Intactivists in Florida snip away at opponents

[MillCreek]

^^^Wow. Some of that reads as if it was from The Protocols of Zion and responses thereto.

[Boomhauer]

It's the Joos fault!

[BlueStarLizzard]

okay, on hearsay account (although I trust the person that made the statement) a man who was circumcised as an adult did state that he had lost sensation.

[230RN]

Somehow throughout this, I can't help thinking of the "Married With Children" episode where Al Bundy gets a circumcision instead of a circular incision.

Laffaminnit.

Terry

[White Horseradish]

To listen to some of you, it's amazing that how the rest of the world survives with all that skin... 

[Perd Hapley]

To listen to some of you, it's amazing that how the rest of the world survives with all that skin... 

Citations needed.

[White Horseradish]

Citations needed.

Citations for what? That the rest of the world outside of Jews, Arabs,a few African tribes and US isn't into peepee-snipping? Or that the rest of the world survives?

it prevents aids, cancer, infections of all stripes

How did Western civilization do without it for most of it's existence, and not perish in a pile of rotten wangs?

[Perd Hapley]

OK, so you have one guy saying that circumcision prevents certain medical conditions. Doesn't really demonstrate your point.

More citations needed. 

Forget that. Just read the whole thread, and it's obvious that the "intactivists" here are the only ones amazed that people have survived - after circumcision.

Source: zahc and Blakenzy's posts in this thread.

[De Selby]

Citations for what? That the rest of the world outside of Jews, Arabs,a few African tribes and US isn't into peepee-snipping? Or that the rest of the world survives?
 How did Western civilization do without it for most of it's existence, and not perish in a pile of rotten wangs?

Those are true statements of the medical reasons for it - not assertions that it's somehow bad or destroying the world not to do it.  It isn't right to use a perjorative like mutilation to describe it, was the point.

[KD5NRH]

okay, on hearsay account (although I trust the person that made the statement) a man who was circumcised as an adult did state that he had lost sensation.

Did you test it?

[230RN]

I think the plural of penis is penes, but I didn't fact-check that.

(I'm still in proofreading mode from another thread in the "Round Table.")

 

[Fitz]

I think the plural of penis is penes, but I didn't fact-check that.

(I'm still in proofreading mode from another thread in the "Round Table.")

 

I prefer penii

[Boomhauer]

I've said it before and I'll say it again...


You people are nuts.

[roo_ster]

We are speaking English, not Latin or Greek.  The word may originate from another language, but it gets treated the same as working-class Anglo-Saxon vocabulary.  So, one can simply, uh, strap on "-es" and call it good.

As for conspiracy theories, I scratch my cranium at some of the Jewish-based sort(1), but I have little doubt considering where America's first real physicians & surgeons got their training--and the times--that there was no little Jewish influence on the origin and growth of the practice.  Hell, such progressive folk thought it grand to involuntarily sterilize folk and give them lobotomies. 

A little bit of skin, given the medical benefits supposed at the time, would not merit any forethought.




(1) OTOH, there is at least one Jewish-initiated circumcision conspiracy in the Bible I can recall.

[Viking]

I prefer penii

Does your wife know about this?

[Perd Hapley]

(1) OTOH, there is at least one Jewish-initiated circumcision conspiracy in the Bible I can recall.

   True, I forgot about that.

[mtnbkr]

I prefer penii

You would.

Chris

[zahc]

It isn't right to use a perjorative like mutilation to describe it, was the point.

Mutilation is the accurate term. It's the word "circumcision" that is euphemism. Some people even use the term "female circumcision", because accurately calling it mutilation is unpleasant and pronounces judgement as to the practice's barbaric essence,  which prevents the barbarians from attempting to launder or whitewash their evil.

[brimic]

Mutilation is the accurate term. It's the word "circumcision" that is euphemism. Some people even use the term "female circumcision", because accurately calling it mutilation is unpleasant and pronounces judgement as to the practice's barbaric essence,  which prevents the barbarians from attempting to launder or whitewash their evil.

Tomato/tomahto

FGM is not even in the same ballpark as male circumcism, but I think that ground has been covered before.

(1) OTOH, there is at least one Jewish-initiated circumcision conspiracy in the Bible I can recall.

[zahc]

Tomato/tomahto

FGM is not even in the same ballpark as male circumcism, but I think that ground has been covered before.

 

Saying it doesn't make it true. Of course girls and boys are different, there is that. but proponents of genital mutilation basically sound the same. There is no basis for choosing one to be acceptable over the other, except as a coping mechanism to avoid acknowledging one's own mutilation, or because one or the other is the norm in one's culture.

