Page 3 of 5 [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,029
Location: Aux Arcs

19 Oct 2021, 10:11 am

Unless it was a home birth, my ex wasn’t circumcised since he was born at home.
Neither was his brother ,this was more common in rural areas in the US.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,029
Location: Aux Arcs

19 Oct 2021, 10:13 am

Pepe wrote:
Erewhon wrote:
In the region of the planet where i currently live, the tails and ears of dogs are legally better protected by law than the penis of a newborn boy.

Image


That abomination on dog mutilation has been banned here in Australia also.
Yet circumcision isn't.
"Interesting".

I had a Dobie and his tail was already docked but I left his beautiful ears the way they should be.Floppy.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 32,880
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

19 Oct 2021, 11:25 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
It was standard practice to circumcise male newborns in the US until recently.

Female circumcision is generally worse for women than male circumcision is for males.

I’m not an advocate for circumcision.


It is way worse, a male getting circumsised still allows them to experience sexual pleasure and though maybe its not necessary in the U.S does seem a common thing to have done.

Female 'circumcision' involves literally cutting their clitoris out so they cannot experience sexual pleasure and they'll be lucky if it doesn't also make sex painful. Also its not necessarily even done in a sterile place its like relatives grabbing the child and holding her down while they amateurly butcher her genitals.

I won't say it is right to circumsize baby boys, maybe it would be better to leave it up to them. But it is not the same thing as female genital mutilation, it doesn't actually remove an organ form the body. Also since the clitoris basically has the purpose to cause an orgasm it means its an organ with a lot of feeling/nerves and things.

So I am not saying people shouldn't fight against circumcision and there aren't good reasons for that. But I do wish people would not try to compare fore-skin removal to cutting out a woman's clitoris because of archaic beliefs women should not be allowed pleasure from sex(I get the impression also a lot of times it is done to girls in adolescence). They aren't the same thing...female genital mutilation would be more akin to just slicing off the whole tip/head of the penis.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,004
Location: Australia

19 Oct 2021, 4:38 pm

traven wrote:
Image

https://www.desertflowerfoundation.org/ ... l/188.html
while
"Female cosmetic genital surgery is rapidly gaining popularity". Patient demand is increasing, and female cosmetic genital surgery is becoming a subspecialty of plastic surgery.
"Anatomy and Aesthetics of the Labia Minora: The Ideal Vulva?"
"Female genital cosmetic surgery: a labial obsession"
( female genital mutilation and female genital cosmetic surgery are both “cultural” issues.)
& "Barbie Procedure for genital beautification" ("these" are titles or headlines)


They are responsible adults and have "the right" to do what they want.
Simples.
There is no issue here, in my mind. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,004
Location: Australia

19 Oct 2021, 4:42 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
It was standard practice to circumcise male newborns in the US until recently.

Female circumcision is generally worse for women than male circumcision is for males.

I’m not an advocate for circumcision.


It is way worse, a male getting circumsised still allows them to experience sexual pleasure and though maybe its not necessary in the U.S does seem a common thing to have done.

Female 'circumcision' involves literally cutting their clitoris out so they cannot experience sexual pleasure and they'll be lucky if it doesn't also make sex painful. Also its not necessarily even done in a sterile place its like relatives grabbing the child and holding her down while they amateurly butcher her genitals.

I won't say it is right to circumsize baby boys, maybe it would be better to leave it up to them. But it is not the same thing as female genital mutilation, it doesn't actually remove an organ form the body. Also since the clitoris basically has the purpose to cause an orgasm it means its an organ with a lot of feeling/nerves and things.

So I am not saying people shouldn't fight against circumcision and there aren't good reasons for that. But I do wish people would not try to compare fore-skin removal to cutting out a woman's clitoris because of archaic beliefs women should not be allowed pleasure from sex(I get the impression also a lot of times it is done to girls in adolescence). They aren't the same thing...female genital mutilation would be more akin to just slicing off the whole tip/head of the penis.


