• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Circumcision

I agree it is quite wrong and probably some trauma stays with you even though you can't remember it at all. However I disagree that it's pedophilic. A parent making the decision is not sexualizing their child, they're conforming to a tradition that is deeply ingrained. If I ever have a son, I will not do it, even though it was done to me. I have come to wish it hadn't been done to me, however I don't feel raped by pedophiles. It's not a sexual thing, it's a tradition. Most people in the United States believe it is better, less transmission of diseases, more clean, etc. I disagree with these assertions actually and I wish we would stop, but I'm just trying to say the reasons parents decide to do it are not malicious or sick.
 
I like my circumcised dick. I think it looks good, and a lot of partners over the year have enjoyed it. I don't see it as mutilation. That's a kind of heinous way to look at my own body and I won't do it. I agree that it's an archaic practice. At the end of the day, it's just a piece of skin. If you have it, great, if you don't, great. It's not going to make or break the rest of your life. I find that people who dwell on the fact that they were cut and get all neurotic about it are people who do too much reading and way, way too much thinking about it.

Are you going to tell guys who have phimosis and needed their foreskin removed that they got mutilated, when the phimosis was ruining their lives? What about guys who live in the tropics and have chronic balanitis with inflammatory damage to the head of their penis?

Just because you are against circumcision doesn't mean you should shame grown men about it. There's nothing we can do about it. Foreskin reconstruction is whack. The skin you're stretching over your penis is not remotely the same to what used to be there. It's purely psychological.

Like honestly... see a therapist. Dicks come in all shapes and sizes and they're all fine. If it's not foreskins, then guys are arguing about what the perfect size is. Like for real just calm down.
 
Nice, pretty much sums up how I feel about that particular thing. What is the fucking point of feeling mutilated? It is what it is, it still works fine, if you have a kid, choose to not do it. Don't try to make me feel bad about myself. I'm fine, it's not a big deal. It's the result of a tradition, not out of a desire to harm. Just let it go and progress into the future as you see fit. Your dick still works, sex is still awesome. What's the big fucking deal?
 
The big deal is that if someone took a sharp object to your privates as a baby or child without a valid medical basis then they essentially took away your agency over what happens to your own body. Which is wrong.

In the name of religion? Okay, so if Catholics had their way abortion would be utterly illegal. Would you want some diety worshipping busybody telling you what should happen to your own body and then make you feel angry because they want to control your sexuality, and all because someone somewhere thinks someone else has some God-given right to take away your right to your own body?

I would be beyond furious. I always use the abortion argument analogy here because it makes perfect sense. No one owns your sexual anatomy. And that's what this child mutilation is. Let's face it, infant circumcision had its roots in trying to curb masturbation. That should put anyone off the idea just to begin with. Your body belongs to no one else.
 
Is that why circumcision started? How does it curb masturbation? Didn't for me... why are you so angry about it? What purpose does that anger serve? Is your life better or worse because of this anger? I agree with your sentiments that it should be different. But the world isn't perfect (that's an understatement), however you could choose to accept what is and move on, and not bring a bunch of negativity into your life.
 
For certain I didn't even realize I was circumcised until I was in my teens and it didn't create any conscious difficulty for me.

I will still always help people to understand it for what it is. Mutilating your 8 day old child's penis for religious fears only you, the parent, have. Getting over it happening to you is easy, getting over having done it to your child I will never know. Perhaps sane descriptions of "traditions" and "religious practices" for what they are will keep some parent from having to get over mutilating their child.
 
Flynnal said:
The big deal is that if someone took a sharp object to your privates as a baby or child without a valid medical basis then they essentially took away your agency over what happens to your own body. Which is wrong.

In the name of religion? Okay, so if Catholics had their way abortion would be utterly illegal. Would you want some diety worshipping busybody telling you what should happen to your own body and then make you feel angry because they want to control your sexuality, and all because someone somewhere thinks someone else has some God-given right to take away your right to your own body?

