Discussion:
Circumcision likened to female genital mutilation
(too old to reply)
answers_here
2004-07-17 09:35:35 UTC
Permalink
The practice of circumcision is clearly to be likened to the practice
of female genital mutilation, albeit to a lesser degree.


The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.

"In the 1890s, it became a popular technique to prevent, or cure,
masturbatory insanity. In 1891 the president of the Royal College of
Surgeons in Great Britain published On Circumcision as Preventive of
Masturbation, and two years later another British doctor wrote
Circumcision: Its Advantages and How to Perform It, which listed the
reasons for removing the 'vestigial' prepuce. Evidently the foreskin
could cause 'nocturnal incontinence,' hysteria, epilepsy, and
irritation that might 'give rise to erotic stimulation and,
consequently, masturbation.'

At the same time circumcisions were advocated on men, clitoridectomies
(removal of the clitoris) were also performed for the same reason (to
treat female masturbators). The US "Orificial Surgery Society" for
female "circumcision" operated until 1925, and clitoridectomies and
infibulations would continue to be advocated by some through the
1930s.


From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masturbation#Masturbation_and_circumcision

It has been argued that the practice of circumcision for non-religious
reasons, still wide-spread in some countries, arose originally as one
of the most popular remedies against masturbation. See circumcision
and female circumcision for a detailed discussion. Extreme male
circumcisions, where much of the penis' skin is removed, are in fact
effective against masturbation because erections can become very
painful, severely restricting the sexual use of the organ. Such
circumcisions would today be referred to as malpractice in a medical
context, but are sometimes practiced in a religious one.

As noted above, even routine male circumcision complicates
masturbation, because the glans penis, which is keratinized and less
sensitive in circumcised males, cannot be massaged with the help of
the foreskin. Masturbation becomes more difficult to learn and may be
experienced as more troublesome. Several surveys indicate that
uncircumcised men and boys masturbate earlier and more frequently than
circumcised men. [3](http://users.bigpond.net.au/xeyr/circum/mast.htm)
A survey in the United States has indicated the opposite [4]
http://www.cirp.org/library/general/laumann/), but that has been
attributed to strong sociodemographic difference between the two
groups of circumcised and uncircumcised men in that country in
particular. Even in pro-circumcision circles, the negative effect on
masturbation, through the painful aftereffects of the operation and
the complication of the process, is sometimes cited as an advantage.
[5](http://www.circlist.com/considering/masturbate.html)

Circumcision opponents like Paul M. Fleiss [6]
(http://cirp.org/news/Mothering1997/) also refer to the over 20,000
nerve-endings in the removed tissue, which are believed to contribute
to a loss of pleasure. While foreskin restoration can alleviate
keratinization and make masturbation using the foreskin possible, it
cannot regenerate the lost nerve-endings.

In males with phimosis, frenulum breve and other similar rare
conditions of the foreskin, however, circumcision alleviates painful
erections (if present) and therefore increases the likelihood that
masturbation would be pleasurable, as would successful foreskin
stretching, frenoplasty, or frenectomy.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 11:48:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?

When you grow up to be a big boy you will realize that there is such a
thing as "coitus" (look it up) and as a delightful bit of foreplay there
is something called "fellatio" (look it up). Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.

Either way you slice it you are a loser.
howard aubrey
2004-07-17 13:56:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?
When you grow up to be a big boy you will realize that there is such a
thing as "coitus" (look it up) and as a delightful bit of foreplay there
is something called "fellatio" (look it up). Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.
LOL!! Ever hear of soap and water? Jewish women adore my
'Sharpei'. I'm sure I've had more 'fellatio' than you'll
ever dream of, loser!

Circumcision is nothing short of sexual mutilation,
and anyone who promotes or condones it is a barbarian.

End of story, half a man...

cheers...

HJA
Post by Briar Rabbit
Either way you slice it you are a loser.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 14:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by howard aubrey
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?
When you grow up to be a big boy you will realize that there is such a
thing as "coitus" (look it up) and as a delightful bit of foreplay there
is something called "fellatio" (look it up). Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.
LOL!! Ever hear of soap and water?
As the man said:

“The proponents of not circumcising stress that lifelong penile hygiene
is essential. This acknowledges that something harmful or unpleasant is
happening under the prepuce.” - Russell T, Med Observer 1993
Post by howard aubrey
Jewish women adore my
'Sharpei'.
Yea right. They fly in fly in weekly by the 747 load.

(the one thing about skin freaks is that they are shocking exaggerators
(aka liars)
Post by howard aubrey
I'm sure I've had more 'fellatio' than you'll
ever dream of,
More than 10? Less than 10? LOL
Post by howard aubrey
loser!
How can I be a lose if I don't stink?
Post by howard aubrey
Circumcision is nothing short of sexual mutilation,
and anyone who promotes or condones it is a barbarian.
How can a aesthetic improvement be a mutilation?
Post by howard aubrey
End of story, half a man...
Don't be so sore. You don't have to stink for the rest of your life.

BTW ... how many women have thrown up in your crotch?
howard aubrey
2004-07-17 16:09:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by howard aubrey
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?
When you grow up to be a big boy you will realize that there is such a
thing as "coitus" (look it up) and as a delightful bit of foreplay there
is something called "fellatio" (look it up). Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.
LOL!! Ever hear of soap and water?
“The proponents of not circumcising stress that lifelong penile hygiene
is essential. This acknowledges that something harmful or unpleasant is
happening under the prepuce.” - Russell T, Med Observer 1993
Here's a little something from this century

http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/stern.htm
Post by howard aubrey
Jewish women adore my
'Sharpei'.
Yea right. They fly in fly in weekly by the 747 load.
Not any more, I'm married, but I had more than my share
here and in Israel while single. Don't be jealous,
it was a wild time to be single.
(the one thing about skin freaks is that they are shocking exaggerators
(aka liars)
Post by howard aubrey
I'm sure I've had more 'fellatio' than you'll
ever dream of,
More than 10? Less than 10? LOL
WAY more than 10... send some pics of females in your
family and I'll tell you if they got lucky.
Post by howard aubrey
loser!
How can I be a lose if I don't stink?
Never had a complaint about 'stink', but I shower
every day, how about you, Pepe La Pew?
Post by howard aubrey
Circumcision is nothing short of sexual mutilation,
and anyone who promotes or condones it is a barbarian.
How can a aesthetic improvement be a mutilation?
Because it's NOT an aesthetic improvement. How can removing
the most sensitive part of a penis be beneficial? I can imagine your
jealousy, since you will never feel the true sensation, but don't blame
me, blame the wacko with the knife!
Post by howard aubrey
End of story, half a man...
Don't be so sore. You don't have to stink for the rest of your life.
Yes, I could get a circumcision if I *chose* to. You never had a choice and
can never go back to normal. You will always be mutilated, and missing out
on the extra pleasure is killing you, now isn't it? LOL!!!
BTW ... how many women have thrown up in your crotch?
None. How about you? Or was it from your face?

cheers....

HJA
unmutilated
howard aubrey
2004-07-17 16:53:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by howard aubrey
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?
When you grow up to be a big boy you will realize that there is such a
thing as "coitus" (look it up) and as a delightful bit of foreplay there
is something called "fellatio" (look it up). Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.
LOL!! Ever hear of soap and water?
"The proponents of not circumcising stress that lifelong penile hygiene
is essential. This acknowledges that something harmful or unpleasant is
happening under the prepuce." - Russell T, Med Observer 1993
LOL! Well, a womans parts require a bit of hygiene too, perhaps more
than an uncirced male, considering the moist environment and all. Perhaps
we should lop off those pesky lips at birth? And what about that horrible
clitoris? Start stimulating that baby and it gets even wetter! Talk about
yeast and odor nirvana! Should we nip it?


