More info than anyone really needs, but I'm not... and I don't really get what the huge difference is. I do find it funny that most girls are like shocked and awed by my penis for reasons other than size.
But really, whatever. Oh no, decreased sexual sensitivity? So... they last longer? Ouch. I'm sure ladies everywhere are very unhappy about this.
Wait, wasn't there some studies that linked uncircumsized guys to some kind of pelvic disorder in women?
"Just remember that sometimes you need to allow problems to just roll like water off of a duckilama's back." ~Reaper
this is just another way to put muslims and jews in jail for having children......
Well, I have to admit, I'm curious Nis, but what's the point of doing it in the first place in those religious contexts? It can't be about getting the family together for the Brisque (however you spelll that).
I say that as a joke, but I am curious why NOT doing this would be a problem... of course, I don't really see a problem with it either way, I'm just curious.
"Just remember that sometimes you need to allow problems to just roll like water off of a duckilama's back." ~Reaper
this is just another way to put muslims and jews in jail for having children......
Well, I have to admit, I'm curious Nis, but what's the point of doing it in the first place in those religious contexts? It can't be about getting the family together for the Brisque (however you spelll that).
I say that as a joke, but I am curious why NOT doing this would be a problem... of course, I don't really see a problem with it either way, I'm just curious.
Brit Mila is refer to the aliance Abraham made with god to follow judaism. the new born child has to be circumsized 8 days after he is born unless there he has a medical problem then it's postponed until the child is healthy. as far as i've heard you can even do it on a sabath or yom kipur because Brit Mila has precedance over all others obligations jews have to god.
making a law against circumcision is like making a law against being jewish.
My opinion on circumcision is that like other "popular" mutilations like nose rings and tattoos, it should be done with the full consent of the subject being circumsized. Doing this to a child which was just born is completely unfair - especially when there's no solid medical evidence toward it being useful.
Let the guy grow up, decide his religious affiliation or lack thereof, and when he becomes an adult, if he wants to, he could go to a hospital, get anaesthetic, and have the procedure performed. That is an approach that I perceive to be as evolved.
Ancient Shelter video is now annotated. New milestone video still pending.
My opinion on circumcision is that like other "popular" mutilations like nose rings and tattoos, it should be done with the full consent of the subject being circumsized. Doing this to a child which was just born is completely unfair - especially when there's no solid medical evidence toward it being useful.
Let the guy grow up, decide his religious affiliation or lack thereof, and when he becomes an adult, if he wants to, he could go to a hospital, get anaesthetic, and have the procedure performed. That is an approach that I perceive to be as evolved.
Seriously, if you don't get this done right after birth, and it is not needed for your religion, who is getting it done voluntarily when they are older, eh? Who is letting something sharp near that area?
Quote:
Keratin is a tough, skin-like substance similar to a callus that forms on top of the nerve endings of the glans, resulting in significant loss of sexual sensitivity.
Hmm, sounds like a lobby for the sex-drug companies. I mean really, do guys need anything to make sex MORE sensitive and quicker then women?
Quote:
Many men who are circumcised suffer the same psychological effects found in rape victims. A sense of great loss and feelings of anger, distrust, and grief are common among circumcised men who are aware of the functions that the foreskin performs. Problems with intimacy in adult life, long term post-traumatic stress disorder, and feelings of personal powerlessness are also reported by men when discussing their circumcisions.
Say what? All this from something that happened before you are 2 weeks old? Throwing the flag on that one...
I guess it is up to the parents. Looks like you can chalk it up to tradition but I dont see it being any type of life threating thing, etc, etc. I'm sure there is significant detail on benifits of it but I'm too tired to look those up *yawn*
I don't think I've ever said this sentence before, but man would I love to hump that butterfly.-- KrazyTaco
One phone call and you're melting like butter over my kettle pop. -- Edwin to Mex
2005 GWJFFL2 Champion
Seriously, if you don't get this done right after birth, and it is not needed for your religion, who is getting it done voluntarily when they are older, eh? Who is letting something sharp near that area?
