parents in hospitals often defer to doctors who they wrongly assume know what they are doing. If they did know in every case, their would be no malpractice suits in court, no botched operations, no deaths from circumcision.

Parents on here have even said their baby slept through the whole operation when in fact the baby had gone into a state of catatonic shock. I could give further examples, but there would be little point.

So you believe whomsoever you wish, and I shall believe the consensus of medical opinion throughout the World when it states, there is no need for, or benefit from, routine circumcision.

As to eye-witness testimony, ask any lawyer what the courts think of that without supporting evidence.

With regard to which of us is making more sense in what we say, I'll let others decide that for themselves, I'm all for personal choice.

strangely enuf, thats why I would go talk to a medical expert, rather than people in a forum with no parental experience, posting websites and articles and vids as proof of what they say.......

its also why I never went to a car mechanic when I needed surgery......

feel free to tell the parents that they have no idea what happened, but I am not as quick to tell people that they have no idea about anything, as strangely enuf, not everybody is that stupid that they can not tell the difference between a sleeping child, and a catatonic child.......

not every child reacts the same way or feels things the same way.... surely your own life experience would have taught you that people react to pain differently....

people post articles done by medical professionals as proof of their claims about circumcision, and now you are talking about how doctors and hospitals get it wrong..... so in effect, websites and articles are being posted by medical professionals that may have got it all wrong.....

I will stick with my personal experiences thank you darkside, and the experiences of other people that are actually medically trained, such as my cousin monick that is a head nurse at the local hospital and had her own children circumcised...... cos I am pretty sure that she would know the difference between catatonic and sleeping... and I would trust her as she was also the head nurse that dealt with me when my father needed the urgent surgery I refered to earlier in this thread....... and I am fuckin sure that she would not be head nurse if she could not tell the difference between a catatonic baby and a sleeping one.....
but we run hospitals here differently to the US and UK, bear that in mind.....

if I want a perspective of sex with cut v's uncut males, I could ask around the forum as there is plenty of people, like katja that could talk about that from personal experience...... or I could believe the study posted in this thread that was posted in a british journal, using 139 females that apparently did not understand most of the questions or did not answer them... cos that really must be a valid study, or people like bidaved would not have posted it to support his stance.....

if I want a perspective of a adult male that was cut as a adult male, I would ask the member that posted in this thread and who got told that his opinion meant nothing, despite the fact he had personal experience with a issue that I have not had.....

and I would leave the other people to post all their articles and studies etc etc etc.... as support for their abuse and insulting of members.....

btw, believing what you want, doesn't make your opinion invalid, darkside, but if you are believing incorrect studies and articles, it makes you look like a total idiot when you say parents can not tell the difference between a catatonic child and a sleeping on

[Katja]

I do not require personal experience of many things to know and firnly believe that they are wrong. I have never personally experienced taking another person's life, clubbing a dog to death, drive while under the influence of alcohol, or kidnapping a child. For some things personal experience is not necessary.

For this reason I do not believe LDD and his argument regarding the necessity of personal experience stands up to scrutiny. My belief is that routine circumcision of an infant child at parental request (or insistence take your pick) when there is no medical need is as wrong as removing the young genital or breast tissue from a young girl and should be made just as unlawful.

I need no personal experience of any of these things to know that each is a great wrong inflicted upon a child. Some day I may develop breast or cervical cancer. Did my parents have the right to have these removed at any stage before I was old enough to make that decision for myself? No they did not. They are part of my body, and until such times as they become diseased and injurious to my continued good health to such an extent that they threaten my life, I will hang on to them, and even then, will make sure that prior to cervix or breasts being surgically removed, every medical remedy possible is undertaken and I am left with no option. We should accord the same respect and rights to an infant boy in respect of his foreskin.

[Annika L]

There is a certain kind of person who can recognize when a topic is controversial, when people on both sides have reasons for believing and acting as they do, but that the issue is sufficiently emotionally charged on both sides that rational debate (on either side) is not entirely possible. Their egos are not so brittle that they need to convert every person to their viewpoint, and to them, this is good, because they realize that due to the emotional nature of the argument, they cannot convert people from the opposing viewpoint to their own.

Such people tend to be called "reasonable people". I like 'em.

[Darkside2009]

An interesting video link dealing with death from circumcision:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyiBdP4GfO8

And another dealing with the many possible complications that can arise, both during, and after circumcision:-

http://www.cirp.org/library/complica...lliams-kapila/

[Darkside2009]

A tragic case of circumcision gone wrong, resulting in the death of a child, see and listen to what the child's parents had to say about it:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YSBS...eature=related

Children are still dying each year in the US from routine circumcision. Is an unnecessary operation worth the risk, of death or serious medical complications that can threaten his life?

