Foreskin Pride Parade in Vancouver ;)

[tenni]

A Vancouver group is leading the city’s first “foreskin pride” march in an attempt to “undo thousands of years of prejudice and persecution.”

“We’re not an anti-circumsion movement,” said Glen Callender, founder of the Canadian Foreskin Awareness Project. “What we’re against is circumcision being forced on people without their consent.”

The group plans to protest outside a prominent Vancouver circumcision clinic, to march through Downtown Vancouver — pants optional — and to rally on the steps of the Vancouver Art Gallery.

Over the past two years, Mr. Callender has led pants-free “foreskin pride” contingents at gay events across North America, but it was only earlier this month that the group held its first dedicated event in Victoria.

The 38-year-old performance artist said it is not an accident the pro-foreskin movement found its feet in GLBT circles. “Queer men are ahead of heterosexual men on the issue, because they interact with penises other than their own — so it’s not difficult for a queer man to quickly come to the conclusion that the men with foreskin have more fun,” he said

Do guys with foreskin have more fun?

Is it all in the eye (pee slit) of the b....holder of the shaft?

This thread is brought to you by tongueincheek.ca :three::wiggle2:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/08/02/foreskin-pride-movement-set-to-protest-vancouver-circumcision-clinic/

7449

[ExSailor]

Yes men who are intact with a foreskin do get more sexual pleasure and do have more fun! The first time I saw a penis with a foreskin I was envious and thought to myself "So that's what a dick is supposed to look like! Shit I've had my penis butchered!" Yes male circumcision is genital mutilation. A circumcision was performed on me when I was an infant and unable to consent, as seems to be the case with most American men who are my age. Had I had a choice, I would have remained intact and kept my foreskin. I think that it would be better if parents would allow their male children to remain uncircumcised until they are able to choose for themselves if they want to remain intact or not. I wish I was not cut though and if I had the choice I would have wanted to keep my foreskin. I remember the first time I had sex with a man that has a foreskin I was envious since he got pleasure from his foreskin and penis in ways that I did not. His penis was also a lot more sensitive than mine and I could do things like lick inside the foreskin or roll it back and forth across his cock head and this pleasured him immensely. I do not have a foreskin so I can't get any pleasure like that. When I was 19 I had sex with a Latino man who was not cut and he fucked me up the ass and it did not hurt and was pleasurable. I had gotten fucked by cut men before that and I found a cut penis to be dry and very painful when getting ass fucked-even with lube; but a cock with a foreskin feels so much better and is A LOT more pleasurable than a cut dick is.

[dafydd]

yeah right on! ii like this guy. tha fact that he even has to form a group in response to an 'anti-foreskin' mentality is heinous. leave mens private bits alone. the foreskin is there for many reasons, and unless it acts up, should be celebrated and indulged. interesting quote at end.... sort of agree about seeing other uncurcumised penises is good for circumcised guys, but not sure if that will convince someone theyre missing out. also hes sounds like hes assuming that queer men are ahead because theyre all uncurcumised......? if not he seems to be saying that circumcised queer men find it a good thing to realise what theyre missing out on. unforunately confusing and careless junket for a such a clear-cut (ahem!) campaign. if i was circumcised that quote might have alienated me. thanks tenni for post! :)

[Katja]

Do guys with foreskin have more fun?



They do when with me. There is so much more one is able to do with a man who still has his foreskin than with a man who has had it removed.:)

[dafydd]

They do when with me. There is so much more one is able to do with a man who still has his foreskin than with a man who has had it removed.:) well i wouldnt go as far to say that.... its not like missing a thumb. point is nobody should be putting a kinfe to a baby boy's penis (do they even use anaesthesia?) without good medical cause. katja, maybe youve been with the likes of these guys: (see link) lol ;) ........ http://www.puppetryofthepenis.com/

[Katja]

well i wouldnt go as far to say that.... its not like missing a thumb. point is nobody should be putting a kinfe to a baby boy's penis (do they even use anaesthesia?) without good medical cause. katja, maybe youve been with the likes of these guys: (see link) lol ;) ........ http://www.puppetryofthepenis.com/ Where is your imagination man? It is quite remarkable the joy one can bring to an uncircumcised man with tongue or finger under foreskin or a little imaginative use of fingernail, shaving brush, flavoured lubricant, nail brush, file or emery board and these are merely a few of our options... the reaction is far greater in the uncircumcised than their surgically modified peers.:bigrin: Not to mention a more full feeling during intercourse than occurs with a circumcised man of comparable penile size and the difference in the manner of the act.:)

[dafydd]

Where is your imagination man? It is quite remarkable the joy one can bring to an uncircumcised man with tongue or finger under foreskin or a little imaginative use of fingernail, shaving brush, flavoured lubricant, nail brush, file or emery board and these are merely a few of our options... the reaction is far greater in the uncircumcised than their surgically modified peers.:bigrin: Not to mention a more full feeling during intercourse than occurs with a circumcised man of comparable penile size and the difference in the manner of the act.:)

As the owner of a foreskin i can say that none of the above sounds particularly kind to a sensitive head. ouch! a fingernail? a penis with a papercut wiould keep me out of action for weeks. my foreskin's existance alone is good enuf without the precision play. it was saved from its fate - im from jewish stock and was duly marked for the slash. was it simply divine intervention that moved father to stop the amputation?; or something as unsettling to him as his baby boy's wide eyes following the silver flash of the annointed scalpol on the ceiling like a star? Poetic maybe but more realistic than his sudden realisation of my foreskin's potential to max out genital pleasure in adulthood by increased interoperability with sharp-edged household accouterments. i cant see the arguments against circumcision being be won by appealing to every parents wish to see their children develop into adults with rich and pleasurable sex lives. I doubt undecided parents would relish exploring the point arguments against circumcision when it requires a mental image of their now sexually active son's man-sized, skin-loose, shaft-supple, friction-free, licked and lubed, foreskin-fancy phallus, breaking the limits of ejaculatory enhancing tantra in anal, oral, or sadomasochistic play.
Still, some parents will do anything to ensure the best for their children's future happiness and the happiness too of their future cocksucker-in-laws. ;)

