Any Tangible Medical Benefits for Circumcision?

[quickquestion]

 

 

Wrong, there is no medical benefit to circumcision anymore in biblical times there might have been but not anymore since you can just wash. Also condoms are just as good at reducing the risk of STD transmission. Circumcision gets rid of the foreskin which plays a vital role in peventing the desensitization of the penis, is a natural lubricant and contains millions of nerve ending which make sex more pleasurable. In fact the only reason circumcision caught on is because of sex phobia and the mentality of a generation that thought masturbation was wrong.

Couldn't agree more.

 

In fact the very fact we have to defend and point out that such a barbaric practice, is, barbaric...enrages me. We are sages of our time And yet we get Downvoted by anonymous supporters of a backwards barbaric stone-age Corrupt and Cruel society. It is so backwards it is enraging. And what's enraging is that these anonymous backwards stone-age barbarians act like they get to define what civilization is and the rules of society. Then they violate our human rights and pat themselves on the back and tell themselves how rational they are.

 

Now, if it's a female, don't even think about it.

Stupid, dumb, cruel, and a human right's violation. As well as illegal. Don't do it, it's bad. Very bad. It's barbaric. Now most religions denounce it, but in the event that they're from some weird cult, then don't listen.

 

Are you kidding me?

A clitoris is almost the exact same thing as a penis.

Butchering a clitoral hood is almost exactly the same as circumcision.

I cannot believe that you think circumcision is acceptable, but say female genital mutilation, which is almost the exact same thing, is barbaric. Are you kidding me right now? I hope that you were making a joke and using sarcasm and not being serious.

 

The fact that society not only continues to do this barbaric violation of human rights, but Defends it and has the gall to not even say sorry, to not even apologize to the Victims But Instead Defend their atrocities they did on their victims, deeply enrages me to my core.

Edited April 14, 2017 by quickquestion

[andrewcellini]

A clitoris is almost the exact same thing as a penis.

Butchering a clitoral hood is almost exactly the same as circumcision.

Sure, but the most common forms of female genital mutilation involve either the partial or complete removal of the clitoral glans along with the clitoral hood, and some practices involve sewing the labia majora together on top of what is essentially the complete destruction of the external genitalia. Thus it may not be fair or accurate to say

I cannot believe that you think circumcision is acceptable, but say female genital mutilation, which is almost the exact same thing, is barbaric.

Edited April 24, 2017 by andrewcellini

[quickquestion]

Sure, but the most common forms of female genital mutilation involve either the partial or complete removal of the clitoral glans along with the clitoral hood, and some practices involve sewing the labia majora together on top of what is essentially the complete destruction of the external genitalia. Thus it may not be fair or accurate to say

Well why not ban both. Let's say FGM is worse than Circumcision. Ban both.

[Raider5678]

Are you kidding me?

A clitoris is almost the exact same thing as a penis.

Butchering a clitoral hood is almost exactly the same as circumcision.

I cannot believe that you think circumcision is acceptable, but say female genital mutilation, which is almost the exact same thing, is barbaric. Are you kidding me right now? I hope that you were making a joke and using sarcasm and not being serious.

 

The fact that society not only continues to do this barbaric violation of human rights, but Defends it and has the gall to not even say sorry, to not even apologize to the Victims But Instead Defend their atrocities they did on their victims, deeply enrages me to my core.

No, it is not sarcasm.

I'm a male.

I was circumcised.

And honestly, I think uncircumcised penises look disgusting. And I wasn't taught that. I stumbled upon a picture of one and I thought there was something wrong.

Obviously, positions would probably be reversed if I hadn't been circumcised.

But I could care less.

Actually, that's wrong. I'm glad I was circumcised.

And female circumcision is not the same thing. So go to health class. It's barbaric. Male circumcision is much safer and has actual benefits(I admit, tiny almost non-existent ones) compared to female circumcision.

[NimrodTheGoat]

Was circumcision just so that they couldn't wank off later in life?

 

Couldn't find a different way to ask the question so I just put it there straight forward.

[zapatos]

I'm not sure what you think circumcision is, but it does not stop the ability to wank off.

