PDA

View Full Version : circumcision or the 5 most sensitive parts



pylus
06-18-2007, 10:09 AM
http://www.livescience.com/health/070615_*****_sensitivity.html

Might not change your mind about anything.... But I'd put it into the cruel and unusual punishment category.

blueeyedgirl
06-18-2007, 11:04 AM
Good article pylus.
There will always be such articles that lean one way or the other. The thing is to be educated about the pro's and the con's of having or not having such a procedure done.

Guest
06-18-2007, 02:44 PM
My signature used to read "Friends don't let friends cut off parts of little boys' *****es" from a prev discussion on circumcision, until a mod made me remove it,lmao

Evangeline
06-18-2007, 02:53 PM
I have heard that before, and agree that it is cruel to remove it. You can prevent std's with condoms, and smart decisions, not altering your body so it makes it harder to catch stds when having unprotected sex.

Guest
06-18-2007, 03:10 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Evangeline</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have heard that before, and agree that it is cruel to remove it. You can prevent std's with condoms, and smart decisions, not altering your body so it makes it harder to catch stds when having unprotected sex. </div></div> /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/high5.gif

Jackie B
06-18-2007, 11:30 PM
Good grief, like we need men's *****es to be more sensitive than they already are. Then we'd only get 5 seconds out of them instead of 10. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif

Evangeline
06-19-2007, 12:21 AM
I don't think that you should get to decide how sensitive your son's [censored] is. It's not your body.

and fyi,not all men have that issue, sorry if you didn't know /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

pylus
06-19-2007, 04:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jackie B</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good grief, like we need men's *****es to be more sensitive than they already are. Then we'd only get 5 seconds out of them instead of 10. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif </div></div>

This lady (maybe not, certainly female though) asks me one day who I expect to please with that little thing. I've heard that before, but I finally realized the answer..... Myself.

Evangeline
07-05-2007, 02:00 AM
Here is a website that has images of botched circumcisions, if you've done this to your child or are considering doing it you should see these images.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched1sb.html

MissMuffett
07-08-2007, 11:28 PM
Most of those are adult circumcisons!

If your gong to show the bad u should also post the Good!! Most of those [censored]'s can be fixed with another circumcion!

http://www.erectionphotos.com/visitorsPix/visitorsGalleryPage3.htm

any surgery u have will have complications EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT!!

Muse
07-09-2007, 04:33 PM
It's just not so black and white as to be able to make the call that circumcision right or wrong. There are gray areas that BOTH sides need to take into account before dancing around judging each other.

I chose not to get my son done. I figured he was born with it, so it won't hurt him to have it there (so to speak) and maybe it's even supposed to be there! And under normal circumstances, I would make that exact same decision again. But my circumstances weren't normal and he had to be circumcised at 5 years old. There was literally no other choice. We looked and talked to quite a few people.

Knowing this, if I were to have another boy, I would chose to have him circumcised when he was born. But I'm still not an advocate for having it done just because.

The only BAD and WRONG decision is an uninformed one. Men in my family had a history of requiring adult circumcision for various complications. Just about every uncircumcised male had to eventually have it done after years of suffering from problems (and a couple of them were over 40). Had I known that when my son was born, I would have had it done, and I do consider ourselves lucky that he was only 5, rather than much older. He doesn't suffer for it, and has actually been happy he had it done because of the pain the alternative had caused him.

Whatever your decision is with your child, it should be educated. The pros and cons should be weighed, family history should be taken into account, availability of good doctors, how willing you are to be vigilant with care, and whether or not you can be prepared (emotionally, financially) if something does go wrong. If your decision is properly informed and educated, it's not a bad choice. Both sides have very valid arguments.

heintzman
07-10-2007, 12:08 AM
very well written,, thanks for the pros and cons!! real life style. i still stand behind my beliefs, but the way you put it, i understand where you are coming from. thanks for being diplomatic.

DogsRule
08-23-2007, 11:40 AM
Here are some other cons....I was all for circ. Would I ever do it again? No /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

http://www.cirp.org/library/complications/awakenings/

MissMuffett
08-28-2007, 10:32 AM
why do u regret it?
I think it was the best thing i could've done. the pros and the cons balance themselves out.

I personally dont want my son if he was uncut to give his future wife cervical cancer and there is a 50% chance of that.