I for one don't think so.

[Darkside2009]

A light-hearted, humorous view of the circumcision debate, from Penn and Teller. Part of their Bullshit series:-

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=416_1218124584

[Katja]

There is a certain kind of person who can recognize when a topic is controversial, when people on both sides have reasons for believing and acting as they do, but that the issue is sufficiently emotionally charged on both sides that rational debate (on either side) is not entirely possible. Their egos are not so brittle that they need to convert every person to their viewpoint, and to them, this is good, because they realize that due to the emotional nature of the argument, they cannot convert people from the opposing viewpoint to their own.

Such people tend to be called "reasonable people". I like 'em.

I do detect a gentle rebuke in this post.

This certainly a controversial topic, at least in one part of the world, and some people have become emotionally involved in the debate and I do agree that rational debate is not entirely possible. I do not believe either that entirely, rational debate has been lost. Being emotional does not necessarily mean that we lose rationale or remain sufficiently dispassionate that we are unable to argue logically and sensibly with enough rationale to be effective, and there is much in this debate, from both sides which meet this criteria.

I do not have an ego which is brittle, nor do I feel the need to convert every opponent to my point of view. I say every opponent because we do not require conversion of every opponent to win an argument or win change. We do however require to win some, and also to convince those who are undecided or simply unknowledgable about an issue.

If we did not or could not persuade people, then why have a debate? What would ever change? Why else in western societies has routine infant circumcision outside of the religious arena (and appears to be losing ground there too) almost become a thing of the past and why in its last great bastion, the United States, has its incidence halved in the last 40 years? Mostly because people, rational, reasonable people on both sides have argued, often passionately and emotionally, but dispassionately and rationally enough in a determined attempt to convince others of the rightness of what they believe, and that to date, those who are against routine infant circumcision, appear to be getting the best of the argument.

I am a reasonable person. To me. How others view me is something I would never be so jumped up to second guess, but most people do seem to think so. Not all those who do not feel the need to win over their opponents are reasonable people nor does the world tend to call them so. Many such people on both sides have huge egos, not always brittle, and try to bludgeon opponents aside. Some refuse to enter into debate or withdraw from it not because of of rationale or even a lack of it, but because they do not like or wish to hear or even listen to the words of the other side.

The other side of the unbrittle ego Annika. It is not all quite 'reasonable' as you seem to make out and not always quite so likeable.

What I do think of this debate is that it is coming to its end. At least in these forums although not in the wider world. Not permanently I suspect or hope, for issues such as this remain live issues which people will feel strongly about, and until such times as they become settled and uncontroversial, they will always be liable to rear their heads. It is quite right that they do, however uncomfortable we may be with them and upon whichever side we happen to be on.

[Long Duck Dong]

I do not require personal experience of many things to know and firnly believe that they are wrong. I have never personally experienced taking another person's life, clubbing a dog to death, drive while under the influence of alcohol, or kidnapping a child. For some things personal experience is not necessary.

For this reason I do not believe LDD and his argument regarding the necessity of personal experience stands up to scrutiny. My belief is that routine circumcision of an infant child at parental request (or insistence take your pick) when there is no medical need is as wrong as removing the young genital or breast tissue from a young girl and should be made just as unlawful.

I need no personal experience of any of these things to know that each is a great wrong inflicted upon a child. Some day I may develop breast or cervical cancer. Did my parents have the right to have these removed at any stage before I was old enough to make that decision for myself? No they did not. They are part of my body, and until such times as they become diseased and injurious to my continued good health to such an extent that they threaten my life, I will hang on to them, and even then, will make sure that prior to cervix or breasts being surgically removed, every medical remedy possible is undertaken and I am left with no option. We should accord the same respect and rights to an infant boy in respect of his foreskin.

rolls eyes......

forming a opinion is easy..... I can say that beating a person senseless in the middle of the street is wrong and a crime and agree with you.....
but I can actually tell you what it feels like, and what was going thru my head at the day, why I did it, and if I was drunk or sober.....
that is personal experience......

you can share your opinion about circumcision and parents and children, but you have no personal experience as a parent with children, so yes, your opinion is still valid that children should have rights....
it doesn't take personal experience to say that its wrong and the children should have rights.....
but I can not ask you what you felt about having your children circumcised cos you lack that personal experience, i would have to ask a parent that has had their children circumcised....

and that is my point.... some things require talking to people with personal experience, vs opinions....
things like flying in a plane, being in the military, working in a bar, running a marathon etc etc...... many people have opinions about them, but only the people that have done them can give me a personal account of what they experienced......

so my point about opinions vs personal experience is very valid, anybody can have a opinion about what is right or what is wrong, but people with personal experiences, have a understanding that people that have not experienced it, do not have......
yet you will see many people without that personal experience, tell people like me, with the personal experience, that we have no idea what we are talking about..... and thats the hilarious part...

so yet again, it doesn't make your opinion wrong or invalid, it simply means I can come to you for a opinion, and go to DD for a detailed account based on personal experience.....

