posted
I feel you are failing to understand the ramifications of FGM, and the motivations. Men use FGM to specifically and intentionally make sex not pleasurable to ensure that the women never cheat on them. There is no medical reason for it to exist at all. Female genital mutilation is a slave collar around women's necks, and it is not a minor process, which is easily recovered from and done with good intent.
I could say that lighting a match and the nuclear bombing of Japan are comparable, as they both involved fire, or compare someone uttering the "n word" under their breath and the holocaust, since they both involve racism, but no one will take me seriously.
And that's exactly the risk you take when you say such ridiculously extreme things, that people will write you off as a crazy and not even give your message a chance. That and you anger those of us who are trying to talk about this with you (at least me, I shouldn't speak for anyone else).
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's all wrong in my opinion. I'm an extremist when it comes to people being allowed to have whole, uncut genitals unless there's a darn reason to alter them...
And that poor little girl Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The most disturbing thing about that link is the pink font and flowers, like having her daughter's clitoris snipped off with a pair of scissors was just a normal baby thing between breast feeding and butt wiping. *shutters*
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In fairness, I don't think they are necessarily cutting it off.
quote:Although all the women had undergone circumcision as infants, there was no clinical evidence of injury to the clitoris or the labia and no physical sign of excised tissue. In the interviews, the majority of women described the procedure as a nicking of the tip of the clitoris or prepuce with a pen-knife or similar, only drawing a drop of blood and causing briefpain.
quote: In countries such as Malaysia and celebration where relatives and guests are invited, and Indonesia (Albar, personal communication) female circumcision has been reduced to puncturing the clitoris with a needle and allowing some bleeding
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I'm sorry, bu tno one has the right to cut anyone's body over culture and religion or because they don't like natural genitals. Having whole genitals should be a human right. This is not difficult to understand.
It's a Jewish males right to be circumcised as an infant and not have to suffer through doing it earlier. You want to violate that right and cause a great deal of unnecessary pain and suffering in the process.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that you hold some sort of moral high ground, here. You're squeamish about something, and you want to stop it no matter what rights you may have to trample in the process.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's a Jewish males right to be circumcised as an infant and not have to suffer through doing it earlier. You want to violate that right and cause a great deal of unnecessary pain and suffering in the process.
You aren't talking about a 'right' here.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why isn't there a right for... I don't know... people not to inflict pain of any sort on a baby that isn't the natural pains of life?
Man, I feel like such an AP extremist with babies in a sling and a breast feeding patch and a no circumcision patch. But, I really would rather that boy be in his mother and father's arms NOT having to go through that.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is a parent's ability to choose to circumcise their son a right? As a medical issue, parents do have a right to make informed medical decisions for their children. I'm not sure about religious parental rights though.
[edit] I'm not stating an opinion, btw, merely a fact...I do not know...I don't have this knowledge.[/edit]
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why isn't there a right for... I don't know... people not to inflict pain of any sort on a baby that isn't the natural pains of life?
You've been pretty clear you don't like circumcision Syn, but I can't quite figure out what consequences you'd like to see enacted your ideal world for those who do circumcise their child. Can you clarify?
quote:Why isn't there a right for... I don't know... people not to inflict pain of any sort on a baby that isn't the natural pains of life?
You've been pretty clear you don't like circumcision Syn, but I can't quite figure out what consequences you'd like to see enacted your ideal world for those who do circumcise their child. Can you clarify?
Hobbes
I don't know... I really wish folks would not bother doing it. i don't want them to get arrested. A lot of the folks don't know it's not a surgery that's totally needed except in rare cases. It's not like they're evil or anything. Maybe the doctors and such should pay a fine or something, but so many people think it's necessary when it isn't. It doesn't help that our culture is foreskin phobic, but things are changing so maybe it's better that folks learn on their own that you don't have to do it and babies feel pain and they don't bother with it anymore or listen to the experts who push it every five seconds, and all of their relatives who push it too and just say, you want to do WHAT? No way.
It's funny how I never really thought about this issue before and now that I've learned about it I'm just Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, to be clear, you don't support regulation of any kind?
And as a side note, a lot of people are aware that it's not 'needed' (in the sense I imagine you intend that word based on previous posts) still have it done and aren't evil. I'm sure you weren't saying they were but the phrasing was confusing to me at least.
posted
I kind of do, and at the same time... I want it to not be necessary to have regulations because folks won't do it anymore.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the word you are looking for Syn is "wish"...as in, upon a star or the magic gene granted me three wishes...