It sounds to me that you've had some bad experiences with sex.
Perhaps you should start looking into cleaner men? Or better yet,
clean that rascal yourself (a nice bubble bath perhaps?), before you
go down on them. You aren't mistakenly getting anal from them
*before* going down on them, are you? Tha would certainly explain
the abnormal odor you describe!

The important thing is for you to keep on trying! You'll get what you
crave eventually, half-man!

cheers....


HJA
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 18:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by howard aubrey
"The proponents of not circumcising stress that lifelong penile hygiene
is essential. This acknowledges that something harmful or unpleasant is
happening under the prepuce." - Russell T, Med Observer 1993
LOL! Well, a womans parts require a bit of hygiene too, perhaps more
than an uncirced male, considering the moist environment and all. Perhaps
we should lop off those pesky lips at birth? And what about that horrible
clitoris? Start stimulating that baby and it gets even wetter! Talk about
yeast and odor nirvana! Should we nip it?
No. The issue that is hilarious is the constant state of denial among
the uncircumcised and their partners -- and of course admirers of the
foreskin that what brews under the foreskin can and does stink.

Women are sensitive about their own problem and generally do what they
can to take care of it and seem happy to accept that if there is a naff
down there, there will be no muff diving.

What's the chance of uncircumcised men accepting reality like the girls do?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-17 19:06:41 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

Pretty good actually.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Buy circumcision books, videos and foreskin restoration equipment at
http://shop.tacep.org
Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-17 15:10:45 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

Has anyone told you there is more to sex than fellatio?
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Buy circumcision books, videos and foreskin restoration equipment at
http://shop.tacep.org
Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 18:20:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Has anyone told you there is more to sex than fellatio?
Yes that is the standard response from the uncircumcised. Just now you
will be telling everyone that oral sex is an unnatural act and should be
outlawed.

Kenny, let me share this with you. Its naughty but its is nice, OK. All
is not lost for you yet, however, there is lots of time for you to meet
a brave girl ... but then again, you are not into girls are you?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-17 18:24:45 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

I don't care if people have oral sex, that's their business. But there is
more to life than that. That's all you seem to go on and on about. No one
really cares. I don't know where you come up with this "information" of
yours but most girls in a loving relationship could care less if a male is
intact or not. Get over it.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Buy circumcision books, videos and foreskin restoration equipment at
http://shop.tacep.org
Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 19:12:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
I don't know where you come up with this "information" of
yours but most girls in a loving relationship could care less if a male is
intact or not. Get over it.
Yes aren't they just darlings for the sacrifices they make. But
accepting their husband "as is" does not mean that will give head with
alacrity ... more likely they will get it elsewhere.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-17 19:16:53 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

As I said before, there is more to life than fallacio. You need to have more
faith in humans.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Buy circumcision books, videos and foreskin restoration equipment at
http://shop.tacep.org
Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 19:21:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
As I said before, there is more to life than fallacio. You need to have more
faith in humans.
I do, I do. I have faith that the bitch is not going to engage my dick
with her teeth. Putting it in there is an act of faith if I ever saw one.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-17 19:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

I mean you have to have more faith that people don't care, that love is
stronger than anything else.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Buy circumcision books, videos and foreskin restoration equipment at
http://shop.tacep.org
Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-17 19:26:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
I mean you have to have more faith that people don't care, that love is
stronger than anything else.
What loveis that Kenny?

Love for mankind's foreskins?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-17 19:29:13 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

Love for each other.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Buy circumcision books, videos and foreskin restoration equipment at
http://shop.tacep.org
Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Igor van den Hoven
2004-08-16 12:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Has anyone told you there is more to sex than fellatio?
Some circumcised men have reported they are so insenstive down there,
that fellatio no longer does the trick for them either. Fortunately
for them more and more girls do not mind being sodomized.
Briar Rabbit
2004-08-18 17:44:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Igor van den Hoven
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Has anyone told you there is more to sex than fellatio?
Some circumcised men have reported they are so insenstive down there,
that fellatio no longer does the trick for them either. Fortunately
for them more and more girls do not mind being sodomized.
Show some sympathy for Kenny and quite a number of the uncircumcised.
They can't get head without some poor girl throwing up in their crotch
so they (predictably) say "who wants to get head anyway" and if that
doesn't work then they start to call fellatio an unnatural sex act. You
have to feel immense pity for them.
Xyzzy
2004-08-18 22:07:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by Igor van den Hoven
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Has anyone told you there is more to sex than fellatio?
Some circumcised men have reported they are so insenstive down there,
that fellatio no longer does the trick for them either. Fortunately
for them more and more girls do not mind being sodomized.
Show some sympathy for Kenny and quite a number
Remembering that there are three billion men on the planet, even tiny
minorities comprise "quite a number."
Post by Briar Rabbit
of the uncircumcised.
They can't get head without some poor girl throwing up in their crotch
so they (predictably) say "who wants to get head anyway" and if that
doesn't work then they start to call fellatio an unnatural sex act. You
have to feel immense pity for them.
BlackWater
2004-07-17 21:26:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?
When you grow up to be a big boy you will realize that there is such a
thing as "coitus" ...
Yea ... but that just breeds more like HIM !
magnulus
2004-07-18 05:50:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.
Either way you slice it you are a loser.
Some people make the same arguements in favor of female circumcision, AKA,
female genital mutilation. "It's more hygenic", "the opposite sex likes it
better", whatever. All rationalizations for a procedure that violates
another human beings rights and serves no medical function.

Circumcision results in morphological changes of the glans.
Keratinization in response to irritation. Normally, keratinization is not
usually considered healthy for mucous membranes. But this is suppossed to
be the "benefit" of circumcision.

If preventing a slight chance of disease is the goal of circumcision, why
don't we excise the breasts off all women as well? Nobody has ever
explained why, despite the fact nearly half of all American males are
circumcised, and many Africans are as well, why AIDS spreads equally well
across the globe. The only thing that stops AIDS is abstinence and
protected sex. Advocating circumcision to prevent AIDS is an invitation
for people to practice unsafe sex.

Circumcision was promoted in the US because it was viewed as a way to keep
children from masturbating (it was also carried out on women at the same
time). Maimonodes noted that circumcision reduces sexual desire several
centuries ago, and modern medical literature suggests circumcision reduces
sexual response. So clearly the goal is to alter the male sexual organ for
the purposes of diminishing sexual desire or responsiveness. Not very
different from the common rationale given for female circumcision by those
that defend it.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 06:46:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by magnulus
Post by Briar Rabbit
Fellatio is something
experienced much less by uncircumcised men as there are few women able
to stand both the stink and the vile taste.
Either way you slice it you are a loser.
Some people make the same arguements in favor of female circumcision, AKA,
female genital mutilation. "It's more hygenic", "the opposite sex likes it
better", whatever. All rationalizations for a procedure that violates
another human beings rights and serves no medical function.
Circumcision results in morphological changes of the glans.
Keratinization in response to irritation. Normally, keratinization is not
usually considered healthy for mucous membranes. But this is suppossed to
be the "benefit" of circumcision.
If preventing a slight chance of disease is the goal of circumcision, why
don't we excise the breasts off all women as well? Nobody has ever
explained why, despite the fact nearly half of all American males are
circumcised, and many Africans are as well, why AIDS spreads equally well
across the globe. The only thing that stops AIDS is abstinence and
protected sex. Advocating circumcision to prevent AIDS is an invitation
for people to practice unsafe sex.
Circumcision was promoted in the US because it was viewed as a way to keep
children from masturbating (it was also carried out on women at the same
time). Maimonodes noted that circumcision reduces sexual desire several
centuries ago, and modern medical literature suggests circumcision reduces
sexual response. So clearly the goal is to alter the male sexual organ for
the purposes of diminishing sexual desire or responsiveness. Not very
different from the common rationale given for female circumcision by those
that defend it.
Thanks for the long reply Kenny, seems to indicate that this issue
really gets up your nose.

Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.

Well maybe we are a year or so away from circumcision being introduced
as a public health initiative in previously non-circumcising societies
as one of the many policy measures against HIV infection.