[drugstore cowboy]

rolls eyes......

forming a opinion is easy..... I can say that beating a person senseless in the middle of the street is wrong and a crime and agree with you.....
but I can actually tell you what it feels like, and what was going thru my head at the day, why I did it, and if I was drunk or sober.....
that is personal experience......

you can share your opinion about circumcision and parents and children, but you have no personal experience as a parent with children, so yes, your opinion is still valid that children should have rights....
it doesn't take personal experience to say that its wrong and the children should have rights.....
but I can not ask you what you felt about having your children circumcised cos you lack that personal experience, i would have to ask a parent that has had their children circumcised....

and that is my point.... some things require talking to people with personal experience, vs opinions....
things like flying in a plane, being in the military, working in a bar, running a marathon etc etc...... many people have opinions about them, but only the people that have done them can give me a personal account of what they experienced......

so my point about opinions vs personal experience is very valid, anybody can have a opinion about what is right or what is wrong, but people with personal experiences, have a understanding that people that have not experienced it, do not have......
yet you will see many people without that personal experience, tell people like me, with the personal experience, that we have no idea what we are talking about..... and thats the hilarious part...

so yet again, it doesn't make your opinion wrong or invalid, it simply means I can come to you for a opinion, and go to DD for a detailed account based on personal experience.....

Your girlfriend Duckies Darling is NOT a medical professional and she's pro circumcision, so she's going to claim that it's perfectly fine and normal and simply has to be done since she thought her kids would be "freaks in the locker room".

I actually have seen circumcisions preformed and so has my ex partner and I posted about OUR personal experiences which you're pretending don't matter or are not nearly as valid as your girlfriend's.

Again what's with the hypocrisy? You did post about how circumcision of both boys and girls is genital mutilation and how this is your opinion.

You can try to twist your own words around and pretend to claim that "Oh the doctor said it was mutilation! I didn't at all!" but right here you did say how circumcision is genital mutilation, and you did agree that circumcising male infants is genital mutilation.

Originally Posted by Long Duck Dong
my penis has been mutilated from a botched circumcision
Quote:
Originally Posted by Long Duck Dong
in a purely medical sense, the removal of the vulva and the clitoris is regarded as a form of mutilation of the human body... and the same can be applied to the removal of the foreskin

mutilation is the unneeded removal of part of the human body.... circumcision for religious reasoning, is marking the human body to set a difference between people.....also using medical logic...circumcision is the removal of the foreskin to mark a person... and in 99% of cases, circumcision falls under the heading of mutilation

the child has no choice in the matter......in the case of my parents, they chose... the circumcision was blotched and I was left scarred... and that has been proven medically... some areas of my penis have NO feeling due to scarring....and the doctor called it MUTILATION

[mikey3000]

This topic is really starting to bore me. Bottom line is I really don't have a preference at all. Cut, uncut, who really cares. What I do object to is dickhead fanatics who feel they have the right to impose their beliefs on others and start insulting those who disagree with their PERSONAL beliefs. It is our job as parents, not yours, to make decisions and set beliefs for our children. And we do as we see fit given the most up to date RELIABLE information availiable. Not, "my ex partner is a nurse, yada, yada yada..." When you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt (with a propper scientific study) that circumcision is harmful, then maybe people will listen to you. Until then your hysterical name calling and accusations have done nothing but hurt your cause. Now I will purposfully direct people to view the WHO's viewpoint and recent HPV transmission studies just because I know there are freaks like you out there making wild and unsubstantiated accusations.

Now I am so done with this stupid and pathetic thread, but be sure of one thing, from now on I'll never pass an oppourtunity to stick up for circumcision as an acceptable health choice for new parents and their sons because getting an STI could be much more damaging to their child and others in the long run. See, I just don't think of the possible sexual benefits to oneself, but the long term health and well being of others as well.

