AWKWARD ZOMBIE

I don't think that my arguments are unsupported. I think it's quite logical to assume that male genital mutilation continues to be commonplace in western society and major religions because, when compared to female genital mutilation, the effects on the male's genitals are far less drastic in nature, and that it's wrong for these conditions to continue.

Welp, reading this thread is very uncomfortable, but I'm going to put something out there before I bow out as well.

There's also a further point to consider. Males that want to get circumcised as an adult can find it to be an expensive and tedious procedure. Also, VERY painful considering the subject matter, not only for the procedure itself, but also for the gradual shift in sensitivity. Cleaning it can be very painful for a long time, as it's sensitive to not only chemicals but physical touch. It's very much not desirable to get circumcised as an adult.

Which means that circumcision, ideally, should be done as a very young child. Last I checked, the verdict was still out whether the infant mind could fully appreciate the pain felt of it, but even so, I was circumcised and I certainly don't remember anything.

As far as I feel, I don't really personally care. That being said, I'm not sure what to decide if I ever had a son, but I likely wouldn't have it done, if just for the possibility of the circumcision going awry.

Unfortunately, the person it affects can't decide during the best time for the procedure to be done.

Anyways, I'm leaving after posting this. Not sure I'll be back to read anything further though because my stomach is in knots over this.

I don't know if you're talking to me, but I wasn't asking why you keep saying mutilate, I was asking Burnttoshreds, who I think is just using the word to exaggerate circumcision.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mutilate

Anyways, I think there is no problem with circumcision, it's pretty safe, and it's not effecting the kids life in a huge way, even if they didn't get to decide or not, I think we shouldn't tell other people what to do with their religions, or how to take care of their children, as long as it isn't super harmful like female circumcision or stoning.

I'm not even religious, my mother told me the reason why I was circumcised was because she didn't want me getting sick from it being not being circumcised, and I agree with her, I prefer it this way.

Anyways, bed time.

I understand having to deal with people using emotionally charged terms to try and argue their point, but I can't help but feel that you're focusing a tad too much on that use of emotionally charged terms to argue your own points.

Male circumcision has its founding in religion, and no, it's not really that harmful when compared to female circumcision, but there's also no good reason for it to be done. There's no founding in science that deems it safer in the long run, or cleaner, or better for sex, or anything else for that matter. It seems it's done purely for that religious aspect, which is commendable, but there are all sorts of things that used to be done for religion that we don't do anymore, and a good lot of them were a hell of a lot more harmless than circumcision (not working on sabbath, not eating pork, not mismatching your clothing when it comes to linen vs cotton, etc.) so it being "really harmless" shouldn't work as justification. It's tradition, but it's an extremely unnecessary procedure. A procedure that has to do with cutting a chunk of your kid's penis off. Not cutting the foreskin off would pose no general difference for the kid, and, actually, be a hell of a lot easier on the parents since they then wouldn't have to babysit the wound. If the kid wants to have it done when he's an adult, that's fine, but even that shouldn't be used as justification. "See, he wanted it anyway. That means we need to do it across the board for everyone." That just doesn't make sense.



How exactly would you know that no? Have you had any experience with having to deal with an uncircumcised penis or is it based off of 3rd party accounts from a few people, some of which I'm guessing are from mom, a woman who doesn't even have a penis?

In certain jewish sects it is customary to suck the blood from the penis after the circumcision. That and circumcision in general is an outdated tradition people do merely for the sake of tradition. Several other traditions have been dropped from our society because they don't serve our culture, why hold onto this one?

edit: reyo said what I said but I said it more succinctly.

No, I was agreeing with you, Noff. Sorry.

And sorry I got heated everyone. It would have been better for me to just leave, or never join in at all, knowing how I would end up feeling for various reasons and that I would get upset about it, especially considering how painful and personal various issues brought up are for me.

Would you really remember something that happens when you're 1 or 2 weeks old anyway?
And you just watch a circumcision and tell me it doesn't hurt.

I would like to actually answer this.

When I was very, very newborn, there was a problem with my back. I'm not entirely clear on what exactly the problem was, but it involved VERY LARGE NEEDLES in my back. These needles had to stay there, while I was held down, for quite some time.

This is why I, even now, am completely terrified of needles. I have left movies because they happened to contain someone getting a shot. Getting a shot myself has been a completely horrible experience that I have had to work very hard to get over.

The way I see it, if an experience from when I was less than a month old has actually made me that scared of something as tiny as a needle, whether I remember feeling it or not (i don't) isn't the issue.

The issue is that it scarred me, mentally.

I can't see causing pain to babies, regardless of age, as a good thing. Saying "well they might not feel it or remember it" doesn't make it better. The inability for a victim to remember an action does not mean the action was any less wrong.

You should not permanently alter the physical appearance of a person without said person's explicit consent. Religion has nothing to do with it, as that is a personal choice, and thus should not affect someone else.

The point is whether or not it causes lasting harm or trauma. If the individual wants to be circumcised, the best time to not have to deal with all of the memories of pain is to get it done as a newborn. I've yet to hear anyone without a botched circumcision say that they have some kind of issue regarding something to the effect of phantom limb syndrome, PTSD, or an innate (not learned) fear of circumcisions. The brain can't process that much to be permanently scarred by the event.

That of course doesn't mean we should circumcise everyone, but assuming we could tell whether someone wanted to be circumcised or not, their best bet is to do it as an infant.



Is your fear an innate fear, or did your parents tell you as a little kid "oh man, when you were a baby they stuck needles in you and left them in you" and that caused a "OH GOD NO" moment that started your fear of needles?

Because unless it's the former, the event didn't scar you, thinking about it is what made you afraid of needles.

Also, I'm assuming the procedure was done to fix whatever was wrong with your back. It wasn't done to torture you as a child because you couldn't consent.

It causes lasting harm as in "a piece of your body has been removed without your consent and can never be fully replaced." I'm not saying that if you're circumcised you're going to be unhappy and wish that you weren't for the rest of your life, but I agree with others who have said that it shouldn't be performed as a baby because there's no viable reason to apart from medical reasons.

Just gonna point out that, to my knowledge, there is no real evidence stating that circumcising the penis will prevent illness. I heard that it might have been linked to a form of cancer, but I'm pretty sure that theory was debunked.

I hear it can help prevent HIV, but that's only really useful in third world countries like africa where almost everyone is infected.

How would it prevent the spread of HIV that makes absolutely no sense

probably because it's dried out instead of it being a wet spot for infection.