[ncfriendforyou]

Yes men who are intact with a foreskin do get more sexual pleasure and do have more fun! The first time I saw a penis with a foreskin I was envious and thought to myself "So that's what a dick is supposed to look like! Shit I've had my penis butchered!" Yes male circumcision is genital mutilation. A circumcision was performed on me when I was an infant and unable to consent, as seems to be the case with most American men who are my age. Had I had a choice, I would have remained intact and kept my foreskin. I think that it would be better if parents would allow their male children to remain uncircumcised until they are able to choose for themselves if they want to remain intact or not. I wish I was not cut though and if I had the choice I would have wanted to keep my foreskin. I remember the first time I had sex with a man that has a foreskin I was envious since he got pleasure from his foreskin and penis in ways that I did not. His penis was also a lot more sensitive than mine and I could do things like lick inside the foreskin or roll it back and forth across his cock head and this pleasured him immensely. I do not have a foreskin so I can't get any pleasure like that. When I was 19 I had sex with a Latino man who was not cut and he fucked me up the ass and it did not hurt and was pleasurable. I had gotten fucked by cut men before that and I found a cut penis to be dry and very painful when getting ass fucked-even with lube; but a cock with a foreskin feels so much better and is A LOT more pleasurable than a cut dick is.

Have you thought about foreskin restoration? I am restoring now and already seeing (and feeling!) results after a couple of months. Pm me or google NORM if you want to know more...Peace

[darkeyes]

Have you thought about foreskin restoration? I am restoring now and already seeing (and feeling!) results after a couple of months. Pm me or google NORM if you want to know more...Peace
Channel4 in the UK did a programme on that 3 or 4 years ago... watching guys with anvils (ok anvils is a sight exaggeration but not much) and huge weights hanging from their willies looked dead unpleasant.. even funny...poor sods that they ever needed to... but for all that the fact that is it is pretty successful..restored willie looks the part...but it can only be a partial restoration cos of the loss of thousands of nerves which circumcision inflicts.. most of the guys interviewed reckoned it made their sex lives better but then some who have been snipped in adulthood think it made theirs better or had no effect.. so the jury is still out..

[Brian]

I don't understand these anti-circumcision groups at all. Saying, "we’re against circumcision being forced on people without their consent" is a bit like saying elementary school is problematic because it is being forced on people without their consent. It shows a lack of quality reasoning. They try too hard. If they just stuck to something like "Circumcision may not be as medically beneficial as once thought", then I think they might gain traction. It is a good example of a cause getting emotional and too far ahead of the facts and losing the argument as a result.

I personally like 'em cut - clean and sexy and ready for oral sex at any time.

- Drew :paw:

[darkeyes]

I don't understand these anti-circumcision groups at all. Saying, "we’re against circumcision being forced on people without their consent" is a bit like saying elementary school is problematic because it is being forced on people without their consent. It shows a lack of quality reasoning. They try too hard. If they just stuck to something like "Circumcision may not be as medically beneficial as once thought", then I think they might gain traction. It is a good example of a cause getting emotional and too far ahead of the facts and losing the argument as a result.

I personally like 'em cut - clean and sexy and ready for oral sex at any time.

- Drew :paw:
Very pleased forya.. don't mind how u prefer ur cock... long as whoever owns the cock has consented to his foreskin being whipped off or left on for that matter... I don't understand how peeps can mutilate little boys.. and I reckon peeps mutilating little boys who have no say whatever in their mutilation is summat to get emotional about.. am sure u would be delighted if a few big heavies stormed in and whipped off ur goolies without u having the right to say a word about it.. there is only one argument... and that is that the bits of a child belong to the child not his parents or Rabbi or Imam and unless there is a good immediate medical reason, those bits are his to decide to lose or keep when he is old enough and sufficiently well informed to decide for himself. Or are you saying that the bits of a child are not his? Because that is exactly what you are saying...

What are those who are pro circumcision afraid of? Free will that's what, and the fact that most boys when they become men will turn round to mum and dad and Rabbi and Imam and tell them where to stick their foreskin clippers...

[Brian]

darkeyes,

Your argument contains the same flaw I have already identified... if all you got is a consent issue then there is no issue. Children can't consent, so adults in custody (usually parents) have the role of consenting for them - making the decision to the best of their abilities. The argument is lost as soon as you try to suggest that parents should not have the authority to make decisions for, and consent on behalf of, their children.

And this, "What are those who are pro circumcision afraid of? Free will that's what", is just an emotional hyperbolic extension of the same flawed argument above. There is still some medical justification for circumcision. It does eliminate those pesky under-the-foreskin infections, retraction issues and so on. I freely admit that the benefits *may* not outweigh the cost - the jury is still out on that - there are doctors on both sides to make the arguments. But for you to suggest that parents and doctors who are pro-circumcision are doing so out of a fear of free will is absurd.

For the life of me I do not understand the emotionalism on the anti-circumcision side. I just don't get it. But the emotionalism and the poor quality arguments make me suspicious and turn me away from the anti-circumcision side.

- Drew :paw:

[Brian]

Your analogy between male genital mutilation and elementary school shows how little you understand things. Elementary school is education that's harmless, while circumcision is mutilation of the genitals that is not needed anymore than female circumcision is, and in the case of male genital mutilation the infant can't consent to it. I’ve noticed that people will make up ANY excuse to mutilate their son’s or boy's genitals including vanity and even worse religious dogma. Male genital mutilation is so painful to an infant that they pass out from the pain Most people already know that circumcision has no medical benefit, most of the world's men are not cut and even in the United States the rate of infant circumcision is decreasing and it's like this in Canada too. As someone who has sucked way more dick than you will I've been with, well a lot of men and circumcision of the penis is a genital mutilation men who are cut do not have a foreskin and do not get to experience the pleasure of having a foreskin and the various pleasurable things you can do with it. Also let's stop the total myth that a cut penis is somehow "clean" while a penis that's not cut is "not clean". Cleaning a foreskin is easy you just pull it back while you take a daily shower or bath and wash it like you would any other body part. Also I have been with men who are cut who had dicks that were not clean and smelled nasty, and I felt bad for them since they didn't have a foreskin.

