Circumcision: Double Standard?

[Jacobania]

Then why are mostly Christians doing it? You can't (rationally) argue with the statistics.

I have a crazy idea. Maybe being Christian isn't the be all and end all of their lives. Maybe they can practice infant circumcision for reasons wholly unrelated to their fondness for Jesus.

Like medical? Phimosis is attributed to only 4% of all circumcisions.

In that same source, it claims that circumcised men are more likely to develop penal warts. There is no evidence that suggests circumcision prevents sexually transmitted diseases and 1 in 50 circumcisions ends in serious complications (and the source clearly points out that that is a conservative estimate).

Disregarding this along with the fact that circumcision (still using the source) can be prevented with other alternative medical options (like medical creams and other procedures), one could logically assume that it is done primarily (though not solely) on religious grounds.

Thankfully, my assumption is merely a hypothesis that has yet to be disproved by empirical evidence. I assume you could provide some?

[Ifreann]

I have a crazy idea. Maybe being Christian isn't the be all and end all of their lives. Maybe they can practice infant circumcision for reasons wholly unrelated to their fondness for Jesus.

Like medical? Phimosis is attributed to only 4% of all circumcisions.

In that same source, it claims that circumcised men are more likely to develop penal warts. There is no evidence that suggests circumcision prevents sexually transmitted diseases and 1 in 50 circumcisions ends in serious complications (and the source clearly points out that that is a conservative estimate).

Disregarding this along with the fact that circumcision (still using the source) can be prevented with other alternative medical options (like medical creams and other procedures), one could logically assume that it is done primarily (though not solely) on religious grounds.

No, one could not. Not medical does not imply religious.

Thankfully, my assumption is merely a hypothesis that has yet to be disproved by empirical evidence. I assume you could provide some?

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[Alyakia]

male circumcision is wrong but female circumcision is a lot more damaging in most cases

perhaps the truth is... somewhere in the middle?

[Camicon]

You don`t understand why some people may be sensitive about having a part of their penis amputated? Or having to admit that their parents were the ones that had it amputated?

Penile foreskin isn't a vestigial structure. It serves a variety of functions, including protecting the more sensitive parts of your penis (like the glans), and increasing sexual satisfaction for men and women (preserving the sensitivity of the glans, providing increased lubrication, providing a more textured surface, etc).

What I don't understand is why you're so indifferent that society is perfectly OK with mutilating the genitals of infant boys.

It's not perfectly OK with it. That's why restrictions are placed on the practice.

Purely on the definition, I object to your use of emotional argument by branding circumcision "amputation". It's not, let's at least call it what it is.

I'm just ambivalent about the procedure.
I have already outlined a possible workaround in which the circumcision of an infant is not permitted but must be chosen as the choice of the child. In the specific case of Jewish religious circumcision, it could be a part of the Bar Mitzvah rites. I do not know why this would be a significant problem, traditionalism aside, for the Jewish religious cause. There is no issue I'm aware of in which an adult convert having a circumcision is considered problematic or whatever.

You don't seem to be aware of my argument. Well, I don't have an argument. I don't have an opinion on the procedure but have an opinion on its legality, which is again, ambivalent.

I didn't say you were OK with circumcision, I said you're indifferent to the fact that (American) society is.

And circumcision is amputation. Calling it anything else is disingenuous.

[Ifreann]

male circumcision is wrong but female circumcision is a lot more damaging in most cases

perhaps the truth is... somewhere in the middle?

Circumcisions for some, miniature American flags for others!

[Sun Wukong]

Generally speaking it's best not to cut things off your children that don't grow back. Unless your physician tells you it's a good idea.

[Jacobania]

I'm sure you've met those people who say "Jesus turned water to wine" type alcoholics.

I have never encountered such an argument.

No, circumcision isn't a tenet of Chritianity (and even rebuked by Paul in Galatians), but nevertheless Christians do contribute significantly to circumcisions worldwide.

I wonder why that is?

So do I. Do you have any evidence to suggest that it has something to do with their Christian faith? Other than correlation, of course. Correlating Christianity with any behavior in the US is pretty meaningless, since most Americans are Christian.

1. Apparently you haven't. It's a "if it's in the bible, it's okay" type mindset. Not saying that they represent a majority of Christians, but they do exist.

2. I'm simply drawing conclusions from the evidence. Show me a statistic with a non-religious (or non-Abrahamic religious) population that has a high circumcision rate and maybe I will be inclined to adjust my views accordingly. Unfortunately, that is not what you have done.

[Alyakia]

I have never encountered such an argument.

So do I. Do you have any evidence to suggest that it has something to do with their Christian faith? Other than correlation, of course. Correlating Christianity with any behavior in the US is pretty meaningless, since most Americans are Christian.