I would be beyond furious. I always use the abortion argument analogy here because it makes perfect sense. No one owns your sexual anatomy. And that's what this child mutilation is. Let's face it, infant circumcision had its roots in trying to curb masturbation. That should put anyone off the idea just to begin with. Your body belongs to no one else.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem discussing circumcision ethics. That's different than telling men that their dicks are mutilated. Mutilation has a very specific connotation. It's what happens to people when they are injured during war, subjected to torture, or a botched medical procedure that has no therapeutic outcome. It's considered a disfigurement. I don't consider circumcision disfigurement. It's simply not the same thing.

I find that the anti-circumcision brigade doesn't differentiate between these things, and so they end up losing my support. I agree there is an ethics issue surrounding involuntary circumcision in babies -- I could give ground to that. But don't tell cut guys that they are mutilated, unnatural, or somehow less than.

Some guys get cut long after infancy for medical reasons, and they live much better lives because of it. You have no business telling them they are mutilated.

This thing we're doing here of isolating a body part in space is very objectifying and denies the whole human being it's attached to. It's kind of fetishistic. For a time I was very distraught after reading anti-circumcision rhetoric because I temporarily bought into this idea that something was wrong with me. It even drove a wedge between my parents and I for a while. Then I started having sex partners who liked my dick, and now I see that there's nothing wrong. I didn't have a problem with my body until someone suggested I was mutilated. Also, my parents acted under standard medical advice at the time, advice which has now changed in Canada.

I got angry, but at the end of the day the anger didn't serve me because I can't change it. Since I'm never having children, I won't even have a chance to raise an uncircumcised son. Like I said, I prefer circumcised dicks because they are cleaner and never smell weird... but I wouldn't reject a guy for having a foreskin. That's stupid.
 
I apologize for using too strong of language. My penis, although cut, isn't truly mutilated. I have been with 3 partners who's penises were mutilated due to circumcision gone badly. All 3 functioned fine and had cosmetic damage, not truly mutilated but poorly done work and really for no reason at all. One of them had a terrible teenage life due to it being publicly known and he was called various slurs.

I have only had about 15 partners that were cut so my personal experience is kinda skewed at 20% of them were botched jobs. So despite that a dozen partners were all fine with just scars instead of foreskin.

It still strikes me as a ridiculous practice that should never have been started. The fact we haven't outlawed it is bothersome. In most states and Canadian provinces you can't get a tattoo under 16 years of age, many even with parental consent.. branding is just outlawed completely.
 
^ That's true, I've seen a lot of botched ones myself... or they're done so tightly that erections are uncomfortable.
 
That would suck. Mine hasn't caused any issues other than the removal of a bunch of nerve endings and it's not like I know the difference. I'd feel a lot worse about it if it hurt or something.
 
The nerve endings thing doesn't make a lot of sense to me, biologically. The glans doesn't get damaged at all from circumcision, so its nerve endings are in tact. Unless scarring is really thick (like burn scars or deep lashes), nerves re-grow and innervation is mostly the same. During puberty the skin of the penis naturally becomes thicker and new nerves grow in that thickened skin. Testosterone and growth hormone increase sensitization so that sexual pleasure can be experienced. We know this because men who take testosterone blockers or get castrated experience numbness in their penis.

So I really doubt this claim that circumcised guys have suffered a devastating loss of nerve endings.
 
Foreigner said:
So I really doubt this claim that circumcised guys have suffered a devastating loss of nerve endings.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of material and links I posted on previous pages that bring this up. There most certainly aren't the same number of nerves, and this isn't even disputed. Most circumcised guys really only feel intensely around the frenulum (one of the bits they tend to leave behind when chopping it off). This is not the case for natural guys.
 
CFC said:
There's plenty of material and links I posted on previous pages that bring this up. There most certainly aren't the same number of nerves, and this isn't even disputed. Most circumcised guys really only feel intensely around the frenulum (one of the bits they tend to leave behind when chopping it off). This is not the case for natural guys.
Click to expand...

Pain and pleasure perception are complicated and can't just be boiled down to nerve endings.

