Male Genital Mutilation - why is this allowed?

Alizrian Crimson

Alizrian Crimson wrote: »

So does using condoms. That's better than encouraging some Bronze Age desert ritual.

True, but its an option and worthwhile in Africa where condom use is not as high as it needs to be.

Roger Hassenforder

Alizrian Crimson wrote: »

It's perfectly valid to ask why mgm is fine but fgm is not. There are different levels of female circumcision. There is even a thought that a limited form of female circumcision should be allowed in the western world. That ok with you?

Frankly I suspect the only reason mgm hasn't been banned is because people are terrified of offending Jews and Muslims.

If there is a sound medical reason then maybe, but you have no right to alter the genitals of someone else. Let the man decide himself when he's old enough.

Sooner this banned the better. And I don't care if that offends Yahweh or Allah.

As i said earlier I didn't do it to my kid because I didn't think it was necessary. My mother had other reasons.

I'm not outraged I was tidied up, in fact I'm kinda glad I was, looking at willies in the showers after a rugby match, I think the ergonomics, aesthetics and userfriendliness of a circumcised nob are superior. I've not suffered any adverse sensory effects and it evidentially hasn't affected its fuctionality.

it's a useful argument to rail against the ongoing trampling of men by feminist/feminazi/misogynism
and the perceived hypocrisy of FGM being repulsive while MG"M" is still allowed.
But to compare circumcision with FGM is an affront to both "victims".

(Allah and Yahweh can fcuk off, I agree on that with you !)

BlueStratos

@Benbooms
Well it's not really a case of not respecting our son's preferences. It's more a case of deciding what we considered best for them.
My wife asked them when they were teenagers how they felt about it (did they resent it etc)? And they were both apathetic about it really. They really don't care they are circumcised as they don't know any different. Maybe if we had them done as teens, and they knew the difference of being uncut/circumcised they may resent us; as it may also have taken longer to heal and be more painful etc.
But they were done as babies and so don't remember it, and don't mind as a result.
My wife did consider whether it was best to get them done as babies/children/teens, but after much research decided all things considered baby was the best time.
My view is the same, having had it done at 25 it takes longer to heal, and its more painful. So I can understand why say a teen that has it done would resent parents for doing so. I would not want to get our sons done as teens for this reason.
But getting them done as babies has been fine, and so my wife encouraged her sister and friends to do the same on that basis.

zedhead

BlueStratos wrote: »

@jobbridge4life
No, I think it's widely accepted and understood that cosmetic children on children is not acceptable nor is it legal.
FGM and circumcision are not the same thing. Nor is circumcision and labiaplasty etc.
Of course my wife would not think it is OK to give a child a boob job or labiaplasty. That should be their choice at 18 when adult.
We just think circumcision looks better and is cleaner, and heals faster when done as a baby rather than adult.
So we decided to get our sons done, and we are both happy we did. They are apathetic about it really.
Everyone has different views on parenting for/against breast feeding/ear piercing/vacinations etc.
The list is endless really, and people will get very heated about these things either way.
I do admit that I sometimes wonder if my wife has developed some kind of fetish for it now. Personally I would not try to influence her friends (or my own friends) in the same way she does.
I suppose she just really likes the look, and finds it arousing. Hence her enthusiasm for it. I don't know really.
Maybe that is just what happens, for example her sister also now prefer it after getting her sons and partner done.
In any case, I don't think it's worth getting worked up or heated over. Each to their own. I like it, some don't; I accept we all don't have the same views on things, and that is fine.

But you are openly admitting you circumcised your sons for cosmetic reasons - so it should be classed as a cosmetic procedure. FGM and circumcision are not the same in terms of long term negative effects, but what is the difference between labiaplasty and circumcision for cosmetic reasons?

Do you not find it a little odd that your wife is almost fetishising your son's and friends sons penises? You are saying she is trying to talk her friends into getting their sons circumcised because she finds it arousing - that is very worrying and strange.

Roger Hassenforder

Widdershins wrote: »

Circumcision's very common among Muslims too.

Ah! They fell for it too

GingerLily

eviltwin wrote: »

Its bad enough you did it but here you are making excuses and trying to deflect by saying most women prefer it....I don't think most women give a toss tbh what a man's dick looks like.

A lot of men on this thread are claiming women prefer it?

I'm a women and I don't!!

greencap

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

I've not suffered any adverse sensory effects and it evidentially hasn't affected its fuctionality.

sure you did.

you just don't know what you lost, because its not there to notice.

thats a bit like an amputee who's lived his whole life saying 'well i dont feel any pain in that bit they hacked off, so whats the problem'.

