While parents are at it, they might as well get their kid a tatoo. Because there's no good reason to ciricumsize your kid apart from cosmetic reasons.
Actually the more I think about it, the more ****** up I think it is. You're performing a procedure that reduces sexual pleasure (and thereby reducing someone's quality of life) on a baby that isn't even capable of giving consent. That's sick.
When I asked my Dad, as a child, he told me that aside from custom it was a matter of cleanliness to prevent possible infection. What did I know? I was 8.
Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations
(02-14-2017, 11:37 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: When I asked my Dad, as a child, he told me that aside from custom it was a matter of cleanliness to prevent possible infection. What did I know? I was 8.
I've heard this argument as well. But as I've researched it, I noticed that hardly any guys in Europe get cut.
So quick question, do European guys have higher rates of the infections this allegedly prevents?
And this kind of smacks evolution in the face; why would we maintain a body part that causes infection?
Started as a religious thing. Some guy thought it prevented disease, became the customary, and has stayed that way.
While anything I've read says that yes, there is marginal reduction of the risk of UTIs, similar results would be achieved by simply washing your junk properly anyways. So probably 95℅ custom, 5% health reasons.
(02-14-2017, 11:44 PM)THE Bigzoman Wrote: I've heard this argument as well. But as I've researched it, I noticed that hardly any guys in Europe get cut.
So quick question, do European guys have higher rates of the infections this allegedly prevents?
And this kind of smacks evolution in the face; why would we maintain a body part that causes infection?
The prepuce doesn't cause balanitis the same way lungs don't cause pneumonia. Bacteria, fungi, and viruses evolved to live in those environments and in some cases cause disease in man. It's like asking why did we evolve skin if skin causes disease? LOL
(02-15-2017, 12:37 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The same reason we comb their hair. Plus the AAP say the benefits of circumcision outweighs the risks. So I guess the question is why wouldn't we.
. . . and the benefits aren't great enough to recommend universal circumcision recommending the final decision be left to the parents based upon their religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs.
Do you intentional try to misrepresent everything or do you not realize you are misrepresenting the American Academy of Pediatrics' position by omitting information?
In light of the AAP's caveat related to circumcision that parents should decide based upon their beliefs, we're back to the original question: why?
(02-15-2017, 12:49 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: . . . and the benefits aren't great enough to recommend universal circumcision recommending the final decision be left to the parents based upon their religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs.
Do you intentional try to misrepresent everything or do you not realize you are misrepresenting the American Academy of Pediatrics' position by omitting information?
In light of the AAP's caveat related to circumcision that parents should decide based upon their beliefs, we're back to the original question: why?
Just pointed out the AAP says the benefits outweigh the risks. Never said they said it should be a mandated institutional process. So I'm not sure what I misrepresented. Of course it should be left to the parents
You kind of answer your own question with the last one you ask. Because parents chose to and the benefits outweigh the risks. Why don't we ask:
Why do we comb out kids hair
Why do we put our kids hair in a ponytail
Why do we dress them up like little sailors
Why do we dress them up and take them out trick or treating
The answer to all is the parents prefer it and it causes the kid no harm (the AAP states it's beneficial).
(02-15-2017, 01:10 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Just pointed out the AAP says the benefits outweigh the risks. Never said they said it should be a mandated institutional process. So I'm not sure what I misrepresented. Of course it should be left to the parents
You kind of answer your own question with the last one you ask. Because parents chose to and the benefits outweigh the risks. Why don't we ask:
Why do we comb out kids hair
Why do we put our kids hair in a ponytail
Why do we dress them up like little sailors
Why do we dress them up and take them out trick or treating
The answer to all is the parents prefer it and it causes the kid no harm (the AAP states it's beneficial).
What is the underlying reason for the preference? Besides the circular logic of 1) parents prefer it and 2) AAP recommends following parent preference. The AAP recommends the procedure be available secondary to modest health benefits. However, the parent's decision can be 100% independent of any potential health benefits. Would you cut off the tip of your nose because Zeus commanded it? I'm sure the studies will show if you cut off the tip of your nose it will decrease both the prevalence and incidence of infections and cancers affecting the tip of the nose.
The part you omitted was the AAP's recommendation parents should chose based upon their "religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs." But, just to be clear, I don't expect you to admit the point.
Parting your kids hair on the left vs. right side isn't the same as a medical procedure to remove part of you son's dick.