What ever happens and what ever you skin freaks say male circumcision
remains a perfectly acceptable parental decision as a result of
religious, cultural or medical considerations.



as to FGM.

This connection you skin freaks attempt to "work" between FGM and male
circumcision is another deceit which you continue to perpetuate.

From the fgm.org web site from 2001 we find that women reject the
association of male circumcision with FGM. They are clearly no
supporters of male circumcision but boy have they got onto what you skin
freaks are up to.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Subject: FEMALE CIRCUMCISION
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001

Recently a member of a male anti-circumcision organization wrote a
letter to my local editor addressing the issue of circumcision. While
truthfully stating the fact that all forms of circumcision performed on
minors are a violation of human rights and medical ethics, the writer
was gravely misleading and self serving in equating Female Genital
Mutilation ("female circumcision") with male circumcision. Furthermore,
his choice of wording gave the mistaken impression that FGM has been
both adequately addressed and "solved."

Male circumcision is an unnecessary procedure performed for conformist,
hygienic and cosmetic reasons. With female "circumcision," these reasons
are often cited to mollify critics and, after thousands of years, have
become accepted superficially. The main reason, however, that young
girls are sexually mutilated, is to ensure their virginity and chastity
by severely damaging or entirely inhibiting their ability to enjoy
sexual relations. This is to prepare them to become "proper wives." It
is done because men insist, no matter how promiscuous themselves, on
virginal, "circumcised" brides. No such correlation exists with male
circumcision. No boy is circumcised to "keep him virginal" until
marriage, or with the deliberate intent decrease his sexual appetite. In
addition, as males, boys exist as part of the status quo, while girls
still struggle for basic rights.

Female genital mutilation is performed to prepare a woman for proper
marriage, and ranges from clitoridectomy, to the hacking, slicing or
burning off of all external female genitalia (excision), and
infibulation, where the girl's entire outer genitals are sliced off,
with the resulting wound bound together with thorn, thread, cowhide
thong or sutures. Her legs are then lashed together for 1-6 weeks while
she heals. Often water is refused her to discourage urination. She is
sewn almost completely shut, leaving small (match head size), inadequate
openings for passage of urine and menses. This is mostly done under less
than sterile circumstances, with rudimentary instruments (razor, knife,
glass, tin can) and no anesthesia. Girls are generally subjected to this
between the ages of 3 to 15 years of age, although it varies
significantly among regions and sub-groups. These procedures result in
complications ranging from shock, chronic infection, post traumatic
stress disorders, hemorrhage, severe scarring (both internal and
external genitals), urinary tract problems, incontinence, infertility,
infant/mother mortality, fibroids, fistula, sexual dysfunction,
psychological disturbance, and not infrequently, death. For my
infibulated friends, a simple ob/gyn exam is pure torture, resulting in
days of bleeding and bed rest. For many, even a child-size speculum is
too large and examination and treatment are difficult.

For male circumcision to be equivalent to even the most simple form of
FGM (Type I, clitoridectomy) the head of the penis (not just the
foreskin) would have to be cut off. FGM is no longer limited to African,
Malaysian and Middle Eastern nations and is now not uncommon in the
U.S., Canada and Europe. If a girl's parents object to this practice, it
is not unusual for a girl to be kidnapped and forcibly "circumcised" by
relatives or members of the community. Women who speak out about this
issue are often ostracized or punished. Even for women who do not fear
being ostracized, this is a highly personal and difficult topic to
discuss. This is not the case with male circumcision, which has become
an open and frequent topic on health radio and television shows and
parent support networks, as well as in print and online media.

FGM is only the beginning of women's suffering: a lifetime of endless
labor, early, arranged marriage - often to much older men - and few
basic rights, including the right to education and economic
independence. Even today, girls enjoy few of the freedoms their brothers
take for granted: movies with friends, outings, school field trips, use
of the telephone.

It is highly unethical and reprehensible to appropriate the enormous
suffering of 150 million girls worldwide to attack the very real, but
far less complicated issue of infant male circumcision; to do so
trivializes the disproportionate agony of women. Can male circumcision
not be abolished on it's own lack of merit? Any comparison between the
two is enormously exaggerated, simplified, and overlooks the misogynous
intentions of FGM.

As women we have so many of our own health issues to address - under
funded and under assisted, and a health care system with undervalues and
demoralizes us. We must prioritize ourselves. Some anti-male circ
activists resort to a type of manipulation: women should actively use
their time to support their cause because 'circumcised men are angry
men, and angry men commit more violence.' While it is true that angry
men are often violent men, and that some men are angry about their
circumcisions, it is quite a stretch to blame the long historic and
global fact of violence and oppression against women and girls on the
practice of male circumcision. By their own statistics, anti male circ
activists have noted that America is a lonely hold out in maintaining
this practice, and yet a January 2000 report by Johns Hopkins, based on
a ten year global study, revealed that 1 in 3 women on this planet have
been raped, beaten or otherwise severely abused.

According to anti male circ activists own stats, the majority of these
women are being abused by uncircumcised males. It is a violent nature in
the first place that tends to originate these practices, including
circumcision.

What really needs to happen is that men need to grow up and address
their own health needs by themselves. Consider this: the majority of
capital and resources on this planet is still controlled by men; the
majority of appointed and elected policy makers are still men; the vast
majority of hospital administrators and policy makers are men; the
majority of insurance policy makers (who pay for male circ) are men. Men
have time to design Stealth bombers, run for office, take over
corporations, but cannot schedule the time (often) to book their own
doctor's appointments. The kindest thing women can do for you is to tell
you to grow up. Your Mommies are busy, our plates are full.
magnulus
2004-07-18 09:21:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Thanks for the long reply Kenny, seems to indicate that this issue
really gets up your nose.
My name is not Kenny.
Post by Briar Rabbit
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.
More bullshit. Since you likely do not have a foreskin, how would you
know?
Post by Briar Rabbit
Well maybe we are a year or so away from circumcision being introduced
as a public health initiative in previously non-circumcising societies
as one of the many policy measures against HIV infection.
Circumcision's popularity is declining. Most doctors do not believe it
has any health benefits for most people, and there is quite a bit of risk in
the procedure. Also, circumcision is almost unknown in Europe. Most
pediatricians and doctors have said that there is not enough good evidence
to conclude that circumcision prevents HIV. OTOH, there is alot of evidence
that confounding factors, such as religious and cultural practices,
particularly in Muslim areas, skews the results and this was not adequately
accounted for in the Indian and global studies on circumcision and HIV.
But then, you are probably totally ignorant of statistics and their
interpretation. Just becaues there is a study supporting something, doesn't
mean it is true.
Post by Briar Rabbit
What ever happens and what ever you skin freaks say male circumcision
remains a perfectly acceptable parental decision as a result of
religious, cultural or medical considerations.
I fully support the right of any child butchered by a doctor to file a
lawsuit for damages, in that case. Let's see how popular circumcision is
then.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 11:43:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by magnulus
Post by Briar Rabbit
Thanks for the long reply Kenny, seems to indicate that this issue
really gets up your nose.
My name is not Kenny.
Its difficult to tell you skin freak clones apart.
Post by magnulus
Post by Briar Rabbit
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.
More bullshit. Since you likely do not have a foreskin, how would you
know?
That blade is double edged. If I don't know what its like to be
uncircumcised how would and uncircumcised man know what its like to be
circumcised?

You see the only people who are able to comment in some detail on any
sexual function of the foreskin of loss of sensitivity or function
through circumcision are those circumcised as adults. And here one would
need correct sample size.

As your fellow skin freak, Kenny, said to one such man: "The point is,
the nerves in the foreskin provide sexual pleasure. Whether you notice
it or not before or after a circumcision is irrelevant, that is their
purpose, that is their function."

This of course brings us back to Huxley's definition of a tragedy, "a
beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact". You can see that you and your
psychosexually obsessed bum chum Kenny are not going to let some facts
get in the way of a "beautiful theory".