The only reasons I hear for it being done by an adult are:
- Medical reasons. I've come across quite a few people that got circumsised due to continuing infection problems. Recent studies also indicate that circumsized men are less likely to get HIV (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg18725113.700), which, while not being very beneficial in the US, might be a significant reason in African countries where HIV is rampant.
- To look like everyone else. Not sure where most everyone is from that has posted so far, but I'm willing to bet that it's not the South. If you're an uncircumcised male in the South, you really stand out in a locker room. Not a big thing when you're older, but it could be when growing up. This is actually a reason our pediatrician gave us for the pros and cons for circumsising our son. Apparently Northern states and far Western states have MUCH lower rates of it than Southern and Mid-western states. I would also bet that whoever is behind this "bill" is from either a Northern state or California.
Speaking as a Jewish girl, I can say I will raise Holy Matzoh if anyone seriously tries to take away circumcisions. In my mind, its the nicest thing a parent can do for their son (and future daughter-in-law). It's a damn shame that some men come with extra foreskin, is all I'm saying. Purely a matter of preference, of course, but it does make a big difference to me.
Circumcision is somewhat misunderstood, I think. It's seen as this barbaric useless custom that only crazy Orthodox parents inflict on their unwitting children. First off: Jews are not the only ones to circumcise. Muslims, as niseg mentioned, and the Orthodox church (well, at least the Coptic, Ethiopian, and Greek traditions) do it too. Outlawing circumcision would affect the traditions of more than just Jews.
Secondly, as niseg mentioned, circumcision in the Jewish faith is a matter of holiness. It is a concrete symbol of the covenant Abraham made with God - y'know, the one where we agreed that if we took God to be our only God, then God would make us his peeps. I guess its our way of renewing the contract with every generation, of showing our faith. Like baptism, from what I understand? Baptism renews the affirmation of faith in each generation too. Niseg is right that a law against circumcision is a law against being Jewish (or Muslim, or Greek Orthodox). It would be like having a law against eating wafers of bread, or splashing water on the head of a baby.
Because circumcision is a matter of religious observance, it is done as quick, efficiently, and painlessly as possible. Babies do not remember the experience as they are only eight days old when it happens (as for converts, well that's a different story). And clearly, men can still have sex, and lots of it, and enjoy every minute of it, after the process. Female circumcision is a different story: from what I understand, it is not done for religious rites, its done specifically and explicitly so that women will not enjoy sex. It's not done humanely but brutally - from the stories I've read its essentially just hacking off a clitoris with a short machete. It has no greater purpose than as a tool of oppression.
There are lots of laws that God set forth that don't make much sense sometimes (Shellfish, Pork, why the hell not?). I'd like to say we do them anyway without question because we love God, and its our way of showing our devotion and faith. But Jews have trouble understanding them and doing them too. Personally, I think it was done that way on purpose, in order to give us something to think about and argue over (Jews being very big on that sort of thing when it comes to their faith. I mean, one of our holy books is essentially a bunch of guys sitting around arguing). If not eating pork and cutting off our babies' foreskins makes us think about our relationship to God in our daily lives, then I think its worth it for that alone. Not a very convincing argument to an atheist, I'll admit, but IANAT (Theologian). It works for me.
As for my son? Totally giving him a circumcision. His future wife will thank me.
"Today's Tom Sawyer, he gets high on you, Kat. You." - Haakon7
Seriously, if you don't get this done right after birth, and it is not needed for your religion, who is getting it done voluntarily when they are older, eh? Who is letting something sharp near that area?
The only reasons I hear for it being done by an adult are:
- Medical reasons. I've come across quite a few people that got circumsised due to continuing infection problems. Recent studies also indicate that circumsized men are less likely to get HIV (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg18725113.700), which, while not being very beneficial in the US, might be a significant reason in African countries where HIV is rampant.
- To look like everyone else. Not sure where most everyone is from that has posted so far, but I'm willing to bet that it's not the South. If you're an uncircumcised male in the South, you really stand out in a locker room. Not a big thing when you're older, but it could be when growing up. This is actually a reason our pediatrician gave us for the pros and cons for circumsising our son. Apparently Northern states and far Western states have MUCH lower rates of it than Southern and Mid-western states. I would also bet that whoever is behind this "bill" is from either a Northern state or California.