My position:
*All* genital mutilation is bad. 8)

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=400854#p8884583


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 32,880
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Oct 2021, 12:22 pm

Pepe wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
It was standard practice to circumcise male newborns in the US until recently.

Female circumcision is generally worse for women than male circumcision is for males.

I’m not an advocate for circumcision.


It is way worse, a male getting circumsised still allows them to experience sexual pleasure and though maybe its not necessary in the U.S does seem a common thing to have done.

Female 'circumcision' involves literally cutting their clitoris out so they cannot experience sexual pleasure and they'll be lucky if it doesn't also make sex painful. Also its not necessarily even done in a sterile place its like relatives grabbing the child and holding her down while they amateurly butcher her genitals.

I won't say it is right to circumsize baby boys, maybe it would be better to leave it up to them. But it is not the same thing as female genital mutilation, it doesn't actually remove an organ form the body. Also since the clitoris basically has the purpose to cause an orgasm it means its an organ with a lot of feeling/nerves and things.

So I am not saying people shouldn't fight against circumcision and there aren't good reasons for that. But I do wish people would not try to compare fore-skin removal to cutting out a woman's clitoris because of archaic beliefs women should not be allowed pleasure from sex(I get the impression also a lot of times it is done to girls in adolescence). They aren't the same thing...female genital mutilation would be more akin to just slicing off the whole tip/head of the penis.


My position:
*All* genital mutilation is bad. 8)

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=400854#p8884583


It does not mean they are the same thing. Idk I figure if circumcision on babies was banned some men once they reach 18 might still choose to have it done. But I don't think any woman is going to willingly get their clit cut out at the age of 18.

I just think one is worse than the other and should not be compared as one and the same.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,004
Location: Australia

22 Oct 2021, 7:29 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
It was standard practice to circumcise male newborns in the US until recently.

Female circumcision is generally worse for women than male circumcision is for males.

I’m not an advocate for circumcision.


It is way worse, a male getting circumsised still allows them to experience sexual pleasure and though maybe its not necessary in the U.S does seem a common thing to have done.

Female 'circumcision' involves literally cutting their clitoris out so they cannot experience sexual pleasure and they'll be lucky if it doesn't also make sex painful. Also its not necessarily even done in a sterile place its like relatives grabbing the child and holding her down while they amateurly butcher her genitals.

I won't say it is right to circumsize baby boys, maybe it would be better to leave it up to them. But it is not the same thing as female genital mutilation, it doesn't actually remove an organ form the body. Also since the clitoris basically has the purpose to cause an orgasm it means its an organ with a lot of feeling/nerves and things.

So I am not saying people shouldn't fight against circumcision and there aren't good reasons for that. But I do wish people would not try to compare fore-skin removal to cutting out a woman's clitoris because of archaic beliefs women should not be allowed pleasure from sex(I get the impression also a lot of times it is done to girls in adolescence). They aren't the same thing...female genital mutilation would be more akin to just slicing off the whole tip/head of the penis.


My position:
*All* genital mutilation is bad. 8)

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=400854#p8884583


It does not mean they are the same thing. Idk I figure if circumcision on babies was banned some men once they reach 18 might still choose to have it done. But I don't think any woman is going to willingly get their clit cut out at the age of 18.

I just think one is worse than the other and should not be compared as one and the same.


"Context", my dear woman.
I was referring to babies, not adults.
As I have mentioned, I have no trouble whatsoever if an adult wants to circumcise themselves. 8)

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=400854&p=8888391#p8886015


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


Erewhon
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2016
Age: 1863
Gender: Male
Posts: 988
Location: Erewhon

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,476
Location: temperate zone

31 Oct 2021, 5:48 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
It was standard practice to circumcise male newborns in the US until recently.

Female circumcision is generally worse for women than male circumcision is for males.

I’m not an advocate for circumcision.


It is way worse, a male getting circumsised still allows them to experience sexual pleasure and though maybe its not necessary in the U.S does seem a common thing to have done.

