What a bunch of morons

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 31, 2007, 7:45 pm

I hope the blades were sterilized at least for the babies.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/ ... index.html

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » January 31, 2007, 10:36 pm

almost every culture has an archetypal ritual involving male bloodletting or injury.

we have them as well, though they are not so visceral as this example

Most American males are circumcized, that only exists in our culture due to its roots as a primitive ritual.

Communinion in Christian churches uses blood as a metaphor. Catholics doctrine states that the wine literally is 'transubstantiated' into real blood during the Sacrament. this seems bizarre to most of us - and probably most Catholics, but any religion that has a persistent organizational history that long will have these rituals rooted in our primitive common pasts.

pretty interesting shit in my opinion. Joseph Campbell's "The Power of Myth" is a fantastic book on the subject.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · January 31, 2007, 11:17 pm

Yeah Voro keep trying to make off the wall examples like circumcision having any corelation to this barbaric bullshit.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » January 31, 2007, 11:57 pm

hahahahhahahahahhaha

haha

hah

your ignorance makes my heart hurt =/

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 1, 2007, 12:01 am

cutting forehead > cutting foreskin

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 1, 2007, 1:05 am

midnyte vs. voronwe in the DEBATE OF THE CENTURY

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » February 1, 2007, 2:17 am

Cuts on the forehead heal. Foreskin don't grow back.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 1, 2007, 2:49 am

Animalor wrote:Cuts on the forehead heal. Foreskin don't grow back.

But circumcision is OK because it is Merican as apple pie, stylish and freakin aerodynamic so it saves energy. And you know the AMA can clip a foreskin and charge an extra K for it and that keeps American working! W is clipped for fucksake and if it is good enough for him...Oh and it reduces self stimulation in males...

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » February 1, 2007, 2:54 am

Yeah Voro keep trying to make off the wall examples like circumcision having any correlation to this barbaric bullshit.

Step back for a moment and imagine what a circumcision would look like to a culture that hasn't been exposed to it. I've been to a few circumcisions and even when they get a baby drunk on wine like they do during religious ceremonies(Bris, etc.), it's still pretty fucking disturbing to watch. It could easily be misconstrued as torturing a baby for random cultural reasons. Without knowing what the forehead cutting ceremony is about or experiencing it for yourself, how can you objectively judge them any differently?

I personally think both ceremonies are fucked up, but I wouldn't say either one is more or less "barbaric" than the other, ( oh wait, "civilized" societies do circumcisions so it must be ok?). If anything, the fact that foreskin is one of the most sensitive areas of the human body would lead me to think that circumcision might be less humane.

If you're going to make judgments between the two, atleast tryto do it objectively.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 1, 2007, 4:16 am

Well then it's two to one.

U.S. and it's western empire = Male Circumcision

vs Female Circumsicion and gashing yourself on the head three times or someome else holding you down and slicing you.

All three practices are moronic although someome made a case for male circumcision being mor hygienic.

90% of the male members in pornos are circumcised. The pr0n industry knows best...they chose circumcision and they chose HD-DVD.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 1, 2007, 5:06 am

hey look everyone. winnow made a flippant remark after getting fucking owned again.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » February 1, 2007, 6:16 am

Well then it's two to one.

U.S. and it's western empire = Male Circumcision

vs Female Circumcision and gashing yourself on the head three times or someone else holding you down and slicing you.

I wasn't talking about female circumcision, and I'm not keeping track of any score. From the little I know about female circumcision, I'd say it's the worst of the three by far, not by the act itself, but the context in which it's enforced.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » February 1, 2007, 10:33 am

Arborealus wrote:
Animalor wrote:Cuts on the forehead heal. Foreskin don't grow back.
But circumcision is OK because it is Merican as apple pie, stylish and freakin aerodynamic so it saves energy. And you know the AMA can clip a foreskin and charge an extra K for it and that keeps American working! W is clipped for fucksake and if it is good enough for him...Oh and it reduces self stimulation in males...