That's why there will NEVER be acceptance of the LGBTQ community, because we are the last to be accepting of others's beliefs, no matter what part of the globe we come from. I am so ashamed of, and yet also glad that said fanatics never reproduced.

[drugstore cowboy]

This topic is really starting to bore me. Bottom line is I really don't have a preference at all. Cut, uncut, who really cares. What I do object to is dickhead fanatics who feel they have the right to impose their beliefs on others and start insulting those who disagree with their PERSONAL beliefs. It is our job as parents, not yours, to make decisions and set beliefs for our children. And we do as we see fit given the most up to date RELIABLE information availiable. Not, "my ex partner is a nurse, yada, yada yada..." When you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt (with a propper scientific study) that circumcision is harmful, then maybe people will listen to you. Until then your hysterical name calling and accusations have done nothing but hurt your cause. Now I will purposfully direct people to view the WHO's viewpoint and recent HPV transmission studies just because I know there are freaks like you out there making wild and unsubstantiated accusations.

Now I am so done with this stupid and pathetic thread, but be sure of one thing, from now on I'll never pass an oppourtunity to stick up for circumcision as an acceptable health choice for new parents and their sons because getting an STI could be much more damaging to their child and others in the long run. See, I just don't think of the possible sexual benefits to oneself, but the long term health and well being of others as well.

That's why there will NEVER be acceptance of the LGBTQ community, because we are the last to be accepting of others's beliefs, no matter what part of the globe we come from. I am so ashamed of, and yet also glad that said fanatics never reproduced.

does anybody recall the creation of an HPV vaccine? why should anyone have 2/3 of their sexual responsiveness and feeling removed, when there is a vaccine to help prevent infection? I agree, the WHO study is bogus. there is another one from New Zealand, which is much larger, and have a different outcome. why, since the 1870’s, has the medical community been working double overtime, to find something which circumcision cures? I realize it is a $250 million+ a year business in the US. what part of “first, do no harm”, are they not getting? damaging or removing the frenulum and inner foreskin, they might as well remove the head, because the frenulum and inner foreskin are much more sensitive. sick stuff, making kids bleed for the parents’ ego and false beliefs. 4 1/2 million years of human evolution is not a mistake. why do we never hear of hygiene problems caused by the female foreskin or the clitoral hood and the tissue known as the labia? it’s the same tissue.
why do we keep seeing the same illogical article posted over and over?

[BiDaveDtown]

This topic is really starting to bore me. Bottom line is I really don't have a preference at all. Cut, uncut, who really cares. What I do object to is dickhead fanatics who feel they have the right to impose their beliefs on others and start insulting those who disagree with their PERSONAL beliefs. It is our job as parents, not yours, to make decisions and set beliefs for our children. And we do as we see fit given the most up to date RELIABLE information availiable. Not, "my ex partner is a nurse, yada, yada yada..." When you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt (with a propper scientific study) that circumcision is harmful, then maybe people will listen to you. Until then your hysterical name calling and accusations have done nothing but hurt your cause. Now I will purposfully direct people to view the WHO's viewpoint and recent HPV transmission studies just because I know there are freaks like you out there making wild and unsubstantiated accusations.

Now I am so done with this stupid and pathetic thread, but be sure of one thing, from now on I'll never pass an oppourtunity to stick up for circumcision as an acceptable health choice for new parents and their sons because getting an STI could be much more damaging to their child and others in the long run. See, I just don't think of the possible sexual benefits to oneself, but the long term health and well being of others as well.

That's why there will NEVER be acceptance of the LGBTQ community, because we are the last to be accepting of others's beliefs, no matter what part of the globe we come from. I am so ashamed of, and yet also glad that said fanatics never reproduced.

We can argue that you're a "dickhead fanatic" when it comes to being pro-mutilation or pro-circumcision for infant boys.

There have been proper scientific studies posted, you've just conveniently ignored them and pretended that they somehow do not count since they do not tell you that infant circumcision is a good thing or that being cut somehow does protect against HIV and other STDs as well as using a condom correctly and consistently, and having safer sex does.

The whole thing you posted about HPV transmission is BS. I know lots of CUT hetero men who have gotten HPV from women and they've passed it along to women. I know cut gay men who have HPV and herpes.

If circumcision is a great protector against HPV, then why is Israel handing out the HPV vaccine to men in a country where 99% of the males are circumcised?

Let’s not forget this was not an independent study. The researchers from the WHO lifted their numbers off a study that was already underway, and had nothing to do with HPV.

Lowering a risk by 25% is not that much of a lowering….HPV is so common now in men. They're saying 44% of males carry the virus. The way to go with this disease is immunization.

