|
Circumcision should be outlawed (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by Psy-T
When a baby boy's natural and intact penis is "circumcised," this is what is lost forever:
- The frenar band of soft ridges--the single most pleasure producing zone on the male body. Loss of this densely innervated and reactive belt of tissue reduces the sensitivity of the remaining penis to about that of ordinary skin.
- Approximately half of the temperature reactive smooth muscle sheath called the dartos fascia.
- Specialized epithelial Langerhans cells, a component of the immune system.
- An estimated 240 feet of microscopic nerves, including branches of the dorsal nerve.
- Between 10,000 to 20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which can discern slight motion, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture. This loss includes thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called the Meissner's corpuscles - the most important sensory component in the foreskin.
- Estrogen receptors the purpose and value of which are not yet fully understood.
- More than 50% of the mobile penile skin, the multi-purpose covering of the glans, that shields all of the specialized penile skin from abrasion, drying, and callusing (by keratin cell layering), and protects it from dirt and other contaminants. The debilitating sexual consequences of keratinizing the glans have never been studied.
- The immunological defense system of the soft mucosa, which may produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as lysozyme, also found in mothers milk, and plasma cells, which secrete immunoglobulin antibodies.
- Lymphatic vessels, the loss of which interrupts the lymph flow within a part of the bodys immune system.
- The frenulum, the very sensitive "V" shaped web-like tethering structure on the underside of the glans; usually amputated along with the foreskin, or severed, which destroys its functionality.
- The apocrine glands of the inner foreskin, which produce pheromones—nature's powerful, silent, invisible behavioral signals to potential sexual partners. They contribute significantly to sexuality. Their loss is unstudied.
- Ectopic sebaceous glands, which lubricate and moisturize.
- The essential "gliding" mechanism. If unfolded and spread out flat, the average adult foreskin measures about 15 square inches, the size of a postcard. This abundance of specialized, self-lubricating mobile skin gives the natural penis its unique hallmark ability to smoothly "glide" in and out within itself—permitting natural non-abrasive masturbation and intercourse, without drying out the vagina or requiring artificial lubricants.
- The pink to red to dark purple natural coloration of the glans, normally an internal organ, like the tongue.
- A significant amount of the penis circumference because its double layered wrapping of loose foreskin is now missing making the circumcised penis defectively thinner than a full-sized intact penis.
- As much as one inch of the erect penis length due to amputation when the connective tissue is torn apart during "circumcision." This shared membrane tightly fuses the foreskin and the glans together while the penis develops. Ripping it apart wounds the glans, leaving it raw and subject to infection, scarring, and shrinkage.
- Several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery and branches of the dorsal artery. The loss of this dense vascularity interrupts normal blood flow to the shaft and glans of the penis, obviously damaging its natural function and possibly stunting its complete and healthy development.
- Every year boys lose their penises altogether from botched "circumcisions" and infections accidents happen. They are then "sexually reassigned" by transgender surgery and must live their lives as females.
- Every year many boys lose their lives from the complications of medically unnecessary circumcisions. The cause of these deaths are a fact the billion dollar per year circumcision industry willfully obscures and conceals.
- Although not yet proved scientifically, there is considerable new evidence that an incomplete penis loses its capacity for the subtle electromagnetic "cross-communication" that occurs only during contact between two mucous membranes, and which contributes to the perception of sexual ecstasy. In other words, medically unjustified foreskin amputation of boys ultimately diminishes the intensity of orgasms for both men and women!
if you say this information is false, i'd love to read anything backing your words. |
Since you didn't want to give a source for this, I will.
It's by Gary L. Harryman and it's entitled "Lost List"
The sources he lists are:
www.cirp.org
www.nocirc.org
www.noharmm.org
www.norm.org
They're all *gasp* anti-circumcision sites!!!
This discussion is as pointless as the first one.
It's like someone with an extra ear lobe telling me how horrible it is that I don't have one, even though I wouldn't want one if I had the choice.
How is someone forcing everyone not to be circumcised somehow better than giving parents the option?
You can go back and forth forever listing and questioning sources as to the medical significance of circumcision, but I gurantee at the end of the day, neither side will have budged.
You have a foreskin, great. I'm happy for you. If there's some sort of award for having one, then you deserve it. But why do you give a rat's ass if someone else doesn't? Especially when probably 99.9% of those who are circumsized wouldn't change that if given the chance? |
|
|
| Psy-T |
thanks for proving you don't read my links:
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
Since you didn't want to give a source for this, I will. |
or my posts for that matter:
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
You have a foreskin, great. I'm happy for you. If there's some sort of award for having one, then you deserve it. But why do you give a rat's ass if someone else doesn't? Especially when probably 99.9% of those who are circumsized wouldn't change that if given the chance? |
|
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nou
WOOOT I WON BETTER SEX/MASTURBATION WEEEEEEEEE! :D
I don't really care what other people have, I for one don't think about other guys dicks all that much... I just don't like people that go "OMG YOU DIDNT GET CIRCUSIZED, YOURE GUNNA GET [insert some retarded medical problem that is either totally false or results from people being unclean slobs who don't wash their head] YOU SUCK!"