Notice how dogmatically your Kenny pronounces on this subject matter?

As the man said:

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." -
Bertrand Russell
Post by magnulus
Post by Briar Rabbit
Well maybe we are a year or so away from circumcision being introduced
as a public health initiative in previously non-circumcising societies
as one of the many policy measures against HIV infection.
Circumcision's popularity is declining.
Where? Islam is on the march (if you had not noticed) so for every
infidel less that circumcises there are three more muslims who do.
Post by magnulus
Most doctors do not believe it
has any health benefits for most people, and there is quite a bit of risk in
the procedure.
Don't you just love the way these skin freaks speak on behalf of "most"
doctors and use phrases like "quite a bit"?

Funny how they get all worked up when someone posts that most women
agree that foreskins stink quite a bit. ;-)
Post by magnulus
Also, circumcision is almost unknown in Europe.
Unknown or not practised? Lets us try to keep this discussion to society
in general rather than your adventures in men's rooms across europe.
Post by magnulus
Most
pediatricians and doctors have said that there is not enough good evidence
to conclude that circumcision prevents HIV.
The truth be known that most doctors (certainly in Europe) know diddly
squat about HIV. Maybe read and article or two but never seen a case.

Lets try one more time on this score shall we?

There is no doubt that male circumcision provides a protective effect
against HIV infection. The issue awaiting confirmation through three
RCT's is a more exact quantification of this protective effect before
considering the implementation of male circumcision as a public health
intervention in traditionally non-circumcising communities. Geddit?
Post by magnulus
OTOH, there is alot of evidence
that confounding factors, such as religious and cultural practices,
particularly in Muslim areas, skews the results and this was not adequately
accounted for in the Indian and global studies on circumcision and HIV.
Isn't it funny how each and every skin freak is an expert on refuting
studies even if they have never personally read then (let alone being
qualified to do so).

My best advice to you is to conduct personal research and not allow
yourself to be spoon fed the spin applied by skin freak web sites. You
are capable of some degree of personal intellectual application aren't
you?
Post by magnulus
But then, you are probably totally ignorant of statistics and their
interpretation. Just becaues there is a study supporting something, doesn't
mean it is true.
Does that apply to the foreskin as well? Can we just laugh off the piece
of crap Taylor produced? LOL You really need to think before you post,
dipshit.
Post by magnulus
Post by Briar Rabbit
What ever happens and what ever you skin freaks say male circumcision
remains a perfectly acceptable parental decision as a result of
religious, cultural or medical considerations.
I fully support the right of any child butchered by a doctor to file a
lawsuit for damages, in that case. Let's see how popular circumcision is
then.
"butchered"?

You skin freaks just can't help yourselves now can you.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-18 16:30:56 UTC
Permalink
Briar,
Post by Briar Rabbit
That blade is double edged. If I don't know what its like to be
uncircumcised how would and uncircumcised man know what its like to be
circumcised?
So, all this talk from you and Jake and others that circumcision doesn't
change anything, like feeling, sexual experience, loss/gaining of
sensitivity...that's all bull now? If nothing changes after a circumcision,
then I know what it's like to be circumcised. Right? Nothing changes. You
need to make up your mind.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 19:03:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Post by Briar Rabbit
That blade is double edged. If I don't know what its like to be
uncircumcised how would and uncircumcised man know what its like to be
circumcised?
So, all this talk from you and Jake and others that circumcision doesn't
change anything, like feeling, sexual experience, loss/gaining of
sensitivity...that's all bull now? If nothing changes after a circumcision,
then I know what it's like to be circumcised. Right? Nothing changes. You
need to make up your mind.
Oh a smarty pants I see.

Kenny-kins it is not I who made the assetion that sexual function or
experience was beter forthe circumcised. It was you skin freaks who have
claim that there is a loss due to circumcision.

How would I know? How would you know? It is therefore up to a large
enough sample of men circumcised after adequate sexual experience to
express. The evidence is out that there is no major difference either way.

So my question to you is why don't you stop try to sell this lie of a
sexual function for the 4skin?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 04:49:58 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

There is a loss. The loss of the foreskin.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 05:01:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
There is a loss. The loss of the foreskin.
That's not a loss ... that's a gain.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 05:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

No, it's a loss. If you cut something off of your body, you lose it.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 05:48:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
No, it's a loss. If you cut something off of your body, you lose it.
See it rather like losing a disfiguring growth or tumor. The loss of
such a disfigurement is no loss but a gain.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 05:49:16 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

The foreskin is normal, it is not a disfigurement. Circumcision is a
disfigurement.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 05:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
The foreskin is normal, it is not a disfigurement. Circumcision is a
disfigurement.
Thats you opinion Kenny-kins honey. Opinions are like assholes, everyone
has one. You also like assholes don't you? Rimming? Skat?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 07:31:48 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

This is not my opinion, it's a fact.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 16:05:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
This is not my opinion, it's a fact.
Nah.
magnulus
2004-07-18 09:31:34 UTC
Permalink
Male circumcision is not totally unlike female circumcision. In many
parts of the world, female circumcision is performed by removing the tissue
around the clitoris that protects it. This tissue comes from the same
tissue that becomes the foreskin in males, so the procedures are analogous.
All fetus's genetalia develope from undiferentiated gonads.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-18 16:26:28 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

Male Circumcision and Female Circumcision are the same. Not medically. But
they are the same. Legally they both violate the same laws, legally the FGM
law is unconstitutional, legally male circumcision violates human rights,
constitutional rights and God given rights.

They aren't similar any other way.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 18:56:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Male Circumcision and Female Circumcision are the same. Not medically. But
they are the same.
Yea right!

Not medically but the same anyway ... they gotta be huh skin freak? Or
another of your theories falls flat on its arse ... (again). You are
really getting desperate aren't you Sheila?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-18 20:38:34 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

You left the rest of my post out I see. Quite convenient for you to ignore
the truth that both types of circumcision are illegal and all FGM laws are
unconstitutional under US law. Accept it, don't accept it. But this is one
thing that I *can* prove.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Jake Waskett
2004-07-18 21:25:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
You left the rest of my post out I see. Quite convenient for you to ignore
the truth that both types of circumcision are illegal and all FGM laws are
unconstitutional under US law. Accept it, don't accept it. But this is one
thing that I *can* prove.
Kenny, if "FGM" laws are unconstitutional, then surely both female and male
circumcision are *legal*.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 04:37:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
You left the rest of my post out I see. Quite convenient for you to ignore
the truth that both types of circumcision are illegal and all FGM laws are
unconstitutional under US law. Accept it, don't accept it. But this is one
thing that I *can* prove.
Oh for heavens sake!

You are living in cloud cuckoo land or what?

If male circumcision was illegal then it would have been prevent long
ago. I suggest that once again you skin freaks have applied a lunatic
interpretation to suit your psychosexually motivated agenda.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 04:50:36 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

Cases have been fought and won over this very issue.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Larry Kenneth
2004-07-22 14:42:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Thanks for the long reply Kenny, seems to indicate that this issue
really gets up your nose.
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.
Women's genitals are capable of emitting much more disgusting smells
than men's genitals.
Post by Briar Rabbit
The main reason, however, that young
girls are sexually mutilated, is to ensure their virginity and chastity
by severely damaging or entirely inhibiting their ability to enjoy
sexual relations. This is to prepare them to become "proper wives." It
is done because men insist, no matter how promiscuous themselves, on
virginal, "circumcised" brides.
That's only one possible reason why girls are circumcised. Other
reasons include medical, cultural, religious and traditional reasons.