You should add conversion to a religion to your list. I can't speak for Islam or Orthodoxy, but I know Judaism requires male converts to be circumcised. It's the whole 'tangible symbol of The Covenant' thing.
As for the reason you don't see too many circumcised men in the South: are there really alot of Jews, Muslims, or Greek/Ethiopian/Coptic Orthodox in the so-called Bible Belt? Six Protestant churches on every street corner but you'll be lucky to find a synagogue in town.
"Today's Tom Sawyer, he gets high on you, Kat. You." - Haakon7
Er... Judaism is far from the only reason circumcision occurs in the U.S. It's a long standing American tradition in addition to any religious motivations. I can safely say it's very uncommon to be uncircumcised here in Minnesota as well.
"People in general have no principles, they do not believe in property rights (except as those rights apply to them), and they will steal all they want as long as they stand no risk of getting arrested for it. -GreatAjax on Piracy
As for the reason you don't see too many circumcised men in the South: are there really alot of Jews, Muslims, or Greek/Ethiopian/Coptic Orthodox in the so-called Bible Belt? Six Protestant churches on every street corner but you'll be lucky to find a synagogue in town.
You read it wrong. It's very common in the South. As Luda says, there are more people than Jews who circumcise as a matter of tradition, it's simply an American tradition in several parts of the country.
Uncut.
My mom decided early on that there was no way some doctor was slicing into her kids without a damn good reason.
I cannot thank her enough.
My children will not be altered before they have had a chance to make an informed decision for themselves.
And for all the time-honored religion arguments out there: Most of you are already breaking dozens of time-honored religious practices by choice. Either because they are outdate, inconvenient, or don't conform to beliefs you've developed through living life. Why would you choose to adhere to one that involves taking a scalpel to an unwilling person?
Not trying to be flame-bait or diss on peoples beliefs, but it seriously confuses the heck out of me!
You know, after reading Katerin's rant, I really do get how women feel during abortion debates.
Also, isn't it rather rude for someone to enter a baby into a covenant with god? What if he grows up to be an atheist? Then you've gone and mutilated his fireman for no good reason at all!
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
Also, isn't it rather rude for someone to enter a baby into a covenant with god? What if he grows up to be an atheist? Then you've gone and mutilated his fireman for no good reason at all!
You know, this happened to me and I don't feel bad about it at all...As Elaine (from Seinfeld, of course) says, uncut he has no face, no personality. I like my guy the way he is...Like a pink Darth Vader helmet.
Location: Running around in circles trying to get a nut
Tuesday, August 16th, 2005 - 9:37am
KaterinLHC wrote:
As for my son? Totally giving him a circumcision. His future wife will thank me.
Why? Please do explain this to me why a woman would be thankful that her husband is missing thousands of nerve endings. Duration? Please that can be learned, just tell him to think about baseball.
If we were cutting off part of the clitoris at birth, you women would be up in arms. This is the same thing as getting circumsized (since they are derived from the same tissue during biological development).
And if you let a man decide this when he is 18, trust me no man is getting circumsized.
If we were cutting off part of the clitoris at birth, you women would be up in arms.
This is female genital mutilation and it's practiced throughout the world. As I mentioned before, it causes them extreme pain during sex and childbirth (moreso than usual, that is). I don't think it's fair to compare the two.
belt500 wrote:
Alien Love Gardener wrote:
Also, isn't it rather rude for someone to enter a baby into a covenant with god? What if he grows up to be an atheist? Then you've gone and mutilated his fireman for no good reason at all!
You know, this happened to me and I don't feel bad about it at all...As Elaine (from Seinfeld, of course) says, uncut he has no face, no personality. I like my guy the way he is...Like a pink Darth Vader helmet.
Same here. I don't know what I'm missing anyway...
You know, this happened to me and I don't feel bad about it at all.
You know, this didn't happen to me and I don't feel bad about it at all.
Perspective, man! Not trying to be flippant with you, belt500. But simply stating that if I had been the victim of ritualistic cult surgery, placing ridged scars on my thighs spelling out "Property of GAWD." Looking back on it after a lifetime without issues coming from these scars and gaining acceptance because everyone else has these scars too, I'd probably be okay with it! In fact, I'd probably think it was weird if people DIDN'T have the scars.