I'm not looking for an argument on the issue, because I find the emotionalism on the anti-circumcision side just takes all the fun out of a good argument. But your post is full of inaccuracies, exaggerations and flawed reasoning, and I can't help but identify just a few.

1: The elementary school analogy IS fair game when people make the really bad argument: "we’re against circumcision being forced on people without their consent". We are talking about children - stop bringing up the consent issue. Parents not only have the right to consent for their children but the DUTY to do so. This is well-established law and ethical principle. You immediately lose the argument as soon as you try go down that path. Stop vilifying parents and doctors ("mutiliation") who are simply trying to do the best for their children using past and present medical science.

2: You say, "As someone who has sucked way more dick than you will." How do you know how much dick I have sucked? Again, the anti-circumcision side loses me completely when their emotionalism causes them to imagine facts that have not yet been established.

3: You say, "Also let's stop the total myth that a cut penis is somehow "clean" while a penis that's not cut is "not clean". Cleaning a foreskin is easy you just pull it back..." You are making the argument that an uncut penis CAN be as clean as a cut penis, not that it IS. A cut penis is clean (more or less) all the time. An uncut penis is clean after it has been cleaned. You basically admit this. It isn't a myth. It is fact. Dick cheese is gross.

And I won't bother debunking the rest. Like I said I find the topic tedious - a suspension of reason in favour of emotion, that does nothing for me. You (and others) can have the last word. I'll read it and will seriously consider and weigh your arguments but I probably won't reply further.

Peace to all.

- Drew :paw:

[darkeyes]

darkeyes,

Your argument contains the same flaw I have already identified... if all you got is a consent issue then there is no issue. Children can't consent, so adults in custody (usually parents) have the role of consenting for them - making the decision to the best of their abilities. The argument is lost as soon as you try to suggest that parents should not have the authority to make decisions for, and consent on behalf of, their children.

And this, "What are those who are pro circumcision afraid of? Free will that's what", is just an emotional hyperbolic extension of the same flawed argument above. There is still some medical justification for circumcision. It does eliminate those pesky under-the-foreskin infections, retraction issues and so on. I freely admit that the benefits *may* not outweigh the cost - the jury is still out on that - there are doctors on both sides to make the arguments. But for you to suggest that parents and doctors who are pro-circumcision are doing so out of a fear of free will is absurd.

For the life of me I do not understand the emotionalism on the anti-circumcision side. I just don't get it. But the emotionalism and the poor quality arguments make me suspicious and turn me away from the anti-circumcision side.

- Drew :paw:
Drew I fail to understand your argument... of course I get emotional about it for it is an emotional subject.. but there is also the right of child to grow healthily and intact.. in the UK a parent had been legally stopped from having healthy breast tissue of her child removed because she felt it was preventative and in her child's interest..and quite right too.. this is relevant to me because I have been a victim of breast cancer and may yet be again. An infant cannot consent you are quite right, and a young child is insufficiently mature to properly make many decision for himself and parents do what they can and make decision for that child as best they are able.. but having body parts removed is not something a parent should have the right to make a decision on. That is for the child to make when he is mature enough and well informed enough to do so... we are not custodians of our children (setting aside legal terminology.. they are not prisoners neither do we own them), but their guardians and protectors. It is not for us to impose our will on our children athough many see that very differently...we prepare and protect the as best we can, but the great decisions of their lives they will make for themselves.. and as far as I can see, one of the greatest decisions a child can make is whether or not, for religious medical or any other reason he (or she) has ownership of his (or her body) and only he (or she) has a right to decide whether that body is left intact or not unless before he (or she) reaches maturity, the body part in question has a valid and immediate medical reason to be removed...

...and let me say, across the world, newly circumcised boys die and are maimed in other ways as a result of botched circumcision and ofte for no explainable reason.. these may be few and far between but it happens.. all surgical procedures have an element risk... we choose for ourselves for the most part whether or not to undergo surgery, but normally it is for pressing medical need that parents are allowed to opt for surgery... and that is as it should be.. infant or child circumcision, for religious or cultural reasons is not pressing medical need....

It is a contemptuous arrogance on your part to tell me that because I become emotional on this issue I have lost the argument. There is sound reasoning and because you don't agree does not mean I have lost the argument.. on the contrary, in most other western countries it is your arguments which have lost the day. There is as much emotion on the side of the pro circumcisers as ever exists on my side of the argument, indeed I would say more because it is a defensive argument of a morally indefensible position (in my opinion).

[Brian]

Drew... It is a contemptuous arrogance on your part...

I apologize if I came across as contemptuous or arrogant. But I stand by my observation that the anti-circumcision forces are plagued by emotionalism. I see it here and elsewhere. Using words like "non-consensual genital mutilation of children" is inaccurate, unfair, overly-emotional and not based in the principle of thoughtful reasoning. These are parents and doctors simply using current medical science to make the best (best to their abilities) medical decisions for their children. To call that 'mutilation against the will of the child' is anti-rational emotionalism. It is the job of parents (under the recommendation of doctors) to make medical decisions for the child. This includes amputation, opening a hymen, circumcision, removal of moles and warts - any procedure which they (doctors and parents) judge to the best of their abilities to be in the interests of the child. To call these "mutilations" is hyperbolic and not right.

I'm giving away free advice here... If people really want to stop circumcision stick to established science and solid thoughtful reasoning. Say something like, "There are questions as to whether the medical benefits for circumcision outweigh the medical benefits against. There are differences of opinion among doctors. Parents and doctors should probably proceed with caution."

