|
How do you like your pen0r? (pg. 22)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| The Peach |
/lurk
elephant trunks = meh. |
|
|
| Slylee |
my high school sweetheart was uncut (lost my virginity to him) so it was more surprising to see a cut one in my adult life lol
either way i dont care as long as it's a decent size and he knows how to work it. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rose
Uhh, I am pretty against religion but there is also the matter of respect. Just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean I am going to be disrespectful to those who do.
lol mutilating your child, just shut up Theresa. For s sake, you always start drama. |
Just pointing out your flawed logic. Just because it's someone's religious beliefs doesn't mean that it should be exempt from scrutiny or reason, especially when the belief may negatively affect others.
People don't perceive circumcision as mutilation because it is common practice. On the other hand, the exact equivalent done to females is mutilation? Why?
Dictionary:
1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts
Seems accurate to me. People don't like the word because, as someone already mentioned, it is both emotionally charged and has a negative connotation. I am just calling it as it is and I don't really care if some people don't like the word, I am not going to sugar coat the act by using neutral or fluffy words.
*cue hatred and flaming*
Honestly, we all know I can be an opinionated bitch from time to time, but how can you not acknowledge that female mutilation (accepted terminology), and circumcision (accepted terminology) are essentially the same thing? They both serve the same purpose, and they both incorporate injury, disfigurement and removal or damaging of parts. The only fundamental difference is that one is accepted by society and the other isn't. |
|
|
| bananas |
| I think only girls in US think un-cut pen0r is gross. |
|
|
| paulandrews |
| quote: | Originally posted by bananas
I think only girls in US think un-cut pen0r is gross. |
Girls and Bas. |
|
|
| Gauss |
| quote: | Originally posted by bas
I don't remember where I left off, but has anyone mentioned that uncut cocks look gross? Girls don't like them, they're scary. |
Maybe in good ol' US of A.
Which says enough, really. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by astroboy
http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00122525
These were the instructions given to men post-circumcision: http://medicine.plosjournals.org/ar...20298.st003.pdf
I was wrong about the second study. It looked at the reverse - whether circumcised men are less likely to transmit the virus to females and was stopped when the data did not support this (but possibly supported the opposite conclusion). http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60998-3/abstract |
As I suspected, we're talking about different studies.
| quote: | Originally posted by Theresa
Honestly, we all know I can be an opinionated bitch from time to time, but how can you not acknowledge that female mutilation (accepted terminology), and circumcision (accepted terminology) are essentially the same thing? They both serve the same purpose, and they both incorporate injury, disfigurement and removal or damaging of parts. The only fundamental difference is that one is accepted by society and the other isn't. |
They don't serve the same purpose. The foreskin and the clitoris are not equivalent organs, are they? The only way the operation serves the same purpose is this daft notion that circumcision discourages masturbation and sexual sin. Believe me: in men, it doesn't. The pain is not psychologically scarring. I can remember it clearly, and it doesn't give me any mental turmoil.
As a circumcised man I don't feel mutilated. I don't feel like my dick is damaged or disfigured. I only even think about the issue in this kind of discussion. I seriously doubt a woman would feel the same if she'd been circumcised. |
|
|
| boris_the_bear |
why are you cutting that foreskin off
*stretches it*
it's so fun to have it :tongue2 |
|
|
| Schadenfreude |
| foreskin is the original fleshlight.;) |
|
|
| boris_the_bear |
| you mean removing the foreskin causes sex to become more natural or what? :haha: |
|
|
| Schadenfreude |
| foreskin is only for communists. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
They don't serve the same purpose. The foreskin and the clitoris are not equivalent organs, are they? The only way the operation serves the same purpose is this daft notion that circumcision discourages masturbation and sexual sin. Believe me: in men, it doesn't. The pain is not psychologically scarring. I can remember it clearly, and it doesn't give me any mental turmoil.
As a circumcised man I don't feel mutilated. I don't feel like my dick is damaged or disfigured. I only even think about the issue in this kind of discussion. I seriously doubt a woman would feel the same if she'd been circumcised. |
The original reasoning behind circumcision was to discourage sexuality, which is the same purpose for female mutilation. It doesn't seem to prevent sexuality in either genders (save for some of the extreme mutilation done to women, like sewing the vaginal opening closed), but that was why they did it. Now people are doing it because they are sheep or uneducated. There isn't any logical, hard scientific fact that supports good reasoning to perform circumcision. All the 'studies' saying it reduces certain diseases are dodgy at best. Maybe if you removed the labia majora on women it would 'prevent' STI's or UTI's too, but we don't do it.
It doesn't matter whether you 'think' it's disfigured or not. I am sure if a woman had her clitoris removed, or any other part of her anatomy for that matter, at birth and didn't know anything different, she wouldn't feel mutilated or have any mental turmoil either. Doesn't make it any less of a mutilation.
You seem to be equating perception with reality, which isn't the same. Because it has been common practice, it is perceived as normal, and most boys have no idea what they are missing. If we started lopping off baby toes, people would think it was normal when a majority didn't have their baby toes and wouldn't see it as disfigurement despite the fact that it is an abnormality.
So for those of you who say that it is for medical reasons, why aren't we performing appendectomies at birth? I would wager a guess that there are far more deaths directly caused by appendicitis than by diseases somehow contracted by the foreskin. Why aren't we removing the tonsils at birth? Seems like there are a lot of complications, illnesses and pain related to getting strep throat, tonsillitis etc. etc. but we leave those alone until they actually cause problems.
If you don't maintain oral hygiene, or clean your nose, they can cause serious infections that could potentially be life threatening, so why aren't we altering those parts of our bodies somehow instead of learning how to clean them properly?
I am not saying your parents are mutilators - chances are they were following what their doctor's advice was or were following tradition and really didn't know of an alternative. Unfortunately for many parents, plain ignorance or preference (as bizarre a preference I think it is) is why they have their boys circumcised, not because they are sadistic mutilators. |
|
|
|
|