Location: Running around in circles trying to get a nut
Tuesday, August 16th, 2005 - 9:50am
LobsterMobster wrote:
Mayfield wrote:
If we were cutting off part of the clitoris at birth, you women would be up in arms.
This is female genital mutilation and it's practiced throughout the world. As I mentioned before, it causes them extreme pain during sex and childbirth (moreso than usual, that is). I don't think it's fair to compare the two.
It's not fair, but it is the equivalent tissue in women. Just saying that men don't miss it and are not caused discomfort because of it does not make it right.
If we were cutting off part of the clitoris at birth, you women would be up in arms.
This is female genital mutilation and it's practiced throughout the world.
I don't think Mayfield was making a point based on historical perspective, but rather: Put the shoe on the other foot: Let's say, as a part of tradition and religious observance, women have their left nipple removed. The surgery leaves the biological functions of the breasts intact, and is done at an early age. This has been done for many years, and some doctors claim that it facilitates breast-feeding because the reduced sensitivity of the 'latent' nipple is less likely to cause discomfort to the woman. Other doctors claim that it is a meaningless guesture and serves no real function other than to make the breasts less sensitive.
Is that a better parallel for you?
/EDIT Let me make clear that I HOPE I'm making this up!!
I am ( because it was the thing to do in the late 60's. Along with everything else Dr. Spock recommended. For the record I am Roman Catholic.
Non of my boys are.
I had a long chat with our pediatrician and there are no physical/medical reasons tio have it done. Teaching my boys to keep their boys clean and fresh is part of my parenting job. Kind of like teaching them how to wipe the under-carriage.
With no health reasons, there is no way that I am going to have my baby strapped to a table and operated on for no reason.
Religious, well that I believe belongs in P&C so will offer no comment here.
Back in my day, you got more than one throat infection out came the tronsils... now they are realizing that maybe they should not do that so quickly. I figure if we don't need the helemt then sooner or later nature will cause them to shrivel up and drop off.
"My motto is, if it's not strong enough to release bowel control, it's not strong enough!"
Morrolan
I did a quick read-through here, and I didn't see anyone bringing up the point that the typical operation done at least in the US removes all the "extra" skin, whereas the Judaic requirement for circumcision (at least as I understand it) only requires a small bit of the foreskin to be removed. Assuming this law is appropriately worded, there's no reason to presume that a "minimal berith" would be illegal, and the soldier would still have essentially a full helmet, so to speak.
Sorry if this was already mentioned.
We chose not to have our boy circumcised, as there aren't any real hygene issues (assuming you bathe appropriately), there are real risks to the surgery, and it's plain not necessary.
If he wants to have this done to himself when he's old enough to make the choice, he'll be free to do so. I have an old friend that chose to marry a Jewish woman whose family essentially required that he convert for them to accept the marriage--and no I don't know how big an issue they made of it--and as part of this process he needed to have a ritualized circumcision performed. All that was needed was to (ouch!) do a lttle cut, and didn't need to have anything removed. But then again, he was already "helmutless".
It's also the most common optional surgical procedure done in the US, if I recall correctly. Yikes!
"Gamers With Jobs will take over the world someday. I hope they're benevolent overlords." -- Bill Harris
More info than anyone really needs, but I'm not... and I don't really get what the huge difference is. I do find it funny that most girls are like shocked and awed by my penis for reasons other than size.
But really, whatever. Oh no, decreased sexual sensitivity? So... they last longer? Ouch. I'm sure ladies everywhere are very unhappy about this.
Wait, wasn't there some studies that linked uncircumsized guys to some kind of pelvic disorder in women?
"Just remember that sometimes you need to allow problems to just roll like water off of a duckilama's back." ~Reaper
i'm jewish so i guess i'm against this.
this is just another way to put muslims and jews in jail for having children......
Well, I have to admit, I'm curious Nis, but what's the point of doing it in the first place in those religious contexts? It can't be about getting the family together for the Brisque (however you spelll that).
