[Storm]

	Originally Posted by Warrior To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	So explain to me how I remember it.

I think nightmar is referring to the fact that the traumatic experience of circumcision has been shown to rewire the brain in negative ways.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
is a link on a few studies.

	If that is really your position, there are all kinds of medical procedures performed on infants and kids that could not be performed because they can't give consent.

Aesthetic procedures?

[AnnaMolly]

Very much against it. Don't have any respect for people who do that to their kids.

Thankfully, where I live (and in Europe in general), it's not very common. Some guys willingly have it done as adults in order to "last longer" during sex, because it obviously takes away a lot of sensitivity. Would never get involved with a guy like that.

Obviously, if it's done for actual medical reasons (phimosis), it's something else entirely and often a sad, but necessary procedure.

[Nightmare]

	Originally Posted by Warrior To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	So explain to me how I remember it.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
an example. There's plenty more, too, just ask.

	If that is really your position, there are all kinds of medical procedures performed on infants and kids that could not be performed because they can't give consent.

None or virtually none that involve the severing of limbs or tissue for no substantial medical reasoning whatsoever.

	You're complaining about "writhing against constraints". My kids did that when I changed their diaper, gave them a bath, put them in a car seat, and a number of other things. Should none of those things be done either?

How is this even comparable? In your family, do you sometimes strap your kid to a table and cut parts of his body off with sharp utensils?

And why do I get the feeling you're defending circumcision as if it is morally correct? That is ethically backward. Get more information on this topic before declaring your position superior.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Warrior]

	Originally Posted by Storm To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I think nightmar is referring to the fact that the traumatic experience of circumcision has been shown to rewire the brain in negative ways. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. is a link on a few studies.

So you're saying he can't explain how I remember?

	Aesthetic procedures?

Yes.

[followthehippos]

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What a load of bullshit. Notice the "unless they sufficiently keep themselves clean" bit. So if you're in a coal mine for your whole life and/or don't have access to sanitation your chances of cancer are increased? What a surprise!!!!

It simply stated uncircumcised males are more likely to get prostate cancer when older. I think the mentioning of cleansing was to illustrate that the most proper way of preventing the development of prostate cancer was to consistently keep oneself clean throughout life, otherwise from the years of buildup or whatever it was ultimately trying to illustrate, prostate cancer can form. Arguably those who are circumcised won't as much of a problem in that department, I don't have a complete recollection of the exact details it described behind why uncircumcised individuals are more likely to get prostate cancer, I just know it established that they are. My underlying fact about cleansing may be off, I'll admit.

	Originally Posted by Ghostwheel To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Surely, there are all manner of infections one can get if one doesn't keep oneself sufficiently clean, yes? Shaving off your hair will protect against lice, but most of us elect to keep the mop on top and take our chances, right? Freedom of choice and personal responsibility, as always, are key here.

I agree with you, I'm not an advocate of circumcision by any means. I'm simply stating that it has been supposedly established that uncircumcised males are more likely to get prostate cancer. If someone wants to 'take the chance' or however you want to term it with uncircumcision I guess that the parents will ultimately decide. Unless they decide not to make that decision and let all males at some age older decide for themselves. Though I've heard getting a circumcision at an older age can be pretty painful.

[eagleseven]

I think it's unnecessary, but I don't work myself into a frenzy like nightmar here. At the time my parents had it done, it was thought to reduce disease risk (which it does, though the effect is marginal). I'm not angry at my parents or the medical establishment for it, and don't miss something I can't remember having.

So I have reduced sensitivity? Big whup, it's not like polio or fetal-alcohol-syndrome.

---

They do have foreskin-reconstruction procedures for those men who are psychologically traumatized whenever they see their penis, nightmar. Might want to look into it.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Warrior]

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. an example. There's plenty more, too, just ask.

That didn't say anything about how I remember being circumcised today.