The main result of the WHO HPV study is that circumcision does not protect men from acquiring HPV in the first place. Why is this not headlined? Because it does not support circumcision.

Only 12% of the 285 men (34 men) were not circumcised, so the statistical significance of any findings regarding circumcision is low. Only about 29% of the men were infected with HPV - circumcised or not - thats only about TEN of the non-circumcised men.

They only tested every six months, about the same as the median time it took HPV to clear, so it is quite preposterous to claim they had found anything worthwhile about the time of clearance of HPV in the small fraction of the small fraction of the total who were not circumcised and had HPV.

This really is junk science, and junk reporting of it.

And its a skin on skin contact thing. One can get it on the mucus membrane in their mouths during falacio. and mucus membrane is what the glans of the penis is made of too. On circumcized males the warts can be so small that they simply look like regular penile bumps that all men get from time to time. It can be very decieving.

The thing with HPV is that it isn’t just one disease there are dozens of strains of it. There are strains that will only show up on a penis and strains that wont show up on a penis at all, since there isn’t really one test that can be done statistics like this are really unreliable.

HPV is a skin to skin disease, can get HPV using condoms so I can’t imagine that being circumcised or not would have a big impact.

Don’t forget that HIV rates are highest in countries where male genital mutilation is common.

There is at least statistical evidence that circumcision may actually increase the risk of AIDS in gay men.

Of the gay and bisexual men who contracted HIV and then died of AIDS in the U.S., nearly 95% were circumcised. Also, the death rate for intact bisexual and gay men was slightly lower. Draw your own conclusions.

The public health bureaucracy used to spread pro-circumcision propaganda with impunity. There was no one to stop them, because the mainstream media acted as a willing conduit for their false assertions (circumcision, far from preventing penile cancer, actually promoted it in the form of cancer of the circumcision scar, but they conveniently forgot to tell you about that). Now the Internet acts as a check and balance on pro-circ bias and phony research.

Circumcision is just culturally accepted mutilation the logic is basically remove a part of the body to lower the risk of certain diseases but I don’t see why we stop there why not remove a woman’s breasts to reduce the rates of breast cancer. Idiot.Logic.

Many women with a history of breast cancer in their family CHOSE to remove their breasts to prevent the cancer. However, the key word there is choice. I don’t think a new born baby boy gets to chose rather he has his genitals mutilated or not.

I’m sure removing the labia off of newborn girls might reduce a little their chances of getting HPV (which there is a vaccine for these days, btw). If you would not consent to have the labia removed from your newborn girl and you consent to have your son circumcised, you are a hypocrite

Try using condoms and having safer sex, instead of mutilating male babies.

Using condoms correctly and having safer sex actually works at preventing HIV and other STDs includinv HPV, unlike genital mutilation.

I guess you lived under a rock during the early 80s Mikey300, when bisexual and gay men in the United States who were all cut and had been since birth were getting infected with HIV and other STDs and dying off in very large numbers.

If circumcision actually had worked against prevention of infection and transmission of HIV and other STDs we would know it by now. Those bisexual and gay men who were pretty much all cut would not have gotten HIV, died from AIDS, or gotten other STDs.

[Darkside2009]

Mikey,

This is the site for the Canadian Paediatric Society, and their position on routine circumcision :-

http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/fn/fn96-01.htm

You don't need to believe me, see what your own country's medical association had to say about it.

As to the name calling, I'm not going to respond to that, other than to say, if you or anyone else, wishes to think of me in those terms that is your prerogative.

I for my part wish you and your family nothing but health and happiness.

[Katja]

One of the inevitable occurrences of an emotional and controvesial debate, especially one which involves children is the polarisation of a debate, where proponents of each side become more entrenched in their position. This appears to be the case with Sammie19 on one side, and Mikey3000 on the other. This in itself is not necessarily fatal to rational debate, but it can be more infurious to it, and make resolving more difficult, more tortuous and protracted and very often more bitter.

In this instance it may be regrettable but people are not automatons and do have emotions and feelings and so these things are an acceptable price to pay in a world of free speech and the democratic ideal. They are an acceptable price whichever side we are on, for the future well being of an infant child.

