Houellebecq,

Celiva has the right to be involved in the decision whether her son has a circumcision, but no right over other people's sons, especially considering that it has about the same risk as having a mole removed.

It is not "secret mens' business", but the men don't care. The only ones that want to interfere are blue rinsed dowagers with too much time and too little facts.

PS.
people have died from penile cancer.
Women do get infections from the bacterial cultivation under the foreskin.
It can and often does stink.

If you lower your hygene standards sufficiently then circumcision is no longer an issue.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3543481/

I don't think its really old grannies who care. A lot of blokes seem to want their foreskin back. They seem pretty dedicated to the cause, taking 6 years stretching it. Going through pain, some even getting it medically replaced.

I think we should undergo the radical procedure of leaving baby boys bodies as nature intended, to prevent this unnecessary turmoil in men.

"a lot of blokes"

If by the figures I get you mean 0.1% then a lot of blokes have sex changes, commit suicide, join religious cults.

Is it a coincidence that NORM is based in San Francisco, the sexually experimental capital of the world?

If you look hard enough you will find people unhappy with their lot in life, but the miniscule minority cannot be used to define what the majority feel.

"As many as 5 percent to 10 percent of uncircumcised males may require circumcision later in life because the skin around the tip of the penis may become tight and uncomfortable (called phimosis). Circumcised males may have a slight decreased chance of getting some sexually transmitted diseases but still need to practice safe sex."

With the resultant higher pain, many more males choose circumcision later in life than choose to be uncircumcised.

While there are a tiny handful of men that are pushing the cause, the vast majority are "blue rinsed dowagers".

CJ,

Well outside of the anthropological you don’t really seem to be on top of the current state of knowledge on the topic so I am not surprised you aren’t aware of the prime movers.

Your adoption of a dodgy attempt to ad hominem based on my religion does not indicate a lot of confidence in your argument.

Celivia,

That is a rather harsh and unfair assessment of my friend. I am completely in favour of immunization. I am fully aware that if most weren’t immunized then the relevant children wouldn’t be healthy. However my friend’s views on immunization are like your views on the current topic – misguided not malicious.

”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?”

Those nerve endings just keep getting more prolific don’t they? Skin has nerve endings but removal of the foreskin doesn’t affect the sexual sensitivity of the penis which would be the bottom line. Men who become clean cut as adults seem to think that it gets the skin out of the way and enables them to enjoy sex more.

”Circumcision was also used in the past to discourage masturbation. How nice- at least it's less barbaric than chopping off hands.”

So I have read many times on anti-circ websites. Perhaps CJ can check whether more than one person had that theory. Religious and coming of age motivations then later hygiene seem to have been the more established motivations prior to advances in medical knowledge on the topic. I am surprised anti-circs don’t drop that charge. Ridiculing the masturbation theory relies on the obvious absurdity of a flap of skin making a difference to sexual things. Since anti-circs now pretend the humble foreskin is sexual they can’t have it both ways.

CONT.

”Also, the glans of the penis, when unprotected by foreskin, is said to become less sensitive.”

If you believed the anti-circ websites they all but wither up and die. A study of 4,500 men before and after found no difference.

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

Yep I’ve read things like that on anti-circ websites. They even say that the foreskin protects against HIV. They will try anything. Fortunately the World Health Organisation doesn’t believe fiction on anti-circ websites and is pushing circumcision in sub-saharan Africa to fight the epidemic.

”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.”

To go through childbirth which sometimes even results in the head getting temporarily deformed babies need to be pretty resistant to pain. However whilst I accept the reduced pain and the religious obligations of people of the Jewish faith and the fact that it won’t be remembered I believe in using anaesthesia.

Houellebecq

The appendix thing may have seemed like a good idea at the time but is it really worth continuing? If you can’t address the proportionality and relevance taking a stab in the dark about appendicitis isn’t the way to go. Guessing incorrectly as you did just makes things worse.

A tiny number of misfits who get misled by anti-circ websites into thinking they are missing out on something doesn't make a lot of blokes.

mjpb,

'taking a stab in the dark about appendicitis isn’t the way to go'

You just don't understand where I'm coming from. You know those kinda people who spend time and energy researching on the internet to prove their point. Not me. I just don't care enough.

I just like to push things along and create outrage. Graham loves the revenue. I actually think it's kinda sad how much stake you guys have in proving that circumcision is the way to go.

Each person will make their own mind up. Why are you so threatened by other people not wanting to circumcise their kids?

Haven't you heard that anything that is 'natural' is better these days. Get with the program.

Or is it just sour grapes for you whenever the hippies have a little win. Or are you Jewish? Or do you hate older women like shadow minister?