OldNotWIse

GingerLily wrote: »

A lot of men on this thread are claiming women prefer it?

I'm a women and I don't!![/QUOTE
Same

seamus

BlueStratos wrote: »

My wife asked them when they were teenagers how they felt about it (did they resent it etc)? And they were both apathetic about it really. They really don't care they are circumcised as they don't know any different.

Well, that's exactly it. They don't know any different. That doesn't make it OK.

Either way, you have removed part of their genitalia and denied them valuable personal experiences.

No, you can't miss what you've never had, but that doesn't justify removing it in the first place.

Roger Hassenforder

greencap wrote: »

sure you did.

you just don't know what you lost, because its not there to notice.

thats a bit like an amputee who's lived his whole life saying 'well i dont feel any pain in that bit they hacked off, so whats the problem'.

Ah here
How do you know what sensitivity I have? They don't cut the fecking nob off.

How white is the white you see? Who can tell which of us is right?

seamus

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Ah here
How do you know what sensitivity I have? They don't cut the fecking nob off.

How white is the white you see? Who can tell which of us is right?

No, but if you've no foreskin, then I know what sensitivity you don't have. The foreskin contains many many nerve endings. Lovely, happy nerve endings.

eviltwin

GingerLily wrote: »

A lot of men on this thread are claiming women prefer it?

I'm a women and I don't!!

Same here.

Wibbs

BlueStratos wrote: »

@Alizrian Crimson
To answer your questions.
I do not consider circumcision to be mutilation. I consider FGM to be mutilation. Not the same things.

I ask again; would you be OK with parents removing exactly the same tissue in girls for the reasons you gave? Simple question.

I am not bothered either way to be honest with you; each to their own. Some women prefer circumcised men, some men prefer women with big boobs etc. That is just the way it is, we all have our own preferences in life.
I think its better, you don't; etc.

Some cultures prefer women and men to have their genitals changed. Why OK for you and not for them?

BlueStratos wrote: »

@jobbridge4life
No, I think it's widely accepted and understood that cosmetic children on children is not acceptable nor is it legal.
FGM and circumcision are not the same thing. Nor is circumcision and labiaplasty etc.

Again; would you be OK with removing the clitoral hood and inner labia of young women. It is the exact same tissue removed. If not why not? Simple question.

I do admit that I sometimes wonder if my wife has developed some kind of fetish for it now.

Wouldn't surprise as it does come up as a fetish with some.

Personally I would not try to influence her friends (or my own friends) in the same way she does.
I suppose she just really likes the look, and finds it arousing. Hence her enthusiasm for it. I don't know really.

Oooo...K.... Hey if someone gets off on some sexual kick in adults then good luck to them, but assuming that and forcing that on children is more than a little disgusting.

In any case, I don't think it's worth getting worked up or heated over. Each to their own. I like it, some don't; I accept we all don't have the same views on things, and that is fine.

Three time's a charm: would you be OK with removing the clitoral hood and inner labia of young girls because a partner found it "arousing"? Sounds pretty disgusting eh?

The sooner all body modifications on any child are banned the better.

Ashbx

BlueStratos wrote: »

I think most Irish girls that have experience it also prefer it (although might be too shy to admit it). So thanks for being open about your view.
So would you get your son's done too? Or prefer your partner was?
This is something my wife finds ironic. Often women that have strong views against circumcision have never actually seen one, or experienced it. Often those that have, actually prefer it. I find men to be more apathetic about it generally, but women seem to have stronger views for and against it; maybe not so much when it comes to partners, but for their preference on getting sons done.
I was the first boyfriend my wife had that was circumcised, and she became pro-circumcision after that really. I think that is often the case, a girl experiences it; and then realises she actually prefers it.

I don't think I would actively go out of my way to get my sons done. But if there was a medical reason for it, I would do it in a heartbeat. But I would try do it as a young baby as opposed to a child/teenager/adult having to get it done.

Obviously, I don't have a penis so its hard for me to pass judgement on it exactly so I think if it came to getting my son done, I would probably let my husband call the shots on that one. However all the people I know who have got it done, 3 of them needed to get it done for medical reasons and one was a muslim so it was done for religious reasons. None of them regret it in the slightest!

My current boyfriend is circumcised and I do prefer it I have to say.

Samuel T. Cogley

Alizrian Crimson wrote: »

You seem unaware that the 'procedure' can go catastrophically wrong. Imagine living your life with a mutilated penis because your parents thought it looked better or was more hygienic. In America there was an infamous case of boy being forced to live as a girl after his penis was destroyed. He killed himself. It's barbaric.