Circumcision is no notable negative effects on your health and does not inhibit ... sexual desire either.
The problem with the representation of ... circumcision as ‘mutilation’ is that the term, among other things, presupposes some irreversible and serious harm. This is not supported by current medical research on ... circumcision.

--Fuambai Ahmadu, "circumcised" woman. I removed the word "female" for clarity.

circumcised women point to the risks of painful clitoral adhesions that occur in girls and women who do not cleanse properly

What is removed is the prepuce - a small piece of the sheath that extends from the clitoris. That sheath has no sexual function

In a study in northern Sudan, published in 1983, only 558 (17.4 percent) of 3,210 women opposed FGM

Who advised the World Health Organization to coin the phrase "mutilation"? Whoever did was cynically manipulating language. We "mutilate" the umbilical cord by cutting it off at birth and arbitrarily deciding how long the navel should be. We "mutilate" our bodies with ear rings, tongue rings, tatoos, nose jobs etc.

--Nowa Omoigui, defending what I will continue to accurately call genital mutilation (of females)

These people, and arguments are obviously bunk to us. Because we are lucky to live in America, we know that clitoral adhesions are not the bane of intact women, that no part of the female genitalia is "superfluous". We know they are lying when they say sexual function is not impacted by removal of "extra" tissue or state that the clitoris is not important even interferes with intercourse. When it is women saying these things, we correctly discern that they are still wrong and either genuinely don't know what they are missing, or they are coping via ostrich method. After all, once you know you have been mutilated, you can be angry, sad, or just accept it, or deny it. Denial is adaptive.

 People in countries that don't practice male genital mutilation, and who have intact genitals, know that arguments for MGM are just as laughable.

[MechAg94]

Saying it doesn't make it true.

Exactly.  That applies to your opinions just as much as anyone else's.  

 

[brimic]

Saying it doesn't make it true. Of course girls and boys are different, there is that. but proponents of genital mutilation basically sound the same. There is no basis for choosing one to be acceptable over the other, except as a coping mechanism to avoid acknowledging one's own mutilation, or because one or the other is the norm in one's culture.

Nope.
FGM is the removal of the clitoris and oftentimes the labia as well.

FGM=/=circumcism

The word association you are using of circumcism--->FGM--->MGM is beyond absurd.

Its like saying an apple grows on a tree, a dog pees on the tree, so apple=dog pee.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Saying it doesn't make it true. Of course girls and boys are different, there is that. but proponents of genital mutilation basically sound the same. There is no basis for choosing one to be acceptable over the other, except as a coping mechanism to avoid acknowledging one's own mutilation, or because one or the other is the norm in one's culture.
--Fuambai Ahmadu, "circumcised" woman. I removed the word "female" for clarity.



--Nowa Omoigui, defending what I will continue to accurately call genital mutilation (of females)

These people, and arguments are obviously bunk to us. Because we are lucky to live in America, we know that clitoral adhesions are not the bane of intact women, that no part of the female genitalia is "superfluous". We know they are lying when they say sexual function is not impacted by removal of "extra" tissue or state that the clitoris is not important even interferes with intercourse. When it is women saying these things, we correctly discern that they are still wrong and either genuinely don't know what they are missing, or they are coping via ostrich method. After all, once you know you have been mutilated, you can be angry, sad, or just accept it, or deny it. Denial is adaptive.

 People in countries that don't practice male genital mutilation, and who have intact genitals, know that arguments for MGM are just as laughable.

Do I understand your reasoning correctly:  FGM is wrong.  Someone somewhere used similar-sounding arguments to justify circumcision.  Therefore circumcision is wrong, too? 

This is obviously a logical fallacy, and I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to realize this.  What gives?

[Perd Hapley]

Mutilation is the accurate term. It's the word "circumcision" that is euphemism.

Um, it's actually a literal description of the procedure.

People in countries that don't practice male genital mutilation, and who have intact genitals, know that arguments for MGM are just as laughable.

  You're claiming that every uncirc'ed/"unmutilated" American somehow knows that circumcision (literal, male circumcision) has none of the alleged benefits? Seriously? So basically every woman who buys into the health benefits of circumcision has had some work done to her privates.

[BlueStarLizzard]

OK. FGM

cutting off the covering of the clitoris = cutting off the foreskin (except the ramifications for woman are more drastic that the ones for men)
removing clitoris = cutting off the entire head of the penis (yes, guys, when chromosomes split and ya'll turn XY, that's what that started from)

sewing shut the labia = there is no equivalent.

Comparing FGM to male circumcision is a non starter. Even the mildest form makes sex outright painful, rather than (presumably) less pleasurable. mmmkay?