Yeah its only an american ritual

"Circumcision is one of the most common medical procedures in the world, with 25 circumcisions performed every minute worldwide [147]. It is also one of the oldest [97, 212], and one of the simplest. The fact that it is still popular must mean that there is something in it! In the USA, which has the greatest medical knowledge and medical expertise in the world, 65-90% of males are circumcised (> 1.2 million newborns per year [240, 338]). Those who are not circumcised are mainly from cultures in which it is unfamiliar (e.g., Hispanic, as well as many European and Asian). Globally approx. 25% of men are circumcised [234]. Such a high rate for elective surgery involving the genitalia suggests important net benefits. Moreover, in most western countries circumcision, where practiced, tends to be a family tradition that has nothing to do with religion. With the rise in information from medical research in recent years, informed parents are learning more and more of the lifelong benefits that circumcision can convey to the health and well-being of their children, and are insisting on this simple procedure. In majority populations of the Middle East and in peoples derived from there, such as Jews and Muslims, circumcision is a mandatory part of their religion. Each year 100,000 Jewish and 10 million Muslim circumcisions are performed, while in Africa the number is 9 million. However, on the other side of the world in Australia, aboriginals also practice circumcision, as do Pacific Islanders. So did the Aztecs. Why is this? A common theme in each case is that these diverse races and cultures have traditionally inhabited a hot and sometimes arid sandy environment, where the heat, sweat and, often, sand getting under the foreskin would be expected to cause considerable irritation. Ritual removal has been the outcome, irrespective of whether this was a "command from God" or just plain common sense, that when embedded in the religion or culture over millennia lost its original health-related significance. Interestingly, in some places, such as Madagascar, circumcision is 100% regardless of religion, and the reason is actually dictated by the women, who maintain that circumcised sex is "longer, stronger and cleaner". All of this is good "dinner party" conversation. However, sociology is a muddy area to trek in to, so this review tries to steer clear of issues like this, as well as religion, as far as possible, but not completely."

Midnyte_Ragebringer · February 1, 2007, 11:21 am

Wow, you guys don't fucking get it. A surgical procedure versus children walking around with swords...the same swords many of their "heroes" used to cut off the heads off their infidels on TV.

uh-huh

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » February 1, 2007, 11:33 am

Whats Ironic is that it is banned in Lebanon and Iran!

Lebanon's top Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, has banned bloodletting during Ashura, even for adults.

Clerics in mainly Shiite Iran forbid it as well, saying the practice is un-Islamic because it harms the body.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 1, 2007, 11:48 am

The fact that it is still popular must mean that there is something in it!

If everyone jumps off the bridge Cart and Midnyte are so doomed lol...

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » February 1, 2007, 12:23 pm

Arborealus wrote:
The fact that it is still popular must mean that there is something in it!
If everyone jumps off the bridge Cart and Midnyte are so doomed lol...

Why because I disproved your dumb ass statement?

Whos the Fucking Lemming now!!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 1, 2007, 12:36 pm

kyoukan wrote:hey look everyone. winnow made a flippant remark after getting fucking owned again.

Oh yeah, severely owned! Voronwe expresses a fascination in male bloodletting rituals and I'm owned? Adding another moronic act doesn't cancel things out, it just adds to the pile.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 1, 2007, 1:10 pm

Cartalas wrote:
Arborealus wrote:
The fact that it is still popular must mean that there is something in it!
If everyone jumps off the bridge Cart and Midnyte are so doomed lol...
Why because I disproved your dumb ass statement?

Whos the Fucking Lemming now!!

Yanno I think you need to actually read the article you quoted which concludes that while it may have originally had some merit...It was now largely a function of tradition, sort of like cutting your head to mourn some martyr...So your article disagrees with your arguement...You read the one sentence I quoted and thought it said what you meant...

Post by **Sylvus** » February 1, 2007, 1:20 pm

Cartalas wrote:
Arborealus wrote:
The fact that it is still popular must mean that there is something in it!
If everyone jumps off the bridge Cart and Midnyte are so doomed lol...
Why because I disproved your dumb ass statement?

