I think one of the things that we far too often overlook in this country is that fact that genital mutilation of newborn boys is common practice, if not standard. Why isn't there more of a cry against this? Do the benefits of circumcision (if any, and I don't see any valid argument that there are any) outweigh the cost and mutilation of a boy?

Of course circumcision isn't the only genital mutilation in the world, but it's the only type in practice in the United States. Female genital mutilation is just as barbaric, if not more so. Americans, and Europeans in general, ban female genital mutilation of babies, but why the hypocrisy in not doing the same for males?

Tags: Christianity, God, Judaism, circumcision, clitoral, covenant, genital, mutilation

Views: 2071

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

While not looking for volunteers- Im curious about the different feel of circumcised men and not circumcised men.  Would any female be willing to explain the experience?  Private response is fine.

No need for privacy, I've written it on these forums many times before. Up until age 35, I had only known circumcised males, and many of them, ... really. I always enjoyed sex... but orgasms were rare. But I started having sex with a more international and younger crowd... intact males... and the orgasms started flowing, instantly, literally. Female copulation with an intact penis involves zero friction, no resistance to entry, smooth, painless, no nicks and cuts, and massive fun.

Of course, in our condom obsessed world... this benefit is somewhat nullified. Copulation with condoms give me vaginal shroom oubreaks. But Canadian doctors have this week announced that a vaccine for HIV is now in its last stage, human testing. So the outlook is good. I have been very lucky to get away with as much unprotected sex as I have. I have always felt like this about many aspects of life, full living is worth the risk.

That's enough information to make me envious. Thanks. Im sure the younger crowd issue is also a help. : ) Another big factor could be the age 35.  Things really get going around that age.  I'd trade all the sex of my 20's for a few more years of middle aged sex. I fully understand the injury aspect of sex as a woman.  Not fun.  Good luck on staying healthy.  I wont repeat all the concerns- Im sure you've heard them.  Living life to it's fullest is always a challenge and it differs from person to person. 

... on injuries... HIV transmission simply does not occur without broken skin, mind you it can be a very small break... but HIV relies on blood transmission, not skin to skin contact, like most STDs. Which is the reason lesbian «sex» is practically zero risk, no semen to blood contact. In order to transmit HIV, it's not sufficient to have simply been in contact with it... one must have actually developed a certain viral load, which for some people who are HIV+, never even occurs. So between having no injuries, and not developing any viral load, the risks of HIV contraction/transmission are not as high as the fear mongering that goes on.

So when I heard yesterday on CBC radio about there being a fight brewing in Canada to decriminalise HIV+ sex, I fully agreed with it.  In my own experience, I assume that because I am a very demanding person, if I'm not prepped and juicy, the copulation is not going to happen, simple as that. As a youth, I didn't know that this behaviour would save me from diseases, but in hindsight of over 30 years of nearly carefree copulations with different nationalities, and not one STD, I'd say it goes a little beyond luck, it speaks about my mate/behaviour choices to a degree, and maybe my immune system. Now of course, I use condoms for penis/anal, because IMO, it's impossible to go anal without micro-injuries.

Our society is so filled with mandatory objects to supposedly save us... which in fact don't do much at all but limit our enjoyment of life. Ah but that's another conversation :)

If all this is true then circumscision will increase the transmission rates from male to female due to injuries even if it lowers the rate of male infection.  Would it be enough to offset the transmission from male to female. 

If you are HIV+ then you owe it to your partners to let them know.  This goes for any STD. 

I have to say I think you are really really lucky.  Im glad for that but I wouldn't advise the same risk.

Indeed... on all...

The situation in Africa with the WHO now officially sanctioning circumcision enrages me to no end. All the medical communities know other methods are more efficient and none of these medical associations condone circumcision in their own countries, yet, when it comes to Africa... These studies are so depressing.

One rule and set of expectations for the first world and another for the third.  Can't help but wonder if we are about to get hit in the head by a BRICK.  (Brazil, India, China, Korea.) 

Im un=subbing to this chat.  All has been said.  Love to chat with you elsewhere TNT. 

@Eric R.  "Female genital mutilation is just as barbaric, if not more so."

Female genital mutilation is far more barbaric.  I've heard it compared to cutting off the end of the penis, rather than just the foreskin.

^^ Female genital mutilation is far more barbaric ^^

 

WHEN IT IS.  But NOT when it's NOT. 

 

MOST FGM affects the hood only (most of the victims alive today are in Indonesia and Malaysia) and in places like Egypt it is done mostly in a very clinical setting. 

 

Both MGM and FGM are done by force or coercion, are enthuisiastically supported by victims, and send hundreds to the grave annually. 

 

The MAIN difference is that 94% of the world's females are covered by laws that have no religious exemption.  No males are protected.  No males have legal recourse.  In California, they recently passed a law with 100% of both houses agreeing ANYONE with no training must have the right to hack at boy parts.  Males are LOSING ground.  California's courts ruled foreskins are exactly as unworthy of protection as puppy tails and kitten claws. 

We don't need to obsess about male or female cutting being worse.  What's true is that far more boys are cut, infant cutting is very haphazard, and all children need protection. 

By having circumcision completely banned, it makes our foundations much stronger when speaking to the rest of the world about banning their genital mutilations. We can lead by example, which is always the best way to lead.

There is a Facebook page on this objective:

End Routine Infant Circumcision

I now view Facebook solely as a free advertising tool, helping us to cover all angles in this crazy profit driven world.

I am thoroughly convinced that humans are less than apes...have you ever, EVER, seen or heard of circumcision, smoking, hanging, electrocution, shooting, bombing, burning, or other such crap among other primates?

Don't get me started!!! I think our supposed intelligence has served practically no good on this planet, other than to self multiply to ludicrous amounts of humans. I would like to see our brains put to a very different use!

RSS

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service