You may be able to describe the anatomy but you can't know what a guy is or isn't feeling.
 
Foreigner said:
Pain and pleasure perception are complicated and can't just be boiled down to nerve endings.

You may be able to describe the anatomy but you can't know what a guy is or isn't feeling.
Click to expand...
Alright then. How about we chop out your tounge and see if you show any signs of still enjoying food. Such signs including that you continue to eat and therefore you must be enjoying it as much as before.
I cant understand why people such as yourself insist on denying the obvious. Are you jewish?
Or is the truth so awful you cant handle it?
 
I mean again I think you're being extreme. Without the tongue you can't taste at all or do a whole lot of other things. Removal of the tongue is a horrific, life-altering, dehumanizing injury. Removal of the foreskin, while yes, unnecessary and removes nerve endings, does not dehumanize someone. It does not prevent them from feeling sexual pleasure. It shouldn't be happening but damn you're acting like the parents are making offerings to satan and getting off on it or something and all the poor guys are destined to a life of being a cripple. It's a bit dramatic. I'm not sure why you feel the need to try to make guys who have been circumcized feel bad about themselves.
 
Its not about making people feel bad about themselves. Its about letting them know they have been robbed.
And condemning the practice so perhaps next generation doesnt have to suffer the same.
 
morpher001 said:
Its not about making people feel bad about themselves. Its about letting them know they have been robbed.
And condemning the practice so perhaps next generation doesnt have to suffer the same.
Click to expand...

I already said that I would never circumcise my son, if I ever had one (and I won't be).

That doesn't mean I readily subscribe to your bad science.
 
I have no problem with my circumcised penis.

I think it's been pretty unfashionable for quite a while now, though. I think the practice will become extinct except among the super religious. I could be wrong.

I agree with shadow though, there's no reason to have some kind of complex about your dick or let it ruin your life. It's nice to have a little variety in the world.
 
I think perhaps some may be miss reading the negative posts. None of us have a problem with our circumcised dicks....

We are condemning the barbaric practice, like we would child castration, branding, tattooing your child, baby nipple rings or really any kind of cosmetic body modification that is mostly irreversible done by parents to children who are not able to consent to it.

Nipple rings would probably be able to grow out and tattoos are already not legal in most states under 16 even with parental consent.

I'm fine with my circumcised penis but I was the lucky 80% who had a good job done and just have a scar not a malformed dick. It is a practice that is slipping into oblivion already but let's always remember no human has the right to alter another cosmetically without consent. Babies can't consent. If it was a cleft palette or a club foot it's not cosmetic only but circumcision is at best only cosmetic and at worst life altering.

Let's just stop.
 
Yourbaker said:
I think perhaps some may be miss reading the negative posts. None of us have a problem with our circumcised dicks....

We are condemning the barbaric practice, like we would child castration, branding, tattooing your child, baby nipple rings or really any kind of cosmetic body modification that is mostly irreversible done by parents to children who are not able to consent to it.

Nipple rings would probably be able to grow out and tattoos are already not legal in most states under 16 even with parental consent.

I'm fine with my circumcised penis but I was the lucky 80% who had a good job done and just have a scar not a malformed dick. It is a practice that is slipping into oblivion already but let's always remember no human has the right to alter another cosmetically without consent. Babies can't consent. If it was a cleft palette or a club foot it's not cosmetic only but circumcision is at best only cosmetic and at worst life altering.

Let's just stop.
Click to expand...

I agree with you and I support stopping the practice, but like I already said 10 times, the language we use while discussing this is also important because the dialogue is taking place between adult men who are circumcised. I find it alienating when people refer to it as mutilation -- I think that's blowing it out of proportion. It's a cosmetic procedure that's not really needed, but it's not like they're chopping their dick off or something. And like I said, the people who cling to the mutilation terminology are also undermining the adult men who need it done for medical reasons.

I think there's plenty of scientific and ethical grounds for dismissing the general practice without having to resort to shock tactics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top