Nothing convinces me of the need to stand up for circumcision more than reading a typical post by an anti-circumcision proponent, which I find tend to be laced with anti-factual emotionalism.

That is my 2 cents. Okay, that is my last post today on the topic, really. ;) I respect you folks on the other side of the argument and I promise I will read and consider your counterpoints.

- Drew :paw:

[nitrog100]

Just throwing it out there, but parents aren't allowed to subject their children to elective surgery without their child's consent. Parents have to approve if a child wants medically unnecessary plastic surgery, but they can't make the kid get plastic surgery if they don't want to. For some reason, circumcision has never been subject to this same standard. There are possible medical benefits, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with a foreskin right off the bat.

[BiDaveDtown]

Many people think circumcision removes nothing more than a little extra skin. However, circumcision removes several critical components of male sexual anatomy. This list enumerates everything currently known to be physically lost after circumcision. Alongside these physical losses, it is important to remember that whenever a child is circumcised, by far the greatest loss is his choice to make decisions about his own body and his own sex life when he becomes an adult. The Foreskin which comprises up to 50% (sometimes more) of the mobile skin system of the penis. If unfolded and spread out flat the average adult foreskin would measure about 15 square inches( the size of a 3x5 inch index card). This highly specialised tissue normally covers the glans and protects it from abrasion, drying, callusing(keratinisation), and contaminants of all kinds.The effect of glans keratinisation has never been studied. [1. M. M. Lander, "The Human Prepuce," in G. C. Denniston and M. F. Milos, eds., Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy (New York: Plenum Press, 1997), 79-81. 2. M. Davenport, "Problems with the Penis and Prepuce: Natural History of the Foreskin," British Medical Journal 312 (1996): 299-301.] The Frenar Ridged Band, the primary erogenous zone of the male body. Loss of this delicate belt of densely innervated, sexually responsive tissue reduces the fullness and intensity of sexual response. [Taylor, J. R. et al., "The Prepuce: Specialized Mucosa of the Penis and Its Loss to Circumcision," British Journal of Urology 77 (1996): 291-295.] The Foreskin's 'Gliding Action' - the hallmark mechanical feature of the normal natural, intact penis. This non-abrasive gliding of the penis in and out of itself within the vagina facilitates smooth , comfortable, pleasurable intercourse for both partners. Without this gliding action, the corona of the circumcised penis can function as a oneway valve, scraping vaginal lubricants out into the drying air and making artificial lubricants essential for pleasurable intercourse. [P. M. Fleiss, MD, MPH, "The Case Against Circumcision," Mothering: The Magazine of Natural Family Living (Winter 1997): 36-45.] Nerve Endings Circumcision removes the most important sensory component of the foreskin - thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner's corpuscles. Also lost are branches of the dorsal nerve, and between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types. Together these detect subtle changes in motion and temperature, as well as fine gradations in texture. [1. R. K. Winkelmann, "The Erogenous Zones: Their Nerve Supply and Its Significance," Proceedings of the Staff Meetings of the Mayo Clinic 34 (1959): 39-47. 2. R. K. Winkelmann, "The Cutaneous Innervation of Human Newborn Prepuce," Journal of Investigative Dermatology 26 (1956): 53-67.] The Frenulum The highly erogenous V-shaped web-like tethering structure on the underside of the glans; frequently amputated along with the foreskin, or severed, either of which destroys its function and potential for pleasure. [1. Cold, C, Taylor, J, "The Prepuce," BJU International 83, Suppl. 1, (1999): 34-44. 2. Kaplan, G.W., "Complications of Circumcision," Urologic Clinics of North America 10, 1983.]

[BiDaveDtown]

Muscle Sheath Circumcision removes approximately half of the temperature-sensitive smooth muscle sheath which lies between the outer layer of skin and the corpus cavernosa. This is called the dartos fascia. [Netter, F.H., "Atlas of Human Anatomy," Second Edition (Novartis, 1997): Plates 234, 329, 338, 354, 355.] The Immunological Defense System of the soft mucosa. This produces both plasma cells that secrete immunoglobulin antibodies and antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as the pathogen-killing enzyme lysozyme. [1. A. Ahmed and A. W. Jones, "Apocrine Cystadenoma: A Report of Two Cases Occurring on the Prepuce," British Journal of Dermatology 81 (1969): 899-901. 2. P. J. Flower et al., "An Immunopathologic Study of the Bovine Prepuce," Veterinary Pathology 20 (1983):189-202.] Lymphatic Vessels the loss of which reduces the lymph flow within that part of the body's immune system. [Netter, F.H., "Atlas of Human Anatomy," Second Edition (Novartis, 1997): plate 379.] Oestrogen Receptors The presence of estrogen receptors within the foreskin has only recently been discovered. Their purpose is not yet understood and needs further study. [R. Hausmann et al., "The Forensic Value of the Immunohistochemical Detection of Oestrogen Receptors in Vaginal Epithelium," International Journal of Legal Medicine 109 (1996): 10-30.] The Apocrine Glands of the inner foreskin, which produce pheremones -nature's powerful, silent, invisible behavioural signals to potential sexual partners. The effect of their absence on human sexuality has never been studied. [A. Ahmed and A. W. Jones, "Apocrine Cystadenoma: A Report of Two Cases Occurring on the Prepuce," British Journal of Dermatology 81 (1969): 899-901.] Sebaceous Glands which lubricate and moisturise the foreskin and glans, normally a protected and internal organ-like the tongue or vagina. Not all men have sebaceous glands on their inner foreskin. [A. B. Hyman and M. H. Brownstein, "Tyson's Glands: Ectopic Sebaceous Glands and Papillomatosis Penis," Archives of Dermatology 99 (1969): 31-37.] Langerhans Cells Specialised epithelial Langerhans cells, a first line component of the body's immune system in a whole penis. [G. N. Weiss et al., "The Distribution and Density of Langerhans Cells in the Human Prepuce: Site of a Diminished Immune Response?" Israel Journal of Medical Sciences 29 (1993): 42-43.]