Whos the Fucking Lemming now!!

You didn't disprove anything, other than saying that circumcision is practiced all over the world. I'll bet you anything, up to and including my life, that Arb already knew that. The phrase "As American as apple pie" has more of a "good, quality family values/wholesomeness" meaning than a "invented by and for Americans" meaning, particularly since Apple Pie has existed for more than twice as long as our country.

Arb was pointing out that a mutilation ritual is okay with you (the collective you) if you practice it, but if they (the people who aren't "you") practice it it's wrong. That's both hypocritical and sad. Other cultures are different than us. If you took a step back and looked at both practices from a complete outsider's perspective, which looks more barbaric?

Then you quoted something that basically says that people practice circumcision because of tradition, implying that that was reason enough to do it. Hence his lemmings comment.

That said, I'm circumcised and I'll probably have any of my progeny circumcised as well.

/edit: er, Arb beat me there.

miir · Post by **miir** » February 1, 2007, 1:24 pm

your ignorance makes my heart hurt

thx cofee + keybord

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 1, 2007, 1:26 pm

Sylvus wrote: /edit: er, Arb beat me there.

Years of practice and natural cat-like dexterity sir!

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » February 1, 2007, 1:29 pm

Sylvus wrote: That said, I'm circumcised and I'll probably have any of my progeny circumcised as well.

/edit: er, Arb beat me there.

Arb already circumsized your progeny?

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 1, 2007, 1:42 pm

Yanno there is a really good National Geographic special about Ashura, Corporal Mortification, African Scarification Rituals etc...The cuts just don't get infected by and large because a razor sharp blade is used...I mean it does happen just with far lower frequency than say your average piercing.

Xyphir · Post by **Xyphir** » February 1, 2007, 1:47 pm

After watching the Penn & Teller episode about circumcision, I have changed from being un-opinionated to being strongly against this out-dated practice. I'm not upset with my parents for trimming my member. They just didn't have the information we do now. If you think Penn & Teller being against this isn't credible, here is another group of people who don't think you should cut a newborn's pee-pee.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » February 1, 2007, 3:32 pm

Well, not all westerns countries do that, we dont normally circumsize male children in denmark (its allowed, so if you for some religious reason wanna get it done, its not a problem).
Personally i wouldnt let anyone come near my dick with a knife, but thats probably just me. And i would certaintly not let anyone near any kid of mines privates with a knife

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » February 1, 2007, 4:04 pm

There was a recent study that showed that circumsized men have a 50% less chance of contracting HIV during heterosexual sex.

Aesthetics/hygeine aside, there are medical benefits to circumcision. The foreskin traps bacteria. It can also hide sores. There is also a reduction of risk of penile cancer.

It may have started as a "ritual" but there are medical benefits.

Xyphir · Post by **Xyphir** » February 1, 2007, 4:27 pm

Lalanae wrote:There was a recent study that showed that circumsized men have a 50% less chance of contracting HIV during heterosexual sex.

What study? This one, which is scientificially unfounded?

I dug up some material on the issue and found this...

A recent review of 27 published studies on the association between HIV and male circumcision in Africa found that, on average, circumcised men were half as likely to be infected with HIV as uncircumcised men. When African men with similar socio-demographic, behavioural and other factors were compared, circumcised men were nearly 60% less likely than uncircumcised men to be infected with HIV.

I tend to agree with the American Medical Association (who are also against circumcision), in which they state:

Regardless of these findings, behavioral factors are far more important risk factors for acquisition of HIV and other sexually transmissible diseases than circumcision status, and circumcision cannot be responsibly viewed as "protecting" against such infections.

Lalanae wrote:Aesthetics/hygeine aside, there are medical benefits to circumcision. The foreskin traps bacteria. It can also hide sores. There is also a reduction of risk of penile cancer.

It may have started as a "ritual" but there are medical benefits.

Additionally, here is what the AMA has to say about penile cancer.