	None or virtually none that involve the severing of limbs or tissue for no substantial medical reasoning whatsoever.

Separation of joined digits is usually purely aesthetic, as are some dental and orthodontic procedures. At the very least they are not strictly necessary for health purposes.

	How is this even comparable?

Writhing against constraints is writhing against constraints. If that was meant to be a meaningful comment, then it is comparable.

	In your family, do you sometimes strap your kid to a table and cut parts of his body off with sharp utensils?

Not routinely, but we have given consent for doctors or dentists to do that on a couple occasions.

	And why do I get the feeling you're defending circumcision as if it is morally correct?

Because you are making it up, I guess.

	That is ethically backward. Get more information on this topic before declaring your position superior.

I have plenty of information. I have offered no ethical or moral position at all. I've only commented on a particular legal aspect regarding consent, ask you to explain how I remember this today, and also about restraining kids and how that factors in. You seem to be the only one proclaiming a superior position.

[Eye on Earth]

Circumcision is a choice. Deal with it.

[ummon]

I'm quite proud that San Franciscans attempted to pass a ban on unnecessary infant circumcision. Unfortunately, the bill was struck off the ballot because a municipality isn't allowed to regulate medical procedures. Still, at least California has a much lower circumcision rate than the rest of the nation.

---------- Post added 04-22-2012 at 07:35 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by Eye on Earth To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Circumcision is a choice. Deal with it.

Not currently. Currently, the person on which circumcision is performed usually has no choice (because his parents make the decision for him). That is wrong.

[Nightmare]

	Originally Posted by Eye on Earth To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Circumcision is a choice. Deal with it.

A choice of the individual, not the parent of the individual. It is only fair that everyone have a right to bodily integrity; something that is legally eluded to. Without that fundamental right, what is the point of being one's own physical entity? Are we given a body to have that body modified to others' liking, where the result of such modification has no impact on that party?

[Eye on Earth]

[QUOTE=ummon;2498959]I'm quite proud that San Franciscans attempted to pass a ban on unnecessary infant circumcision. Unfortunately, the bill was struck off the ballot because a municipality isn't allowed to regulate medical procedures. Still, at least California has a much lower circumcision rate than the rest of the nation.

---------- Post added 04-22-2012 at 07:35 PM ----------



Not currently. Currently, the person on which circumcision is performed usually has no choice (because his parents make the decision for him). That is wrong.[/QUOTE]

So, you would advocate parents not having a right to make decisions for their children prior to the point when a child can decide on their own. That's naive thinking. That kind of thinking gets people killed.

What I am saying is that parents have decisions to make and they can choose to have the procedure done or not. Parents can educate themselves and make their own choice for the health and welfare of their child.

---------- Post added 04-22-2012 at 11:45 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	A choice of the individual, not the parent of the individual. It is only fair that everyone have a right to bodily integrity; something that is legally eluded to. Without that fundamental right, what is the point of being one's own physical entity? Are we given a body to have that body modified to others' liking, where the result of such modification has no impact on that party?

I see absolutely nothing in the US Constitution that says that people have a right to bodily integrity as it applies to circumcision. You're advocating for a right that doesn't exist.

[Nightmare]

	That kind of thinking gets people killed.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeee!

	What I am saying is that parents have decisions to make and they can choose to have the procedure done or not. Parents can educate themselves and make their own choice for the health and welfare of their child.

A procedure with no substantial medical grounding should be illegal to perform on a minor. A parent cannot walk into a doctor's office and demand the doctor amputate their infant's limbs. That would be illegal. Why does this not apply to circumcision?

	I see absolutely nothing in the US Constitution that says that people have a right to bodily integrity as it applies to circumcision. You're advocating for a right that doesn't exist.

Dude, that's the point. I advocate for this right to exist legally, not just on an animal and ethical level. I also said such things are legally eluded to, didn't I? It's eluded to in the 'Right to Privacy' jargon. This has taken substantial heat with Roe v. Wade, and I think it's time the Supreme Court does something substantial with it. Demand it be legislation.

