Male Genital Mutliation bill in congress. Again.

I seem to get the impression that several people aren't aware of what circumcision actually is. For the male, this means removing the foreskin. Just the skin. For the female, this means removing part of the clitoris. This is done exclusively to make sex painful and unpleasurable for the women, usually as a means of controlling her sex habits. If the equivilant was done to males, the head of the penis would be removed. Do you see why this is different?

Rezzy wrote:

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.

Actually, I misspoke. I didn't have it done for any religious reasons. It was done because doctors at the time were saying that it's a cleanliness thing and that it would reduce the chances of infections. So, there is more to the lopping than religion.

belt500 wrote:

I like my guy the way he is...

We all do, Belt! We all do! ;)[/quote]
Awesome. I didn't realize my penis had that large a following!

I am circumcised and my wiener works fine.

PyromanFO wrote:
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.

Oops! You're right, I did! That's what happens when I post before coffee. No rational thought should take place before the daily caffiene injection.

Mayfield wrote:
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.

Why am I planning on circumcising my boys, if I have any? Well, I'm Jewish, for one. But, aside from that....

[DISCLAIMER]I enter the realm of unsubstantiated claims here. Please do not take my opinion as I am saying in anyway something universal. If you don't want to enter the realm of Too Much Info, then skip over this next part.

I have had sex with men who are circumcised and with those who are not. Sex is FAR more pleasurable for me with a circumcised guy. Foreskin is not only ugly, but it gets in the way when a guy is not fully erect (which happens in the course of foreplay) and makes certain sexual acts rather unpleasant for me. The guys with foreskins I've slept with also tend to smell differently (in a bad way) down there .... be less clean... its really rather offputting. Nobody wants to get up close and personal with nether regions that smell bad. Finally, I find an uncircumcised penis - even an unerect one - is aesthetically pleasing and personally arousing. Certainly more so than something in a sheath - who knows what's hiding under there? I'm not saying I can't have a good time with an uncircumcised guy... but its just not the same level of fun.

[END TOO MUCH INFO PART]

I am not the only woman who feels this way, though certainly its not a universal opinion. I have discussed this with my girlfriends before, though, and y'know how people say once you've had [fill in the blank], you'll never go back? Well, I think its pretty much the same with circumcised penises (penii?) too.

The thing is, men can still enjoy sex - and heartily so, might I add - without a foreskin. It's very difficult for women to enjoy sex without a clitoris. Indeed, that's if female circumcision stops at the clitoris; I've heard terrible tales (i'll try and find some links for you guys) about more than just clitorises being removed.

I resent the fact that circumcisions are treated as some sort of obscure practice. It's not obscure, at least in Jewish tradition. Abraham, when he was chattin' it up with God up on the hill, was told that as a "token of the covenant", Jews should circumcise their boys. We're told right up front that its a way of remembering our faith in God as a people. Now, if you want to argue whether children should be forced to do it without full knowledge, that's a different story, but saying that it is a form of "ritualistic cult surgery" is rather unfair to the holiness of the practice. Judaism, Islam, and Orthodox are not cults, by the way.

Rezzy wrote:

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?

And arguing that people should not practice circumcision because they are already breaking other laws is just plain illogical. If I break the speed limit, does that mean I should be allowed to murder people, then? Being a religious person does not mean that you always live by the laws and never make any mistakes and are perfectly devout all the time. Jees, look at David, for instance. Or Noah. But being holy means you strive to be the best you can and follow the laws as best as you can. Circumcision is a holy rite; it is an affirmation of the covenant, as is all the other laws we strive to follow. There's gotta be some more Jews out there to back me up on this: where did you go niseg? Help me!

I don't think a parent should be able to consent to unnecessary surgery. Traditional or not. Personally I've had to repress enough over bad haircuts and OshKosh.