[Katja]

rolls eyes......

forming a opinion is easy..... I can say that beating a person senseless in the middle of the street is wrong and a crime and agree with you.....
but I can actually tell you what it feels like, and what was going thru my head at the day, why I did it, and if I was drunk or sober.....
that is personal experience......

you can share your opinion about circumcision and parents and children, but you have no personal experience as a parent with children, so yes, your opinion is still valid that children should have rights....
it doesn't take personal experience to say that its wrong and the children should have rights.....
but I can not ask you what you felt about having your children circumcised cos you lack that personal experience, i would have to ask a parent that has had their children circumcised....

and that is my point.... some things require talking to people with personal experience, vs opinions....
things like flying in a plane, being in the military, working in a bar, running a marathon etc etc...... many people have opinions about them, but only the people that have done them can give me a personal account of what they experienced......

so my point about opinions vs personal experience is very valid, anybody can have a opinion about what is right or what is wrong, but people with personal experiences, have a understanding that people that have not experienced it, do not have......
yet you will see many people without that personal experience, tell people like me, with the personal experience, that we have no idea what we are talking about..... and thats the hilarious part...

so yet again, it doesn't make your opinion wrong or invalid, it simply means I can come to you for a opinion, and go to DD for a detailed account based on personal experience.....

You may roll your eyes all you like, but sometimes it is well to have those who do not have personal experience to view any issue with eyes which see what those too close to an issue cannot. It is often called 'an independent view' but I am the first in my own case to admit that I have long since ceased to be independent in this debate. Yet it was just that independence of thought as a young girl which eventually turned my mind to believe that which I have argued over the last few weeks.

You are right. Personal experience is important, but not always as important as you think it. Having or not having personal experience does not invalidate an opinion, but sometimes personal experience can blind us to the reality just as easily as can a lack of it. In both instances it can make us so stiff and intransigent that we will never change our minds.

I came to support the anti infant circumcision lobby because I had an open-ness of mind and knew little,thought even less and had never taken a position on or been indoctrinated into a view until I began to think and learn about it when I was about 16 years of age. The catalyst was not a debate on circumcision because in England or the rest of the United Kingdon, there is no debate about it among the general population. The catalyst was a 17 year old boy, the first I had slept with who had been circumcised and his question to me, of the difference between sex with a guy who was circumcised and one who was not.

[sammie19]

Again what's with the hypocrisy? You did post about how circumcision of both boys and girls is genital mutilation and how this is your opinion.

You can try to twist your own words around and pretend to claim that "Oh the doctor said it was mutilation! I didn't at all!" but right here you did say how circumcision is genital mutilation, and you did agree that circumcising male infants is genital mutilation.

Isn't this another form of genital mutilation? Metaphorically ripping the balls off someone and his argument?

And rolling of eyes, in the way which both LDD and Cowboy have done is hardly an way of accepting a person's arguments as valid. More an expression of exasperation and contempt for another view and dismissing it as having any credibilty whatever. Not a way to win friends and influence people and it is no way to cool inflamed tempers or passions.

[Long Duck Dong]

You may roll your eyes all you like, but sometimes it is well to have those who do not have personal experience to view any issue with eyes which see what those too close to an issue cannot. It is often called 'an independent view' but I am the first in my own case to admit that I have long since ceased to be independent in this debate. Yet it was just that independence of thought as a young girl which eventually turned my mind to believe that which I have argued over the last few weeks.

You are right. Personal experience is important, but not always as important as you think it. Having or not having personal experience does not invalidate an opinion, but sometimes personal experience can blind us to the reality just as easily as can a lack of it. In both instances it can make us so stiff and intransigent that we will never change our minds.

I came to support the anti infant circumcision lobby because I had an open-ness of mind and knew little,thought even less and had never taken a position on or been indoctrinated into a view until I began to think and learn about it when I was about 16 years of age. The catalyst was not a debate on circumcision because in England or the rest of the United Kingdon, there is no debate about it among the general population. The catalyst was a 17 year old boy, the first I had slept with who had been circumcised and his question to me, of the difference between sex with a guy who was circumcised and one who was not.

there is nothing wrong with being anti circumcision, until you start telling other people that they are wrong because of what you believe.....and thats what so many people are seeing in this thread....

the constant abuse and bashing of people for making a choice that others do not argue with....... and thats why a lot of members avoided this site, cos like so many other threads in the site, dealing with circumcision, its always turned out the same way......

you want to support the rights of the children ? that admirable.... and I can respect that, but parents are sick to death of hearing about how to raise the perfect children and be the perfect parents.... and how they could do better
and yes you can argue that you are only talking about one thing only.... but so are the food experts and the immunisation experts, and the schooling experts and the neo natal experts, and the pre school experts, and the people on tv and in the books and in the websites and in the videos.....

and that is something you would really understand as a parent.... how pissed off you would become, getting told time and time again, how to raise your children according to everybody elses rules and quidelines.....

and we are talking about every day life, not things like foot binding and circumcision.....