(02-15-2017, 01:40 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: What is the underlying reason for the preference? Besides the circular logic of 1) parents prefer it and 2) AAP recommends following parent preference. The AAP recommends the procedure be available secondary to modest health benefits. However, the parent's decision can be 100% independent of any potential health benefits. Would you cut off the tip of your nose because Zeus commanded it? I'm sure the studies will show if you cut off the tip of your nose it will decrease both the prevalence and incidence of infections and cancers affecting the tip of the nose.
The part you omitted was the AAP's recommendation parents should chose based upon their "religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs." But, just to be clear, I don't expect you to admit the point.
Parting your kids hair on the left vs. right side isn't the same as a medical procedure to remove part of you son's dick.
just so we don't accuse me of omitting facts and/or trying to misrepresent like you are not doing with your limited use of the bold function. Here's the whole page:
Quote:Circumcision is a religious or cultural ritual for many Jewish and Islamic families, as well as certain aboriginal tribes in Africa and Australia. Circumcision can also be a matter of family tradition, personal hygiene or preventive health care. Sometimes there's a medical need for circumcision, such as when the foreskin is too tight to be pulled back (retracted) over the glans. In other cases, particularly in certain parts of Africa, circumcision is recommended for older boys or men to reduce the risk of certain sexually transmitted infections.
Quote:The American Academy ofPediatrics (AAP) says the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. However, the AAP doesn't recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns. The AAP leaves the circumcision decision up to parents — and supports use of anesthetics for infants who have the procedure. Circumcision might have various health benefits, including:
Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Washing beneath the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis is generally easy, however.
Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The overall risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections are more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on.
Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.
Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis.
Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men.
Circumcision might not be an option if certain blood-clotting disorders are present. In addition, circumcision might not be appropriate for premature babies who still require medical care in the hospital nursery. Circumcision doesn't affect fertility, nor is circumcision generally thought to enhance or detract from sexual pleasure for men or their partners.
So even though you consider the logic "circular" reasons have been given. So yours and the OP's question has been answered. So answer the counter question asked (feel free to provide a circular one): Why wouldn't a parent?
(02-15-2017, 01:55 AM)bfine32 Wrote: just so we don't accuse me of omitting facts and/or trying to misrepresent like you are not doing with your limited use of the bold function.
The bold function is intended to be limited. Like the limited use of the bold function in the article you quoted. Using the bold function on my entire response doesn't really draw your attention to the important part you need to focus on, does it? This is ridiculous as usual.
That's the primary source and not a secondary source paraphrasing the primary source.
Quote:So even though you consider the logic "circular" reasons have been given.
You stated the AAP recommends circumcision. Actually, they recommend it be made available if the parent so chooses based upon their religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs. Basically, you claimed the AAP recommends getting your son circumcised. But, the AAP position is they will do it if you want it done. There is a difference between the actual policy and what you claim. Either you understand and don't care or you're pretending to not understand. It's already a moot point.
You have persistently avoided answering the reasons why a parent would circumcise their son for religious, ethical, or cultural reasons. I understand why. It's pretty damn silly to cut your foreskin off because some Bronze Age, Middle Eastern goat hoarders started doing it a long time ago. Especially when you want to build a wall to prevent modern day, Middle Eastern goat herders from bringing their "savage" customs to the U.S.
Hair styles can be cultural practice as they differ by culture. So the hair style argument is an example of a cultural practice, but not an explanation of why someone would choose that cultural practice.
Quote:So yours and the OP's question has been answered.
Not in the least. I know the medical reasons behind the AAP's policy better than you. I don't need you to provide me with secondary sources of info as to why the AAP recommends to doctors to provide circumcisions based upon parent's beliefs.
The questions are:
Why would parents choose to circumcise their son based upon a religion?
What ethical belief would lead parents to choose circumcision?
What cultural beliefs would lead parents to choose circumcision and why?
You could argue the medical information you listed earlier is part of the modern American culture which leads to more parents choosing circumcision. But, Europe has the same modern medical information and yet circumcision isn't as popular. Therefore, there is more to the American cultural preference for circumcision than just the medical information. That's what you're not even coming close to answering.
Quote:So answer the counter question asked (feel free to provide a circular one): Why wouldn't a parent?
