Fuck Sexism

[Truthordeal]

Secularism's on the rise for the next eight years. Overall, a trend seems to be heading that way, yes, but to say that George Bush was the last big hurrah is a bit presumptuous.

[Lord J Esq]

Circumcision as a flashpoint for the sexism topic. Interesting. Male circumcision is one of those subjects I could almost not care less about. For what it's worth, I was circumcised shortly after birth. I remember nothing of the experience. I do not feel that I am missing out on anything by not having the extra bits. I am in favor of the procedure due to its hygienic qualities, which is to say that I support it being covered by health insurance. I don't necessarily think that it should be a mandatory procedure, though.

The "anti-circ" (pertaining to male circumcision only) really creep me out. They're mostly made up of the same luddites and conspiracy theorists who tell us that our milk is mostly pus and that vaccination makes children sick. It's easier to be in favor of circumcision with people like that advocating for the other side.

Lastly, perhaps this is a bit hypocritical coming from me, but, ZeaLitY, I think you're crossing the line from valid aggressiveness to plain old rabies. It's okay to loathe loathsome people and loathsome ideas--I certainly do--but it seems to me that your (justifiable) wrath is degenerating into (embarrassing) rage.

Then again, only you know what you are truly after. In the past I have deliberately pressed a point far enough that it cost me the support of the audience. There are times when preserving decorum or even reputation is less important than pressing a point or pursuing a cause. My advice is that you make sure that that's really what's going on in your head, and that you're not simply getting carried away by your own emotions.

[ZeaLitY]

It's just depressing seeing abject ignorance. Hating it feels productive as opposed to letting the idiocy stand (if only because the opposite side's already won valid arguments and retired).

[Samopoznanie]

The foreskin is nerve-dense tissue that conducts pleasure like the rest of the organ... **snip** <-- no pun intended

That's my basic reason for being against it. I think of it as taking out your retainer -- you get that extra bit of sensation to the touch of things.

I also think it should be a personal choice, as opposed to the parents'. If you want the cosmetic or sanitary benefits, or convert to a religion that demands it, by all means, reach for the nearest pair of scissors and have at it. I don't like the idea of parents deciding such things before their kids are old enough to think for themselves. I feel the same way as far as religion goes.

The sanitary argument, I've never gotten. For crying out loud, if you can't be bothered washing, you deserve to go under the knife.
The whole debate over whether it's healthy or unhealthy has been going back and forth for decades now, and likely won't end anytime soon. Last I read, the medical community was discouraging it, but at the same time, it's been found that snipped guys in Africa have a lower rate of HIV/AIDS, so who knows what will come of that.


Whatever. My elephant still has its trunk. I could care less how others' look.

[Lord J Esq]

Oh, I forgot to add: About the trauma of being circumcised shortly after birth: Birth itself is a far greater trauma. I wouldn't worry too much about this angle.

[Samopoznanie]

Oh, I forgot to add: About the trauma of being circumcised shortly after birth: Birth itself is a far greater trauma. I wouldn't worry too much about this angle.

That's a moot point as far as I'm concerned. Women know what they're in for and choose to give birth. If they want a kid without the pain, they can go and adopt one. A mother's decision to give birth doesn't give her the right to tailor the kid's genitalia to her own liking,  IMO.

It's just the issue of choice that does it for me. Women have the right to choose, so should their sons in this case.

[Zephira]

Why would she want to tailor her kid's genitalia to her own liking anyway? It's not like she's the one who's going to be liking it. And even though most circumcised men do say they don't regret it, I still think it's a choice to be left up to the child. What if he decides he doesn't want to be a part of that religion anymore?

And I've never heard of this clitoral circumcision. The sound of that really scares me. Do they just cut the whole clitoris off?

[Truthordeal]

Zephira, yes, they do. In a lot of the cases, they do cut the entire thing off. Most modern practitioners though, will only cut off the hood. But unlike the penal circumcision, it leaves the woman practically devoid of all sexual feeling.

As for penal circumcision...just let them do it. Y'all are acting like its some form of primitive barbarism, when its a perfectly reasonable medical procedure.

Who honestly cares? Will it wreck anyone's life for being circumcised, or left without? Will it show up on a job application? Will you be blacklisted or forbidden to play sports in school because of it?

Circumcision is  not going to affect anyone's life any great deal.

Speaking of which, since when is it wrong for parents to make decisions on behalf of their children? We could discuss this issue further with religion, specific types of education, nutrition or ethics to great depths, but circumcisions? Come on!

If it weren't for the religious aspect of it, many of you wouldn't even care.