I don't like laws that try to tell other people how to live their lives when they are not effecting anyone other than them selves. If parents want to slice their child, it should be up to them. I was sliced and I'm glad. I've heard way too many girls talk about how they don't like uncircumised penises. I saw a Penn and Teller episode about this and it is possible to get the foreskin back if someone really wants it.

And what about all the kids born intersex, and the parents decide to make them a boy or a girl, or the doctors do it and don't even tell the parents. Now that's mutilation.

KaterinLHC wrote:

The guys with foreskins I've slept with also tend to smell differently (in a bad way) down there .... be less clean... its really rather offputting.

I think this has more to do with the fact that by default, a circumsized person is more aware of the condition of their peepee. In the process of that "talk" when they're told about the circumcision, hopefully someone gives them pointers on cleaning it as well.

Unfortunately there are people out there who

a) Don't fold back the skin to clean the area directly under/around the foundation of the head. This is the main culprit of accumulating unsightly garbage and smells. Soaping and washing there in the shower every morning stops it dead.

b) Leave traces of urine in their foreskin area after peeing. This has a tendency to leak into underwear and also create smells.

I think this kind of education should be mandatory. A lot of people are left to figure out these things on their own.

shihonage wrote:

This is the main culprit of accumulating unsightly garbage and smells.

wow. I actually never really thought about "accumulating garbage" down there. Very, very disturbing.

belt500 wrote:
shihonage wrote:

This is the main culprit of accumulating unsightly garbage and smells.

wow. I actually never really thought about "accumulating garbage" down there. Very, very disturbing.

Kind of like a lint filter... gotta clean it after each use.

You know, I don't mean to keep this thread going, but I still haven't gotten an answer to my question. What's the religious purpose here. Yeah yeah, sign of commitment to God, blah blah... why the hell do you need to chop off part of a weinerbomb (or is that a weiner firecracker at that point?) as that symbol? Where did that come from? I find it all a little wierd. I mean, to each his own, if that's your belief, I think you should be able to do it, I just have a problem with it being done to guys without their approval of the issue.

Demosthenes wrote:

You know, I don't mean to keep this thread going, but I still haven't gotten an answer to my question. What's the religious purpose here. Yeah yeah, sign of commitment to God, blah blah... why the hell do you need to chop off part of a weinerbomb (or is that a weiner firecracker at that point?) as that symbol? Where did that come from? I find it all a little wierd. I mean, to each his own, if that's your belief, I think you should be able to do it, I just have a problem with it being done to guys without their approval of the issue.

I thought I'd already explained what the religious significance of circumcision is? That it's a tangible symbol of the Covenant Abraham made with God (that being a cornerstone of the Jewish faith, btw). If you like, I will look up in the Torah and Talmud to see if I can find any speculation within the religion as to why, specifically, God asked for that. But the "religious purpose" of circumcision is that it's a symbol of faith, which millions of Jews (and other religions' adherents) believe is a relevant way of expressing their beliefs and commitment to God.

It's the same thing, symbollicaly, as splashing water on a baby's forehead. You are reaffirming your faith, and introducing your beloved child to God when you baptize. Same sort of thing with circumcisions.

I really wish you wouldn't "blah blah" my religious convictions, either. Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean that they aren't worthy of respect. I don't say to you, "Agnostic, blah blah" or "Christian whatever". Maybe you can't understand why anyone would do something simply out of religious belief and commitment to God, but that doesn't mean you should ridicule it.

Finally, I think you have a vague misunderstanding as to how much circumcision takes off. Circumcision is not chopping off a part of the wienerbomb; it is slicing off a small section of the foreskin. Foreskin != head of penis.

Where did that come from?

Abraham, the father of Islam and Judeo-Christianity. Oh, what warring brothers they are!

Okay, so here's what I've found about the reasoning behind, specifically, circumcision in the Jewish faith. Sefer HaChinuch (I've never heard of him, either) made the following argument.

