[rk3388]

At the end of the day it is up to the parents. Living in N. America I have never met anyone who regretted or got mad that they were circumsised.

Yes babies can't "consent" to it, but babies can also not consent to being fed or getting enough sleep. That's a ridiculous argument for why people should be against it.

Completely up to the parents- You should respect their choice to have their baby circumsised or not.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by rk3388

Actually no, it's not like saying that at all

The piece of skin doesn't benefit anyone's life in anyway. And no it is not rubbish because not everyone who is uncircumcised has good hygiene- and that is what increases the risk of cancer.

OK, how about cutting earlobes off newborns, as earlobes do not benefit anyones life in anyway and some people may not clean behind their ears so it would improve their hygiene later in life? Blobulas the god of ears demands it.

Also foreskin does actually make a big difference. A lot of circumcised guys say that they lose sensitivity in their dick when circumcised.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

But why would God make men with foreskins if God wanted them not to have them

To tell "his" people apart, i.e. test/sign of faith, etc

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by rk3388

Completely up to the parents- You should respect their choice to have their baby circumsised or not.

The parents do not own the childs body. I find this attitude quite shocking tbh. The child should, when old enough, be able to decide if they wish to have body parts lopped off unnecessarily or not.

I would be willing to put a very large bet on that if it was adult males deciding for themselves if they want part of their dick removed, the practise would die out pretty quickly. but its fine,m as its imposed on babies and they cannot remember it. Which is, again a ****ty way to look at it.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by rk3388

I have never met anyone who regretted or got mad that they were circumsised.

Do you often discuss your penis with people you meet?

https://www.yourwholebaby.org/men-speak-out/
http://www.circumstitions.com/Resent.html
http://www.bloodstainedmen.com/

I cannot imagine it being a big talking point, tbh

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by rk3388

Actually no, it's not like saying that at all

The piece of skin doesn't benefit anyone's life in anyway. And no it is not rubbish because not everyone who is uncircumcised has good hygiene- and that is what increases the risk of cancer.

Not everyone has good hygiene full stop.

That's a problem that resolves itself by being hygienic, not lopping skin off because they can't be arsed to bloody wash.

And foreskin has all kinds of uses. Artificial lubricants are big sellers in the US because the man's natural moist maker is dried up.

[Jamie89]

The foreskin does a lot more than I realised I just googled this...

http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm

2. Protection. The sleeve of tissue known as the foreskin normally covers the glans and protects it from abrasion, drying, callusing (keratinization), and environmental contaminants. The glans is intended by nature to be a protected internal organ, like the female clitoris [see illustration]. The effect of an exposed glans and resulting keratinization on human sexual response has never been studied. Increasing reports by circumcised men indicate that keratinization causes a loss of sexual sensation, pleasure and fulfillment [3, 4].

3. Ridged bands. The inner foreskin contains bands of densely innervated, sexually responsive tissue [1]. They constitute a primary erogenous zone of the human penis and are important for realizing the fullness and intensity of sexual response [5].

4. Gliding action. The foreskin is the only moving part of the penis. During any sexual activity, the foreskin and glans work in unison; their mutual interaction creates a complete sexual response. In heterosexual intercourse, the non-abrasive gliding of the penis in and out of itself within the vagina facilitates smooth and pleasurable intercourse for both partners [Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see illustration]. Without this gliding action, the corona of the circumcised penis can function as a one-way valve, dragging vaginal lubricants out into the drying air and making artificial lubricants essential for non-painful intercourse [6].

5. Specialized sensory tissue. In addition to the "ridged bands" mentioned above, thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors (Meissner’s corpuscles) constitute the most important sensory component of the penis [1]. The foreskin contains branches of the dorsal nerve and between 10,000 and 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which are capable of sensing slight motion and stretch, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12].

6. The frenulum. This is a highly nerve-laden web of tissue that tethers the inner foreskin to the underside of the glans [see photo]. It is similar to the frenula found under the tongue, the upper lip and the clitoral hood (female foreskin). For many intact men, the penile frenulum is a male "G-spot" that is highly pleasurable when repeatedly stretched and relaxed during sexual activity [13]. Depending on the surgical method used, the frenulum is partially to completely destroyed by circumcision.

7. Proper blood flow. The foreskin contains several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery. The loss of this rich vascularization interrupts normal blood flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, damaging the natural function of the penis and altering its development [1].

