POll: Did you circumcise your son, if he was born in the past 5 years?

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: moshquerade

your reasoning is flawed in that adults are proxies for children who aren't old enough yet to make decisions about their health or well being. if we were to use your logic babies would never be vaccinated because they aren't old enough to give consent.

Tattoos and newborn circumcision aren't necessary for health. You could argue that down the road, a minor might need a circumcision or other surgery, but surgery is done when there's a problem, not as a preventative. We don't remove tonsils at age 5 routinely anymore.

Vaccinations, on the other hand have decades of proven benefit around the world. No one who gets their MMR gets the measles anymore and measles are a lot worse than any shot.

a 5 yr old *may* need his/her tonsil removed and a parent is there to give consent and do what he/she believes is right for the child. you saying that things should be put off until someone is an adult makes no reasonable sense.

You're talking need vs. want. If a 5 year old NEEDS to have his tonsils out for a valid medical reason, that's one thing. If daddy WANTS his newborn to have cosmetic surgery on his genitals, that's different.

some people view both of those procedures as needs whether you do or not.

I'm not concerned with "some people". The only kind of medicine that should be practiced on a minor is evidence based. There is no evidence that circumcision in the newborn period provides benefits that can't be achieved better with other less expensive, less invasive measures, like proper care, antibiotics, condoms, etc. There's no evidence that Daddy or Baby will be psychologically scared by having different looking genitals, especially since adult and child genitals look different anyway.

Give me evidence that circumcision is absolutely essential to a particular child's well being and acceptable results can't be acheived another way and then the circumcision is justified. This is the same standard that should be used for any medical treatment of a child, from a tonsillectomy to ADHD to a cold to vaccinations.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: adlep

I take a cushion of my dear foreskin any day over an underwear. Also, the foreskin slides out during the intercourse. When it stands, it looks no different from yours.

In addition, someone in this thread already mentioned that they wanted to reduce sensitivity so they got rid of the foreskin so they could last longer during secks.

No thank you. There are other ways of doing it. It seems like a terrible, terrible idea. Reducing pleasure and sensitivity around my dick? Nope. That is just...wrong.

Yes, but if your foreskin looks ugly when flaccid then some women (like Gigglegirl admitted) would refuse to suck it.

Definitely a personal decision for Islandboi but he is happy with his cck now so you can't knock it. I don't see why wanting to last longer to please your lover would be a bad reason to have the surgery, but to each their own.

 

[adlep]

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: moshquerade

your reasoning is flawed in that adults are proxies for children who aren't old enough yet to make decisions about their health or well being. if we were to use your logic babies would never be vaccinated because they aren't old enough to give consent.

Tattoos and newborn circumcision aren't necessary for health. You could argue that down the road, a minor might need a circumcision or other surgery, but surgery is done when there's a problem, not as a preventative. We don't remove tonsils at age 5 routinely anymore.

Vaccinations, on the other hand have decades of proven benefit around the world. No one who gets their MMR gets the measles anymore and measles are a lot worse than any shot.

a 5 yr old *may* need his/her tonsil removed and a parent is there to give consent and do what he/she believes is right for the child. you saying that things should be put off until someone is an adult makes no reasonable sense.

You're talking need vs. want. If a 5 year old NEEDS to have his tonsils out for a valid medical reason, that's one thing. If daddy WANTS his newborn to have cosmetic surgery on his genitals, that's different.

some people view both of those procedures as needs whether you do or not.

I'm not concerned with "some people". The only kind of medicine that should be practiced on a minor is evidence based. There is no evidence that circumcision in the newborn period provides benefits that can't be achieved better with other less expensive, less invasive measures, like proper care, antibiotics, condoms, etc. There's no evidence that Daddy or Baby will be psychologically scared by having different looking genitals, especially since adult and child genitals look different anyway.

Give me evidence that circumcision is absolutely essential to a particular child's well being and acceptable results can't be acheived another way and then the circumcision is justified. This is the same standard that should be used for any medical treatment of a child, from a tonsillectomy to ADHD to a cold to vaccinations.

But, but, but the GOD said it is OK to do it...It must be true then.
Bottom line is that the proponents of circumcision have no arguments, so they resort to some odd ones like: women think it is "hot" which is an absolute BS.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: adlep

I take a cushion of my dear foreskin any day over an underwear. Also, the foreskin slides out during the intercourse. When it stands, it looks no different from yours.