Female 'circumcision' involves literally cutting their clitoris out so they cannot experience sexual pleasure and they'll be lucky if it doesn't also make sex painful. Also its not necessarily even done in a sterile place its like relatives grabbing the child and holding her down while they amateurly butcher her genitals.

I won't say it is right to circumsize baby boys, maybe it would be better to leave it up to them. But it is not the same thing as female genital mutilation, it doesn't actually remove an organ form the body. Also since the clitoris basically has the purpose to cause an orgasm it means its an organ with a lot of feeling/nerves and things.

So I am not saying people shouldn't fight against circumcision and there aren't good reasons for that. But I do wish people would not try to compare fore-skin removal to cutting out a woman's clitoris because of archaic beliefs women should not be allowed pleasure from sex(I get the impression also a lot of times it is done to girls in adolescence). They aren't the same thing...female genital mutilation would be more akin to just slicing off the whole tip/head of the penis.

Absolutely. Female GM is much worse.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,630
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

31 Oct 2021, 6:02 am

Male circumcision doesn’t ordinarily cause problems for the child. Female circumcision does, however. I’m unaware of any legitimate basis for religious female circumcisions. The point of male circumcision is ethnic identity. It represent being a part of a holy people set apart for God’s purpose. It is not necessary for a goy to be circumcised. If you want to be part of the Jewish community as a convert, it is required.

I rather like the idea of my boys and I having something special in common that makes us “set apart” similar to how the Jews were. The point of Christianity is salvation through faith, not by works of the law, hence why circumcision is irrelevant. Nevertheless, it’s still a cool idea. Therefore I had my boys cut.

On a baby, the actual wound is minimal. I’ve had paper cuts worse that that. When boys get older and get scraped knees falling off a bike it hurts worse than infant circumcision. The same can’t be said for a fully developed adult penis. Considering that just prior to the exodus certain Hebrews were circumcised with knives made from flint, infant circumcision is vastly more humane.

Parents have the right to do as they like with their own children. Given that male circumcision rarely does actual harm to the child, it is a decision best left up to the parents. If you don’t like infant circumcision, that it your right. Don’t circumcise your own baby. Leave other parents alone to make what they believe is the best decision for their children.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,476
Location: temperate zone

31 Oct 2021, 6:28 am

AngelRho wrote:
Male circumcision doesn’t ordinarily cause problems for the child. Female circumcision does, however. I’m unaware of any legitimate basis for religious female circumcisions. The point of male circumcision is ethnic identity. It represent being a part of a holy people set apart for God’s purpose. It is not necessary for a goy to be circumcised. If you want to be part of the Jewish community as a convert, it is required.

I rather like the idea of my boys and I having something special in common that makes us “set apart” similar to how the Jews were. The point of Christianity is salvation through faith, not by works of the law, hence why circumcision is irrelevant. Nevertheless, it’s still a cool idea. Therefore I had my boys cut.

On a baby, the actual wound is minimal. I’ve had paper cuts worse that that. When boys get older and get scraped knees falling off a bike it hurts worse than infant circumcision. The same can’t be said for a fully developed adult penis. Considering that just prior to the exodus certain Hebrews were circumcised with knives made from flint, infant circumcision is vastly more humane.

Parents have the right to do as they like with their own children. Given that male circumcision rarely does actual harm to the child, it is a decision best left up to the parents. If you don’t like infant circumcision, that it your right. Don’t circumcise your own baby. Leave other parents alone to make what they believe is the best decision for their children.

Hate to spoil your fun, but...

Imitating something done by one-point-five people in a thousand may well make you feel unique.

But imitating what one person in four does - does not make you "set apart" so much.

Jews ( little more than one thousandth of the World population) may practice circumcision. But so do Muslims (one forth of the world's population). :lol:



Cornflake
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 53,223
Location: Over there

31 Oct 2021, 8:52 am

Apologies for chopping up your post like this but there are just so many points I wanted to address.