I say that as a joke, but I am curious why NOT doing this would be a problem... of course, I don't really see a problem with it either way, I'm just curious.
"Just remember that sometimes you need to allow problems to just roll like water off of a duckilama's back." ~Reaper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_mila
Brit Mila is refer to the aliance Abraham made with god to follow judaism. the new born child has to be circumsized 8 days after he is born unless there he has a medical problem then it's postponed until the child is healthy. as far as i've heard you can even do it on a sabath or yom kipur because Brit Mila has precedance over all others obligations jews have to god.
making a law against circumcision is like making a law against being jewish.
My opinion on circumcision is that like other "popular" mutilations like nose rings and tattoos, it should be done with the full consent of the subject being circumsized. Doing this to a child which was just born is completely unfair - especially when there's no solid medical evidence toward it being useful.
Let the guy grow up, decide his religious affiliation or lack thereof, and when he becomes an adult, if he wants to, he could go to a hospital, get anaesthetic, and have the procedure performed. That is an approach that I perceive to be as evolved.
Ancient Shelter video is now annotated. New milestone video still pending.
Seriously, if you don't get this done right after birth, and it is not needed for your religion, who is getting it done voluntarily when they are older, eh? Who is letting something sharp near that area?
Hmm, sounds like a lobby for the sex-drug companies. I mean really, do guys need anything to make sex MORE sensitive and quicker then women?
Say what? All this from something that happened before you are 2 weeks old? Throwing the flag on that one...
I guess it is up to the parents. Looks like you can chalk it up to tradition but I dont see it being any type of life threating thing, etc, etc. I'm sure there is significant detail on benifits of it but I'm too tired to look those up *yawn*
I don't think I've ever said this sentence before, but man would I love to hump that butterfly.-- KrazyTaco
One phone call and you're melting like butter over my kettle pop. -- Edwin to Mex
2005 GWJFFL2 Champion
The only reasons I hear for it being done by an adult are:
- Medical reasons. I've come across quite a few people that got circumsised due to continuing infection problems. Recent studies also indicate that circumsized men are less likely to get HIV (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/mg18725113.700), which, while not being very beneficial in the US, might be a significant reason in African countries where HIV is rampant.
- To look like everyone else. Not sure where most everyone is from that has posted so far, but I'm willing to bet that it's not the South. If you're an uncircumcised male in the South, you really stand out in a locker room. Not a big thing when you're older, but it could be when growing up. This is actually a reason our pediatrician gave us for the pros and cons for circumsising our son. Apparently Northern states and far Western states have MUCH lower rates of it than Southern and Mid-western states. I would also bet that whoever is behind this "bill" is from either a Northern state or California.
Speaking as a Jewish girl, I can say I will raise Holy Matzoh if anyone seriously tries to take away circumcisions. In my mind, its the nicest thing a parent can do for their son (and future daughter-in-law). It's a damn shame that some men come with extra foreskin, is all I'm saying. Purely a matter of preference, of course, but it does make a big difference to me.
Circumcision is somewhat misunderstood, I think. It's seen as this barbaric useless custom that only crazy Orthodox parents inflict on their unwitting children. First off: Jews are not the only ones to circumcise. Muslims, as niseg mentioned, and the Orthodox church (well, at least the Coptic, Ethiopian, and Greek traditions) do it too. Outlawing circumcision would affect the traditions of more than just Jews.
Secondly, as niseg mentioned, circumcision in the Jewish faith is a matter of holiness. It is a concrete symbol of the covenant Abraham made with God - y'know, the one where we agreed that if we took God to be our only God, then God would make us his peeps. I guess its our way of renewing the contract with every generation, of showing our faith. Like baptism, from what I understand? Baptism renews the affirmation of faith in each generation too. Niseg is right that a law against circumcision is a law against being Jewish (or Muslim, or Greek Orthodox). It would be like having a law against eating wafers of bread, or splashing water on the head of a baby.