In addition, someone in this thread already mentioned that they wanted to reduce sensitivity so they got rid of the foreskin so they could last longer during secks.

No thank you. There are other ways of doing it. It seems like a terrible, terrible idea. Reducing pleasure and sensitivity around my dick? Nope. That is just...wrong.

Yes, but if your foreskin looks ugly when flaccid then some women (like Gigglegirl admitted) would refuse to suck it.

Definitely a personal decision for Islandboi but he is happy with his cck now so you can't knock it. I don't see why wanting to last longer to please your lover would be a bad reason to have the surgery, but to each their own.

You can have any reason you want, if you make the decision for yourself. Otherwise, you're a creep who thinks too much about your son's sex life.

 

[adlep]

Yes, but if your foreskin looks ugly when flaccid then some women (like Gigglegirl admitted) would refuse to suck it.

Definitely a personal decision for Islandboi but he is happy with his cck now so you can't knock it. I don't see why wanting to last longer to please your lover would be a bad reason to have the surgery, but to each their own.

There are some extreme medical conditions that justify the procedure. But they should not be applied on a mass scale.

In regards to your 1st statement, I am not sure how to respond. It is still a part of my body, and I really think that this is the last thing a woman looks when having a sex with a male...

"Honey, you are great looking, and have a 10 in dick, but that foreskin on your cock when flaccid is a total turn off for me?"

Hmm.
Funny.
Then I dump and find a great looking European/Latin chick...

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: adlep

Yes, but if your foreskin looks ugly when flaccid then some women (like Gigglegirl admitted) would refuse to suck it.

Definitely a personal decision for Islandboi but he is happy with his cck now so you can't knock it. I don't see why wanting to last longer to please your lover would be a bad reason to have the surgery, but to each their own.

There are some extreme medical conditions that justify the procedure. But they should not be applied on a mass scale.

In regards to your 1st statement, I am not sure how to respond. It is still a part of my body, and I really think that this is the last thing a woman looks when having a sex with a male...

"Honey, you are great looking, and have a 10 in dick, but that foreskin on your cock when flaccid is a total turn off for me?"

Hmm.
Funny.
Then I dump and find a great looking European/Latin chick...

I wouldn't worry too much about it, like you said it's just cultural. Basically pr0n has glamorized cut ccks and hairless beavers which may not accurately reflect reality.

 

[GiggleGirl]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: adlep

I take a cushion of my dear foreskin any day over an underwear. Also, the foreskin slides out during the intercourse. When it stands, it looks no different from yours.

In addition, someone in this thread already mentioned that they wanted to reduce sensitivity so they got rid of the foreskin so they could last longer during secks.

No thank you. There are other ways of doing it. It seems like a terrible, terrible idea. Reducing pleasure and sensitivity around my dick? Nope. That is just...wrong.

Yes, but if your foreskin looks ugly when flaccid then some women (like Gigglegirl admitted) would refuse to suck it.

Definitely a personal decision for Islandboi but he is happy with his cck now so you can't knock it. I don't see why wanting to last longer to please your lover would be a bad reason to have the surgery, but to each their own.

i didnt say it looked ugly... it was just different than what im used to, less attractive but only when flaccid. usually when you are with someone, they are erect before you get to the sucking anyhow. really the only situation i could see where i would really be around a flaccid uncut penis would be if my boyfriend were uncircumcised. and at that point, i probably would think of it any differently as any circumcised penis

 

[GiggleGirl]

in addition, you have no idea how much penis/foreskin research i have done since last night after watching that penn & teller video. i think if all of the crazy guys on this site who talk about how its nasty or whatnot did a little bit of research then they wouldnt be so anti-foreskin.

and honestly, why would you NOT want your child to grow up whole? especially if there is no real medical need to cut it off

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
I see mutilation of innocent babies is still alive and well.

 

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: GiggleGirl
in addition, you have no idea how much penis/foreskin research i have done

You must really love penis!

 

[DivideBYZero]

Are you still all arguing about cocks?

 

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
Are you still all arguing about cocks?

You getting all hot and bothered? :fap;

 

[coolVariable]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
I see mutilation of innocent babies is still alive and well.

LOL! Genital mutilation is some Muslims/some Africans cutting out the clitoris in their newborn daughters.

Circumcision is not mutilation, by any means. :roll:

Yes it is.
Mosaic religions got a firm grip on American culture much??

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk
The eyeball analogy is utter nonsense.

I don't have a foreskin and I have a healthy and fulfilling sex life.