1. Apparently you haven't. It's a "if it's in the bible, it's okay" type mindset. Not saying that they represent a majority of Christians, but they do exist.

2. I'm simply drawing conclusions from the evidence. Show me a statistic with a non-religious (or non-Abrahamic religious) population that has a high circumcision rate and maybe I will be inclined to adjust my views accordingly. Unfortunately, that is not what you have done.

south korea (due to the american occupation, admittedly)

[Ifreann]

I have never encountered such an argument.

So do I. Do you have any evidence to suggest that it has something to do with their Christian faith? Other than correlation, of course. Correlating Christianity with any behavior in the US is pretty meaningless, since most Americans are Christian.

1. Apparently you haven't. It's a "if it's in the bible, it's okay" type mindset. Not saying that they represent a majority of Christians, but they do exist.

2. I'm simply drawing conclusions from the evidence. Show me a statistic with a non-religious (or non-Abrahamic religious) population that has a high circumcision rate and maybe I will be inclined to adjust my views accordingly. Unfortunately, that is not what you have done.

I don't know why Americans hate foreskins. But the fact that they are mostly Christians is inconclusive.

[Jacobania]

Like medical? Phimosis is attributed to only 4% of all circumcisions.

In that same source, it claims that circumcised men are more likely to develop penal warts. There is no evidence that suggests circumcision prevents sexually transmitted diseases and 1 in 50 circumcisions ends in serious complications (and the source clearly points out that that is a conservative estimate).

Disregarding this along with the fact that circumcision (still using the source) can be prevented with other alternative medical options (like medical creams and other procedures), one could logically assume that it is done primarily (though not solely) on religious grounds.

No, one could not. Not medical does not imply religious.

Thankfully, my assumption is merely a hypothesis that has yet to be disproved by empirical evidence. I assume you could provide some?

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

1. Though I would agree with that, countries with a predominately high Christian, Muslim and Jewish population are the main contributors to circumcision. It seems that the more a society embraces an Abrahamic faith, the more circumcision exists. The statistics clearly show this correlation exists.

2. I have provided several sources for my claims in previous posts. It is your claims that lack evidence and should be dismissed.

[Alyakia]

1. Apparently you haven't. It's a "if it's in the bible, it's okay" type mindset. Not saying that they represent a majority of Christians, but they do exist.

2. I'm simply drawing conclusions from the evidence. Show me a statistic with a non-religious (or non-Abrahamic religious) population that has a high circumcision rate and maybe I will be inclined to adjust my views accordingly. Unfortunately, that is not what you have done.

I don't know why Americans hate foreskins. But the fact that they are mostly Christians is inconclusive.

it's because they wanted to stop kids masturbating, and then they kept doing it because well i was circumcised so my kid should be too. admittedly this may be due to their christianity but there was no "it's in the bible so we should do it!" step.

[Sashaaka Horde]

It is a tenet of both Judaism and Islam that penises should be circumcised. It is not a tenet of Christianity. Christians outside the US don't generally do it. Christians in the US doing it doesn't make it a religious practice. Christians in the US also drink Bud Light, and no loving God would wish that on His people.

I'm sure you've met those people who say "Jesus turned water to wine" type alcoholics. No, circumcision isn't a tenet of Chritianity (and even rebuked by Paul in Galatians), but nevertheless Christians do contribute significantly to circumcisions worldwide.

I wonder why that is?

Because one of the inventors of corn flakes told them it would stop masturbation.
Dr Kellogg's prescription, 1888

Do note: He never denied that it caused pain. Rather, he thought the pain was a good thing because "the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

He also wanted to apply "pure carbolic acid to the clitoris [is] an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice (i.e. female masturbation) in those whose will power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control."

Totally the person I want controlling my sexuality.

[Ifreann]

I'm sure you've met those people who say "Jesus turned water to wine" type alcoholics. No, circumcision isn't a tenet of Chritianity (and even rebuked by Paul in Galatians), but nevertheless Christians do contribute significantly to circumcisions worldwide.

I wonder why that is?

Because one of the inventors of corn flakes told them it would stop masturbation.
Dr Kellogg's prescription, 1888

Do note: He never denied that it caused pain. Rather, he thought the pain was a good thing because "the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

He also wanted to apply "pure carbolic acid to the clitoris [is] an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice (i.e. female masturbation) in those whose will power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control."

Totally the person I want controlling my sexuality.

50 Flakes of Corn.

[PFQ Recruiting Office]

I am a circumsized male, and I have not been infected during the operation whatsoever. I have had no problems with being circumsized either.

Sample size of 1?

Bra-fucking-vo

?

You mean my d*ck? The size remains the same. I'm 13 ffs.

[Galloism]

Sample size of 1?