[thesorehead]

I'm not convinced that circumcision necessarily fucks anything up in 100% of cases, but I'm equally unconvinced that there is any rational medical reason for it to be a standard procedure.

Maybe one in a million babies might have some real medical reason (I dunno... cancer? some kind of severe disfigurement?) but the cleanliness argument is total hogwash in a country with clean running water on tap.

[followthehippos]

Originally Posted by thesorehead To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I'm not convinced that circumcision necessarily fucks anything up in 100% of cases, but I'm equally unconvinced that there is any rational medical reason for it to be a standard procedure. Maybe one in a million babies might have some real medical reason (I dunno... cancer? some kind of severe disfigurement?) but the cleanliness argument is total hogwash in a country with clean running water on tap.

Dangit, you're going to make me look up the facts now just so my whole cleanliness statement doesn't become a point of rebuke.

[eagleseven]

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	A choice of the individual, not the parent of the individual. It is only fair that everyone have a right to bodily integrity; something that is legally eluded to. Without that fundamental right, what is the point of being one's own physical entity? Are we given a body to have that body modified to others' liking, where the result of such modification has no impact on that party?

How do you feel about parents piercing their child's ears?

Giving their child vaccines?

Forcing their child to wear cosmetic orthodontics (braces)? Braces are damned painful.

Forcing their child to diet for beauty pageants and sports?

[Nightmare]

	Originally Posted by thesorehead To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm not convinced that circumcision necessarily fucks anything up in 100% of cases, but I'm equally unconvinced that there is any rational medical reason for it to be a standard procedure..

I think it's difficult to not fuck something up 100% of the time when it involves physically severing a critical part of the peripheral nervous system.

Oh, and I just remembered something for future argument: <1% of routine postnatal circumcisions result in severe medical complications, with a few of those resulting in death. Food for thought.

---------- Post added 04-22-2012 at 11:58 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by eagleseven To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	How do you feel about parents piercing their child's ears?

I think it's horrible and on the same level of insanity.

	Giving their child vaccines?

I think most are unwarranted and unneeded especially in a safe environment. Vaccines have a tendency to not sever valuable tissue or damage children in any way, also.

	Forcing their child to wear cosmetic orthodontics (braces)? Braces are damned painful.

I wasn't aware parents have the legal authority to force their children to wear braces.

	Forcing their child to diet for beauty pageants and sports?

Once again, wasn't aware parents have this authority. Sounds like child abuse to me.

[AnnaMolly]

	Originally Posted by eagleseven To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	How do you feel about parents piercing their child's ears? Giving their child vaccines? Forcing their child to wear cosmetic orthodontics (braces)? Braces are damned painful. Forcing their child to diet for beauty pageants and sports?

All shit, except for the vaccines, which have sound medical reasons for being administered. Maybe not all, mind you, but you wouldn't want your child to get tetanus from getting their knee bloody.
Braces are fine once the child is old enough to give consent.

Ear rings on babies / toddlers are actually a pet peeve of mine. I've worked in pediatrics a bit, and when I see a 3 month old baby girl with pierced ears, I immediately think that her parents probably have a combined IQ of 110.

[eagleseven]

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I think it's horrible and on the same level of insanity.

Routinely done.

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I think most are unwarranted and unneeded especially in a safe environment. Vaccines have a tendency to not sever valuable tissue or damage children in any way, also.

Then you're unaware of the rare side-effects...but most infants received a large battery of vaccines, to permanently alter their immune system. Infants have eosinophilia to protect against parasite infections common to human newborns, but make them prone to allergies in the cleaner first-world countries. The vaccine battery permanently shifts the baby's WBC count towards neutrophils and leukocytes, cells suited to fight the bacteria and viruses still common in the US.

	Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I wasn't aware parents have the legal authority to force their children to wear braces. Once again, wasn't aware parents have this authority. Sounds like child abuse to me.

Indeed, parents do have this legal authority, and it's extremely common. It's not child abuse to force your fat kid to exercise, your ugly kid to wear makeup, or your bucktoothed kid to get painful dental work. Children have almost no legal rights...even beating them is legal.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


In fact, it's illegal to keep kids out of school, no matter how much they hate class.

[Arcanist]

Advocates have a statist mentality. They take a one-size-fits-all approach and think that other people are merely their playthings and must submit to their whims. That they have some sort of "authority" to impose this nonsense on sentient humans. They made me that hateful person that I am today.

[AnnaMolly]

	Originally Posted by Arcanist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Advocates have a statist mentality. They take a one-size-fits-all approach and think that other people are merely their playthings and must submit to their whims. That they have some sort of "authority" to impose this nonsense on sentient humans. They made me that hateful person that I am today.

Which is why, if I was a man and circumsized, I'd loathe my parents. And why I can't respect people who do it to their kids. I'll think you're a traditionalist, probably religious or otherwise SJ-inclined, selfish moron.

---------- Post added 04-23-2012 at 06:16 AM ----------

	Originally Posted by eagleseven To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Children have almost no legal rights...even beating them is legal.

WTF, are you serious? Is it really illegal in the US?

[Eye on Earth]

Originally Posted by nightmar149 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeee! A procedure with no substantial medical grounding should be illegal to perform on a minor. A parent cannot walk into a doctor's office and demand the doctor amputate their infant's limbs. That would be illegal. Why does this not apply to circumcision? Dude, that's the point. I advocate for this right to exist legally, not just on an animal and ethical level. I also said such things are legally eluded to, didn't I? It's eluded to in the 'Right to Privacy' jargon. This has taken substantial heat with Roe v. Wade, and I think it's time the Supreme Court does something substantial with it. Demand it be legislation.

So, you readily admit that no law exists to support your claims that circumcision should not be performed. Therefore, without legal backing your position is mute.

Feel free to stump Congress to change the law.

[Arcanist]

	Originally Posted by AnnaMolly To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Which is why, if I was a man and circumsized, I'd loathe my parents. And why I can't respect people who do it to their kids. I'll think you're a traditionalist, probably religious or otherwise SJ-inclined, selfish moron.

I was never circumcised, but abused in other ways. Trust me, ignorance is preferable to my current state.

[eagleseven]

	Originally Posted by AnnaMolly To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Which is why, if I was a man and circumsized, I'd loathe my parents. And why I can't respect people who do it to their kids. I'll think you're a traditionalist, probably religious or otherwise SJ-inclined, selfish moron.

Or they could be living in the 1980s and following the American Medical Association's recommendations to keep their newborn healthy?

	Originally Posted by AnnaMolly To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	WTF, are you serious? Is it really illegal in the US?

Various forms of spanking is legal in the US, as long as you do no permanent physical damage. So whacking fleshy parts with your hand, belt, hairbrush, or broomstick is legal...breaking bones or spilling blood is abuse.

It's especially common in immigrant families, and most American immigrants can recall heartwarming stories of running away from angry parents. See below.



To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



This makes me laugh so hard I cry...so true!

[stasis]

	Originally Posted by AnnaMolly To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Which is why, if I was a man and circumsized, I'd loathe my parents.

You might be underestimating the ease with which one does not miss what one can not recall. While we can shrug at the apparent pointlessness of this procedure and refuse to perpetuate it further, the loathing you envision seems unlikely without the aid of ostracism or envy.

[Othesemo]

I think of people who get their babies circumcised similarly to how I think of parents who get their children's ears pierced while they're still infants- vapid, ignorant jackasses. If your child grows up and decides that, for some strange reason, he actually wants someone to guillotine his penis, so be it. In the mean time, I count it as one of the few things that I consider absolutely reprehensible.