About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Forward one pageLast Page


Post 20

Monday, October 24, 2005 - 6:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Reading this thread, I find myself involuntarily moving my legs together. Not joking, either. Really. I'm glad I had daughters.


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 21

Monday, October 24, 2005 - 7:53pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Q: How many medical specialists does it take to circumcise a whale?
A: Foreskin divers.


Post 22

Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 12:56pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ashley said

"This is the real trauma for boy children who are circumcised: they won't enjoy sex as much."

=(

Guess that settles it, we are actually traumatized for life.

Michael



Post 23

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 5:26amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

An interesting article on circumcision and HIV.  Might be relevant here.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9806505/site/newsweek/


Post 24

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 6:19amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I was cut as an infant, and I suspect that Ashley's right about cut men not getting as much out of sex as uncut men, given that the only way I can get off is through intercourse.

Post 25

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 8:04amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Summer, thanks for that news link.  It bolsters the argument about circumcision as a means of automatic hygiene and disease prevention.

As for Matthew's comment, I would need to see some kind of rigorous study to accept the notion that uncut men enjoy sex more than cut men.  I would not even know how to conduct such a study.  Suffice it to say that I doubt most cut men need to have intercourse in order to climax.


Post 26

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 8:44amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
This may be more information that you want to know.  But for medical reasons I had to undergo circumcision at the age of 60.  It was not pleasant I can tell you, but I can also say that my orgasms are 100% longer and more enjoyable since the procedure.  For what it is worth, it's anecdotal.

To address some other things said and unsaid.  It is likely that the Hebrew practice of circumcision derived from the Egyptians who practiced it.

Uncircumcised men have a higher incident of penile cancer.

Women married to uncircumcised men have a higher incident of cervical cancer.

(Edited by Robert Davison on 10/27, 11:33am)


Post 27

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 8:50amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Robert wrote:
organisms are 100% longer
Hahahaha!  That is the funniest misspelling I have read all day!  What fun can we have with that?
  • It means the sperm cells are twice their normal length, giving them plenty of tail to spin?
  • Other?

(Edited by Luke Setzer on 10/27, 8:52am)


Post 28

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
If anyone is really interested in this issue from a fuller exposition on all levels, there is a site called Circumstitions that posts a great deal of information on Circumcision, Female Genital Mutilation, and Involuntary Sex Reassignment.

It is a site devoted to the individual right of intactness. Some of the stuff there is a real eye-opener.

Michael


Post 29

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 10:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The kind of study Luke Setzer asks for in #25 ought to be straightforward to conduct.  If uncircumcised males enjoy the act more, you'd expect that, controlling for a few variables including age, marital status and medical condition, they'd be more sexually active than circumcised males.  If any remotely respectable research bore this out, anti-circumcisionist propaganda would trumpet its findings to the skies.  Since this hasn't happened, we have to conclude at least provisionally that the original claim is false.

Peter

(Edited by Peter Reidy on 10/27, 11:37am)


Post 30

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 11:34amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Luke,

Vey ist mir.  The sort of thing spell check doesn't catch.


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 31

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 1:21pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No way, Peter. That's not straightforward at all. If it's very pleasurable for either person, I would assume that either person would do it as often as possible. I have had partners who were pretty good and partners who were smoking hot and I think I wanted it just as much from either one. Sex on a bad day is still better than sitting on the couch watching tv. Unless hockey is on.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 32

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 4:49pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think if I had a baby son I would leave him uncut and let him decide on his own later in life whether the medical and sexual benefits, if any, are worth the pain and hassle of becoming cut.  That sounds like the most fair plan of action.  As for protecting against increased risks of contracting HIV, that is what careful partner selection and condoms accomplish.

Post 33

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 7:25pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Total failure rate of all condoms:   9.13%

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 34

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 7:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Robert-
I tend to prefer that the total failure rate of all the morons that don't know how to use condoms approaches 100%, and that this taints the 'failure rate of condoms' statistic.


Post 35

Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:44pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When parents did it, as they did to me, in the '60s, they thought there was a medical reason. It was no more an initiation of force than removing the umbilical cord in most people's minds.

Nowadays, we know it is misguided from a medical perspective (though circumcized men have less chance of contracting some SDTs). So now that myths and religious traditions are the only justifications left for circumcision, and neither of those considerations concern the wellbeing of the baby boy, there is no justification for harming an infant in this way.

I would even go so far as to say that such a practice, like female circumcision, should be outlawed.

I miss my foreskin, damn it! After everything Ashley has said about it I want to break down and cry like a baby. A baby who's just had his foreskin sliced off!


Post 36

Friday, October 28, 2005 - 4:18amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Casey's right, I don't think parents who circumcised their kids a generation ago meant anything evil by it... even today I don't think most people give it much thought. I am just trying to get the word out so that as many thoughtful people as possible will consider the consequences.

As far as condoms and cancer and STDs etc. go, you have to get that the foreskin itself isn't going to wreak this disaster - it's only going to happen if you aren't careful with it. The same could be said of the female part, it is particularly hazard-ridden (!!) but I'm still glad I have one. I think that if kids are taught to keep clean and watch out where they poke it, the odds that it's going to turn black and drop off because of the foreskin are extremely low.

And Casey, don't cry. Like I said, the experience remains very pleasurable for all involved. Think about how much you like your favorite coffee. Now if I tell you that my local Wawa has better coffee, you don't stop loving your coffee as much. Unless someday you come and have a Wawa coffee, and then your coffee is ruined forever. But for now, you will keep having your delicious local coffee each morning, blissfully unaware that it is only second best. Mmm!

Post 37

Friday, October 28, 2005 - 6:29amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
After all, we wouldn't  have had a foreskin if it hadn't evolved - meaning that there had to have been a validity to its existence...

Post 38

Friday, October 28, 2005 - 8:27amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm gonna cry even louder now. Thanks a lot, Ashley.

Waaaaa!


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 39

Friday, October 28, 2005 - 8:46amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
 Michelangelo didn't circumcise David, Why?
Ciro
ps
Double click on David's penis to have a larger view :)


(Edited by Ciro D'Agostino on 10/28, 8:54am)


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.