Bluestratos, why do think it's ok to cut little boys but not girls?

I'm very aware of it hence why I cited it in my post. Reading (and sockpuppeting) don't seem to be your forte.

greencap

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Ah here
How do you know what sensitivity I have? They don't cut the fecking nob off.

How white is the white you see? Who can tell which of us is right?

The foreskin has nerve endings.

Nerve endings were removed.

You lost something.

But you don't notice it because it was so long ago.

Also your weiner is some percentage smaller than it needs to be.

I mean if you had a time machine and a digital scale.

And if you traveled back in time and stopped your mutilation and then travelled back to now and flopped your weiner onto the scale, your weiner would be heavier today.

Alizrian Crimson

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

As i said earlier I didn't do it to my kid because I didn't think it was necessary. My mother had other reasons.

I'm not outraged I was tidied up, in fact I'm kinda glad I was, looking at willies in the showers after a rugby match, I think the ergonomics, aesthetics and userfriendliness of a circumcised nob are superior. I've not suffered any adverse sensory effects and it evidentially hasn't affected its fuctionality.

it's a useful argument to rail against the ongoing trampling of men by feminist/feminazi/misogynism
and the perceived hypocrisy of FGM being repulsive while MG"M" is still allowed.
But to compare circumcision with FGM is an affront to both "victims".

(Allah and Yahweh can fcuk off, I agree on that with you !)

There is nothing wrong with comparing male circumcision to female circumcision. Both involve the modification of child's genitals, often for religious and cultural reasons. If adults want to be circumcised, then maybe they should be allowed.

As I've said, there are calls for a mild version of fgm to be allowed in the west. Would that be ok?

pickarooney

BlueStratos wrote: »

@wench
Yes, I do. And I think it is a parents right to force their respective views on their children until they are 18 and adult.
At which point they are entitled to their own views, such as voting in elections, smoking and drinking, etc.
My wife and I prefer it, and so we had our son's done; as we think it's best. Our views, our children, forcing our views on them.
Neither my wife nor I have a problem with that. We force our views on them about many things.
They are both teenagers now, and have never expressed any problem or resentment whatsoever about it. I would describe their respective views on circumcision as the same as religion and politics really; apathetic on all accounts.
What others choose to do (or not) with their children is their business, I don't really mind either way.
My wife is more pro-circumcision though, but I don't really mind that either. Each to their own really.

You don't appear to be capable of holding or expressing an opinion. You go around in circles contradicting yourself and deferring to your wife and the law when asked to clarify anything.

namloc1980

BlueStratos wrote: »

@jobbridge4life
No, I think it's widely accepted and understood that cosmetic children on children is not acceptable nor is it legal.
FGM and circumcision are not the same thing. Nor is circumcision and labiaplasty etc.
Of course my wife would not think it is OK to give a child a boob job or labiaplasty. That should be their choice at 18 when adult.
We just think circumcision looks better and is cleaner, and heals faster when done as a baby rather than adult.
So we decided to get our sons done, and we are both happy we did. They are apathetic about it really.
Everyone has different views on parenting for/against breast feeding/ear piercing/vacinations etc.
The list is endless really, and people will get very heated about these things either way.
I do admit that I sometimes wonder if my wife has developed some kind of fetish for it now. Personally I would not try to influence her friends (or my own friends) in the same way she does.
I suppose she just really likes the look, and finds it arousing. Hence her enthusiasm for it. I don't know really.
Maybe that is just what happens, for example her sister also now prefer it after getting her sons and partner done.
In any case, I don't think it's worth getting worked up or heated over. Each to their own. I like it, some don't; I accept we all don't have the same views on things, and that is fine.

You suspect your wife has a fetish for circumcised penis and finds it arousing and this is why she got her son done...."hence her enthusiasm for it". That is seriously messed up. Seriously messed up.

pickarooney

OldNotWIse wrote: »

No. Are we not allowed make comparable arguments now?

You didn't make an argument. You asked why nobody else was making one.

OldNotWIse

seamus wrote: »

Among men.

Wider analyses find that the practice of circumcising men to protect against HIV and other STDs results in an increase of risky sexual behaviour because many believe themselves "protected" against infection.

Especially in poorer nations, you then see a rise in women and gay men becoming infected because they're already a bigger risk group than heterosexual men.

So as a strategy for reducing HIV in men, circumcision has some benefit. As a public health strategy though, it has little or no benefit overall.
You're surprised that people react in disgust about the topic of mutilating children's genitals?