AngelRho wrote:
Male circumcision doesn’t ordinarily cause problems for the child.
That's irrelevant, and "ordinarily" isn't good enough. It's also their body part, not yours and they should be able to make a choice later in life when they are better informed.

Quote:
I’m unaware of any legitimate basis for religious female circumcisions.
I don't believe there is any legitimate basis for forcibly mutilating the genitals of either sex.

Quote:
The point of male circumcision is ethnic identity.
It's not exactly a public statement though, is it? This identity "badge" that's kept tucked away in underwear, presumably only revealed to a partner - who is relieved(?) to find they're dating someone with an "approved" identity. Is that how this identity is supposed to achieve results?

Quote:
I rather like the idea of my boys and I having something special in common that makes us “set apart” similar to how the Jews were.
Personally, I'd be happy that they are my sons and already utterly unique but that's just me.

Quote:
Nevertheless, it’s still a cool idea. Therefore I had my boys cut.
8O There are no words...

Quote:
On a baby, the actual wound is minimal. I’ve had paper cuts worse that that.
When boys get older and get scraped knees falling off a bike it hurts worse than infant circumcision.
You'd know this how? And of course, when boys get older, they just have to live with this mutilation because there's no going back.

Quote:
The same can’t be said for a fully developed adult penis. Considering that just prior to the exodus certain Hebrews were circumcised with knives made from flint, infant circumcision is vastly more humane.
Phew, thank goodness those days of ritual mutilation are gone, eh?
Oh wait...

Quote:
Parents have the right to do as they like with their own children.
It's shocking to me that this includes mutilating them.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,630
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

31 Oct 2021, 8:59 am

Cornflake wrote:
Apologies for chopping up your post like this but there are just so many points I wanted to address.

AngelRho wrote:
Male circumcision doesn’t ordinarily cause problems for the child.
That's irrelevant, and "ordinarily" isn't good enough. It's also their body part, not yours and they should be able to make a choice later in life when they are better informed.

Quote:
I’m unaware of any legitimate basis for religious female circumcisions.
I don't believe there is any legitimate basis for forcibly mutilating the genitals of either sex.

Quote:
The point of male circumcision is ethnic identity.
It's not exactly a public statement though, is it? This identity "badge" that's kept tucked away in underwear, presumably only revealed to a partner - who is relieved(?) to find they're dating someone with an "approved" identity. Is that how this identity is supposed to achieve results?

Quote:
I rather like the idea of my boys and I having something special in common that makes us “set apart” similar to how the Jews were.
Personally, I'd be happy that they are my sons and already utterly unique but that's just me.

Quote:
Nevertheless, it’s still a cool idea. Therefore I had my boys cut.
8O There are no words...

Quote:
On a baby, the actual wound is minimal. I’ve had paper cuts worse that that.
When boys get older and get scraped knees falling off a bike it hurts worse than infant circumcision.
You'd know this how? And of course, when boys get older, they just have to live with this mutilation because there's no going back.

Quote:
The same can’t be said for a fully developed adult penis. Considering that just prior to the exodus certain Hebrews were circumcised with knives made from flint, infant circumcision is vastly more humane.
Phew, thank goodness those days of ritual mutilation are gone, eh?
Oh wait...

Quote:
Parents have the right to do as they like with their own children.
It's shocking to me that this includes mutilating them.

If you don’t like it, you don’t have to do it to your own boys.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,004
Location: Australia

31 Oct 2021, 2:01 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
It was standard practice to circumcise male newborns in the US until recently.

Female circumcision is generally worse for women than male circumcision is for males.

I’m not an advocate for circumcision.


It is way worse, a male getting circumsised still allows them to experience sexual pleasure and though maybe its not necessary in the U.S does seem a common thing to have done.

Female 'circumcision' involves literally cutting their clitoris out so they cannot experience sexual pleasure and they'll be lucky if it doesn't also make sex painful. Also its not necessarily even done in a sterile place its like relatives grabbing the child and holding her down while they amateurly butcher her genitals.