Because circumcision is a matter of religious observance, it is done as quick, efficiently, and painlessly as possible. Babies do not remember the experience as they are only eight days old when it happens (as for converts, well that's a different story). And clearly, men can still have sex, and lots of it, and enjoy every minute of it, after the process. Female circumcision is a different story: from what I understand, it is not done for religious rites, its done specifically and explicitly so that women will not enjoy sex. It's not done humanely but brutally - from the stories I've read its essentially just hacking off a clitoris with a short machete. It has no greater purpose than as a tool of oppression.
There are lots of laws that God set forth that don't make much sense sometimes (Shellfish, Pork, why the hell not?). I'd like to say we do them anyway without question because we love God, and its our way of showing our devotion and faith. But Jews have trouble understanding them and doing them too. Personally, I think it was done that way on purpose, in order to give us something to think about and argue over (Jews being very big on that sort of thing when it comes to their faith. I mean, one of our holy books is essentially a bunch of guys sitting around arguing). If not eating pork and cutting off our babies' foreskins makes us think about our relationship to God in our daily lives, then I think its worth it for that alone. Not a very convincing argument to an atheist, I'll admit, but IANAT (Theologian). It works for me.
As for my son? Totally giving him a circumcision. His future wife will thank me.
"Today's Tom Sawyer, he gets high on you, Kat. You." - Haakon7
My Website v. 3.0
You should add conversion to a religion to your list. I can't speak for Islam or Orthodoxy, but I know Judaism requires male converts to be circumcised. It's the whole 'tangible symbol of The Covenant' thing.
As for the reason you don't see too many circumcised men in the South: are there really alot of Jews, Muslims, or Greek/Ethiopian/Coptic Orthodox in the so-called Bible Belt? Six Protestant churches on every street corner but you'll be lucky to find a synagogue in town.
"Today's Tom Sawyer, he gets high on you, Kat. You." - Haakon7
My Website v. 3.0
Er... Judaism is far from the only reason circumcision occurs in the U.S. It's a long standing American tradition in addition to any religious motivations. I can safely say it's very uncommon to be uncircumcised here in Minnesota as well.
"People in general have no principles, they do not believe in property rights (except as those rights apply to them), and they will steal all they want as long as they stand no risk of getting arrested for it. -GreatAjax on Piracy
"You just checked in to Hotel Califoni-getyourasskicked!" Steely Dan said to The Eagles
Well, uh... I think these guys are conflating male genital mutilation with female genital mutilation.
Effects of MGM: Decreased sexual sensitivity.
Effects of FGM: Intense pain during sexual intercourse and childbirth.
This is just silly.
NOTE: This is not a doodle bug.
BF2142 Stats
Yeah, but they tend to be well lit...
NOTE: This is not a doodle bug.
BF2142 Stats
Uncut.
My mom decided early on that there was no way some doctor was slicing into her kids without a damn good reason.
I cannot thank her enough.
My children will not be altered before they have had a chance to make an informed decision for themselves.
And for all the time-honored religion arguments out there: Most of you are already breaking dozens of time-honored religious practices by choice. Either because they are outdate, inconvenient, or don't conform to beliefs you've developed through living life. Why would you choose to adhere to one that involves taking a scalpel to an unwilling person?
Not trying to be flame-bait or diss on peoples beliefs, but it seriously confuses the heck out of me!
Politely rude. Briskly vague. Firmly uninformative.
Ok I am now prepared to begin my conquering of the world.
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
You know, after reading Katerin's rant, I really do get how women feel during abortion debates.
Also, isn't it rather rude for someone to enter a baby into a covenant with god? What if he grows up to be an atheist? Then you've gone and mutilated his fireman for no good reason at all!
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
Uhh, how about no?
You know, this happened to me and I don't feel bad about it at all...As Elaine (from Seinfeld, of course) says, uncut he has no face, no personality. I like my guy the way he is...Like a pink Darth Vader helmet.
Why? Please do explain this to me why a woman would be thankful that her husband is missing thousands of nerve endings. Duration? Please that can be learned, just tell him to think about baseball.
If we were cutting off part of the clitoris at birth, you women would be up in arms. This is the same thing as getting circumsized (since they are derived from the same tissue during biological development).
And if you let a man decide this when he is 18, trust me no man is getting circumsized.