Maybe the parents are Catholic and decline for religious reasons. Maybe the parents have witnessed the affects of a botched circumcision or the father wishes he had never been circumcised if given a choice and the parents decline for ethical reasons. Or the parents are European and decline for cultural reasons because the Mum and Dad want him unclipped like dear ol' dad despite knowing a circumcision may reduce the higher than usual number of UTIs a man may get in his lifetime from 1-2 down to 0-1.
Those are reasons. People believe those reasons. But, why do they believe those reasons?
(02-15-2017, 04:19 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The bold function is intended to be limited. Like the limited use of the bold function in the article you quoted. Using the bold function on my entire response doesn't really draw your attention to the important part you need to focus on, does it? This is ridiculous as usual.
That's the primary source and not a secondary source paraphrasing the primary source.
You stated the AAP recommends circumcision. Actually, they recommend it be made available if the parent so chooses based upon their religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs. Basically, you claimed the AAP recommends getting your son circumcised. But, the AAP position is they will do it if you want it done. There is a difference between the actual policy and what you claim. Either you understand and don't care or you're pretending to not understand. It's already a moot point.
You have persistently avoided answering the reasons why a parent would circumcise their son for religious, ethical, or cultural reasons. I understand why. It's pretty damn silly to cut your foreskin off because some Bronze Age, Middle Eastern goat hoarders started doing it a long time ago. Especially when you want to build a wall to prevent modern day, Middle Eastern goat herders from bringing their "savage" customs to the U.S.
Hair styles can be cultural practice as they differ by culture. So the hair style argument is an example of a cultural practice, but not an explanation of why someone would choose that cultural practice.
Not in the least. I know the medical reasons behind the AAP's policy better than you. I don't need you to provide me with secondary sources of info as to why the AAP recommends to doctors to provide circumcisions based upon parent's beliefs.
The questions are:
Why would parents choose to circumcise their son based upon a religion?
What ethical belief would lead parents to choose circumcision?
What cultural beliefs would lead parents to choose circumcision and why?
You could argue the medical information you listed earlier is part of the modern American culture which leads to more parents choosing circumcision. But, Europe has the same modern medical information and yet circumcision isn't as popular. Therefore, there is more to the American cultural preference for circumcision than just the medical information. That's what you're not even coming close to answering.
Maybe the parents are Catholic and decline for religious reasons. Maybe the parents have witnessed the affects of a botched circumcision or the father wishes he had never been circumcised if given a choice and the parents decline for ethical reasons. Or the parents are European and decline for cultural reasons because the Mum and Dad want him unclipped like dear ol' dad despite knowing a circumcision may reduce the higher than usual number of UTIs a man may get in his lifetime from 1-2 down to 0-1.
Those are reasons. People believe those reasons. But, why do they believe those reasons?
Well done.
Alternately, you could have just said:
JOHN ROBERTS: From time to time in the years to come, I hope you will be treated unfairly so that you will come to know the value of justice... I wish you bad luck, again, from time to time so that you will be conscious of the role of chance in life and understand that your success is not completely deserved and that the failure of others is not completely deserved either.
(02-15-2017, 04:19 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreach Wrote: Not in the least. I know the medical reasons behind the AAP's policy better than you. I don't need you to provide me with secondary sources of info as to why the AAP recommends to doctors to provide circumcisions based upon parent's beliefs.
Breathe. No one is questioning your status as an expert on penis. After your dissertation I went back and reread the OP to make sure I didn't miss all those questions you asked. To my suprise he asked "why circumsize besides cosmetic". I gave reasons and provided a source. Yet somehow that triggered you to go off on a tangent.
(02-15-2017, 11:14 AM)Westwood Bengal Wrote: I didn't have my son cut. Completely unnecessary.
It still blows my mind that it persists as a tradition in our culture, but most people are sheep, and never question things like this.
"Congratulations, you have a son. I know he is only seconds old, but lets cut off some skin from his penis."
SMH.
Our son was almost 6 months old when his was done. He was a premie and we had to wait until he was completely off oxygen because he was born with a double hernia so he needed surgery!
They just did i all at once.
My wife and I discussed it and did it since it was the "normal" thing to do and would do him no harm in the long wrong as far as we could tell.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(02-15-2017, 11:26 AM)GMDino Wrote: Our son was almost 6 months old when his was done. He was a premie and we had to wait until he was completely off oxygen because he was born with a double hernia so he needed surgery!
They just did i all at once.
My wife and I discussed it and did it since it was the "normal" thing to do and would do him no harm in the long wrong as far as we could tell.
I was born with a double hernia. Is that fairly common do you know?
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