I won't say it is right to circumsize baby boys, maybe it would be better to leave it up to them. But it is not the same thing as female genital mutilation, it doesn't actually remove an organ form the body. Also since the clitoris basically has the purpose to cause an orgasm it means its an organ with a lot of feeling/nerves and things.

So I am not saying people shouldn't fight against circumcision and there aren't good reasons for that. But I do wish people would not try to compare fore-skin removal to cutting out a woman's clitoris because of archaic beliefs women should not be allowed pleasure from sex(I get the impression also a lot of times it is done to girls in adolescence). They aren't the same thing...female genital mutilation would be more akin to just slicing off the whole tip/head of the penis.

Absolutely. Female GM is much worse.


"Hitler killed millions.
Stalin murdered more.
Bother were very naughty boyz." 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 14,812
Location: I'm right here

31 Oct 2021, 2:22 pm

AngelRho wrote:
If you don’t like it, you don’t have to do it to your own boys.


Perhaps people should only be entitled to make that choice over their own genitals. What your parents prefer is irrelevant, they're not their parts to go mutilating.


_________________
Be reasonable, demand the impossible.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,004
Location: Australia

31 Oct 2021, 2:30 pm

WARNING!
An image of "Scarification" on a child is embedded in this post.

AngelRho wrote:
Male circumcision doesn’t ordinarily cause problems for the child. Female circumcision does, however. I’m unaware of any legitimate basis for religious female circumcisions. The point of male circumcision is ethnic identity. It represent being a part of a holy people set apart for God’s purpose. It is not necessary for a goy to be circumcised. If you want to be part of the Jewish community as a convert, it is required.


God's motives are questionable, imo, if he demands babies should be mutilated.
I think cutting off the baby's ears would make a better show of religious commitment. :thumright:

Some Muslims also circumcise innocent infants, bwt.

AngelRho wrote:
I rather like the idea of my boys and I having something special in common that makes us “set apart” similar to how the Jews were.


As I said, cutting off children's ears would make a better statement of committment for all to see.
Cutting heads off is a step too far, however. 8O

AngelRho wrote:
The point of Christianity is salvation through faith, not by works of the law, hence why circumcision is irrelevant. Nevertheless, it’s still a cool idea. Therefore I had my boys cut.


Ahhh. Vested interest identified. 8)
Are your Christian children Jewish, btw? <disingenuous> :mrgreen:

AngelRho wrote:
On a baby, the actual wound is minimal. I’ve had paper cuts worse that that.


Then you wouldn't have a problem with this either:



If the mods have a problem with this image they can simply delete that rather than the entire post. 8)

AngelRho wrote:
When boys get older and get scraped knees falling off a bike it hurts worse than infant circumcision. The same can’t be said for a fully developed adult penis. Considering that just prior to the exodus certain Hebrews were circumcised with knives made from flint, infant circumcision is vastly more humane.


So, you are saying that for thousands of years, the practice was barbaric?

AngelRho wrote:
Parents have the right to do as they like with their own children. Given that male circumcision rarely does actual harm to the child, it is a decision best left up to the parents. If you don’t like infant circumcision, that it your right. Don’t circumcise your own baby. Leave other parents alone to make what they believe is the best decision for their children.


The child is your "property".
You can do with them what you want. :mrgreen:

Genital mutilation is not the biggest sin in the world, but it is not necessary, especially these days.
Let the child decide for themselves when they have the reasoning facilities. 8)

BTW, didn't god design humanity?
Will he admit he made a mistake when he added the foreskin? :scratch:

This reminds me of a joke:
Q: What is the useless bit of meat on the end of a penis called?
A: A man. :mrgreen:

There is a female version, btw. 8O


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


Last edited by Cornflake on 31 Oct 2021, 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.: Put the image inside a spoiler so members can decide whether to see it or not