Circumcised penises are easily distinguishable from uncircumcised penises. Cutting off the foreskin was a way to make Jews physically distinguishable from non-Jews, just as we are spiritually distinct from non-Jews. Monotheism was a big deal, back when the Jews popularized it. Apart from the Zoroastrians arguably, we were the only bunch doing it. Choosing to worship one God was an extreme spiritual step - just as cutting off a part of a man's foreskin can be seen as extreme too.

Why the penis, then, and not the ear? Because God wanted this symbol to be a choice one. As a penis is one-half the neccessary hardware for the creation of human life, a penis is an apt method of symbolizing the continuation of the commitment throughout the generations. A circumcised penis is preferred, optimal

So if it's preferred, why didn't God just make men without foreskins? Because circumcision is, in itself, a symbol of how we need to approach our faith. Just as we cannot achieve physical perfection without effort, so can we not achieve spiritual perfection without effort. It's to remind us that spirituality requires effort and struggle and sometimes pain.

Maimonides, on the other hand, had a totally different take on it. He was kickin' around in the Middle Ages, so he had kind of a 'sex is evil' sort of take that everyone seemed to buy into back then, in that church dominated world. He said that Jews remove the foreskins of penises so that we can remind ourselves that we must curb our sexual habits, that we "must turn from evil and do good" (as recommended in Psalms 34:15). I don't buy that, myself. I think poor big M. was just a product of his time.

All of this was taken from the Big Huge Jewish FAQ, www.torah.org - at this specific site.

I've gotta thank you, Demos. Researching this with the intent of explaining it has made me understand my faith's practices better - I'm not a particularly devout Jew, but I do like exploring the Torah and arguing about it. I never got circumcision either. Now, I feel like I do. Thanks :).

Strangely this conversation is making me think of Ashoura Day for Shiite muslims. When they have parades of men cutting thier heads in a religious ritual.

IMAGE(http://www.colesgazette.com/shiite_ashoura.jpg)

It's the same thing, symbollicaly, as splashing water on a baby's forehead. You are reaffirming your faith, and introducing your beloved child to God when you baptize. Same sort of thing with circumcisions.

Putting water on the forehead doesn't hurt.

Demosthenes wrote:

You know, I don't mean to keep this thread going, but I still haven't gotten an answer to my question. What's the religious purpose here. Yeah yeah, sign of commitment to God, blah blah... why the hell do you need to chop off part of a weinerbomb (or is that a weiner firecracker at that point?) as that symbol? Where did that come from?

As to why circumcision specifically, I'm kind of partial to the theory is is that it came about for hygienic reasons, and the religious reasons being grafted on after the fact. There's not exactly a lot of opportunities to bathe frequently in the arid areas where Islam and Judaism came about, after all.

Similar to the deal with catching diseases off improperly prepared pork and pigs being declared unclean animals, and such.

I think it's related to men wanting to chop off their son's wang so their son doesn't kill them and impregnate their wife.

Edwin wrote:

Putting water on the forehead doesn't hurt.

It does if you hold 'em under there for a few extra seconds.

Downing doesn't hurt. It's just scary till you get the first breath of water. Been there, done that.

As to why circumcision specifically, I'm kind of partial to the theory is is that it came about for hygienic reasons, and the religious reasons being grafted on after the fact.

I find it amusing you use the terminology "grafted on by religion" in a discussion about circumcision...

belt500 wrote:
Edwin wrote:

Putting water on the forehead doesn't hurt.

It does if you hold 'em under there for a few extra seconds. :wink:

Do they really do that? I've seen pictures of when I was baptised against my will, and all the did was use like a cup to pour some water on my forehead. I guess that would be kind of freaky if you dunk the kid underwater for a little bit of time.

Edwin wrote:
belt500 wrote:
Edwin wrote:

Putting water on the forehead doesn't hurt.