[Long Duck Dong]

does anybody recall the creation of an HPV vaccine? why should anyone have 2/3 of their sexual responsiveness and feeling removed, when there is a vaccine to help prevent infection? I agree, the WHO study is bogus. there is another one from New Zealand, which is much larger, and have a different outcome. why, since the 1870’s, has the medical community been working double overtime, to find something which circumcision cures? I realize it is a $250 million+ a year business in the US. what part of “first, do no harm”, are they not getting? damaging or removing the frenulum and inner foreskin, they might as well remove the head, because the frenulum and inner foreskin are much more sensitive. sick stuff, making kids bleed for the parents’ ego and false beliefs. 4 1/2 million years of human evolution is not a mistake. why do we never hear of hygiene problems caused by the female foreskin or the clitoral hood and the tissue known as the labia? it’s the same tissue.
why do we keep seeing the same illogical article posted over and over?

I can tell you now, that there are grave concerns arising in NZ over the vaccine as some females have died after having the vaccine or suffered severe side effects..... and a number of doctors have stopped using it until its retested.......

its not 1 injection its 3 over a number of months and the study is not matching what the doctors are seeing......

[Katja]

there is nothing wrong with being anti circumcision, until you start telling other people that they are wrong because of what you believe.....and thats what so many people are seeing in this thread....

the constant abuse and bashing of people for making a choice that others do not argue with....... and thats why a lot of members avoided this site, cos like so many other threads in the site, dealing with circumcision, its always turned out the same way......

you want to support the rights of the children ? that admirable.... and I can respect that, but parents are sick to death of hearing about how to raise the perfect children and be the perfect parents.... and how they could do better
and yes you can argue that you are only talking about one thing only.... but so are the food experts and the immunisation experts, and the schooling experts and the neo natal experts, and the pre school experts, and the people on tv and in the books and in the websites and in the videos.....

and that is something you would really understand as a parent.... how pissed off you would become, getting told time and time again, how to raise your children according to everybody elses rules and quidelines.....

and we are talking about every day life, not things like foot binding and circumcision.....

Yet another distraction from the debate. This debate is not about raising our children. It is about whether or not we leave them as nature intended until such times as they are able to make any decision about what happens to their body parts for themselves.

The argument is not about how we raise our children to be good citizens. I have my own ideas in how it should be done but only once becoming a parent and am faced with the reality can I truly get any idea about how I would raise children. This argument is not about that so can you stop producing irrelevant posts about something which is not pertinent and concentrate on what is.

I will pick you up on this LDD. How else can I or anyone else change minds about something I believe in unless I tell people what I believe? If we do not do that nothing changes. It really is hard lines if some people get upset about what I or anyone else says, but it is what debate is about. So cease this constant barrage of distraction and irrelevance and face up to the reality of the world.

One final thing. Although not as such an issue of how to raise a child to be a good citizen, once upon a time foot binding was an everyday issue in China for millions of girls, female genital mutilation remains so for millions in (and outside) of Africa, and the circumcision of infant boys for millions around the globe, in particular the United States.These issues were or are everyday life and of immense importance to hundreds of millions.

[Long Duck Dong]

Your girlfriend Duckies Darling is NOT a medical professional and she's pro circumcision, so she's going to claim that it's perfectly fine and normal and simply has to be done since she thought her kids would be "freaks in the locker room".

I actually have seen circumcisions preformed and so has my ex partner and I posted about OUR personal experiences which you're pretending don't matter or are not nearly as valid as your girlfriend's.

Again what's with the hypocrisy? You did post about how circumcision of both boys and girls is genital mutilation and how this is your opinion.

You can try to twist your own words around and pretend to claim that "Oh the doctor said it was mutilation! I didn't at all!" but right here you did say how circumcision is genital mutilation, and you did agree that circumcising male infants is genital mutilation.

you are not a medical expert either.... and sure you have personal experiences watching.... but thats watching..... can you talk from the personal experience of being circumcised as a adult, or being a circumcised male ????

as for DD, her opinion is her opinion, I do not have to agree with her opinion... but, its like your opinion, nobody has to agree with your opinion either.... or you.... tho they were welcome to ignore you as i believe many people have already....

as for twisting my words, i know what I wrote,... and I have explained it... and its there in black and white, " the doctor called it mutilation " the same way you are telling people they are mutilated...
and I said by medical logic... in the same way i have said in this thread, " by defination, all surgeries harm and damage the human body "...

if I wanted to say that circumcision is wrong and mutilation, I would be acting like your identical twin..... cos you are the one telling people that they are mutilating their children, constantly.......

