Yeah, those uncut European guys are scaring the ladies away. Those cut American, Jewish, and Muslim men are the only ones to ever satisfy a lady and the only ones to last any time at all in bed. :roll: Yup, every man requires surgical correction to be able to perform in bed. :thumbsup:
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Mom, Dad in Court Over Son's Circumcision
Page 17 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Yeah, those uncut European guys are scaring the ladies away. Those cut American, Jewish, and Muslim men are the only ones to ever satisfy a lady and the only ones to last any time at all in bed. :roll: Yup, every man requires surgical correction to be able to perform in bed. :thumbsup:
The problem is people that casually adopt circumcision. I haven't seen any study on it, but i would bet it's mainly because they had it done, or because they think there's vast hygenic reasons for it. The second isn't true, which is why doctors around the industrialized world don't endorse it if it's not medically necessary... and some associations like the British Medical Association do not allow it to be done at all unless there are medical reasons.
And as for tradition... well, i would assume a tradition would have to last longer than one generation. Even if it was tradition, i'm still against it, religious or not. There are many religious rites that have been removed or updated as civilization advanced, this should be one of them as well.
Uncircumcised and loving it. There's no medical reason for it, assuming the child is taught to clean himself properly (except in very rare cases where the foreskin is so tight it chafes the penis), and I've never been ridiculed or made to feel out of place for being uncircumcised. Never had the ladies complain, either.
ThaGrandCow
Diamond Member
Actually, that's my exact point. Does having it done for 2 generations mean that you need to get your child cut too? For a time, doctors thought that it provided a medical benefit. Now they have evidence to prove otherwise, hence why they give you the choice as a parent instead of doing it without asking when a child is born. My birthday is in 1981, and in California at the time my father wasn't even asked. The doctors just did it. My father is cut, but my grandfather wasn't. The reasons for both me and my father getting cut are now either proven wrong or are non-issues.
So why make it a tradition? There's no idealism behind it that you could say. You say that it's now a tradition with your family, yet the only reason you will continue to do it is just because it happened to you. Do you have a reason to continue on with it other than "it happened to me so it will happen to my son?"
Those of the jewish religion have been doing it for thousands of years. It was started because of a need at the time and moved from there into a major ceremony. Even after there was no longer a need they continued to do it, because it had been ingrained into their beliefs for so long that it was an integral part of their religion. They have a huge ceremony to celebrate when a child gets circumcised, as opposed to someone else just putting a checkmark in a box when their wife is pushing out a child.
Think of it along the same lines as the old barber shops and bloodletting. They believed it cured headaches, illnesses, and other problems. Do you go to a barber to release a pint or two of blood anymore? No? Why not? Because it was something that people did until it was proven unnecessary.
ThaGrandCow
Diamond Member
:beer:
If you're at the point where she's seeing if you're circumcised or not, it's kind of a non-issue anyways. When the pants are off, you're getting booty no matter what (unless she's crazy or passes out from being stupid and drinking too much)
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
Whoever suggests circumcision for the reducing the chances of getting HIV needs to have their head checked.
ThaGrandCow
Diamond Member
Even if they are a medical professional?
StrangerGuy
Diamond Member
You don't need medical professionals to tell you that unprotected sex with a HIV infected individual is guaranteed to infect you with HIV. Circumcision or not is irrelevant.
The problem is Doboji, people like this will make it their business which is already in the works...they will amass support, push legal confrontations and attempt to win decisions that will outlaw the practice thus making anyone who wishes to have their child circumsized seen as a horrible horrible person and possibly if done a criminal...
This isn't a win/lose situation as it is ultimately based on preference...those that are familiar with one mindset will go one direction etc...at least until some concrete decision regarding the practice is made by the powers that be....as long as there is a choice in the matter there will be those for and against as it is human nature.
I am sorry to be blunt as generally I try to be as professional as possible however put candidly you are an absolute moron if you truly feel that this is about "protecting children"...using an argument like that sounds like something straight out of an activist handbook especially when talking about a non lethal, elective proceedure...
parents make plenty of decisions about your body before you reach age of consent that directly impact their appearance...
If there was a truly unbiased source which clearly stated that there was a tangible negative impact to the proceedure then that would be one thing, but the fact is I have yet to see anything put forward which is truly "objective" and feel that finding such in matters such as these will be near impossible...plus with even the slightest chance of infection being possible, no matter how infintissimal, I feel it will be justification enough for parents to continue with the proceedure, which is why anti circumcision groups are trying to gather support and are following cases such as this...
The fact is for the people who do have medical reasons which mandate the proceedure be performed later in life the reality is every one of them says it hurts like a mofo and every one wishes that they had it done when they were younger and couldn't remember.
ThaGrandCow
Diamond Member
Which once again completely ignores the question of 'why would you?', and only focuses on 'this is why I have the right to do it'
I am not an activist, I don't lobby for any laws to be made, because I do agree in the end people should be allowed to make their own decisions (smoking, abortion, whatever). But I still am waiting for a pro-circumcision person who isn't jewish to give a legitimate reason or even just an explanation for why they would do it... one that isn't based on an outdated medical assumption that has since been proven worthless.