People in those cultures believe that an uncut woman is ugly,
unhealthy, smelly (sounds familiar?) and often use that as a
justification to have their daughters circumcised.
Post by Briar Rabbit
Female genital mutilation is performed to prepare a woman for proper
marriage, and ranges from clitoridectomy, to the hacking, slicing or
burning off of all external female genitalia (excision), and
infibulation, where the girl's entire outer genitals are sliced off,
with the resulting wound bound together with thorn, thread, cowhide
thong or sutures.
As always they are comparing the most severe forms of female
circumcision with male circumcision in order to minimize the harms of
the later.

Here are female circumcisions sorted by types:

Type I: Excision of the prepuce with or without excision of part or
all of the clitoris.

Type II: Excision of the prepuce and clitoris together with partial or
total excision of the labia minora.

Type III: Excision of part or all of the external genitalia and
stitching/narrowing of the vaginal opening (infibulation).

Type IV: Unclassified: includes pricking, piercing or incision of
clitoris and/or labia; stretching of clitoris and/or labia;
cauterization by burning of clitoris and surrounding tissues; scraping
(angurya cuts) of the vaginal orifice or cutting (gishiri cuts) of the
vagina; introduction of corrosive substances into the vagina to cause
bleeding or herbs into the vagina with the aim of tightening or
narrowing the vagina; any other procedure which falls under the
definition of FGM given above.

As you can see, one form of female circumcision (namely, excision of
the clitoral hood) is analogous to male circumcision, and other forms
(such as nicking the clitoris and/or labia) are less severe than male
circumcision.
Post by Briar Rabbit
For male circumcision to be equivalent to even the most simple form of
FGM (Type I, clitoridectomy) the head of the penis (not just the
foreskin) would have to be cut off.
That's a lie. Type 1 female circumcision includes removal of only the
clitoral hood.
Post by Briar Rabbit
These procedures result in
complications ranging from shock, chronic infection, post traumatic
stress disorders, hemorrhage, severe scarring (both internal and
external genitals), urinary tract problems, incontinence, infertility,
infant/mother mortality, fibroids, fistula, sexual dysfunction,
psychological disturbance, and not infrequently, death. For my
infibulated friends, a simple ob/gyn exam is pure torture, resulting in
days of bleeding and bed rest. For many, even a child-size speculum is
too large and examination and treatment are difficult.
Comparisons between the risks of different operations are meaningless
unless the same baseline is used in all cases. Any surgical procedure
becomes high risk when performed by an untrained operator under
unhygienic conditions. Male circumcision is no exception: in one
region of South Africa alone, at least 18 circumcision-related deaths,
5 mutilations, and 42 hospitalizations were reported during the tribal
initiation season that began last September (Source: U.S. State
Department, Report on Human Rights Practices in South Africa,
February)

Conversely, the rate of complications from female circumcision are
much lower when the operation were performed under hygienic
conditions. In short, it's inappropriate to measure female
circumcision undertaken in remote African villages against male
circumcision performed in modern western hospitals.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-22 17:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Larry,

I'm going to have to agree, but I seriously doubt that anyone will listen or
even try to understand your rationale, but I do, and I appreciate it.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
d***@aol.com
2004-07-22 18:59:15 UTC
Permalink
LIKE A VULTURE TO A CARCASS, ANOTHER FORESKINSTEIN FAYGELEH TOUCHES
Post by Larry Kenneth
Post by Briar Rabbit
Thanks for the long reply Kenny, seems to indicate that this issue
really gets up your nose.
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.>
Women's genitals are capable of emitting much more disgusting smells
than men's genitals.>>
Ah, I see that we have another great debater in our midsts! LOL!
Larry, unlike men, women have no choice but to put up with their
odoriferous emanations. Men have a choice: a simple, safe & beneficial
circumcision - the safest and most commonly performed surgical
procedure in all of medicine, occurring more frequently than tooth
extraction. Unfortunately for women (due to the physiological
differences in anatomy), God forgot to design a backup plan!ehe Even
if one were to excise the labia minora/majora, one would still be left
with foreskin (clitoris) - epicenter for pleasure. Whereas with the
male anatomy, the head of the penis (not the foreskin) is where the
greatest degree of sensation lies. Thus being able to excise excess
rotten flesh, without impairing sexual function. In order to believe
in the clitorectomy canard, the entire penis would have to be lopped
off!
Larry, you also forget that men are led by their noses. We are the
horniest creatures on the planet! As long as we have a warm hole to
nestle inside of, we will generally tolerate anything!ehehe And that
"anything" includes the fishy-scented snatch!eh At the same time,
women should not have to tolerate our emanations - the same cottage
cheese-like fumes that can just as easily be eradicated with one
simple & safe snip! Once again, if a flap of skin grew over your
decrepit TUSH, would you revel in the bacteria that it traps, or would
you run to the doctor to have it removed!? No-brainer, right!? Well,
the same rationale applies to male foreskin. It's a cesspool for
disease! A useless scab of skin that serves no useful function (ie.
hymen, appendix, wisdom teeth), other than to cause a lifetime of
unwanted hassles and upkeep.
The removal of foreskin is precisely what separates us from the
animals! As John "The Elephant Man" Merrick once said: "I am not an
animal, I am a human being!" If you want to SHLEP around a marsupial
sac that should have gone out with Neanderthal man, so be it! You can
PLOTZ with that identifying heathen marker, or you can finally join
the human race!eh -D, NYC "The anti-circumcision craze has developed
because groups of conservative, sensitive, medically misinformed
individuals, some with fanatical emotionalism, have not seen the
consequences of a society where males are not circumcised. While
medical prophylactic measures are readily accepted by our society,
surgical prophylaxis is in danger of being discarded by an
overemphasis on the return to the "natural." The intense pain of
natural childbirth is seen as a reward while the minor discomfort, if
any, of circumcision is magnified beyond reason." - DR.GERALD WEISS
Post by Larry Kenneth
Post by Briar Rabbit
The main reason, however, that young
girls are sexually mutilated, is to ensure their virginity and chastity
by severely damaging or entirely inhibiting their ability to enjoy
sexual relations. This is to prepare them to become "proper wives." It
is done because men insist, no matter how promiscuous themselves, on
virginal, "circumcised" brides.
That's only one possible reason why girls are circumcised. Other
reasons include medical, cultural, religious and traditional reasons.
People in those cultures believe that an uncut woman is ugly,
unhealthy, smelly (sounds familiar?) and often use that as a
justification to have their daughters circumcised.
Post by Briar Rabbit
Female genital mutilation is performed to prepare a woman for proper
marriage, and ranges from clitoridectomy, to the hacking, slicing or
burning off of all external female genitalia (excision), and
infibulation, where the girl's entire outer genitals are sliced off,
with the resulting wound bound together with thorn, thread, cowhide
thong or sutures.
As always they are comparing the most severe forms of female
circumcision with male circumcision in order to minimize the harms of
the later.
Type I: Excision of the prepuce with or without excision of part or
all of the clitoris.
Type II: Excision of the prepuce and clitoris together with partial or
total excision of the labia minora.
Type III: Excision of part or all of the external genitalia and
stitching/narrowing of the vaginal opening (infibulation).
Type IV: Unclassified: includes pricking, piercing or incision of
clitoris and/or labia; stretching of clitoris and/or labia;
cauterization by burning of clitoris and surrounding tissues; scraping
(angurya cuts) of the vaginal orifice or cutting (gishiri cuts) of the
vagina; introduction of corrosive substances into the vagina to cause
bleeding or herbs into the vagina with the aim of tightening or
narrowing the vagina; any other procedure which falls under the
definition of FGM given above.
As you can see, one form of female circumcision (namely, excision of
the clitoral hood) is analogous to male circumcision, and other forms
(such as nicking the clitoris and/or labia) are less severe than male
circumcision.
Post by Briar Rabbit
For male circumcision to be equivalent to even the most simple form of
FGM (Type I, clitoridectomy) the head of the penis (not just the
foreskin) would have to be cut off.
That's a lie. Type 1 female circumcision includes removal of only the
clitoral hood.
Post by Briar Rabbit
These procedures result in
complications ranging from shock, chronic infection, post traumatic
stress disorders, hemorrhage, severe scarring (both internal and
external genitals), urinary tract problems, incontinence, infertility,
infant/mother mortality, fibroids, fistula, sexual dysfunction,
psychological disturbance, and not infrequently, death. For my
infibulated friends, a simple ob/gyn exam is pure torture, resulting in
days of bleeding and bed rest. For many, even a child-size speculum is
too large and examination and treatment are difficult.
Comparisons between the risks of different operations are meaningless
unless the same baseline is used in all cases. Any surgical procedure
becomes high risk when performed by an untrained operator under
unhygienic conditions. Male circumcision is no exception: in one
region of South Africa alone, at least 18 circumcision-related deaths,
5 mutilations, and 42 hospitalizations were reported during the tribal
initiation season that began last September (Source: U.S. State
Department, Report on Human Rights Practices in South Africa,
February)
Conversely, the rate of complications from female circumcision are
much lower when the operation were performed under hygienic
conditions. In short, it's inappropriate to measure female
circumcision undertaken in remote African villages against male
circumcision performed in modern western hospitals.
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-22 19:28:08 UTC
Permalink
Larry,