[Long Duck Dong]

Yet another distraction from the debate. This debate is not about raising our children. It is about whether or not we leave them as nature intended until such times as they are able to make any decision about what happens to their body parts for themselves.

The argument is not about how we raise our children to be good citizens. I have my own ideas in how it should be done but only once becoming a parent and am faced with the reality can I truly get any idea about how I would raise children. This argument is not about that so can you stop producing irrelevant posts about something which is not pertinent and concentrate on what is.

I will pick you up on this LDD. How else can I or anyone else change minds about something I believe in unless I tell people what I believe? If we do not do that nothing changes. It really is hard lines if some people get upset about what I or anyone else says, but it is what debate is about. So cease this constant barrage of distraction and irrelevance and face up to the reality of the world.

One final thing. Although not as such an issue of how to raise a child to be a good citizen, once upon a time foot binding was an everyday issue in China for millions of girls, female genital mutilation remains so for millions in (and outside) of Africa, and the circumcision of infant boys for millions around the globe, in particular the United States.These issues were or are everyday life and of immense importance to hundreds of millions.

tell people what you believe by all means, but respect their right to disagree..... cos thats the same thing you would like people to do with you....

circumcision is a aspect of raising children, its one of many choices a parent faces, breast feed or not, circumcise or not, natural meds or artificial meds, medical surgery or not....... and thats stuff that parents deal with right from the moment the child is born and some times before they are born....
so its got nothing to do with raising children to be good citizens, but the right of the parent to raise their children as best they can, the way they see fit, without people constantly sitting in judgement of them for not being perfect parents

I have been talking about differing aspects and issues arising around children and the rights of children and how they would apply in one respect, and be ignored in the next respect..... and watching the way that people get edgy and worked up about that..... and how its irrelevant, when in fact its aspects of childrens rights and surgeries, and the thread is about banning circumcision which is a surgery on children and the rights of choice for children.... so,... who has the open mind and who is blind to any other options and opinions

[tenni]

I think that if this bylaw passes and stands up to court challenges that it will alter matters significantly.

It is not about merely having an opinion and respecting other people's opinions. This is more along the lines about abortion and who has the right to determine what happens to a person's body imo. The argument on that issue is also controversial and illustrates the confusion on rights.

If there is no immediate danger to the health/survival of the child, the parent may not have the legal right to alter/mutilate the child's body. Despite some North Americans' getting upset, circumcision meets the definition of mutilation of a body. What has not happened in North America is a realistic understanding about a social custom versus newer information on how this mutilation impacts an infant's future.

I think that I have previously posted how this has played out in my country so far. Even when the child's health/survival is at immediate risk, the courts are asked to intervene when a parent refuses medical treatment or insist on prolonging life when the medical authorities differ from the parents. I don't think that the Supreme Court of my country and maybe your country have made a final decision on this question over who has the right to decide. I think that they have made individual decisions on when a parent refuses medical help to save the child though but only on a case by case situation. The courts were dealing with the decisions when medical authorities wanted not to prolong the life with a procedure deemed questionable but parents wanted it but didn't make a decision yet. The child was terminal in the medical authorities view. (not sure as it was a tricky court challenge) Canada has made a decision on abortion and there are no laws on abortion. It is seen as a decision to be made between the "individual" and the medical authorities. If medical authorities state that circumcision on infants is not appropriate, I wonder why Canada has circumcision happening then? Strange? Maybe the medical boards have not stated it in a way that seems strong enough. I wonder if this circumcision was taken to court what would happen? Parental rights are not able to over ride all decisions about a child's survival or body.

I think that rather than discuss opinions on the merits of circumcision, it may be more effective to discuss how your society interprets the rights of the individual to make decisions about their body.

[jamieknyc]

if this law is passed, there isn't a chance in the world that it will stand up in court.

[tenni]

Why do you write that Jamie? What decisions have your courts made on the rights as to who makes decisions about a child parents versus the medical authorities?

QUOTE=jamieknyc;201378]if this law is passed, there isn't a chance in the world that it will stand up in court.[/QUOTE]

[DuckiesDarling]

if this law is passed, there isn't a chance in the world that it will stand up in court.

Bingo. Jamie, as a lawyer, I am sure you are more qualified than anyone on this forum to explain how US law works and all the other ramifications that people seem to disregard while pushing for what THEY think is right.