8. Immunological defense. The soft mucosa of the inner foreskin produces plasma cells, which secrete immunoglobulin antibodies, and antibacterial and antiviral proteins [7, 14], such as the pathogen-killing enzyme called lysozyme [15 and Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see explanation]. All of the human mucosa (the linings of the mouth, eyelids, vagina, foreskin and anus) are the body's first line of defense against disease. This benefit of the foreskin could be one possible explanation why intact men are at lower risk of chlamydia and other sexually transmitted diseases [16-21].

9. Langerhans cells. These specialized epithelial cells are a component of the immune system and may play a role in protecting the penis from sexually transmitted infections such as HIV (AIDS) [Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see explanation and 14-16, 18].

10. Proper lymph flow. The foreskin contains lymphatic vessels, which are necessary for proper lymph flow and immunological functioning.

11. Estrogen receptors. The foreskin contains estrogen receptors, whose purpose is not yet fully understood and needs further study [22].

12. Apocrine glands. These glands produce pheromones, nature’s invisible yet compelling signals to potential sexual partners. The effect of their absence on human sexual behavior has never been studied [23].

13. Sebaceous glands. The oils produced by these glands lubricate and moisturize the foreskin and glans, so that the two structures function together smoothly.

14. Dartos fascia. This is a smooth muscle sheath that underlies the scrotum, the entire penis and the tip of the foreskin. It is necessary for proper temperature regulation of the genitals (causing these structures to elongate in the heat and shrink in the cold). Approximately half of the Dartos fascia is destroyed by circumcision [7].

15. Natural texture and coloration of the glans. In the intact penis, the glans normally appears moist, shiney, and pinkish-red to dark purple. These visual cues often attract and excite a sexual partner. The glans of a circumcised penis is dry, rough and often light pink to bluish-gray in color [see photos].

16. Zero risk of serious infection or surgical injury. Unfortunate boys who suffer botched circumcisions lose part or all of their penis from surgical mishap or subsequent infection. They are often "sexually reassigned" by castration and "transgender surgery." They are relegated to a life of hormone therapy and are compelled to live their lives as pseudo-females, the success of which has never been fully assessed [24-46].

17. Zero risk of death from surgery. Every year boy die from the complications of circumcision, a fact that the American circumcision industry ignores, obscures, or downplays [29-31].

18. Zero risk of delayed or diminished maternal bonding. Circumcision, even if anesthesia is used, causes unavoidable operative trauma and post-operative pain that has been shown to disrupt bonding with the mother, which in turn interferes with the first developmental task of every human, that of trust (trust in human contact, in personal safety, etc) [47-51].

19. Electromagnetic "cross-communication." Anecdotal reports suggest that, without the mucosa of its foreskin, the penis lacks the capacity for the subtle electromagentic energy transfer that occurs during contact between two mucous membranes (the vaginal walls and the exposed inner lining of the foreskin). Such contact contributes to the full experience of sexual pleasure. These reports deserve further scientific study.



Some of this is to do with sexual pleasure and to be fair a man who was circumcised as a baby wouldn't know any different and it just makes for a slightly different experience, but I don't think there is evidence of circumcised men being more prone to sexual dysfunction, so I take most of that with a pinch of salt. Still interesting stuff though.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Very true. This passage is in all different Bible versions, but afaik, Christians don't consider circumcision necessary. But Muslims and Jews do. Go figure

Yeah Muslims & Jews have similar views . They both are against eating pork aswell .

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

OK, how about cutting earlobes off newborns, as earlobes do not benefit anyones life in anyway and some people may not clean behind their ears so it would improve their hygiene later in life? Blobulas the god of ears demands it.

Also foreskin does actually make a big difference. A lot of circumcised guys say that they lose sensitivity in their dick when circumcised.

They do. The foreskin helps keep it moist (aiding penetration) and preserve sensation in the gland. Cut it off and you get dry and numb dicks in desperate need of lube.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

To tell "his" people apart, i.e. test/sign of faith, etc

He couldn't just give them a clear sign like a cross on the forehead? He needed to give them differing genitalia?

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Do you often discuss your penis with people you meet?

https://www.yourwholebaby.org/men-speak-out/
http://www.circumstitions.com/Resent.html
http://www.bloodstainedmen.com/

I cannot imagine it being a big talking point, tbh

Certainly not over drinks or dinner

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

He couldn't just give them a clear sign like a cross on the forehead? He needed to give them differing genitalia?