[quickquestion]

No, it is not sarcasm.

I'm a male.

I was circumcised.

And honestly, I think uncircumcised penises look disgusting. And I wasn't taught that. I stumbled upon a picture of one and I thought there was something wrong.

Obviously, positions would probably be reversed if I hadn't been circumcised.

But I could care less.

Actually, that's wrong. I'm glad I was circumcised.

And female circumcision is not the same thing. So go to health class. It's barbaric. Male circumcision is much safer and has actual benefits(I admit, tiny almost non-existent ones) compared to female circumcision.

That's nice. But you are missing one important thing.

Consent.

If you get a prince albert and enjoy it doesn't mean everyone should be forced to get a prince albert.

If circumcision had no ill effects for you doesn't mean that everyone who gets it will get no ill effects.

Edited April 25, 2017 by quickquestion

[DrP]

Being fair QQ I do not think there are any ill effects for men beyond a week or 2 of soreness. We've been doing it for thousands of years. It just seems pointless when the 'benefits' are so slight and exaggerated or hoisted up to protect their precious notion that it MUST be of some use as it was ordered by god.

 

@Raider5678 - wrt appearance - I would say you find it disgusting only because it is different to what you are used to - it is YOU that has the unnatural dong mate! Not the rest of us.. Maybe you have become so used to the deformity that was forced upon you that it seems normal for you and everyone else looks weird and disgusting. I can understand that, but it does not make it disgusting. I would just stop looking at other blokes cocks if it bothers you. ;-)

[quickquestion]

Being fair QQ I do not think there are any ill effects for men beyond a week or 2 of soreness. We've been doing it for thousands of years. It just seems pointless when the 'benefits' are so slight and exaggerated or hoisted up to protect their precious notion that it MUST be of some use as it was ordered by god.

 

@Raider5678 - wrt appearance - I would say you find it disgusting only because it is different to what you are used to - it is YOU that has the unnatural dong mate! Not the rest of us.. Maybe you have become so used to the deformity that was forced upon you that it seems normal for you and everyone else looks weird and disgusting. I can understand that, but it does not make it disgusting. I would just stop looking at other blokes cocks if it bothers you. ;-)

There are several side effects. Death, of babies, and hyper sensitivity.

My brother complains because his peewee hurts when he walks.

He was circumcised.

But society doesn't care.

They march on with the iron clad boots of tyrants.

[Raider5678]

@Raider5678 - wrt appearance - I would say you find it disgusting only because it is different to what you are used to - it is YOU that has the unnatural dong mate! Not the rest of us.. Maybe you have become so used to the deformity that was forced upon you that it seems normal for you and everyone else looks weird and disgusting. I can understand that, but it does not make it disgusting. I would just stop looking at other blokes cocks if it bothers you. ;-)

It was a statement of fact, and I also pointed out that "The positions would probably be reversed if it wasn't", so this entire point is moot.

But yes, I have stopped ;-)

There are several side effects. Death, of babies, and hyper sensitivity.

My brother complains because his peewee hurts when he walks.

He was circumcised.

But society doesn't care.

They march on with the iron clad boots of tyrants.

Hurts when he walks?

I've never heard of that side effect.

 

Also, don't be an asshole and use him as an example.

Take him to the doctor.

Edited April 30, 2017 by Raider5678

[John Cuthber]

There are several side effects. Death, of babies, and hyper sensitivity.

My brother complains because his peewee hurts when he walks.

He was circumcised.

But society doesn't care.

They march on with the iron clad boots of tyrants.

Death from infection is a perfectly credible outcome.

Why did QQ's post get marked down?

[Strange]

Why did QQ's post get marked down?

 

 

Perhaps because of his tedious attitude.

[zapatos]

Death from infection is a perfectly credible outcome.

Why did QQ's post get marked down?

 

I'm curious why it got marked up when it characterized people like me as 'iron clad booted tyrants' simply because I made a choice characterized as "neutral" by my doctor.

[John Cuthber]

 

I'm curious why it got marked up when it characterized people like me as 'iron clad booted tyrants' simply because I made a choice characterized as "neutral" by my doctor.

Look again.