If I don't have eyelids I will probably go insane and kill myself.

You don't know...
Maybe if someone would remove you eyelids as a toddler, you would be fine. Your eyes would get used to it after a while and you wouldn't know any better
Your eyes would be less sensitive, but cleaner and more desirable by women. You would also argue that you eyes are just fine - and you can see as well as person with eyelids.
Latter on some medical group would come up with a study that actually, removing your eyelids makes your entire body better and the procedure helps to prevent cancer...

What you clowns that are so up in arms about cutting a guy's dick lack is perspective. When you start using extreme and sensationalist analogies to support your position then you are usually treading on thin ice. Eyeballs and a dick are not comparable organs with comparable functions.

It's a slippery slope analogy.

 

[adlep]

Originally posted by: coolVariable

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
I see mutilation of innocent babies is still alive and well.

LOL! Genital mutilation is some Muslims/some Africans cutting out the clitoris in their newborn daughters.

Circumcision is not mutilation, by any means. :roll:

Yes it is.
Mosaic religions got a firm grip on American culture much??

Ditto, circumcision is a form of a genital mutilation, that is a bottom line
Sorry, just accept it as a fact and when it comes to your time to make a decision for your little one, do the right thing.

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: GiggleGirl
in addition, you have no idea how much penis/foreskin research i have done since last night after watching that penn & teller video. i think if all of the crazy guys on this site who talk about how its nasty or whatnot did a little bit of research then they wouldnt be so anti-foreskin.

and honestly, why would you NOT want your child to grow up whole? especially if there is no real medical need to cut it off

bingo

 

[adlep]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk
The eyeball analogy is utter nonsense.

I don't have a foreskin and I have a healthy and fulfilling sex life.

If I don't have eyelids I will probably go insane and kill myself.

You don't know...
Maybe if someone would remove you eyelids as a toddler, you would be fine. Your eyes would get used to it after a while and you wouldn't know any better
Your eyes would be less sensitive, but cleaner and more desirable by women. You would also argue that you eyes are just fine - and you can see as well as person with eyelids.
Latter on some medical group would come up with a study that actually, removing your eyelids makes your entire body better and the procedure helps to prevent cancer...

What you clowns that are so up in arms about cutting a guy's dick lack is perspective. When you start using extreme and sensationalist analogies to support your position then you are usually treading on thin ice. Eyeballs and a dick are not comparable organs with comparable functions.

It's a slippery slope analogy.

Just because you say so...
I presented my arguments for comparing the two. The fact that you don't like the analogy does not make it a lie or a "slippery slope". Think about it, accept it, and next time around think before making a decision for your newborn

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: adlep


It has happened by mistake. I pushed the wrong button.
Edit: adlep's out. Gotta go on a service call. Sorry about your lost foreskin you all. You have lost a lot. Your penis lost it's best friend.

:shocked:

Sorry, no. My right hand is where it's always been.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: adlep

But, but, but the GOD said it is OK to do it...It must be true then.
Bottom line is that the proponents of circumcision have no arguments, so they resort to some odd ones like: women think it is "hot" which is an absolute BS.

"Hello Kettle, let me introduce you to my friend, Black."

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk
The eyeball analogy is utter nonsense.

I don't have a foreskin and I have a healthy and fulfilling sex life.

If I don't have eyelids I will probably go insane and kill myself.

You don't know...
Maybe if someone would remove you eyelids as a toddler, you would be fine. Your eyes would get used to it after a while and you wouldn't know any better
Your eyes would be less sensitive, but cleaner and more desirable by women. You would also argue that you eyes are just fine - and you can see as well as person with eyelids.
Latter on some medical group would come up with a study that actually, removing your eyelids makes your entire body better and the procedure helps to prevent cancer...

What you clowns that are so up in arms about cutting a guy's dick lack is perspective. When you start using extreme and sensationalist analogies to support your position then you are usually treading on thin ice. Eyeballs and a dick are not comparable organs with comparable functions.

It's a slippery slope analogy.

Just because you say so...
I presented my arguments for comparing the two. The fact that you don't like the analogy does not make it a lie or a "slippery slope". Think about it, accept it, and next time around think before making a decision for your newborn

Not because I say so, but because it is a rule of logical argument. Cutting off someone's eyelids, never having a medical basis throughout history, is completely unreasonable in comparison to a proven medical procedure, despite its debated necessity in modern medicine.

You know, I now stand near in the middle ground on this issue. But if you and your argument here is representative of the majority anti-cut crowd, then do forgive me if I choose not to be a part of your crusade based on failed logic.