[BiDaveDtown]

Colouration The natural coloration of the glans and inner foreskin (usually hidden and only visible to others when sexually aroused) is considerably more intense than the permanently exposed and keratinized coloration of a circumcised penis. The socio-biological function of this visual stimulus has never been studied. The glans ranges from pink to red to dark purple among intact men of Northern European ancestry, and from pinkish to mahagony to dark brown among intact men of African and Asian descent. If circumcision is performed on an infant or young boy, the connective tissue which protectively fuses the foreskin and glans together is ripped apart. This leaves the glans raw and subject to infection, scarring, pitting, shrinkage, and eventual discoloration. Over a period of years the glans becomes keratinized, adding additional layers of tissue in order to adequately protect itself, which further contributes to discoloration. [P. M. Fleiss, MD, MPH, "The Case Against Circumcision," Mothering: The Magazine of Natural Family Living (Winter 1997): 36-45.] Penis Size Some of the penis length and circumference because its double-layered wrapping of loose and usually overhanging foreskin is now missing, making the circumcised penis truncated and thinner than it would have been if left intact. An Australian survey in 1995 showed circumcised men to have erect penises an average of 8mm shorter than intact men. [1. R. D. Talarico and J. E. Jasaitis, "Concealed Penis: A Complication of Neonatal Circumcision," Journal of Urology 110 (1973): 732-733. 2. Richters J, Gerofi J, Donovan B. Why do condoms break or slip off in use? An exploratory study. Int J STD AIDS. 1995; 6(1):11-8. ] Blood Vessels Several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery are removed in circumcision. This loss of the rich vascularity interrupts normal flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, damaging the the natural function of the penis and altering its development. [1. H. C. Bazett et al., "Depth, Distribution and Probable Identification in the Prepuce of Sensory End-Organs Concerned in Sensations of Temperature and Touch; Thermometric Conductivity," Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry 27 (1932): 489-517.� 2. Netter, F.H., "Atlas of Human Anatomy," Second Edition (Novartis, 1997): plates 238, 239.] Dorsal Nerves The terminal branch of the pudendal nerve connects to the skin of the penis, the prepuce, the corpora cavernosa, and the glans. Destruction of these nerves is a rare but devastating complication of circumcision. If cut during circumcision, the top two-thirds of the penis will be almost completely without sensation. [1. Agur, A.M.R. ed., "Grant's Atlas of Anatomy," Ninth Edition (Williams and Wilkins, 1991): 188-190. 2. Netter, F.H., "Atlas of Human Anatomy," Second Edition (Novartis, 1997): plate 380, 387.] Complications Every year boys lose their entire penises from circumcision accidents and infection. They are then "sexually reassigned" by castration and "transgender surgery" and expected to live their lives as "females". [1. J. P. Gearhart and J. A. Rock, "Total Ablation of the Penis after Circumcision with Electrocautery: A Method of Management and Long-Term Followup," Journal of Urology 142 (1989):799-801. 2. M. Diamond and H. K. Sigmundson, "Sex Reassignment at Birth: Long-Term Review and Clinical Implications," Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 151 (1997): 298-304.] Death Every year many boys lose their lives from the complications of circumcision, a fact the billion-dollar-a-year circumcision industry in the U.S. routinely obscures and ignores. [1. G. W. Kaplan, "Complications of Circumcision," Urologic Clinics of North America 10 (1983): 543-549. 2. R. S. Thompson, "Routine Circumcision in the Newborn: An Opposing View," Journal of Family Practice 31 (1990): 189-196.]

[IanBorthwick]

I'm not looking for an argument on the issue, because I find the emotionalism on the anti-circumcision side just takes all the fun out of a good argument. But your post is full of inaccuracies, exaggerations and flawed reasoning, and I can't help but identify just a few.

Ok Drew, had LOADS of props for you until this. Now you're making a HUGE case against yourself here.


1: The elementary school analogy IS fair game when people make the really bad argument: "we’re against circumcision being forced on people without their consent". We are talking about children - stop bringing up the consent issue. Parents not only have the right to consent for their children but the DUTY to do so. This is well-established law and ethical principle. You immediately lose the argument as soon as you try go down that path. Stop vilifying parents and doctors ("mutiliation") who are simply trying to do the best for their children using past and present medical science.

Now, allow me to explain how your bad argument for a bad argument IS a bad argument.

First, the "Do no Harm" test. Is a school causing harm? No, in fact it's preparing a child. Is a Circumcision doing harm? Hell yes! On top of the fact it's done without anesthetic, that it's done without medical cause or rationale, and that boys fricking DIE from it, your argument is patently ridiculous. Your parental consent demand is hyperbolic at BEST, since parents who murder their own children obviously have their OWN consent. Naturally, right? So in some cases it's necessary to protect a child from a parent's stupidity. Life changing decisions in all the civilized countries of the world demand consent or an age in which a person can understand life changing events before they continue...but not in this one. GO back to the drawing board on that one, Drew, your logic follows no logic.

Second comes the "informed" test: The excuse of "doing their best for children" when they are ill informed and pressured is also an argument without merit, one disposing of the responsibility of education. It's the same excuse that allows parents to trap a child in with their 3 pack a day habit in house and car and wonder why the child carries an emergency inhaler 24/7 and cannot play sports...all because the information is there but they don't wish to acknowledge it.



2: You say, "As someone who has sucked way more dick than you will." How do you know how much dick I have sucked? Again, the anti-circumcision side loses me completely when their emotionalism causes them to imagine facts that have not yet been established.

3: You say, "Also let's stop the total myth that a cut penis is somehow "clean" while a penis that's not cut is "not clean". Cleaning a foreskin is easy you just pull it back..." You are making the argument that an uncut penis CAN be as clean as a cut penis, not that it IS. A cut penis is clean (more or less) all the time. An uncut penis is clean after it has been cleaned. You basically admit this. It isn't a myth. It is fact. Dick cheese is gross.