But I will argue in this thread until someone gives me a good reason not to.
ThaGrandCow
Diamond Member
You are correct, surgery hurts. Does that mean we should amputate the left hand from every child that is born to prevent pain from when one of them has an accident major enough to need amputation later in life? Choosing to cut your child now as opposed to letting them decide for themselves in the future makes absolutely no medical impact on them between birth and when the diseases it may prevent might be a factor.
EDIT: before it's even considered as an argument against me, I will never utter the phrase 'protect the children.' In the end the parent has the final say, I just want to hear one good reason why.
Not ignoring it at all Cow, simply a realist in that as it is elective surgery there really doesn't have to be a valid reason...for many misconceptions, tradition or whatever are all the reasons they will ever need and as long as the proceedure is elective and offered, and there is a slight chance of a possible medical reason for it then you can bet your bottom dollar that many people will continue to opt for it....until they say that it is never ever ever ever necessary (meaning a 0.000000000% chance of ever needing the surgery) and or if they make it illegal there will always be parents who go with door number 1.
I am personally fail to see why you need what you consider a "legitimate" reason or what you consider a "just explanation"...do you ask the same of parents who put their kids in braces even though it can be painful and annoying? or why some parents tape coins to their kids belly buttons (even though it does nothing) to prevent an "outie"....the fact is, as it has already been stated here many many times over that most parents today opt for the proceedure either because of religion in the case of Jewish tradition, out of aesthetics, or because of a misconception on possible health issues, but even that isn't wholly accurate as it is still put fourth that there can be medical situations which deem it necessary just no one knows who will need it and who won't until a much later age at which time the surgery will be very painful.
I think you will be arguing till the Cows come home as you will never find the answer or the justification that you desire because you will never grasp the concept that many don't do things out of logic...and that is a fact of life.
Ahh extrimism at its best...nice try at pulling a wildly obnoxious scenerio out of your rump and trying to use it in comparison...
Like I said, as long as the medical community perforoms the proceedure and also purports that there could possibly be a scenerio that warrants said proceedure then people will opt to have it done sooner rather than later....
Last I checked there is no similar presumption made on hands and or other appendages by the medical community.
It is absolutely about protecting children from barbaric thugs like you. Its about protecting children from "elective" sexual surgery by greedy doctors and their parents who just follow the herd. Why is it so difficult for you people to understand that a child has a right to his whole body? Is non-lethal your only limiting criteria for parents' rights to elective surgery on their kids?
People like you would be arguing for FGM, if you lived in the Middle East. After all, its non-lethal. Meets your criteria for what parents can and should do to their kids.
And I wear the activist label with pride.
Yeah, haircuts, nail clippings, clothes... stuff that I can change. When my mother signed to have be circumcised, that's permanent. She had no right to intrude on my sex life, but people like you make it possible.
The AAP could come out tommorrow and say "Circumcision is bad." and people like you would say... "Oh, that's biased."
If you need to be circumcised later in life, you have an incompetent and/or lying docs. Circ rates are very low in other parts of the world, where docs are training to treat and not just to hack.
ThaGrandCow
Diamond Member
How about vasectomies at birth? That would solve a pretty huge problem of teen pregnancies, and hey it's even reversable when they are ready for kids! What parent would say no to making sure their kid never had to deal with an "oops" situation and drop out of college to take care of an unplanned child? It could be offered, all the parent has to do is put a check in a box!
Babbles
Diamond Member
Holy cow your idiotic and fallacious comparisons are doing nothing to support your arguments. You really need to sit back and re-read the drivel you are spilling on these boards.
To compare this situation to randomly amputating hands, vasectomies is nothing less than sheer idiocy.
Please, for the love of whatever you believe in, think about the crazy comparisons you are making before you post them here.
Eat Spam's response is looney enough that it doesn't even warrant my time, but I did get a good chuckle seeing him foam at the mouth...
With you Cow all I can say again is that you make no compelling argument...your analogies are very weak and almost laugable at best.
Like I said, in your mind you will always be right, just as in the minds of others they will always be right at least until the powers that be make a definitive judgement on the matter...as it currently stands it is elective and something that is offered as a choice, until that changes you will always have those who opt in for their own reasons...unless you plan on becomming an activist about it on one side or the other and actually do something about that which you believe then arguing about it on the internet and trying to shove your opinions and beliefs down the throats of others is sheer stupidity and a waste of time.
Vic, is that you? You sound like Vic, questioning my sanity.
Like I said while "foaming at the mouth", there's no arguing with a pro-circumcision type. Everything that isn't Ed Schoen or Thomas Wiswell or Dr. Kellogg is propaganda.
Must kill you that the activists are winning. Your beloved "non-lethal" procedure is declining in popularity.
moshquerade
No Lifer
:thumbsdown:
gunning to get this thread locked? 😕
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