 

[OCGuy]

This thread is full of stinky uncut penises trying to put down the guys who are cut.

 

[ChaoZ]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk
The eyeball analogy is utter nonsense.

I don't have a foreskin and I have a healthy and fulfilling sex life.

If I don't have eyelids I will probably go insane and kill myself.

You don't know...
Maybe if someone would remove you eyelids as a toddler, you would be fine. Your eyes would get used to it after a while and you wouldn't know any better
Your eyes would be less sensitive, but cleaner and more desirable by women. You would also argue that you eyes are just fine - and you can see as well as person with eyelids.
Latter on some medical group would come up with a study that actually, removing your eyelids makes your entire body better and the procedure helps to prevent cancer...

What you clowns that are so up in arms about cutting a guy's dick lack is perspective. When you start using extreme and sensationalist analogies to support your position then you are usually treading on thin ice. Eyeballs and a dick are not comparable organs with comparable functions.

It's a slippery slope analogy.

Just because you say so...
I presented my arguments for comparing the two. The fact that you don't like the analogy does not make it a lie or a "slippery slope". Think about it, accept it, and next time around think before making a decision for your newborn

Not because I say so, but because it is a rule of logical argument. Cutting off someone's eyelids, never having a medical basis throughout history, is completely unreasonable in comparison to a proven medical procedure, despite its debated necessity in modern medicine.

You know, I now stand near in the middle ground on this issue. But if you and your argument here is representative of the majority anti-cut crowd, then do forgive me if I choose not to be a part of your crusade based on failed logic.

When the first penis was cut was there a medical basis for it?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: ChaoZ

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: adlep

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk
The eyeball analogy is utter nonsense.

I don't have a foreskin and I have a healthy and fulfilling sex life.

If I don't have eyelids I will probably go insane and kill myself.

You don't know...
Maybe if someone would remove you eyelids as a toddler, you would be fine. Your eyes would get used to it after a while and you wouldn't know any better
Your eyes would be less sensitive, but cleaner and more desirable by women. You would also argue that you eyes are just fine - and you can see as well as person with eyelids.
Latter on some medical group would come up with a study that actually, removing your eyelids makes your entire body better and the procedure helps to prevent cancer...

What you clowns that are so up in arms about cutting a guy's dick lack is perspective. When you start using extreme and sensationalist analogies to support your position then you are usually treading on thin ice. Eyeballs and a dick are not comparable organs with comparable functions.

It's a slippery slope analogy.

Just because you say so...
I presented my arguments for comparing the two. The fact that you don't like the analogy does not make it a lie or a "slippery slope". Think about it, accept it, and next time around think before making a decision for your newborn

Not because I say so, but because it is a rule of logical argument. Cutting off someone's eyelids, never having a medical basis throughout history, is completely unreasonable in comparison to a proven medical procedure, despite its debated necessity in modern medicine.

You know, I now stand near in the middle ground on this issue. But if you and your argument here is representative of the majority anti-cut crowd, then do forgive me if I choose not to be a part of your crusade based on failed logic.

When the first penis was cut was there a medical basis for it?

as a preventive, yes. It existed as a quick and easy solution to potentially life-threatening disease, in a climate and environment where such was more prevalent. I suppose it survives to this day mostly as tradition, just like avoiding pork. but there you go.

Removing eyelids as neither a medical or historical basis, and is an obvious example of a slippery slope line of argument in this debate.

 

[RadiclDreamer]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: adlep

But, but, but the GOD said it is OK to do it...It must be true then.
Bottom line is that the proponents of circumcision have no arguments, so they resort to some odd ones like: women think it is "hot" which is an absolute BS.

"Hello Kettle, let me introduce you to my friend, Black."

Not even the same.

This is something that should not be FORCED onto a child without their concent. Just because you think its ok does not give you the right (your child or not) to force it upon your child.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: adlep

But, but, but the GOD said it is OK to do it...It must be true then.
Bottom line is that the proponents of circumcision have no arguments, so they resort to some odd ones like: women think it is "hot" which is an absolute BS.

"Hello Kettle, let me introduce you to my friend, Black."

Not even the same.

This is something that should not be FORCED onto a child without their concent. Just because you think its ok does not give you the right (your child or not) to force it upon your child.

Well from that Penn and Teller clip the kid can always tape a brick to his dick if he ever decides he wants to go for the Snuffleupagus look.