Bra-fucking-vo

?

You mean my d*ck? The size remains the same. I'm 13 ffs.

Congratulations!

There's not many of us 13 inchers around.

[Ifreann]

?

You mean my d*ck? The size remains the same. I'm 13 ffs.

Congratulations!

There's not many of us 13 inchers around.

Even fewer 13 inches around.

[New confederate ramenia]

I'm sure you've met those people who say "Jesus turned water to wine" type alcoholics. No, circumcision isn't a tenet of Chritianity (and even rebuked by Paul in Galatians), but nevertheless Christians do contribute significantly to circumcisions worldwide.

I wonder why that is?

Because one of the inventors of corn flakes told them it would stop masturbation.
Dr Kellogg's prescription, 1888

Do note: He never denied that it caused pain. Rather, he thought the pain was a good thing because "the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

He also wanted to apply "pure carbolic acid to the clitoris [is] an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice (i.e. female masturbation) in those whose will power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control."

Totally the person I want controlling my sexuality.

What the fuck? Circumcision doesn't prevent masturbation if you're circumcised as a newborn, and most people are circumcised as newborns.

[Imperializt Russia]

Congratulations!

There's not many of us 13 inchers around.

Even fewer 13 inches around.

#IAmThe1%?

[Imperializt Russia]

I'm sure you've met those people who say "Jesus turned water to wine" type alcoholics. No, circumcision isn't a tenet of Chritianity (and even rebuked by Paul in Galatians), but nevertheless Christians do contribute significantly to circumcisions worldwide.

I wonder why that is?

Because one of the inventors of corn flakes told them it would stop masturbation.
Dr Kellogg's prescription, 1888

Do note: He never denied that it caused pain. Rather, he thought the pain was a good thing because "the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

He also wanted to apply "pure carbolic acid to the clitoris [is] an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice (i.e. female masturbation) in those whose will power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control."

Totally the person I want controlling my sexuality.

Kellogg was a puritanical twatbasket. Your point?

[Fartsniffage]

Because one of the inventors of corn flakes told them it would stop masturbation.
Dr Kellogg's prescription, 1888

Do note: He never denied that it caused pain. Rather, he thought the pain was a good thing because "the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

He also wanted to apply "pure carbolic acid to the clitoris [is] an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice (i.e. female masturbation) in those whose will power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control."

Totally the person I want controlling my sexuality.

Kellogg was a puritanical twatbasket. Your point?

Twatbasket....do they have those to contain the by-products of FGM?

[Diopolis]

Then why are mostly Christians doing it? You can't (rationally) argue with the statistics.

I have a crazy idea. Maybe being Christian isn't the be all and end all of their lives. Maybe they can practice infant circumcision for reasons wholly unrelated to their fondness for Jesus.

Indeed. Christian churches are by and large more opposed to circumcision than supportive of it.

[Sashaaka Horde]

Because one of the inventors of corn flakes told them it would stop masturbation.
Dr Kellogg's prescription, 1888

Do note: He never denied that it caused pain. Rather, he thought the pain was a good thing because "the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

He also wanted to apply "pure carbolic acid to the clitoris [is] an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice (i.e. female masturbation) in those whose will power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control."

Totally the person I want controlling my sexuality.

Kellogg was a puritanical twatbasket. Your point?

Main point: He probably played a role in popularizing circumcision amongst American Christians, if not the most significant role.
Sub-point 1: He was also wrong and circumcision wasn't really all that effective for the purpose he promoted it, that is preventing masturbation, so the presence of circumcision in America is at least partially based off of a failed hypothesis.
Sub-point 2: A major proponent of circumcision thought it caused pain and that this was a good thing, so that probably throws out the whole 'it doesn't cause pain so it's not bad' argument.
My conclusion: Americans are circumcising their children based on ideas that have turned out incorrect, and it is causing unnecessary pain.

[Imperializt Russia]

Sub-point 2: A major proponent of circumcision thought it caused pain and that this was a good thing, so that probably throws out the whole 'it doesn't cause pain so it's not bad' argument.

A major proponent of the nationalisation of industry thought that the killing of tens of millions of his own citizens thought that was justifiable.
So that probably throws out the whole "nationalisation of industry is a decent policy" argument.

[Saiwania]

South Korea (due to the american occupation, admittedly)

Japan had a US occupation but circumcision didn't take off there, so I think Koreans took a liking to the practice on their own to a certain extent. They had every opportunity to reject it but didn't.

[Alyakia]

South Korea (due to the american occupation, admittedly)

Japan had a US occupation but circumcision didn't take off there, so I think Koreans took a liking to the practice on their own to a certain extent. They had every opportunity to reject it but didn't.

that doesn't change what i said