To chop or not to chop?

**Strike For The South** · 08-09-2006, 21:02

Grits are horrible

**Lemur** · 08-09-2006, 21:59

Just to throw a little more out there -- my little lemur can always get circumcised, if he likes, when he grows up. You can always take away, but you can never put it back.

Reason enough to leave his willie alone.

**Sasaki Kojiro** · 08-09-2006, 22:05

Originally Posted by Lemur

Just to throw a little more out there -- my little lemur can always get circumcised, if he likes, when he grows up. You can always take away, but you can never put it back.

Reason enough to leave his willie alone.

It's not a big deal for a baby, but for an adult it's a major ordeal. I believe one of the reasons circumcision became popular was that there is a chance they would have to get it for medical reasons later, and no one wanted to put them through that.

**Lemur** · 08-09-2006, 22:07

Watch a video of a baby being circumcised. Trust me, it's a big deal for them. Just because they don't remember it later doesn't obviate the screaming and apparent agony they face when they're chopped. At least as an adult you can get anesthesia -- which is not available for a newborn.

Honestly, I think the practice is barbaric. What reading I did when I was faced with this question indicated that the popularity of circumcision in 20th century America had a lot to do with early-century anti-masturbation hysteria.

If there's real interest, I'll dig up my old research and post it here.

**GoreBag** · 08-10-2006, 00:42

Originally Posted by Lemur

Honestly, I think the practice is barbaric.

Not really pertinent at all, but I do think this position is hilarious.

**Pannonian** · 08-10-2006, 01:37

Post by Gorebag
I don't know why, but I find your name amusing in juxtaposition with the thread subject. An operation gone wrong, perhaps?

**GoreBag** · 08-10-2006, 03:51

What did it say before the edit?

**Aenlic** · 08-13-2006, 04:57

I wasn't given a choice. It was just standard medical practice in the US in the 1950's. Not that I'd have been able to make an intelligent decision; since at that point I was only capable of sleeping, eating and occasionally spewing out of one end or the other.

**IrishArmenian** · 08-16-2006, 20:50

I got it. I think it is good that I got the knife when I was a baby. Cleaning is easier.

**Divinus Arma** · 09-11-2006, 02:41

How goes your science project lars573? (spare the details please)

**caravel** · 08-10-2006, 13:45

Originally Posted by Lemur

Watch a video of a baby being circumcised. Trust me, it's a big deal for them. Just because they don't remember it later doesn't obviate the screaming and apparent agony they face when they're chopped. At least as an adult you can get anesthesia -- which is not available for a newborn.

Honestly, I think the practice is barbaric. What reading I did when I was faced with this question indicated that the popularity of circumcision in 20th century America had a lot to do with early-century anti-masturbation hysteria.

If there's real interest, I'll dig up my old research and post it here.

Agree 100%. Circumcision is in fact pointless mutilation.

**orangat** · 08-09-2006, 22:06

The study in question is flawed because the circumcised men were advised and got into the habit of using condoms and the number and rate of seropositive test results among the circumcised has risen quite rapidly after the study.
http://www.circumstitions.com/HIV-SA.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,,1836572,00.html

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, CPA, BMA and BAPA take the stance of actualy discouraging routine circumcision. The AMA and AAP are more neutral but do not recommend routine circumcision either.

If anyone on this forum have greater resources and medical know-how than the combined recommendations of the CPS, AAP, AMA, BMA, BAPA I'm all ears.