It does if you hold 'em under there for a few extra seconds. :wink:

Do they really do that? I've seen pictures of when I was baptised against my will, and all the did was use like a cup to pour some water on my forehead. I guess that would be kind of freaky if you dunk the kid underwater for a little bit of time.

Full body immersion style baptisms are quite common.

Do they really do that? I've seen pictures of when I was baptised against my will, and all the did was use like a cup to pour some water on my forehead. I guess that would be kind of freaky if you dunk the kid underwater for a little bit of time.

I remember hearing about how my mother and father were seperated briefly after my sister's birth and that my father and grandmother on my father's side essentially kidnapped my sister and took her out of state to be baptized at a specific (I don't know which one) Catholic Church because "We wanted to save her soul from the fires of hell!"

back on topic:

Considering you can be converted to Judaism/whatever later in life I do not see why you should force this procedure on anyone unable to give consent.

Dr. Ghastly wrote:

Considering you can be converted to Judaism/whatever later in life I do not see why you should force this procedure on anyone unable to give consent.

Well, first off, converting to Judaism is not like converting to Methodism. Nobody just splashes water on your forehead, and boom, you're a Jew. Some Christian faiths don't even require baptism to join up - as long as you declare Jesus to be your savior, you're in. It's totally different with Jews: a long and ardous process that takes months of study and classes and such.

Moreover, as long as your Mom's Jewish, you're born a Jew. The religion considers you Jewish. So, my son will be Jewish, regardless of whether I circumcise him or not. But because he is Jewish, he has duties to God to fulfill, and it is my responsibility to help him fulfill his mitzvoh when he cannot. Part of the deal of being a male Jew is getting your foreskin partially removed. Are you this adamant against baptism? If you are, then you are being consistent. If not, then I ask why not?

Y'know, you don't choose to enroll in school, or get your tetanus shots, or go to dayschool when you're a kid - your parents choose for you. Your parents forced all sorts of things on you without you being able to give your consent. This is just one more thing that a Jewish person's parents choose to do for him. If my son later decided to leave the faith, that would be up to him. But just because you can later drop out of school, does that mean your parents shouldn't enroll you in the first place? Does that mean that just because you can later neglect your health, your parents shouldn't concern themselves with shots either?

Your parents are supposed to set an example for you, and how you live your life: that includes your spiritual life too. You can later choose to ignore their way of doing things, modify it, or accept it, but to suggest that parents should just completely not supply the basic foundations of faith to their child is being illogical. My son will make his desicions when he's old enough to do so. Until that time, I will make them for him.

Y'know, you don't choose to enroll in school, or get your tetanus shots, or go to dayschool when you're a kid - your parents choose for you.

I think the biggest difference is that those are required by law (they are right?), and they actually have a noteworthy effect on the child's health.

If my son later decided to leave the faith, that would be up to him. But just because you can later drop out of school, does that mean your parents shouldn't enroll you in the first place?

The big difference here that I see is that leaving the faith is super easy. Getting that foreskin back is a mission and a half and costly (I would at least assume so, I have not looked into how you can get it back).

Edwin wrote:
Y'know, you don't choose to enroll in school, or get your tetanus shots, or go to dayschool when you're a kid - your parents choose for you.

I think the biggest difference is that those are required by law (they are right?), and they actually have a noteworthy effect on the child's health.

It's required by my law, too. Jewish law.

If my son later decided to leave the faith, that would be up to him. But just because you can later drop out of school, does that mean your parents shouldn't enroll you in the first place?

The big difference here that I see is that leaving the faith is super easy. Getting that foreskin back is a mission and a half and costly (I would at least assume so, I have not looked into how you can get it back).

Getting back those countless years you spent in lower school will never happen. Nor will you ever be able to erase the fact you once got tetanus shots, no matter how much you mess up your health.

Well, first off, converting to Judaism is not like converting to Methodism. Nobody just splashes water on your forehead, and boom, you're a Jew. Some Christian faiths don't even require baptism to join up - as long as you declare Jesus to be your savior, you're in. It's totally different with Jews: a long and ardous process that takes months of study and classes and such.