MissMuffett
08-28-2007, 10:39 AM
btw im a proud mom of a circumcised boy!! /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

blueeyedgirl
08-28-2007, 11:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eyezofanangel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I personally dont want my son if he was uncut to give his future wife cervical cancer and there is a 50% chance of that. </div></div>

Where did you read that? I have never heard of that before.

blueeyedgirl
08-28-2007, 11:44 AM
Ok so I looked it up and well there are sites that say yes it can and then there are sites that say its a myth.

http://www.notjustskin.org/downloads/InfoandQuotes.pdf

adigirl
08-28-2007, 01:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jackie B</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good grief, like we need men's *****es to be more sensitive than they already are. Then we'd only get 5 seconds out of them instead of 10. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/lol.gif </div></div>


/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rofl.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/high5.gif

adigirl
08-28-2007, 02:02 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eyezofanangel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most of those are adult circumcisons!

If your gong to show the bad u should also post the Good!! Most of those [censored]'s can be fixed with another circumcion!

http://www.erectionphotos.com/visitorsPix/visitorsGalleryPage3.htm

any surgery u have will have complications EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT!!
</div></div>

OK, those are just not attractive.

MissMuffett
08-29-2007, 10:19 AM
the link u posted blueeyed girl was showing dates of 1982-1997-1999. these studies of cervical caner was done in 2002.. So your notes are untrue and out of date.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9405E5DB1F3DF932A25757C0A9649C8B63

blueeyedgirl
08-29-2007, 10:37 AM
If i kept looking I could probably find more with a closer date. Most cases of cervical cancer are caused by HPV. However now there is a shot for this as a preventative measure.

MissMuffett
08-29-2007, 09:50 PM
circumcision is also a preventative measure for aids/hiv by 60% even WHO | World Health Organization now supports this!

blueeyedgirl
08-30-2007, 12:21 PM
We can probably argue this back and forth but that is not what i want to do. Parents just need to educate themselves of the pro's and con's and speak with a professional or two and base their decisions on that. As I have stated before i am not at all for it but will not ram my decisions down someones throat.

euro
08-30-2007, 02:33 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eyezofanangel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">circumcision is also a preventative measure for aids/hiv by 60% even WHO | World Health Organization now supports this!
</div></div>

There are also those who say this claim is based on flawed studies.

Exaggerated claims about circumcision to prevent HIV (http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html)

Consider this comment from the article above:

The United States has the highest rate of HIV infection and the highest rate of male circumcision in the industrialized world.

MissMuffett
08-30-2007, 10:29 PM
I wouldn't trust that site. there are only 3 references that were done during this these studies.. 1 was in 2007 and it refers to female circumcison, which isn't the study, and the second one is from anonomyous, and the 3rd one agrees with me.

ALso Euro please be aware that hiv/aids rate not only due to heterol sexual but there are alot of other factors including DRUGS and homosexual behaviours. These studies that were concluded did not test either one.. And u also have to take in consideration the population of the USA, which is second biggest in the world...

MissMuffett
08-30-2007, 10:53 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,,2045119,00.html

blueeyedgirl
08-30-2007, 11:47 PM
http://www.circumcision.org/hiv.htm

"In the other countries, there was either no difference in HIV rates between circumcised and uncircumcised men or circumcised men were more likely to be HIV-positive than uncircumcised men"
Taken from here http://www.docguide.com/news/content.nsf/news/852571020057CCF6852571CD005207D9

http://www.interscientific.net/AOE2007.html
http://www.afrol.com/articles/24469

euro
08-31-2007, 09:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eyezofanangel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wouldn't trust that site. there are only 3 references that were done during this these studies.. 1 was in 2007 and it refers to female circumcison, which isn't the study, and the second one is from anonomyous, and the 3rd one agrees with me.

ALso Euro please be aware that hiv/aids rate not only due to heterol sexual but there are alot of other factors including DRUGS and homosexual behaviours. These studies that were concluded did not test either one.. And u also have to take in consideration the population of the USA, which is second biggest in the world... </div></div>

Which makes one wonder how an African study applies in North America...


Check this (http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/05/12/12/roberts.htm)

or

this (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/142562/the_truth_about_circumcision_hivhpv.html)

which says:

The World Health Organization recently published that circumcision may offer some protection against HIV for men. It did not, however, reveal the exact details of the studies. (Why not?)

or this one... (http://www.circinfo.org/hiv.html)

which says...The latest argument for circumcising normal male infants is that, even if all the other reasons for circumcision have proven to be rubbish, at least it will protect them from the AIDS virus. The claim is wrong because circumcision does not protect against HIV infection, and it is irrelevant because, even if it did, infants and boys are not at risk because they do not have sex with carriers of the virus.

and

After many years of fruitless endeavour and an expenditure running into hundreds of millions of dollars, evidence has finally come to light that in Africa men who have unprotected intercourse with HIV positive partners are less likely, or will take longer, to become infected with HIV if they have been circumcised. The protective effect is estimated at 50 per cent, meaning that if it takes an uncircumcised man eight sessions of unsafe sex to get infected, it will take a circumcised man twelve sessions. How this rather limited protection justifies talk of a “vaccine”, or authorises circumcision of sexually inactive – and thus not at risk – infants and boys, is not at all clear. The media hype surrounding the results of the clinical trials [1] on which these conclusions are based have been out of all proportion to their real significance.