I had just never given it much thought. I suppose I probably bought the spin about the hygiene argument. It's interesting to see that there is more to the issue than this and it is always good to be educated.

But by all means feel free to be instantly defensive with me because of this.

GingerLily

GingerLily wrote: »

A lot of men on this thread are claiming women prefer it?

I'm a women and I don't!!

Oh I definitely do!

BlueStratos

@greencap
I think you are talking nonsense.
Reason being, unless you have been both uncut and circumcised in your life; then you cannot compare the two states.
I am assuming from your posts that you are uncut, and therefore do not know what you are talking/lecturing about.
I on the other hand do. Reason being, I was circumcised at 25 (am now 40) so have lived 25 years uncut, and the last 15 circumcised.
I am therefore in a position to compare the two.
No, there is no difference in terms of sensitivity. Yes, I enjoy sex, masturbation, oral sex; the same before I was circumcised and after.
Much of what one reads on the internet about this is myth, and in your case typed by people who just don't know; as they have either never experienced being uncut/circumcised.
It's often the same case with women, they have strong views for/against circumcision.
But ask them have they tried both, then often they have only ever seen or experienced uncut/circumcised.
So they cannot really compare the two as they don't know what sex/oral sex/masturbation with them is really like.
You talking about a penis weighing less or being smaller really is silly.
Having tried both, I prefer being circumcised. Having tried both, my wife prefers circumcised.
Our views are based on fact, unlike your views which are based on speculation.

Ashbx

OldNotWIse wrote: »

GingerLily wrote: »

A lot of men on this thread are claiming women prefer it?

I'm a women and I don't!![/QUOTE
Same

Im a woman and I do. We don't have to all like the same things!

eviltwin

BlueStratos wrote: »

@greencap
I think you are talking nonsense.
Reason being, unless you have been both uncut and circumcised in your life; then you cannot compare the two states.
I am assuming from your posts that you are uncut, and therefore do not know what you are talking/lecturing about.
I on the other hand do. Reason being, I was circumcised at 25 (am now 40) so have lived 25 years uncut, and the last 15 circumcised.
I am therefore in a position to compare the two.
No, there is no difference in terms of sensitivity. Yes, I enjoy sex, masturbation, oral sex; the same before I was circumcised and after.
Much of what one reads on the internet about this is myth, and in your case typed by people who just don't know; as they have either never experienced being uncut/circumcised.
It's often the same case with women, they have strong views for/against circumcision.
But ask them have they tried both, then often they have only ever seen or experienced uncut/circumcised.
So they cannot really compare the two as they don't know what sex/oral sex/masturbation with them is really like.
You talking about a penis weighing less or being smaller really is silly.
Having tried both, I prefer being circumcised. Having tried both, my wife prefers circumcised.
Our views are based on fact, unlike your views which are based on speculation.

You were able to make that choice for yourself as an adult. You forced it on your son. That's what people have an issue with.

kunst nugget

BlueStratos wrote: »

Our views are based on fact, unlike your views which are based on speculation.

I think your views are actually based on cognitive dissonance…

Samuel T. Cogley

Alizrian Crimson wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with comparing male circumcision to female circumcision. Both involve the modification of child's genitals, often for religious and cultural reasons. If adults want to be circumcised, then maybe they should be allowed.

As I've said, there are calls for a mild version of fgm to be allowed in the west. Would that be ok?

Actually there is.

Male circumcision or MGM what ever you want to call it is a fairly benign if archaic practice usually done very safely. If you try and force it underground you remove that safety. A better option would be to seek compensation against their parents when of age if the child felt that strongly about it.

FGM on the other hand is a real issue and one that causes real problems for every single person that undergoes it. Comparing the two cheapens the latter. They are two separate issues and should be treated as such.

BlueStratos

@bubblypop and @Ashbx
Thanks for being open about that. I think many share your view but due to the negative response they are afraid to say so.
Can you tell us why you prefer it?

OldNotWIse

Ashbx wrote: »

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Im a woman and I do. We don't have to all like the same things!

Exactly. And shouldn't it be about what the man wants and not the woman? I mean, it seems inherently wrong that alteration should be made to another human on the basis that other people will find it pleasing. If we did the same with girls on the basis that when they grow up, men will find them more sexually appealing there would be outrage. Surely it is up to the man to decide when he is old enough what he wants his body to look like.

kylith

GingerLily wrote: »

A lot of men on this thread are claiming women prefer it?

I'm a women and I don't!!

eviltwin wrote: »

Same here.

I am also a woman and, having experienced both, I would choose uncircumcised every time. It looks better and it feels better.