It was a criticism of society for continuing- as you say- to characterise as "neutral" something that's fairly clearly wrong (at least, without consent).

[zapatos]

Look again.

It was a criticism of society for continuing- as you say- to characterise as "neutral" something that's fairly clearly wrong (at least, without consent).

 

I didn't realize that had been agreed upon. I suppose if it is so clearly wrong now that it is also probably illegal.

[quickquestion]

 

 

Perhaps because of his tedious attitude.

How do you know I am a he? Thought you said she's get manhandled on physics boards moreso.

 

 

I didn't realize that had been agreed upon. I suppose if it is so clearly wrong now that it is also probably illegal.

illegal does not make wrong. fat politicians dilly and dally with their barbaric morality while baby's have to pay the price.

[zapatos]

How do you know I am a he? Thought you said she's get manhandled on physics boards moreso.

 

illegal does not make wrong. fat politicians dilly and dally with their barbaric morality while baby's have to pay the price.

 

Do you suppose you can go one post without name calling?

[quickquestion]

 

Do you suppose you can go one post without name calling?

Why shouldnt i name call people who butcher and violate others rights? No i must sit there while barbaric butchers mutilate everyone and how dare i name call them, meanwhile they are aloud to run around like barbarians.

[Manticore]

It doesn't need to - why even bother if the debateable 'benefits' are so slight. Wait until it's an adult and let it decide.

Benefits are 'slight'?

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/spr08circumcisionmap/

[John Cuthber]

Benefits are 'slight'?

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/spr08circumcisionmap/

The benefit of circumcision before, rather than after, reaching the age of consent are slight.

[DrP]

Also I'm not fully convinced of that AIDS article. The fact they have a slightly higher amount of AIDS victims could be due to the correlation between being circumcised and being religious.... you are less likely to be so promiscuous if circumcised because you are more likely to be religious (or have been influenced by the religious). How on earth would snipping off your foreskin prevent you from getting AIDS? What's the science behind it?

[Manticore]

If I remember rightly - it was quite a few years ago - the original research showed that herpes infection considerably increased the chances of getting HIV and that the incidence of herpes was directly related to lack of circumcision.

 

(I could be completely wrong here - as I said, it was quite a while ago.)

Edited May 2, 2017 by Manticore

[DrP]

Yes - but did that study take into account the sexual behaviour of the religious vs the non religious? The lack of herpes imo could be related to the fact that the more religious a person the less promiscuous they are. Since circumcision is purely a religious practice it would be reasonable to assume that those that have been circumcised are less likely to get herpes due to their reduced promiscuity - Again - how could it possibly have anything to do with whether or not they have had their genitals mutilated? It seems ridiculous - it seems like people want there to be a benefit so they can say that there book is right. This herpes claim is clutching at straws. (Correlation doesn't automatically imply causation).

Edited May 2, 2017 by DrP

[John Cuthber]

Yes - but did that study take into account the sexual behaviour of the religious vs the non religious? The lack of herpes imo could be related to the fact that the more religious a person the less promiscuous they are. Since circumcision is purely a religious practice it would be reasonable to assume that those that have been circumcised are less likely to get herpes due to their reduced promiscuity - Again - how could it possibly have anything to do with whether or not they have had their genitals mutilated? It seems ridiculous - it seems like people want there to be a benefit so they can say that there book is right. This herpes claim is clutching at straws. (Correlation doesn't automatically imply causation).

There is, IIRC a real mechanism. The cell markers to which HIV binds in the first place are strongly expressed by the mucosal cells of the foreskin.

 

However that's irrelevant until the man is sexually active and by that stage he will( or should) be old enough for consent.

[DrP]

OK John - it might be a real effect.... but I am still not convinced the level of sexual activity of the individuals is taken into account. I smell some bias on the interpretation of the results. If the only benefit is a slightly less chance of herpes whilst engaging in sexual permiscuity then I think that better education regarding safe sexual practices is probably going to far out weight the benefits of snipping off the end of your penis.

lol - and how far do you want to go with it? If you cut the whole thing off then there will be even less chance of contracting sexually transmitted diseases right? ;-)