Save your time, darrint68 doesn't see anyone's viewpoint other than his own
and since he is all mighty (I guess), he is always right.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-30 16:48:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Kenneth
Post by Briar Rabbit
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.
Women's genitals are capable of emitting much more disgusting smells
than men's genitals.
So if this were true one should accept the foreskin's stink?

Why are you reducing this to the lowest common denominator?
Xyzzy
2004-07-31 17:11:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by Larry Kenneth
Post by Briar Rabbit
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.
Women's genitals are capable of emitting much more disgusting smells
than men's genitals.
So if this were true one should accept the foreskin's stink?
Why are you reducing this to the lowest common denominator?
You think pussy is the "lowest common denominator"? You may despise
all genitalia, but at least you're not sexist about it.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-31 17:38:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xyzzy
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by Larry Kenneth
Post by Briar Rabbit
Anyway you slice it, the foreskin is prone to emit stomach churning
smells. Its quite disgusting.
Women's genitals are capable of emitting much more disgusting smells
than men's genitals.
So if this were true one should accept the foreskin's stink?
Why are you reducing this to the lowest common denominator?
You think pussy is the "lowest common denominator"? You may despise
all genitalia, but at least you're not sexist about it.
Well obviously you know nothing about pussy.

How can you compare the delights of pussy with the disgusting foreskin?
What is it about the foreskin that does it for you? The stink? Does
hideous do it for you then? Is it the association with rimming (but
licking) and skat?

Anyway you slice the foreskin it is a dog.

As the man said:

“The proponents of not circumcising stress that lifelong penile hygiene
is essential. This acknowledges that something harmful or unpleasant is
happening under the prepuce.” - Russell T, Med Observer 1993 (1 Oct)
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-31 17:44:31 UTC
Permalink
Xyzzy,

Briar doesn't know what he's talking about. He assumes all foreskins have an
odour. What's funny is he has never had a foreskin as an adult, he is
completely disqualified from all conversations regarding the foreskin
because of that. Assumptions like he is making can't be made by him,
although he thinks he can.

Even funnier is how he has that "matter of fact" attitude. Haha. I say you
just let him fool himself until he dies.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-31 17:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Xyzzy,
Briar doesn't know what he's talking about. He assumes all foreskins have an
odour. What's funny is he has never had a foreskin as an adult, he is
completely disqualified from all conversations regarding the foreskin
because of that. Assumptions like he is making can't be made by him,
although he thinks he can.
Kenny, funny that you claim not to be gay yet seem to claim such expert
knowledge of the foreskin?

As of you claim you have not touched, felt or smelt any foreskin other
than your own can you claim to possess this expertise?

Just asking.
Xyzzy
2004-08-01 01:39:41 UTC
Permalink
I say you just let him fool himself until he dies.
He reminds me of myself, somehow, when I was first confronted with the
fact that someone cut off part of my body. But he is taking the
"it's-dirty-&-dangerous" route instead of realizing that something was
stolen.
Kenny Thomas
2004-08-01 02:56:08 UTC
Permalink
Xyzzy,

Sometimes they just can't be told, you just have to let them go.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Jake Waskett
2004-08-01 13:38:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xyzzy
I say you just let him fool himself until he dies.
He reminds me of myself, somehow, when I was first confronted with the
fact that someone cut off part of my body. But he is taking the
"it's-dirty-&-dangerous" route instead of realizing that something was
stolen.
I guess if you are sufficiently determined to find some kind of a deep, dark
response to learning something, then you'll probably find it.
Xyzzy
2004-08-03 15:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jake Waskett
Post by Xyzzy
I say you just let him fool himself until he dies.
He reminds me of myself, somehow, when I was first confronted with the
fact that someone cut off part of my body. But he is taking the
"it's-dirty-&-dangerous" route instead of realizing that something was
stolen.
I guess if you are sufficiently determined to find some kind of a deep, dark
response to learning something, then you'll probably find it.
Some people can even rationalize cutting off part of young person's
penis, if they are determined to do so. They don't even need medical
studies or clinical trials. Or any rationale really. Just "the thing
to do."

At the height of the hospital circumcision craze (late 70's early
80's) hospitals didn't have statistics on UTI's, penile "sensitivity"
or any reasoning used now to circumcise 45% of the U.S. population.
And no good reason to believe that "it doesn't hurt a baby." So why'd
they do it? What was the motivation to put so many children through
so much pain? I guess if you are sufficiently determined...
Briar Rabbit
2004-08-03 16:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xyzzy
Some people can even rationalize cutting off part of young person's
penis, if they are determined to do so.
The proximity fallacy again. The mammalian penile sheath may well be
aproximate to the penis but that does not bestow any sexual function on
the hideous thing.
Kenny Thomas
2004-08-03 17:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xyzzy
At the height of the hospital circumcision craze (late 70's early
80's) hospitals didn't have statistics on UTI's, penile "sensitivity"
or any reasoning used now to circumcise 45% of the U.S. population.
And no good reason to believe that "it doesn't hurt a baby." So why'd
they do it? What was the motivation to put so many children through
so much pain? I guess if you are sufficiently determined...
Good point.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Stan de SD
2004-08-08 23:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Xyzzy,
Briar doesn't know what he's talking about. He assumes all foreskins have an
odour.
So you consider yourself an expert on foreskins. I assume you have made a
habit of smelling a lot of penises up close? :O(
Kenny Thomas
2004-08-09 00:11:11 UTC
Permalink
| So you consider yourself an expert on foreskins. I assume you have made a
| habit of smelling a lot of penises up close? :O(

No, I'm no expert, but considering that I have a foreskin and it has no
odour, that certainly makes me qualified to say "not all foreskins have an
odour" which is exactly what I said.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

"A child's life is like a piece of paper on which every passerby leaves a
mark." - Chinese proverb

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-08-09 05:53:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
| So you consider yourself an expert on foreskins. I assume you have made a
| habit of smelling a lot of penises up close? :O(
No, I'm no expert, but considering that I have a foreskin and it has no
odour, that certainly makes me qualified to say "not all foreskins have an
odour" which is exactly what I said.
Well you would say that wouldn't you. Not really the sort of unbiased
opinion I would accept. Sorry.
Briar Rabbit
2004-08-09 05:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Kenny Thomas
Xyzzy,
Briar doesn't know what he's talking about. He assumes all foreskins have
an
Post by Kenny Thomas
odour.
So you consider yourself an expert on foreskins. I assume you have made a
habit of smelling a lot of penises up close? :O(
Yes Kenny is a closet case. But I have to accept that his knowledge of
intimate details of foreskins is superior to mine. Even thought where he
lives the circ rate is 80% plus I guess if he hangs out in the mens room
long enough and often enough he will come across a few stinky ones. It
appears that the smell really sets him off ;-)
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 06:56:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by magnulus
Maimonodes noted that circumcision reduces sexual desire several
centuries ago,
One man, hundreds of years ago. Think about this for a moment. Is it not
funny how the skin freaks cling onto the words of this "person" as if
they have discovered the Holy Grail yet will in a emotional knee jerk
response reject anything and everything which suggests that circumcision
has a benefit? Now if I pulled something out of a centuries old book in
which some person claimed that male circumcision improved virility would
you be happy to embrace it without question?
Post by magnulus
and modern medical literature suggests circumcision reduces
sexual response.
Well true to form you don't provide any sources so you expect people to
believe the innuendo on face value.