And the descent into opinion is complete. YOUR opinion now trumps anyone else's, rather than follow your preference this statement indicates where your esthetic preference lies and you're fine with it being impressed on the male population. However, my friend, a penis that is circumcised does suffer more infections more readily and they show less due to the fact the area can hide subcutaneous infections, not to mention the fact that without the foreskin men suffer more bladder infections because you have removed a protective device that nature intended it to have.The "Dick Cheese" you speak of is Smegma, a secretion from a gland that is sliced away that creates a protective barrier just as with the Clitoris but in larger quantity. You don't like, wash cloths are a perfect solution. Or pick a partner that is sliced. But do not be repulsed by something in a MAN that you find on a WOMAN just because you are biased. It's ridiculous to listen to and shows YOUR emotion.



And I won't bother debunking the rest. Like I said I find the topic tedious - a suspension of reason in favour of emotion, that does nothing for me. You (and others) can have the last word. I'll read it and will seriously consider and weigh your arguments but I probably won't reply further.

Peace to all.

- Drew :paw:

Now so far you've debunked nothing, as the part 2 to your response is speculation and a pissing match between yourself and whomever you're arguing with. Don't argue someones opinion and call your opinion fact. But once again, I will leave you with words of wisdom about circumcision from someone wiser than myself in it...pay attention to Neurogenic Shock, amputation, psychological issues, PTSD, ED. Mentioning all these things is not "emotional decision making". Ignoring the facts IS because that's how we allow ourselves a means to rationalize any bad behavior.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxhJXw0I4EA&feature=plcp

[RobUK]

Just to add (yet another) viewpoint to muddy the water of the whole cut/uncut debate...

I'm in a wheelchair, so I sometimes find myself without access to a suitably adapted shower. This often happens when travelling, as some areas don't even have reliable running water for ANY shower, let alone functioning accessible showers. Times like that, I often think I'd prefer to be circumcised (one less hygiene issue to worry about!), but I'm not from a Jewish or Muslim background, and I don't have any serious medical reason to be circumcised, so I'd have to find a private clinic to get it done.

Finding such a clinic is hard. As many web-users are American or Canadian, and many were just circumcised as a matter of routine, many of these circumcised men resent them having been circumcised without their personal consent and, as a result, the cut/uncut debate is a rather polemical issue. Whenever I've tried to get real information in a web forum, I'm bombarded with messages begging me to reconsider getting cut, or some refuting supposed medical-benefits of doing so, and I give up trying to find stuff out!

[ExSailor]

Dick cheese is gross What's really gross and not to mention barbaric, pointless, and sick is to mutilate an infant or young boy's genitals via circumcision.

[IanBorthwick]

Just to add (yet another) viewpoint to muddy the water of the whole cut/uncut debate...

I'm in a wheelchair, so I sometimes find myself without access to a suitably adapted shower. This often happens when travelling, as some areas don't even have reliable running water for ANY shower, let alone functioning accessible showers. Times like that, I often think I'd prefer to be circumcised (one less hygiene issue to worry about!), but I'm not from a Jewish or Muslim background, and I don't have any serious medical reason to be circumcised, so I'd have to find a private clinic to get it done.

Finding such a clinic is hard. As many web-users are American or Canadian, and many were just circumcised as a matter of routine, many of these circumcised men resent them having been circumcised without their personal consent and, as a result, the cut/uncut debate is a rather polemical issue. Whenever I've tried to get real information in a web forum, I'm bombarded with messages begging me to reconsider getting cut, or some refuting supposed medical-benefits of doing so, and I give up trying to find stuff out!

Ok, I want this put to bed now. I'm sick of hearing it, sorry you're in a wheelchair, but you have to get on board the reality train.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smegma


The reality is smegma is CLEAN, it's how you get clean NATURALLY. Soap and alcohol are new inventions and have side effects. The foreskin evolved to be a self-cleaning structure and smegma is a part of that process. So what you want is a cleaner clean than nature intended, and are taught to think that this is not clean.....

Once again, both males and females have this, no one is railing against it in women but we're ok with carving it from men. Even Fran is nauseated at the thought of this, she and I disagree on shitloads but not on this. It's barbaric! It's an attempt to control, it's hideous, it kills, it's not something that should be up for debate, or talked about in ANY circles as an "esthetic"! Whether you believe in God, Nature, Gaea, evolution, or the Magic Electron(stole that from Carlin), none of the above are stupid. It's there for a reason. Are you smarter than any of the above?

Stop and think before you answer: The foot you avoid sticking in your mouth may be your own.

[RobUK]

OK, now let me put this straight!

I assume you were circumcised when you were a baby, and are angry. Hence your emotive response. I may be in a wheelchair, but I don't seem to be the one here with issues.

Yes, smegma is technically clean. If, by clean, you mean sanitary. But it smells and tastes bad. Wether I NEED to clean it up, for me, is neither here nor there. I would just prefer to. What's wrong with that? Grease grows in our hair as our body tries to keep it free of dirt and dead skin. Doesn't mean we don't use shampoo.

Now, it's time for you to get on this 'reality train'. This is exactly the kind of berating reply no-one needs. Everyone knows the pros and cons. No-one needs the issue to be clouded by such emotive retorts.