Penile Cancer: Penile cancer is a rare disease in the United States (0.9 to 1 per 100,000). Among uncircumcised men the incidence is estimated to be 2.2/100,000. Six case series published between 1932 and 1986 found that all penile cancers occurred in uncircumcised individuals. Results of one case control study provide an exception to this general rule, although circumcision status was determined by self-report. Nevertheless, this study also found that the absence of neonatal circumcision increased the risk for penile cancer by a factor of 3.2 Other identified risk factors for penile cancer are phimosis (occurring exclusively in uncircumcised males), genital warts, infection with human papilloma virus, large number of sexual partners, and cigarette smoking. Nevertheless, because this disease is rare and occurs later in life, the use of circumcision as a preventive practice is not justified.

I like my chances against getting this disease. Would you cut off part of your clitorus if it meant you reduced your risk of cervical cancer by .0012%? The benefits simply do not out-weigh the cost.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » February 1, 2007, 5:30 pm

The HIV study was recent. I heard it announced on the radio less than a week ago. I'll try to find its source.

Comparing the clitoris to the foreskin is stupid. No clitoris = no sexual pleasure, orgasm. No one is wanting to cut off your dick or testicles. I've talked to circumsized guys and not one of them wishes he had his foreskin back. In fact, they all seem rather pleased with not having one.

Those who are not circumcised get really defensive about it, as evidenced by this thread. I see far more castration anxiety from uncircumcised guys than circumcized guys.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » February 1, 2007, 5:34 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6176209.stm

Here it is.

Circumcision can cut the rate of HIV infection in heterosexual men by 50%, results from two African trials show.
The findings are so striking, the US National Institutes of Health decided it would be unethical to continue and stopped the trials early.

It supports a previous South African study which reported similar results.

Experts said it was a significant breakthrough but could not replace standard methods of preventing infection such as condoms.

The two trials of around 8,000 men took place in Uganda and Kenya were due to finish in July and September 2007 respectively.

But after an interim review of the data by the NIH Data and Safety Monitoring Board, it was decided to halt the trials as it was unethical not to offer circumcision in the men who were acting as controls.

Bleeding less likely

The trial in Kenya found a 53% reduction in new HIV infections in heterosexual men who were circumcised while the Ugandan study reported a drop of 48%.

Results last year from a study in 3,280 heterosexual men in South Africa, which was also stopped early, showed a 60% drop in the incidence of new infections in men who had been circumcised.

There are several reasons why circumcision may protect against HIV infection.

Specific cells in the foreskin may be potential targets for HIV infection and also the skin under the foreskin becomes less sensitive and is less likely to bleed reducing risk of infection following circumcision.

When Aids first began to emerge in Africa, researchers noted that men who were circumcised seemed to be less at risk of infection but it was unclear whether this was due to differences in sexual behaviour.

A modelling study done by international Aids experts earlier this year showed that male circumcision could avert about six million HIV infections and three million deaths in sub-Saharan Africa.

A further trial in Uganda to assess the risk of HIV transmission to female partners is due to report in 2008 but the effect among men who have sex with men has not yet been studied.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » February 1, 2007, 5:45 pm

Medical reasons aside, who wants an anteater snout hangin from their groin?

Xyphir · Post by **Xyphir** » February 1, 2007, 6:00 pm

Lalanae wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6176209.stm

Here it is.

Circumcision can cut the rate of HIV infection in heterosexual men by 50%, results from two African trials show.
The findings are so striking, the US National Institutes of Health decided it would be unethical to continue and stopped the trials early.

It supports a previous South African study which reported similar results.

Experts said it was a significant breakthrough but could not replace standard methods of preventing infection such as condoms.

The two trials of around 8,000 men took place in Uganda and Kenya were due to finish in July and September 2007 respectively.

But after an interim review of the data by the NIH Data and Safety Monitoring Board, it was decided to halt the trials as it was unethical not to offer circumcision in the men who were acting as controls.