Here are the facts, that it does not reduce sexual function:


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Effects of circumcision on male sexual function: debunking a myth?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z24112F05


Effects of circumcision on male sexual function: debunking a myth?

Collins S, Upshaw J, Rutchik S, Ohannessian C, Ortenberg J, Albertsen P.

Department of Urology, Louisiana State University School of Medicine,
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.

PURPOSE: Claims of superior sexual sensitivity and satisfaction for
uncircumcised males have never been substantiated in a prospective
fashion in the medical literature. We performed such a study to
investigate these assertions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Brief Male Sexual Function Inventory (BMSFI)
was administered to sexually active males older than 18 years before
undergoing circumcision. After a minimum interval of 12 weeks after the
operation, the survey was again administered. The 5 domains of the BMSFI
(sexual drive, erections, ejaculation, problem assessment overall
satisfaction) were each given a summed composite score. These scores
before and after circumcision were then analyzed by Wilcoxon signed-rank
testing.

RESULTS: All 15 men who participated in the study between September 1999
and October 2000 were available for followup. Mean patient age plus or
minus standard deviation was 36.9 ± 12.0 years. There was no
statistically significant difference in the BMFSI composite scores of
reported sexual drive (p >0.68), erection (p >0.96), ejaculation (p
Post by magnulus
0.48), problem assessment (p >0.53) or overall satisfaction (p >0.72).
CONCLUSIONS: Circumcision does not appear to have adverse, clinically
important effects on male sexual function in sexually active adults who
undergo the procedure.


===================

Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile
sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q55131F05


Adult circumcision outcomes study: effect on erectile function, penile
sensitivity, sexual activity and satisfaction.

Fink KS, Carson CC, DeVellis RF.

Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program and Division of Urology,
School of Medicine, and the Department of Health Behavior and Health
Education, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, USA.

PURPOSE: Evidence concerning the effect of circumcision on sexual
function is lacking. Men circumcised as adults are potentially in a
unique position to comment on the effect of a prepuce on sexual
intercourse. We examine sexual function outcomes in men who have
experienced sexual intercourse in the uncircumcised and circumcised states.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men 18 years old or older when circumcised were
identified by billing records during a 5-year period at an academic
medical center. Medical charts were reviewed for confirmation of the
procedure and to identify the indication(s). These men were surveyed to
assess erectile function, penile sensitivity, sexual activity and
overall satisfaction. Data were analyzed using paired t tests to compare
category scores before and after circumcision.

RESULTS: A total of 123 men were circumcised as adults. Indications for
circumcision included phimosis in 64% of cases, balanitis in 17%,
condyloma in 10%, redundant foreskin in 9% and elective in 7%. The
response rate was 44% among potential responders. Mean age of responders
was 42 years at circumcision and 46 years at survey. Adult circumcision
appears to result in worsened erectile function (p = 0.01), decreased
penile sensitivity (p = 0.08), no change in sexual activity (p = 0.22)
and improved satisfaction (p = 0.04). Of the men 50% reported benefits
and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having
been circumcised.

CONCLUSIONS: Our findings may help urologists better counsel men
undergoing circumcision as adults. Prospective studies are needed to
better understand the relationship between circumcision and sexual function.


===================

EFFECTS OF CIRCUMCISION ON MALE PENILE SENSITIVITY
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/message/328


EFFECTS OF CIRCUMCISION ON MALE PENILE SENSITIVITY
Clifford B Bleustein*, Haftan Eckholdt, Joseph C Arezzo, Arnold Melman,
Bronx,
NY

Introduction and Objective:
Controversy continues to exist about the effect of circumcision on
penile sensitivity and sexual satisfaction. This study was designed to
evaluate penile sensitivity in both circumcised and uncircumcised males.
We evaluated both large and small axon nerve fibers using vibration,
pressure, spatial perception, and warm and cold thermal thresholds.
Measurements both in functional men and men with erectile dysfunction
(ED) were obtained to evaluate for differences in penile sensitivities.

Methods:
Seventy-nine patients were evaluated. In the cohort evaluated, 54%
(43/79) were uncircumcised, while 46% (36/79) were circumcised. All
patients completed the erectile function domain of the International
Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire. Patients were
subsequently tested on the dorsal midline glans of the penis. In
uncircumcised males, the foreskin was retracted for testing.
Vibration (Biothesiometer), pressure (Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments),
spatial perception (Tactile Circumferential Discriminator), and warm and
cold thermal thresholds (Physitemp NTE-2) were measured. Bivariate
relationships were assessed using chi square, t test, and Pearson
correlations. Composite null hypotheses were assessed with mixed models
repeated measures analysis of variance allowing us to covary for age,
diabetes, and hypertension.

Results:
Functional group t test analysis only demonstrated a significant (p=
0.048) difference for warm thermal thresholds with a higher threshold
(worse sensation) for uncircumcised men. However, significance was lost
when we controlled for age, hypertension, and diabetes. For the
dysfunctional groups ttest analysis only demonstrated a significant (p=
0.01) difference for vibration (biothesiometry) with a higher threshold
(worse sensation) for uncircumcised men. Again, this also lost
significance (p=0.08) when controlling for age, hypertension, and
diabetes. We also found that overall race is related to circumcision
status with Caucasian men 25 times and African American men 8 times
more likely to be circumcised than Hispanics.

Conclusions:
We present a comparative analysis between uncircumcised and circumcised
men using a battery of quantitative somatosensory tests that evaluate
the spectrum of small to large axon nerve fibers. We demonstrated that
there are no significant differences in penile sensation between
circumcised and uncircumcised men with respect to vibration, spatial
perception, pressure, warm and cold thermal thresholds in both patients
with and without erectile dysfunction.
magnulus
2004-07-18 09:27:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
One man, hundreds of years ago. Think about this for a moment. Is it not
funny how the skin freaks cling onto the words of this "person" as if
they have discovered the Holy Grail yet will in a emotional knee jerk
response reject anything and everything which suggests that circumcision
has a benefit?
The foreskin has a function. It protects the glans of the penis from
irritation and infection and helps lubricate during intercourse.

Why do you think sexual lubricants sell so well to circumcised males?
Because they have no foreskin.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 12:04:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by magnulus
Post by Briar Rabbit
One man, hundreds of years ago. Think about this for a moment. Is it not
funny how the skin freaks cling onto the words of this "person" as if
they have discovered the Holy Grail yet will in a emotional knee jerk
response reject anything and everything which suggests that circumcision
has a benefit?
The foreskin has a function. It protects the glans of the penis from
irritation and infection
... when we were swinging in the trees. Now if that "protection" was
necessary why do you think many indigenous tribes were practicing
circumcision before they started wearing clothes? I suggest that over
time they figured out (separately and independently) that the damn thing
was more of a hinderance than a help.
Post by magnulus
and helps lubricate during intercourse.
It does?

OK, now you have never been with a women have you (this is obvious).

OK, lets work through this then.

* How much smegma and other gunk must be allowed to accumulate under
the foreskin so as to be of assistance in lubricating during coitus?

* What would be the state of this gunk by the time sufficient had
accumulated to assist with lubrication?

* Would "smelly" be an understatement to describe this by now "ripe"
mixture of bodily excretions?

