CJ Morgan

Have just lately come to this thread and so was as flabbergasted as you when I read mjpb's claim that the pro-circumcision group was started by gays. Having shared a household with a couple of gay men (and seen more than I ever wanted to), this is news to me also.

Wouldn't you need REALLY floppy foreskin?... never mind. If I reflect upon mjpb's strong religious affiliation, his attempt to somehow shift the blame to gays starts to make sense.

As for medical reasons for circumcision, a foreskin that does not retract properly can lead to infection later in life. As for a reduction in cancer, teaching boys to properly wash themselves by pulling back the foreskin is just as effective and eliminates any need for circumcision.

As for aesthetics; a healthy body always looks best. I think women are more likely to object to 'dick-cheese' than foreskin.

Fluoride; I honestly don't know. My niece and nephew grew up on a bushland property, reliant on tank-water and have very healthy teeth. I am not happy about the amount of chemicals that are added to our drinking water as it is. I also envisage increased water treatment as we turn more and more to recycled sources as well as increased pollution effecting our catchment areas.

Vaccination would have prevented my uncle's polio. Anecdotally, I don't know of anyone who has had complications due to vaccination. I have yet to read any substantive peer-reviewed studies that vaccinations are an indicator in autism.

Finally, Cornflower posted something positive about women - whooooo-hooooo! About time.

CJ Morgan,

Fluoridation and circumcision both can help prevent problems just as immunization can. That is not rot.

”Male circumcision in various forms has been a widespread practice in many different cultures for millennia, but it was never done for 'health' reasons until very recently. It has generally been associated with rites of passage or other essentially religious purposes, but has only in the past century or so been performed ostensibly for reasons of hygiene, and even then primarily in Western societies or those that have adopted allopathic medicine. It's a favourite topic among anthropologists, and there's an extensive literature about it.”

True

I reckon it would be difficult to find a study on that type of thing (gay males who dock) but it is widely known. There might be a study but I am unaware of it.

Your anecdote is unsurprising. Circumcision fell out of favour in the 70s as there was insufficient evidence that it provided a medical benefit. Since then it has been extensively studied. 20 years ago things weren’t as settled and the 70s mentality was still prevalent.

I don’t know the sexual preference of your doctors nor care but I doubt that they were anti-circumcision activists just because they advised against it at that time and I am open to correction but I would be surprised if they would have considered it “mutilation”. Given the state of knowledge at the time they were probably giving the best advice they could.

Severin,

We are talking about a very small subgroup engaging in an unusual practice. There is no reason to believe it reflects the majority opinion of gay men. Of the tiny sample of gay men who I have discussed it with they all prefer circumcised for what that is worth.

I am not so quick to jump to conclusions about hygiene. Yes it is more likely to cause problems for the uncircumcised but why do you assume that applies to penile cancer? Do you also assume that the association between cervical cancer risk and uncircumcised partners is due to them having dirty penises?

I think, since people sometimes have problems with their appendix, we should just remove it at birth.

Better to be safe than sorry aye.

Hmm, what other organs could we remove?

Why Houellebecq the skin is a very large organ estimated to be about 2 square metres. Removing the foreskin of even the best endowered male wouldn't come close to removing the organ. Removing the humble foreskin is a little less invasive then removing an appendix and removal of it protects the health of other organs not the skin. Just to do your disproportionate and irrelevant throw away line to death... are you aware of any research that indicates that removing the appendix will protect against a number of medical conditions?

mjpb: << it would be difficult to find a study on that type of thing (gay males who dock) but it is widely known >>

Really? I hadn't heard of it and neither had Severin. I suspect it's only "widely known" within the somewhat repressed circles in which you apparently move.

You really shouldn't let your homophobia detract from your arguments. Your apparent fascination with "gay males inserting the end of their penises into each other" is very telling, and does absolutely nothing for your defence of circumcision.

It also has absolutely nothing to do with fluoridation - but any excuse for a bit of gay bashing, eh?

mjpb
"I have a friend who doesn’t believe in immunization and all kids are fine. I still think both procedures are a good idea."
S/he is a selfish parasite who relies on herd immunity created by others who DO immunise their children.

"they are defending a humble flap of skin"
Plus extras like 20,000 nerve endings. Men with foreskin left in tact have more nerve endings. Don't men want their penis to be as sensitive as possible?

Circumcision was also used in the past to discourage masturbation. How nice- at least it's less barbaric than chopping off hands.
Also, the glans of the penis, when unprotected by foreskin, is said to become less sensitive.

The 'evidence' you and SM present to back up your argument with is voodoo-science.

The only thing that I am very happy to change my mind on after reading some articles on pubmed about pain and circumcision is that this is a less painful procedure if this is done during the first week after birth than when it is performed later.

I only hope you will not be so silly as to claim that foetuses that are aborted do feel a great deal of pain next time I bump into you in an abortion debate.

Still, having no circumcision is even less painful than having one done below the age of 1 week.

Pain
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19223238?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=10

Oh I really love this discussion about fluoridation, CJ! ;)