Bleeding less likely

The trial in Kenya found a 53% reduction in new HIV infections in heterosexual men who were circumcised while the Ugandan study reported a drop of 48%.

Results last year from a study in 3,280 heterosexual men in South Africa, which was also stopped early, showed a 60% drop in the incidence of new infections in men who had been circumcised.

There are several reasons why circumcision may protect against HIV infection.

Specific cells in the foreskin may be potential targets for HIV infection and also the skin under the foreskin becomes less sensitive and is less likely to bleed reducing risk of infection following circumcision.

When Aids first began to emerge in Africa, researchers noted that men who were circumcised seemed to be less at risk of infection but it was unclear whether this was due to differences in sexual behaviour.

A modelling study done by international Aids experts earlier this year showed that male circumcision could avert about six million HIV infections and three million deaths in sub-Saharan Africa.

A further trial in Uganda to assess the risk of HIV transmission to female partners is due to report in 2008 but the effect among men who have sex with men has not yet been studied.

Dr Kevin De Cock, director of the HIV/Aids department of the World Health Organization...

hahahahaha... poor bastard.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » February 1, 2007, 6:46 pm

It should be noted that what the study essentially said was that, in a culture where men have indiscriminate sex with multiple partners, in a hot climate, where hygene isn't quite as prevelant, are largely ignorant about the details surrounding STDs, and refuse to wear condoms, circumcision can probably save some lives. Groundbreaking, yes, as long as you keep it in context.

What anti-circ advocates don't want you to know: The study exists, and seems to debunk the myth that circumcision cannot possibly help to prevent disease.

What pro-circ advocates don't want you to know: There's more to it than the headline "CIRC CURES AIDS!!!"

It's a very important study, in that it could help save lives while catching Africa up on the use of condoms, and the dangers of STDs. But it is largely irrellevant to a culture with hygene, less disease and promiscuity, and ready access to condoms, which are INFINITELY more effective in preventing the spread of STDs.

Still, it is a landmark study in that it could help Africans at least in the short term, and circumcision can become a tool in the war on AIDS, at least in the third world.

As for me, in my lucky situation as a member of the western world, I am only against circumcision for cosmetic reasons (the most common reason to have it done in the US), but that is only a personal guideline, and I don't begrudge anyone the right to disagree with me, and surgically alter their children accordingly.

How the hell does this topic keep coming up, by the way?

As for the original topic, it's useful to keep in mind that we westerners are only a few generations removed from rituals that now seem equally primitive to us. It's like the new guy to America who gets off the boat, then turns around and shakes his fist at all the "damn immigrants" in line behind him. It may be barbaric, but keep in mind that people are people, and we're all more similar than ANY of us would like to admit.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » February 1, 2007, 8:22 pm

The only person who gets it, in the article wrote: Hind Abinabi, a 52-year-old Shiite woman and mother of four, said to maim children was not only cruel, but also against the religion.

"When the rest of the world is going to the moon, look where these people are -- still drawing blood from their heads," she said.

Talk about circumcision all you want... not one fucking person who's ever had it remembers it happening, and we don't do it every fucking year to commemorate.

I give a rats ass what happened to some historically important person hundreds of years ago. If I want to remember it I'll read a fucking book, not cut my fucking head open.

These people are stuck in the stone age and I doubt they will ever come around.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » February 1, 2007, 9:21 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Yeah Voro keep trying to make off the wall examples like circumcision having any corelation to this barbaric bullshit.

This from a wrestling fan, when the wrestlers used to slash themselves across the forehead with razorblades concealed in their wrist bands to excite mouthbreathers like yourself.

Go irony!

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 1, 2007, 9:30 pm

Fash wrote:Talk about circumcision all you want... not one fucking person who's ever had it remembers it happening, and we don't do it every fucking year to commemorate.