* How long should an uncircumcised man wait between having sex so as to
allow the gunk to build up to the required level again?

Now lets move onto female lubrication (out of your area of expertise I
believe but nevertheless):

"Most women do not walk around well-lubricated, and need a good amount
of stimulation to lubricate. If that doesn't produce good lubrication, I
would wonder if you are not making a good amount of estrogen. Estrogen
is the hormone most responsible for vaginal lubrication." - Mary Jane
Minkin M.D. (Obstetrician/Gynecoclogist) from her column "Doctor-on-
Call" on women.com.

So the lesson learned for you is that if you want to speak with
authority on heterosexual matters you need at least to be heterosexual
yourself.
Post by magnulus
Why do you think sexual lubricants sell so well to circumcised males?
Because they have no foreskin.
They do?

Do you have any facts to support this statement or are you just happy to
continue to continue to peddle disingenuous deceit on the dull and ignorant.
Sperry
2004-07-21 14:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by magnulus
The foreskin has a function. It protects the glans of the penis from
irritation and infection and helps lubricate during intercourse.
Foreskin by itself is also a very sensitive tissue. Many intact men
consider the area of the foreskin around the frenulum (called ridged band)
to be the most sensitive part of their penis.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-22 16:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sperry
Post by magnulus
The foreskin has a function. It protects the glans of the penis from
irritation and infection and helps lubricate during intercourse.
Foreskin by itself is also a very sensitive tissue. Many intact men
consider the area of the foreskin around the frenulum (called ridged band)
to be the most sensitive part of their penis.
The ridged band is not around the frenulum. This fatal flaw in your
posts clearly indicates that you don't know what the fuck you are
talking about. But skin freaks will try their luck antway. Lies,
innuendo, half truths and blatant misrepresentation is their stock in
trade. Sad SOBs are these skin freaks, very sad.
Sperry
2004-07-21 16:34:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by Sperry
Foreskin by itself is also a very sensitive tissue. Many intact men
consider the area of the foreskin around the frenulum (called ridged band)
to be the most sensitive part of their penis.
The ridged band is not around the frenulum.
Part of ridged band is around the frenulum. It blends from the frenulum,
goes all around the penis close to the preputial sphincter and then joins
with the frenulum again on the other side. And it is indeed the most
sensitive part of the penis according to many intact men. Too bad you were
deprieved of it when you were to young to have any say on the matter. That
might explain your angry posts though.

More on ridged band, including useful links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ridged_band
Jake Waskett
2004-07-22 17:26:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sperry
And it is indeed the most
sensitive part of the penis according to many intact men.
... who just happen to be anti-circumcision activists.

Most uncircumcised men that I've spoken to (outside of circumcision-related
environments) place little value in it, regarding the glans as the most
sensitive part.
d***@aol.com
2004-07-23 23:50:02 UTC
Permalink
And it is indeed the most > > sensitive part of the penis according to many intact men. > > ... who just happen to be anti-circumcision activists. > >
<<Most uncircumcised men that I've spoken to (outside of
circumcision-related > environments) place little value in it,
regarding the glans as the most > sensitive part.>>

<<Whatever part I can put in the chick's mouth (or between some big
round titties) is the most sensitive for me. Maybe if you got to bust
a few loads on a pair of 40DD's once in a while, you wouldn't be so
hung up on some silly-assed piece of skin that looks pretty faggety to
begin with.>>

I'll say it once & I'll say it again: if anyone wants to increase
their chances of nabbing high-class trim, they will forgo that fugly
scab of skin!ehehe Extra skin = queasy gals = less boots a
knockin'!ehe In the end, don't be a loner! - circumcise that boner &
FEH! already!eh -D, NYC "1/3 of all American multimillionaires are
tallied as Jewish; 45% of the top 40 of the Forbes 400 richest
Americans are Jewish, yet they comprise a measly 2% of the American
populace" - STEVEN SILBIGER ("The Phenomenon of The Jews" - 2000)
http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/poj.htm (The Phenomenon Of The
Jews)
http://www.aids.net.au/lemons-news-10-03-04.htm (Circumcision provides
a 2-8 protective fold against HIV)
http://www.circinfo.net/benefits_of_circumcision.htm (Benefits of
circumcision - Prof. Brian Morris - 30+ years of unbias research)
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm (Jews, IQ & Nobel
Laureates)
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Economy/telaviv.html (Tel Aviv - Top
10 High-Tech Cities In the World - Newsweek)
http://www.eonline.com/Features/Specials/Jews (Do Jews run Hollywood?
You bet they do, and what of it? - Ben Stein)
NS
2004-07-24 06:59:11 UTC
Permalink
And it is indeed the most > > sensitive part of the body according
to many intact men. > > ... who just happen to be anti-beheading activists.
<<Most beheaded men that I've spoken to (outside of
beheading-related > environments) place little value in it,
regarding the part as the most > sensitive part.>>
<<Whatever part I can put in the chick's mouth (or between some big
round titties) is the most sensitive for me. Maybe if you got to bust
a sweeps on a pair of 40DD's once in a while, you wouldn't be so
hung up on some silly-assed piece of body that looks pretty faggety to
begin with.>>
I'll say it once & I'll say it again: if anyone wants to increase
their chances of nabbing high-class trim, they will forgo that fugly
...
How ridiculous can one get?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-18 16:34:06 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

The study only used 15 and 123 men. Not nearly enough to represent the
entire population of the world or of any country. And Bleustein was a joke.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-18 19:04:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
The study only used 15 and 123 men. Not nearly enough to represent the
entire population of the world or of any country. And Bleustein was a joke.
There were three studies quoted. Why pick on one?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-18 20:40:18 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

I did all three.

First one only had 15 participants.
Second one only had 123 participants.
Third one by Bleustein "tested" absolutely nothing that is relevant.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Jake Waskett
2004-07-18 21:24:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
I did all three.
First one only had 15 participants.
Second one only had 123 participants.
Third one by Bleustein "tested" absolutely nothing that is relevant.
Kenny, I guess you don't believe in the existence of the "ridged band",
since Taylor's study only involved 23 (from memory) individuals.
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 04:41:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
I did all three.
First one only had 15 participants.
Second one only had 123 participants.
Third one by Bleustein "tested" absolutely nothing that is relevant.
You got a problem with the sample size of those studies skin freak?

OK, then :

* Taylor used 22 foreskins

* O'Hara used 139 surveys

Laugh these off as well?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 04:51:45 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

Yes, they are all flawed. They are not represetative of the entire
community. You seem to think I only have problems with studies that go
against my viewpoint? I don't, and I'm not ashamed to say so.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Briar Rabbit
2004-07-19 05:03:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenny Thomas
Briar,
Yes, they are all flawed. They are not represetative of the entire
community. You seem to think I only have problems with studies that go
against my viewpoint? I don't, and I'm not ashamed to say so.
hehe ... just as I thought. You skin freaks are not going to let a few
facts get in the way of a "beautiful fetish" now are you?
Kenny Thomas
2004-07-19 05:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Briar,

You haven't provided any facts.
--
K.T.
Private Investigator MOCert.
www.tacep.org

Discuss circumcision in a retro-moderated environment at
http://forums.tacep.org/

"Americans are under the illusion that they can sacrifice the rights of
others and still maintain their own" - Anthony Romero

Contact Information:
Y! - soccer00kid
MSNM - soccer00kid @ yahoo.com.
AIM - #Private#
Electronic Mail - kenny @ tacep.org
Postal Mail -
Kenny Thomas
PO Box 713
Stockton, MO 65785
Stan de SD
2004-07-18 20:25:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Briar Rabbit
Post by answers_here
The movement of the skin layers of the foreskin provides a built-in
form of lubrication, usually making it easy to masturbate without
additional lubrication if a foreskin is present. Depending on its
degree, this normal lubricating function can be absent after
circumcision.
Has nobody told you that there is more to sex than masturbation?
Maybe that's all he can get...
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...