[Zephira]

For the moment, let's leave the religion aspect out of it. What I'm worried about is the parents choosing to give the baby a mostly cosmetic operation that will last his whole life, before he's old enough to make that decision himself. Along those same lines, what about tattoos? If I carry a baby in me for nine months, wouldn't it be within my right to have him tattooed as soon as he comes out? Ooh, or maybe put him through that plastic surgery that gives him elf ears. And while we're customizing my baby, let's give him fangs and split his tongue, too. It's only cosmetic, right? He's too young to make that decision so it's up to me, right? Hey, he's getting his penis cut, might as well go the extra mile.

[Samopoznanie]

And I've never heard of this clitoral circumcision. The sound of that really scares me. Do they just cut the whole clitoris off?

To my understanding it's practiced largely in paternal societies in Africa (Sudan is the example I've usually heard) and some parts of the Middle East. It's a much more crude and dangerous procedure sometimes called FGM or Female Genital Mutilation. There are a number of variations on it; sometimes they cut the whole clitoris off, sometimes just the hood, other times they'll go for some of the labia too, maybe poke around inside the vagina while they're at it. Another big difference is that it's usually performed during childhood, i.e. 5-10 years old -- that's a trauma that will stick with you, I'd bet. I've never read the cultural justification for FGM and certainly nothing about alleged health benefits, similar to male circumcision. It's a different ballgame by all accounts. The UN and WHO have even taken action to try and ban it / raise awareness.

[Lord J Esq]

The only legitimate rationale for circumcision of newborn males is medical, not religious or aesthetic. Thus, comparisons like tattoos are not relevant. Vaccination is a better comparison.

Here, in about three seconds I googled some statistics from a reputable source (the NIH) as to some of the benefits of the procedure:

http://www.nih.gov/news/health/mar2009/niaid-25.htm

Addendum: Technically, we could leave circumcision to await one's teenage years, when the individual in question is presumably capable of making an informed choice, but before he becomes sexually active. In practice, however, the immaturity and ignorance surrounding human genitalia, especially at that age, combined with the many social stereotypes about (male) circumcision, would discourage many people from making an unbiased decision. That's why I support making the procedure available to mothers of newborns, but not enforcing it like a vaccination regimen. This is one of those areas where I feel comfortable with the parent(s) making a decision affecting their child: from a public health standpoint, it's the smart thing to do, and it carries almost no credible risks whatsoever (provided that the procedure is administered professionally). But if the parents are against it, then the kid himself will still have the option of seeking it out later. He'll just be that much less likely to do so because of the cultural crap.

[Truthordeal]

In tandem with Lord J., Zephira, tattoos and elfin ears will get you blacklisted and probably will come up during a job interview.

The only situation where I think it would be detrimental to have a circumcision is if your a porn star and no one wants to hire you because of that. That's a far stretch though.

Lord J explained it far better than I did though.

[IAmSerge]

Ernie Chambers, the senator who sued God, is an agnostic.

Just wondering... how the hell do you even do that?

And on topic: I was circumcised.  I haven't heard of any circumcised man having any problems with sexual pleasures.  Most of the males in the US are circumcised (I think, don't quote me.  In fact, disprove me!  =D )

[Truthordeal]

Our justice system may be the pride of the world, Serge, but there's still a lot of leeway for morons to make it through.

Anyway, about the circumcision numbers:

"Nobody really knows but organisations(sic) campaigning against it estimate that worldwide about one in four males are circumcised. National rates vary widely from about 80% of males in the USA to 2% in Sweden, where non-medical circumcision is now illegal in children. In the UK, the number of circumcisions for medical reasons has fallen from 35% of English boys in the 1930s to 6.5% in the 1980s and today some 12,200 such circumcisions are performed annually. Some doctors consider that this is still far too many."

http://www.malehealth.co.uk/userpage1.cfm?item_id=1352

That's all the info you'll need on the matter. Or, more specifically, all you'll ever want.

[Boo the Gentleman Caller]

If it's a child's decision to get his pee-pee cut, then it can also be argued we as parents should give the child the decision making control for everything in his / her life. 

Let's let them chose what they want to eat for dinner; let's let the kiddies choose what time we go to bed; let's let them entirely choose who and what they do in their free time, whether it be drugs, sex, booze, video games, painting, karate, farming, shitting; let's let them choose to get vaccinated or not; let's let them choose to take their own life if they see it a proper decision.

Point being, children often don't know how to make proper decisions; they aren't mentally capable of grasping the importance of many concepts.  As such, giving a child the right to choose whether or not to be castrated is like giving an elephant caviar: entirely pointless.  Of course, you could always argue that they could "wait until they're, like 18, to have it done".  Well, then that's another story.

Now I have to go to work.