I do. I was 8 when I had to do it due to an infection. I was put under and when I woke up, I couldn't walk without it hurting. Going to the bathroom was pure fucking hell for the next week too. The amount of pain I went through was horrible.\

I'd rather slash my forehead than do this again.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » February 1, 2007, 11:25 pm

I'd also hazard a guess that all the observant Jews who had it done by a Rabbi at their bris around age 13 prolly remember it too.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 2, 2007, 1:26 am

cutting your scalp with a razor sharp edge enough to bleed doesn't really hurt. it's not "mutilating yourself," hurts a lot less than self flagellation that some chrisitian groups do, and probably a lot less than getting some priests's schwang up your 13 year old altar boy ass.

although abdullah the butcher did it so much through his wrestling career that he had welts in his head you could press a quarter into.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » February 2, 2007, 6:15 am

There's nothing I can add to this thread to make it even more funny or retarded so I'm just going to post this emote I've wanted to use for ages.

Xyphir · Post by **Xyphir** » February 2, 2007, 12:17 pm

Lalanae wrote:The HIV study was recent. I heard it announced on the radio less than a week ago. I'll try to find its source.

Comparing the clitoris to the foreskin is stupid. No clitoris = no sexual pleasure, orgasm. No one is wanting to cut off your dick or testicles. I've talked to circumsized guys and not one of them wishes he had his foreskin back. In fact, they all seem rather pleased with not having one.

Those who are not circumcised get really defensive about it, as evidenced by this thread. I see far more castration anxiety from uncircumcised guys than circumcized guys.

First, I said "part of your clitorus", not the whole nub. There are still a shit-ton of nerve endings in the foreskin, and men who have gotten circumcision later in life have noted a difference in sexual pleasure. Second, you ascertation that clitoral stimulation is the primary source of sexual stimulation is flat out wrong. There is the g-spot, and some women (and men) receive arousal/orgasm by anal stimulation.

What good does it do to ask a guy who is already circumcised if he misses his foreskin? How can you miss something you never got to utilize? Find someone who has had sex before circumcision and then after circumcision and ask him if he misses his foreskin.

And for the record, I have a helmet and not an anteater.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » February 2, 2007, 12:24 pm

Fuck that circumcision shit. I'll keep the ~6square inches of ergoenous tissue, thanks.

In the modern day with decent personal hygiene there is NO real benefit to lopping off the foreskin. Seriously, it takes 10 seconds in the shower to "check under the hood".

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 2, 2007, 1:26 pm

most women prefer the look of a circumsized penis over an uncircumsized.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 2, 2007, 1:39 pm

Yeah but anyone that leaves me because of the look of my penis...I'm probably better off without...

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 2, 2007, 4:14 pm

I've yet to see an uncircumcised ePenis in Second Life...not that I'm on a quest to do so! SL has all manner of male sexual organs including canine cocks but no uncircumcised human ones.

Someone could make millions in SL selling an uncircumcised ePenis.

You could tell your grandkids when they ask, "How did you get so rich gandpa/ma?"

"Well little Rico, I created a best selling uncircumcised ePenis in Second Life!"

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » February 5, 2007, 8:48 am

kyoukan wrote:most women prefer the look of a circumsized penis over an uncircumsized.

Performing a medical procedure to protect the aesthetic sensibilities of a third party isn't a compelling argument and might also raise ethical questions

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » February 5, 2007, 12:46 pm

I am satisfied with my circumcision. I give the doctor who delivered me 2 thumbs up. A+++++++++++ would use him again 10/10.

And I agree. I don't want an anteater hanging down from my groin!

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » February 5, 2007, 1:04 pm

Winnow wrote:90% of the male members in pornos are circumcised. The pr0n industry knows best...they chose circumcision and they chose HD-DVD.

He pretends that this fact does not actually give him great pride and joy.

Tuddi2 · Post by **Tuddi2** » February 18, 2007, 11:40 am

kyoukan wrote:most women prefer the look of a circumsized penis over an uncircumsized.

and the difference in look of an uncircumsized penis and the circumsized one while erect are what now ?

not sure how many guys walk around their houses without any clothes, enough to warrent a womans say on what their penis looks like when flaccid.