[ExSailor]

Just to add (yet another) viewpoint to muddy the water of the whole cut/uncut debate... I'm in a wheelchair, so I sometimes find myself without access to a suitably adapted shower. This often happens when travelling, as some areas don't even have reliable running water for ANY shower, let alone functioning accessible showers. Times like that, I often think I'd prefer to be circumcised (one less hygiene issue to worry about!), but I'm not from a Jewish or Muslim background, and I don't have any serious medical reason to be circumcised, so I'd have to find a private clinic to get it done. Finding such a clinic is hard. As many web-users are American or Canadian, and many were just circumcised as a matter of routine, many of these circumcised men resent them having been circumcised without their personal consent and, as a result, the cut/uncut debate is a rather polemical issue. Whenever I've tried to get real information in a web forum, I'm bombarded with messages begging me to reconsider getting cut, or some refuting supposed medical-benefits of doing so, and I give up trying to find stuff out! Just because you're in a wheelchair that does not mean that you somehow are incapable of bathing yourself or taking a shower, or that you can't find a bath, shower, or bidet even while traveling. I have friends who are in wheelchairs, who travel a lot, and they are not cut and have no issues with their foreskins or with bathing. They're also living in Europe and travel to other places as well. DO NOT get your foreskin removed. I'm cut and if I had a choice I would have kept my foreskin. I remember when I first had sex with a man who has a foreskin I became jealous and thought to myself, "Shit so this is what a man's cock is supposed to look like and how it's supposed to function. I've been butchered!" My dick is large at 7.5 inches medium thick but had I kept my foreskin I would have had a larger and thicker penis, and I would not have a fugly scar where my foreskin and frenulum had been ripped off and forcibly removed without my consent when I was born. When I've had sex with men who have a foreskin I noticed how they get pleasure from their entire penis including the foreskin while guys like me who are cut do not get this at all. Also circumcision causes more longterm problems than it solves them: Could your circumcision be affecting your erection? It just might, according to a new study published in the International Journal of Men’s Health. Researchers surveyed 300 men and found that circumcised fellas had a 4.5 times greater chance of suffering from ED than noncircumcised guys. One reason: Circumcised penises experience up to a 75 percent reduction in sensitivity compared to non-snipped members, according to a study published in the British Journal of Urology International.

[IanBorthwick]

OK, now let me put this straight!

I assume you were circumcised when you were a baby, and are angry. Hence your emotive response. I may be in a wheelchair, but I don't seem to be the one here with issues.[/quote]

First let's put this straight for real. There are no exclamation marks in my post, no emotes or smileys or frownies. The shouting match is in your head. Keep it there and do not put that off on me. I am calm, rational and coherent. Second, don't assume. You're not good at it and you don't know me or the condition of my penis. And if I was circumcised as a child I'm not the issue. it's millions of babies YET to be circumcised.


Yes, smegma is technically clean. If, by clean, you mean sanitary. But it smells and tastes bad. Wether I NEED to clean it up, for me, is neither here nor there. I would just prefer to. What's wrong with that? Grease grows in our hair as our body tries to keep it free of dirt and dead skin. Doesn't mean we don't use shampoo.


Now I will refrain from going at length into things you do not know such as why we smell, how the hair on our heads, armpits and pubic mound are meant to smell, but the smegma is not meant to be overtly stinky and how your example falls flat. Nor am I going to point out at length that you are arguing for a needless procedure to be continued. You want to do it, have at it Hoss. it's your dick. Slice it into any shape you like. But don't call it clean to make yourself feel better. Not unless you are willing to champion the same thing in women, which you aren't because you knwo what that will get you. Men are no worse than women in that regard and since we haven't a larger opening so near the rectum we are MUCH cleaner than women.

But don't pretend you're arguing for this procedure stems from anything besides vanity and expedition. And if that's enough for you to carve yourself a la Bris Milah, then go for it. Just make no bones that you are the one with the issue as I said in my post. You want to outdo clean, think it will be easier and are buying into all the thousand of years of platitudes.


Now, it's time for you to get on this 'reality train'. This is exactly the kind of berating reply no-one needs. Everyone knows the pros and cons. No-one needs the issue to be clouded by such emotive retorts.

Sorry, Hoss, already there. You can come along for a ride when you realize that no one knows the pros and cons, especially in the US because we're shoved a bill of goods directly down the throat. And with a casual look on the internet you'll see there is far more propaganda FOR it than facts against it. And people simply accept it without question, especially in the US. Never thinking, never asking, never questioning, simply walking lock step, and always spouting off like the other side, the con side, are emotional, irrational, unthinking, touchy feely, when in fact we're the ones basing our judgement on fact not esthetic. Using our heads and studies that are conclusive, not rhetoric straight from the Old Testament on Clean/Dirty.

And if you feel like you've been berated, understand you're no more berated than when a teacher introduces you to something you don't want to know, or when a parent tells you to finish your broccoli or you can't leave the table. In short In Culpa Est Vestrum.

[tenni]

Uh..this was suppose to be light fun satire..oh well. :(

[RobUK]

OK, this is the last post I'll make on this topic because I agree with Tenni and general failure to read what I've already written is too tiring. And patronising. So let's agree to disagree.

[darkeyes]

Uh..this was suppose to be light fun satire..oh well. :(
Think we can give site owner lil slap on hands and face for changing the mood and urs truly for snappin' 'is head off.... soz... but think it 1 of these subjects when that is likely to happen, Tenni babes...:)

[Brian]

Think we can give site owner lil slap on hands and face for changing the mood and urs truly for snappin' 'is head off.... soz... but think it 1 of these subjects when that is likely to happen, Tenni babes...:) Mmmm, not sure I agree completely with that take on the thread.

First of all, even though the OP referenced tongueincheek.ca, the article that is the source of the OP is 100% serious. There really are "Foreskin Pride" groups marching.

Secondly, I was responding to the claim in this thread that medical circumcision is genital mutilation. I didn't dial it up first. The hyperbole of the anti-circumcision side did that. Circumcision is definitely NOT genital mutilation when it is done after weighing the pros and cons scientifically, which is often done by reading a pamphlet from one's obstetrician/pediatrician/doctor often followed by a conversation with the same. To vilify parents who choose to circumcise on the basis of the best medical science of the time is wrong.

So I slap you back playfully with wet fish.

7658

- Drew :paw:

Edit: Actually I misread your last post somewhat darkeyes. I thought you said *I* snapped my head off. My mistake, sorry. Oh well, it is all good. We're all just having a good old fashioned argument. An agreement to disagree.