Your compassion and longing for babies to not suffer needless (or any) pain is admirable but in the real world the ramifications of even simple seeming issues (like don't hurt babies in their stuff) can be multifaceted and difficult to wrap your brain around.
Perhaps you can see if there is an organization dedicated to increasing general knowledge/awareness that circumcision isn't obligatory and volunteer your time time there?
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Already joined several. But the thing is, it's already seldom done in Europe except for religious reasons, and even some religious folks are questioning it.
This really... doesn't seem difficult to me. What confuses me is that this sort of thing even exists. I really can't understand it at all.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, so I'm trying to pin this down Syn. Every post you've made emphasizes you wish people wouldn't circumcised their children, so I understand that. However, since it's a religious thing for some I think it's rather self-evident that no matter the world someone will do it. Are you arguing for consequences of any kind for the parents, or requirements prior to preforming the act that would make it hard to obtain (as some suggest or require for abortions)? Or are you just wishing people didn't do it, with no thought of any change in law of any kind?
posted
I don't know... one thing that has caused circumcision to go down is the fact that a lot of insurances or Medicaid isn't paying for it. That's one thing that could help. I hate the idea of parents getting arrested over circumcision because so many folks think it's beneficial. If they can be pushed into it by relatives and doctors and such, the opposite could happen. They can be pushed into NOT doing it. Folks can learn more about the foreskin and what it does, and learn that it's not a simple procedure for an infant, and the numbers go down and keep going down... It helps to send accurate, up to date information out there and convince people that foreskins are not a ticking time bomb and 80% of men are intact without horrible side effects and that foreskin is NORMAL.
I'm hoping you don't need a law to do this. Usually laws like this make people furious, but the law being discussed in San Francisco seems reasonable to me in the sense that you really should not be able to alter anyone like that in the first place. Heaven forbid someone did that to a grown man.
I'm more for education than jailing people over this. That would make things worse.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't know... one thing that has caused circumcision to go down is the fact that a lot of insurances or Medicaid isn't paying for it. That's one thing that could help. I hate the idea of parents getting arrested over circumcision because so many folks think it's beneficial.
When my son was born the hospital gave us literature discussing both options including benefits and draw backs, they also provided links to literature discussing both.
The overwhelming impression I got was that there isn't a clear right way, and hospital certainly didn't talk about it as if there was a clear way to go.
I mean heck, in Africa they are circumcizing people en masse because a study was deemed so relevant it needed to be concluded prematurely, and enacted on ethical grounds, because male circumcision has shown to drastically decrease the chance somebody can contract HIV through sex.
Does the fact an African has a much better chance of not getting HIV through circumcision suddenly make it OK for parents to circumcize their baby? I confess I find it somewhat tiresome and concerning that people have to find a rationale for religious belief that is divorced from God, just so they can practice their religion in their own household.
Where does that stop? By having my children pray with me at night, am I *imposing* a sense of relying on some fairy tale instead of self-reliance? Would it then be necessary for the state to step in so as to stop me from damaging my child's mental health which is I think you will agree as important as physical health?
There was a time in this country where easily the vast majority of males were circumcized routinely. I haven't met anybody who looks back on that time with horror and regret. I certainly don't look down at my own penis in anger and frustration, sex works just fine for me.
Also you might want to read up on how circumcision is performed today, my son was circumcised, and there was no knife or searing involved.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's a Jewish males right to be circumcised as an infant and not have to suffer through doing it earlier. You want to violate that right and cause a great deal of unnecessary pain and suffering in the process.
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: and that foreskin is NORMAL.
Of course it's normal. For non-Jews. And for Jewish boys less than a week old. Who said it wasn't normal?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
It seems like it would be best to discontinue the practice unless it is medically necessary on an individual basis. Parents really shouldn't be allowed to indoctrinate their children into their religion at the cost of the child's well being. They can certainly make the choice to do so when they're older, but forcing a religion on a child is... barbaric.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dantesparadigm: It seems like it would be best to discontinue the practice unless it is medically necessary on an individual basis. Parents really shouldn't be allowed to indoctrinate their children into their religion at the cost of the child's well being. They can certainly make the choice to do so when they're older, but forcing a religion on a child is... barbaric.