:p |
LOL. Yeah, that's cool. I have no problem with people who are not circumsized. Circumcized individuals probably see it as a health/convenience/appearance benefit while those who are uncircumsized probably see it as just plain unnecessary and potentially detrimental. Whichever side you're on, more power to you. Have fun with your weiner, and don't worry about somebody else's. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by Psy-T
yep, absolutely nothing... except straightforward logic: you lose nearly half your nerve endings in the penis and wear your glans (which is said to be the equivalant of a clitoris), you will experience less pleasure from sexual acts. :rolleyes: |
penis envy? |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
They're all *gasp* anti-circumcision sites!!!
|
oh no, Psy-T...haven't i said that ?!?!?! :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
penis envy? |
not in the usual sense.. but yeah, i guess so...
cheeky bastard :p |
|
|
| mezzir |
gonna try to find some more info supporting this, i just heard it on i think the bbc world service on public radio a week or so back
Study: Circumcision of Men Lowers AIDS Risk
| quote: |
July 27, 2005 -- South African men who agreed to be circumcised had a 65 percent lower risk of HIV infection. AIDS experts say the implications are complicated.
This is the first study to show a direct link between circumcision and reduced risk of HIV. Among 1,500 young men who agreed to be circumcised, only 18 got infected with HIV over the next year-and-a-half. Among the same number of uncircumcised men, there were three times more infections.
Scientists presented the findings in Brazil. AIDS experts say the results are promising. But Charles Gilks of the World Health Organization worries that newly circumcised men will feel invulnerable.
"If there is an increase in unsafe behavior in men, this will undoubtedly increase the risk of women acquiring HIV," Gilk says.
Results from three similar African studies are expected in the next two years. -- Richard Knox |
source
idk what that story's source is, and i want to find more info before stating it as fact or otherwise, but i just thought i'd put that out there |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by mezzir
gonna try to find some more info supporting this, i just heard it on i think the bbc world service on public radio a week or so back
Study: Circumcision of Men Lowers AIDS Risk
source
idk what that story's source is, and i want to find more info before stating it as fact or otherwise, but i just thought i'd put that out there |
I would also like to know more about this. As the study is reported, it seems like the "control group" is just all other uncircumcised men, which makes the findings hardly convincing, scientifically speaking.
Anyway, this thread sure has its share of BS, but one particularly poor point that seems to pop up over and over again from pro-circumcision guys is that "women love circumcised dicks". What kind of ass argument is that? Are you guys telling me that you do with your dick as women wish? That's really manly. One would have thought that real men do with their most priced possesion as they themselves want. Are you guys prepared to get a Prince Albert piercing too, if that turns out to be popular among women?
Also, for those of you in favour of allowing parents to circumcise their newborns, and compare it with having your daughter's ears pierced: Why not compare it with the real pendant, namely female circumcision? Do you also support this - and to what degree? Is a sewn-up fully-mutilated girl your kind of dream date? |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
I would also like to know more about this. As the study is reported, it seems like the "control group" is just all other uncircumcised men, which makes the findings hardly convincing, scientifically speaking. |
http://ajcp.metapress.com/(if4muq45duzru2exgeeo4efl)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,7,19;journal,3,76;linkingpublicationresults,1:300401,1
http://sti.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/82/2/101
http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/articl...i?artid=1262556
http://www.iavireport.org/Issues/Is...ircumcision.asp
| quote: | | Anyway, this thread sure has its share of BS, but one particularly poor point that seems to pop up over and over again from pro-circumcision guys is that "women love circumcised dicks". What kind of ass argument is that? Are you guys telling me that you do with your dick as women wish? That's really manly. One would have thought that real men do with their most priced possesion as they themselves want. Are you guys prepared to get a Prince Albert piercing too, if that turns out to be popular among women? |
In the US, women are exposed to images of the cimcumsized penis from an early age. That might be different in other countries, but that is what most women here expect. Yeah, the probably get over that, but it is something that most American woman have pre-concieved images of.
| quote: | | Also, for those of you in favour of allowing parents to circumcise their newborns, and compare it with having your daughter's ears pierced: Why not compare it with the real pendant, namely female circumcision? Do you also support this - and to what degree? Is a sewn-up fully-mutilated girl your kind of dream date? |
Removing a flap of skin on the penis and what goes on in female circumcision, as well as the ideals behind it, are on two completely different scales. I'd more likely put male circumcision on par with infant vaccinations than to famale circumcision. |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
Removing a flap of skin on the penis and what goes on in female circumcision, as well as the ideals behind it, are on two completely different scales. I'd more likely put male circumcision on par with infant vaccinations than to famale circumcision. |
vaccinations aren't surgical procedures, and you aren't set to lose sensetivity in your sexual organs as a result of them (supposedly, ok? :o) |
|
|
| Psy-T |
and i'd like a serious response from NeoPhono in regards to this:
1.A. If you lose a lot of youre penis' nerve endings
1.B. You will experience less pleasure from sexual acts
2.A. If you wear your penis' glans (which is said to be the equivalant of a clitoris, wikipedia for one supports the hypothesis that the glans is homologous to the clitoral glans)
2.B. You will experience less pleasure from sexual acts
is this biased information?
is it false information?
are the B statements not the obvious results of the A condtions??
if not, and the circumcision procedure involves cutting off a part of the skin that has a lot of nerve endings aswell as seving to protect the penis' glans from wear (as many sources i've read state), then by pure healthy logic - you will experience less pleasure from sexual acts. |
|
|
|
|