Please bear in mind that the WHO is a very political and currently very messed up agency that has come under fire for a number of reasons, not the least of which is bad policy.

DogsRule
09-02-2007, 10:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eyezofanangel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">why do u regret it?
I think it was the best thing i could've done. the pros and the cons balance themselves out.

I personally dont want my son if he was uncut to give his future wife cervical cancer and there is a 50% chance of that. </div></div>


Due to complications....

MagicFingers
09-03-2007, 10:12 AM
Sorry but from that article i took. Those who have multiple sex partners are more likely to contract HPV which inturn contributes to cervical cancer. Wonder how many of those couples where the woman had cervical cancer and the man was circumsized had only had 1 sex partner. We have to remember studies like this, pull out and offer only the information they want the public to have. All studies should be read and taken with a grain of salt as many studies should be read from beginning to end and with an open mind. Too much is left up to interpretation. And we don't have all the facts from that study only what the NEW YORK TIMES decided to publish.

MissMuffett
09-14-2007, 09:29 AM
your right lets inject a chemical into the bodies of our future mothers when we dont know the long time effects of this!!

Im refering to the new hpv needle!

blueeyedgirl
09-14-2007, 10:32 AM
You are willing to cut a piece of your childs body yet not willing to inject your child. How ironic is that lmfao.

There are going to be several different preventative measure at some point that will come out. All I was pointing out is that there is now a new preventative measure out there. Doesnt mean that is what i would use.

Edited to add.....Do you not get your child his vaccine needles as needed. If so then in your words you are "injecting him full of chemicals". It is another type of preventative measure.

I have gotten my son his vaccines every time they are suppose to be done. But somewhere I draw the line when it comes to preventive measures. Everyone has their opinion when it comes to having a circ. I make sure that the pros and the cons are both out there so that people are making an educated decision on such a matter.

euro
09-14-2007, 02:40 PM
Indeed. And I am glad that our friend Regis at the Catholic School Board along with his trustee friends have spoken out against this. As we know, there is no premarital sex among Catholic teens. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif

MissMuffett
09-14-2007, 10:45 PM
all of these vaccinactions have been out for years.. they have been fully researched. as for circ... IT ISN"T A CHEMICAL.. and we are aware of the long term BENEFITS&gt;

maybe some people who are anti circ should ask nurses who works @ old ages homes how many problems they see with men who have forskin and u tell me differnet!!!

blueeyedgirl
09-14-2007, 11:06 PM
I feel like a broken record so I guess this will be my last post on the subject.(well hopefully anyways lol)

With everything there will always be PROS and CONS. It is us as parents to decide which is better for our child. You can not force something like this down someones throat. If you are for it then great lay out the benifits. I am not for it and because you posted some of the benifits i have turned around and posted the cons for it.

I did speak with professionals and worked in an old age home right before my son was born so trust me i heard things. The things i heard pretty much were about the same level for each side.

Just like the vaccines when your child will be of age to have sex the hpv vacc will have been out long enough to make an educated guess at that point wether it is safe or not.

We can continue to go back and forth on this issue but it will always be the same. You will have your pros and I will have the cons. I have never and will never judge a parent on giving their child a circ. Just be educated about it and have an opened mind when going into it. If you believe in it so strongly of course all you are going to see are the pros.

MissMuffett
09-14-2007, 11:31 PM
I"ll fully aware of the pros and cons. thanks
/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Crusty
09-18-2007, 01:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eyezofanangel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">all of these vaccinactions have been out for years.. they have been fully researched. as for circ... IT ISN"T A CHEMICAL.. and we are aware of the long term BENEFITS&gt;

maybe some people who are anti circ should ask nurses who works @ old ages homes how many problems they see with men who have forskin and u tell me differnet!!!
</div></div>


um .... ya

I'll gladley get involved with this thread ... as soon as there are some semi-intelligent posts.

MissMuffett
09-18-2007, 02:28 PM
now your just being rude!!

Crusty
09-18-2007, 02:43 PM
I'll stop being rude, if you get hooked on Phonics.