Ain't gonna happen. And it's the opposite of barbaric to raise a Jewish child Jewishly.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I probably would not force my heathenism on future children. If they want to be a religion, they could do that.
But then they'd tell me I'm going to hell. How frustrating.
There are some that hate being circumcised and having the choice taken from them. Using things like the plastibell doesn't seem less painless to me.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Um... actually, yes, I am.
Nope. You would be if you were saying that the parents had the right to circumcise their child. There is no right that a jewish baby male possesses in this regard which is not otherwise present on non-jewish male babies. They are not, in fact, exercising any rights or consenting on the procedure. They are having an act performed on them by the decision of their parents.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't really understand how a baby can be Jewish. Judaism is a set of complex philosophical and theologic beliefs that a child can't even begin to comprehend. It's very strange that parents can trundle along pretending that an infant is just as devout to the arbitrary requirements of a religion as they are.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is really a pretty strange thing to say dante. I mean, children are almost always considered to be of the culture they were born into, even when they haven't yet learned all the rights and customs.
quote:Originally posted by dantesparadigm: I don't really understand how a baby can be Jewish. Judaism is a set of complex philosophical and theologic beliefs that a child can't even begin to comprehend. It's very strange that parents can trundle along pretending that an infant is just as devout to the arbitrary requirements of a religion as they are.
quote:Originally posted by dantesparadigm: I don't really understand how a baby can be Jewish. Judaism is a set of complex philosophical and theologic beliefs that a child can't even begin to comprehend.
The answer's pretty much a derivation of what you note here. The very same theologic beliefs assert that the baby is Jewish given a number of conditions, none of which involve comprehension on the part of the baby, and as far as they're concerned, being born a jew makes them obligated to do a ton of things and have a ton more restrictions on what they're allowed to do, whether or not they agree when they're grown up. Etc etc etc.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't really understand how a baby can be Jewish.
Jewish is a religion and a race...I'm Jewish...as my mother is a Jew, as her mother is a Jew...but my grandmother never practiced any particular religion that I was aware of, my mother claims to be "a completed Jew" (Christian) and I'm against organized religions. My father is (among other things) from Swedish stock, so he dubbed me a "Swew", or Swedish Jew.
To rivka...he asks a question and you instead of answering the question, point out he is ignorant...well played!
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not a question of ignorance. This particular poster has had this conversation before, but doesn't understand. Whether that's due to incompatible worldviews or some other reason, it really is that simple.
He doesn't understand.
This is not an insult, a slur, or anything else along those lines.
It is merely a statement of fact.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess Judaism is a little different, since it has such a strong cultural and ethnic component. I just sort of get the willies whenever someone pretends a child believes in or understands a very specific God. It's disconcerting. It's like pretending a baby is a Strict Constitutionalist because its parents are.
How about "child of Jewish/Muslim/LDS parents" rather than "Jewish/Muslim/LDS Child". That way you avoid making the ridiculous claim that the child has religious beliefs while preserving the implication that a parent has some right to raise a child according to their personal philosophy.
Posts: 959 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But Jewish is a race...like saying don't say the child is black, just raised by parents who are black...it's silly.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But a child PRACTICING a particular religious or cultural tradition is, in fact, of that religious or cultural tradition even if they do not yet have a rational belief in the reasons behind it.
Being Jewish is an incredibly strong example, but it is far from the only example.
If I only take myself as an example, I was a Catholic child. I was born into an extremely Polish Catholic family, I participated in sacraments, rites, and rituals pretty much from my moment of birth. While I may not have made a conscious decision to believe in Catholic doctrine, it made me no less a Catholic child. This fact was never more clear than when my own child was born, and whether or not to baptize him was an agonizing decision.
quote:Originally posted by dantesparadigm: I guess Judaism is a little different, since it has such a strong cultural and ethnic component. I just sort of get the willies whenever someone pretends a child believes in or understands a very specific God. It's disconcerting. It's like pretending a baby is a Strict Constitutionalist because its parents are.
How about "child of Jewish/Muslim/LDS parents" rather than "Jewish/Muslim/LDS Child". That way you avoid making the ridiculous claim that the child has religious beliefs while preserving the implication that a parent has some right to raise a child according to their personal philosophy.
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: But that the person is being shallow by expecting that a partner should change themselves to fit that standard regardless of how they might feel about the matter, particularly when modifications are permanent.