I'm aware of this. I didn't imply simplicity, just that it can be done later in life (if you are not born jewish of course..)

Moreover, as long as your Mom's Jewish, you're born a Jew. The religion considers you Jewish. So, my son will be Jewish, regardless of whether I circumcise him or not. But because he is Jewish, he has duties to God to fulfill, and it is my responsibility to help him fulfill his mitzvoh when he cannot. Part of the deal of being a male Jew is getting your foreskin partially removed. Are you this adamant against baptism? If you are, then you are being consistent. If not, then I ask why not?

What if he doesn't want to follow the jewish teachings and doesn't want to have his foreskin snipped? I love the arguments people bring up to this that your a kid, you don't realize what has happend, so you will grow up used to it. How about they surgically remove your arm? You won't have really known anything different there either..

And yes, I am against baptizing children for the exact same reason. I want the choice. With baptism it's not such a big deal, compared to circumcision, because they aren't cutting pieces of me off that I was born, but the idea still rankles.

Y'know, you don't choose to enroll in school, or get your tetanus shots, or go to dayschool when you're a kid - your parents choose for you. Your parents forced all sorts of things on you without you being able to give your consent. This is just one more thing that a Jewish person's parents choose to do for him. If my son later decided to leave the faith, that would be up to him. But just because you can later drop out of school, does that mean your parents shouldn't enroll you in the first place? Does that mean that just because you can later neglect your health, your parents shouldn't concern themselves with shots either?

Going to school or daycare do not involve removing pieces of thier flesh. Getting a tetanus shot is not mandatory because you can home school (as I believe those shots are really only required if you wish to send the kid to public/private school. Correct me if I am wrong) Dropping out of school is a choice that will affect them from thier own choice to do so. Cutting off part/all of thier foreskin is a choice that will affect them for the rest of thier life that they had no say in.

You're making health based arguments on an initial discussion of religious overtones and meanings. I thought it was purly a religious reason for doing this. If it isn't, doctors has shown there is NO medical reason or justification for doing this to a child, so why still do it? Because you don't want to educate your kids on how to clean themselves? Because you want to make sure his g/f, wife, boyfriend, whatever has, in your opinion, and aestecthically pleasing penis to look at? Those reasons sound awfully selfish to me.

Your parents are supposed to set an example for you, and how you live your life: that includes your spiritual life too. You can later choose to ignore their way of doing things, modify it, or accept it, but to suggest that parents should just completely not supply the basic foundations of faith to their child is being illogical. My son will make his desicions when he's old enough to do so. Until that time, I will make them for him.

Yeah, because removing the flesh of a child, who may not have agreed to in the first place, to satisfy your personal relgious beliefs is logical and fair. What if a parent wants to make the choice for his or her child to remove the penis and have a sex change ont he child? Afterall he isn't old enough to make his own decisions and they may have really wanted a girl.....

Getting back those countless years you spent in lower school will never happen. Nor will you ever be able to erase the fact you once got tetanus shots, no matter how much you mess up your health.

True. But again 1) it is required by US law, and 2) you sort of need it to continue on in life. Having a little piece of skin does not end it.

Moreover, as long as your Mom's Jewish, you're born a Jew. The religion considers you Jewish. So, my son will be Jewish, regardless of whether I circumcise him or not. But because he is Jewish, he has duties to God to fulfill, and it is my responsibility to help him fulfill his mitzvoh when he cannot. Part of the deal of being a male Jew is getting your foreskin partially removed. Are you this adamant against baptism? If you are, then you are being consistent. If not, then I ask why not?

Ok, so what am I? My mom came from a christian family, but did the full conversion to Judaism for her first marriage. She got divorced and married my father, who is catholic. I was baptised catholic and circumsized (though I think it was done at the hospital). So, can I still kick it with God or what? And if so, which God?