Playing WoW as: Vilius (70 NE Druid)
This is female genital mutilation and it's practiced throughout the world. As I mentioned before, it causes them extreme pain during sex and childbirth (moreso than usual, that is). I don't think it's fair to compare the two.
Same here. I don't know what I'm missing anyway...
NOTE: This is not a doodle bug.
BF2142 Stats
Just don't let the women pass the law to remove the penis completely.
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
You know, this didn't happen to me and I don't feel bad about it at all.
Perspective, man! Not trying to be flippant with you, belt500. But simply stating that if I had been the victim of ritualistic cult surgery, placing ridged scars on my thighs spelling out "Property of GAWD." Looking back on it after a lifetime without issues coming from these scars and gaining acceptance because everyone else has these scars too, I'd probably be okay with it! In fact, I'd probably think it was weird if people DIDN'T have the scars.
We all do, Belt! We all do!
Politely rude. Briskly vague. Firmly uninformative.
.......................
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
It's not fair, but it is the equivalent tissue in women. Just saying that men don't miss it and are not caused discomfort because of it does not make it right.
Playing WoW as: Vilius (70 NE Druid)
I don't think Mayfield was making a point based on historical perspective, but rather: Put the shoe on the other foot: Let's say, as a part of tradition and religious observance, women have their left nipple removed. The surgery leaves the biological functions of the breasts intact, and is done at an early age. This has been done for many years, and some doctors claim that it facilitates breast-feeding because the reduced sensitivity of the 'latent' nipple is less likely to cause discomfort to the woman. Other doctors claim that it is a meaningless guesture and serves no real function other than to make the breasts less sensitive.
Is that a better parallel for you?
/EDIT Let me make clear that I HOPE I'm making this up!!
Politely rude. Briskly vague. Firmly uninformative.
I have to say I've never given much thought to Belt's guy one way or the other. I guess I may be in the minority though.
If I'd known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself
Rezzy's analogy is better. I think it's a closer comparison. Also, it has boobies.
Don't worry Zedian, we won't let them lock you away.
NOTE: This is not a doodle bug.
BF2142 Stats
I am ( because it was the thing to do in the late 60's. Along with everything else Dr. Spock recommended. For the record I am Roman Catholic.
Non of my boys are.
I had a long chat with our pediatrician and there are no physical/medical reasons tio have it done. Teaching my boys to keep their boys clean and fresh is part of my parenting job. Kind of like teaching them how to wipe the under-carriage.
With no health reasons, there is no way that I am going to have my baby strapped to a table and operated on for no reason.
Religious, well that I believe belongs in P&C so will offer no comment here.
Back in my day, you got more than one throat infection out came the tronsils... now they are realizing that maybe they should not do that so quickly. I figure if we don't need the helemt then sooner or later nature will cause them to shrivel up and drop off.
"My motto is, if it's not strong enough to release bowel control, it's not strong enough!"
Morrolan
Moving to P&C... mostly to remove "Genital Mutilation" from the damn topics list. *shudder*
Certis beat me to it. - Elysium
I did a quick read-through here, and I didn't see anyone bringing up the point that the typical operation done at least in the US removes all the "extra" skin, whereas the Judaic requirement for circumcision (at least as I understand it) only requires a small bit of the foreskin to be removed. Assuming this law is appropriately worded, there's no reason to presume that a "minimal berith" would be illegal, and the soldier would still have essentially a full helmet, so to speak.
Sorry if this was already mentioned.
We chose not to have our boy circumcised, as there aren't any real hygene issues (assuming you bathe appropriately), there are real risks to the surgery, and it's plain not necessary.
If he wants to have this done to himself when he's old enough to make the choice, he'll be free to do so. I have an old friend that chose to marry a Jewish woman whose family essentially required that he convert for them to accept the marriage--and no I don't know how big an issue they made of it--and as part of this process he needed to have a ritualized circumcision performed. All that was needed was to (ouch!) do a lttle cut, and didn't need to have anything removed. But then again, he was already "helmutless".
It's also the most common optional surgical procedure done in the US, if I recall correctly. Yikes!
"Gamers With Jobs will take over the world someday. I hope they're benevolent overlords." -- Bill Harris