[darkeyes]

Mmmm, not sure I agree completely with that take on the thread.

First of all, even though the OP referenced tongueincheek.ca, the article that is the source of the OP is 100% serious. There really are "Foreskin Pride" groups marching.

Secondly, I was responding to the claim in this thread that medical circumcision is genital mutilation. I didn't dial it up first. The hyperbole of the anti-circumcision side did that. Circumcision is definitely NOT genital mutilation when it is done after weighing the pros and cons scientifically, which is often done by reading a pamphlet from one's obstetrician/pediatrician/doctor often followed by a conversation with the same. To vilify parents who choose to circumcise on the basis of the best medical science of the time is wrong.

So I slap you back playfully with wet fish.

7658

- Drew :paw:

Edit: Actually I misread your last post somewhat darkeyes. I thought you said *I* snapped my head off. My mistake, sorry. Oh well, it is all good. We're all just having a good old fashioned argument. An agreement to disagree.
Therefore if what u say is correct, Andrew dear, the removal of a breast is not a mutilation when done for medical purposes? I will remember that if the worst comes to the worst.... and every time I run my finger across the rather unsightly patch on my thigh where the skin was removed to help repair my breast, I will remember your words...but do think u ought to read your dictionary a little more carefully....

..and u slap me across the face with a wet fish and genital mutilation will be the least of your worries..*laffs*;).

[ExSailor]

I personally like 'em cut - clean and sexy and ready for oral sex at any time. Dick cheese is gross. I've encountered far more foul odors and nasty tastes from circumcised American guys than from the countless uncircumcised men from various European countries I've slept with or the European and Latino guys I've slept with in NYC who were also not cut. The argument that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV and other STIs is bunk. An uncut guy wearing a condom is at far lower risk of contracting or transmitting HIV and other STIs than a cut guy without one. I'd suggest you try exploring the world (especially the parts where men get to keep their foreskins) a little more.

[Brian]

I regret saying that "Dick cheese is gross" in a debate about circumcision. It adds nothing good to the debate.

- Drew :paw:

[blugirl789]

emotionalism for this group is most likely a marketing tactic at gaining attention. ppl definitely notice emotional outbursts.

from my own personal experience having a son, i was mislead by the hospital staff in believing circumcision was in his best interest. being drained from pregnancy, and then delivering my son, i didn't have the energy to make the best decision on my own and trusted these ppl. i read the articles provided at the hospital. but that's the only research i did on it. i didn't comprehend the pain, though it seems obvious. the hospital staff made it seem quick, painless, super easy. and because my husband and most men i have known are circumcised, i went thru with it, having my son circumcised.

it was awful. and i feel guilty reading this thread and remembering having put my child through excruciating pain. it was heart-breaking. for a newborn to have a slice on his penis, the blood, the shrill cries of pain. to have a wound on his penis, and then have to wear a diaper over such a wound...it's a recipe for disaster. he didn't get an infection. there were however other complications no one warned me of. it was a nightmare, and am furious at myself. it's in the past, but wish i would have been more honestly informed.

[darkeyes]

emotionalism for this group is most likely a marketing tactic at gaining attention. ppl definitely notice emotional outbursts.

from my own personal experience having a son, i was mislead by the hospital staff in believing circumcision was in his best interest. being drained from pregnancy, and then delivering my son, i didn't have the energy to make the best decision on my own and trusted these ppl. i read the articles provided at the hospital. but that's the only research i did on it. i didn't comprehend the pain, though it seems obvious. the hospital staff made it seem quick, painless, super easy. and because my husband and most men i have known are circumcised, i went thru with it, having my son circumcised.

it was awful. and i feel guilty reading this thread and remembering having put my child through excruciating pain. it was heart-breaking. for a newborn to have a slice on his penis, the blood, the shrill cries of pain. to have a wound on his penis, and then have to wear a diaper over such a wound...it's a recipe for disaster. he didn't get an infection. there were however other complications no one warned me of. it was a nightmare, and am furious at myself. it's in the past, but wish i would have been more honestly informed.
People know exactly where I stand on the subject of infant male circumcision.. ur post, blu, reminded of an article on the bbc website bout the subject a few days ago.. I don't know that it will ease ur pain, but it may help and explains in some depth why it is such a prickly and controversial issue.....http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19072761

[blugirl789]

People know exactly where I stand on the subject of infant male circumcision.. ur post, blu, reminded of an article on the bbc website bout the subject a few days ago.. I don't know that it will ease ur pain, but it may help and explains in some depth why it is such a prickly and controversial issue.....http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19072761

that was my experience as a parent- the dilemma. thanks for sharing the article. i'll be informing my kids in the future when they are faced with this dilemma of their own as they have kids. it just plain sucks seeing your kid in pain.

[Brian]

This was in my paper today and may also help blugirl... "Circumcision pluses outweigh risks: U.S. pediatricians" (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/circumcision-pluses-outweigh-risks-us-pediatricians/article4500463/)

There really are pros and cons on both sides and I don't think people should feel bad because they decided one way or another. We're all just doing the best we can with the science at hand. There is no rule that says science MUST reveal the correct answer, only that it is the best tool we have to answer these questions because it is most likely to get us as close to the right answer as possible.

- Drew :paw:

[blugirl789]

This was in my paper today and may also help blugirl... "Circumcision pluses outweigh risks: U.S. pediatricians" (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/circumcision-pluses-outweigh-risks-us-pediatricians/article4500463/)

There really are pros and cons on both sides and I don't think people should feel bad because they decided one way or another. We're all just doing the best we can with the science at hand. There is no rule that says science MUST reveal the correct answer, only that it is the best tool we have to answer these questions because it is most likely to get us as close to the right answer as possible.

- Drew :paw:


thank you drew. i respect the american academy of pediatrics and john hopkins university and hospital.

[BiPhone]

In Norway the goverment have proposed a law to only circumsize children when the child is old enough to make the choice himself and that it can only be done by a health profesional.