A cross on the forehead yes they do that on ash Wednesday but it rubs off as it's not a permanent mark , hope you don't mean scarification?! .

It's up to people how they interpret this, and you'll find it's usually Muslims & Jews that circumcise , its not that common in Christianity .

As i said personal hygiene is what keeps it clean ,doesn't matter if it's circumcised or not if you never wash then that's on you .

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

A cross on the forehead yes they do that on ash Wednesday but it rubs off as it's not a permanent mark , hope you don't mean scarification?! .

It's up to people how they interpret this, and you'll find it's usually Muslims & Jews that circumcise , its not that frequent in Christianity .

As i said personal hygiene is what keeps it clean ,doesn't matter if it's circumcised or not if you never wash then that's on you .

I was being facetious.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I was being facetious.

I figured as much . But like i said it's up to them with their faith and beliefs , i just hope they take the proper health advice and supervision.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I figured as much . But like i said it's up to them with their faith and beliefs , i just hope they take the proper health advice and supervision.

Oh I agree it's completely up to them.

But I won't allow them to make stuff up like it being cleaner when it's bollocks.

[MTVN]

I'm surprised people are so strongly against it. There's a quarter of a million Jews in the UK, to make circumcision illegal would be considered a huge attack on that part of British society

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Oh I agree it's completely up to them.

But I won't allow them to make stuff up like it being cleaner when it's bollocks.

I think some of them worry their kids wont wash it properly , so they do this as some quick fix but you still have to clean yourself properly no matter what .

[Vicky.]

I don't see how it would be considered an attack, rather than defending the rights of babies not to have parts chopped off on the whims of their parents. It would not be banned completely, adult men would have the choice to get it done if they wanted to

Fairly sure not many would chose to have it done though

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I think some of them worry their kids wont wash it properly , so they do this as some quick fix but you still have to clean yourself properly no matter what .

I don't think they have much to worry about until the child is older and they start to produce bodily... things. By that point if they're not hygienic they're a dirty bastard and need to sort it out.

Young kids foreskin is actually fused to the gland and isn't retractable.

[Jamie89]

Yeah the religious freedom argument is deeply flawed, a baby can't decide or communicate their religion or give consent, you can't use your own right to religious freedom to impose unnecessary surgery onto another person. Babies are entitled to human rights as much as their parents are entitled to their right of religious belief. Banning circumcision for infants isn't stopping anyone from believing anything.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I don't think they have much to worry about until the child is older and they start to produce bodily... things. By that point if they're not hygienic they're a dirty bastard and need to sort it out.

Young kids foreskin is actually fused to the gland and isn't retractable.

Did you also know that it's used in some face creams and moisturisers .

Like i said its personal hygiene, all of us are told to wash properly from a young age and if we don't then that's our problem .

I think some people are glad they had it done as a child and got it out the way , but obviously the thought of it doesn't sound pleasant for them .

[MTVN]

Babies aren't able to make decisions about literally anything though, they can't choose the religion they're brought up as, they can't choose whether they're fed meat, they can't choose if their parents smoke or drink around them, they can't choose if they're breastfed etc. etc. There's a million and one decisions that parents can make or not make which have an impact on a baby's body and their life

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Did you also know that it's used in some face creams and moisturisers .

Like i said its personal hygiene, all of us are told to wash properly from a young age and if we don't then that's our problem .

I think some people are glad they had it done as a child and got it out the way , but obviously the thought of it doesn't sound pleasant for them .

What's in moisturisers and face creams?

Not a crusty nib.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Babies aren't able to make decisions about literally anything though, they can't choose the religion they're brought up as, they can't choose whether they're fed meat, they can't choose if their parents smoke or drink around them, they can't choose if they're breastfed etc. etc. There's a million and one decisions that parents can make or not make which have an impact on a baby's body and their life

Yes and things that bring harm are considered not ok. Smoking, drinking and physically harming the child.

I know people don't regard it the same but I see it as physical harm to a child for no reason.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yes and things that bring harm are considered not ok. Smoking, drinking and physically harming the child.

I know people don't regard it the same but I see it as physical harm to a child for no reason.

Ok but some people would also claim that not allowing a child meat or not breastfeeding harms a child and some would say the opposite