Sorry it's been taking so long to reply, it seems by the time I get around to it the conversation has moved on...
I want to make an important distinction: I too don't approve of asking your partner to change. But just as boob size, butt size (some like 'em big, some like 'em small), body hair, make up, etc. can influence what woman a man wants to date, circumcision can be an influence in what man a woman wants to date. It's more of "I'll date or not date this person because he has/doesn't have a foreskin", not a "I'm going to make my current partner get a circumcision to please me."
If it makes the difference between a sexual encounter being a wonderful, pleasurable experience or an awkward, uncomfortable, gross experience, I don't think a woman should be subjected to a foreskin just to prove she's not a shallow bimbo.
I'm not going to call women who prefer foreskins shallow or whores, everyone has their own preferences, their own turn ons. Can't we live and let live?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry Db, but I think it is against the user agreement for people here to agree to disagree. We are contractually obligated to argue the topic to death. Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've got no problem with argument, I enjoy it.
I do have a problem with the tone of a lot of the arguments here. I've tried my best to remain cordial and civil, and avoid saying anything that could be perceived as insulting. but it seems several people here have no problem making hurtful, sweeping comments. Synesthesia calling women who prefer circumcised men bimbos and shallow in particular... obviously she realized there are a lot of married men and men with girlfriends on this forum. If I'm not too fond of having most of my past girlfriends called bimbos, I can't imagine the married men here are too fond of their wives being called the same.
Synesthesia: I think you've mentioned you have tattoos. How would you feel if, say, I said "any girl who has tattoos is a mutilated freak, and any guy who prefers girls with tattoos is an effeminate douche bag"? How would your husband feel about that comment?
(FWIW, I love tattoos. My ex had a lot of them, and they made her even more beautiful )
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry, but it's just not nice to reject a guy just because he has a foreskin. Dang. It's like folks in this country act like it's something icky and disgusting. I mean, being subjected to a part that is actually a natural part of the body? It's like a dude saying i don't want to be with a girl who has a clitoris because they are gross and nasty and will cause infection and will grow really long. I think it's the myths about it that bug me. Tattoos are awesome, but they aren't a natural part of the body we're born with. If someone is going to reject a man for having a foreskin I think she or he is the one who has the problem and needs to get over it. Also you shouldn't think a person is a freak or mutilated for having tattoos or ect. You'd miss out on a good person to date if you did that.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dogbreath, I don't think you've got the high ground on cordial and civil here.
You went beyond "Aesthetically I prefer the look of a circumcised penis" to suggesting that sex with an uncircumcised man would be "an awkward, uncomfortable, gross experience."Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: Dogbreath, I don't think you've got the high ground on cordial and civil here.
You went beyond "Aesthetically I prefer the look of a circumcised penis" to suggesting that sex with an uncircumcised man would be "an awkward, uncomfortable, gross experience."
Re read my posts, I'm referring to women who find foreskins gross. I have no opinion on them myself, being a heterosexual male. Were I a woman (or gay) and held that opinion myself, it still would be perfectly valid - it's not an insult to the moral character of the person involved, it's merely a description of my own tastes. Saying you're not attracted to a person and calling them a bimbo are two very different things.
quote:I'm sorry, but it's just not nice to reject a guy just because he has a foreskin.
Considering all of the ridiculous and esoteric rejections I've heard, I think "I don't like the way your penis looks" would be refreshingly honest. Not long ago, I had a girl turn me down because I remind her of her brother.
quote:Dang. It's like folks in this country act like it's something icky and disgusting. I mean, being subjected to a part that is actually a natural part of the body?
Just put yourself in their shoes. Please. Imagine you *did* think a foreskin is icky and disgusting. To the point that you were grossed out and couldn't enjoy the sex. It's not something you can just change your mind about, either.
Maybe you can't agree with these women, but can you at least agree they're not shallow bimbos for preferring a certain look?
quote:It's like a dude saying i don't want to be with a girl who has a clitoris because they are gross and nasty and will cause infection and will grow really long.
Apples and orangutangs. Circumcision is a harmless, healthy, minor surgery that leaves a male fully capable of enjoying intercourse. I myself think of it as an improvement. At worst, it does no harm. FGM is dangerous, and takes away a woman's ability to feel sexual pleasure. It's a terrible comparison.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
