You never know what you're going to come across in the inter-webs. I thought it was interesting enough to warrant a thread.
A 19 YO pontificates on the mutilation he endured at the hands of a sexually repressive civilization.
FWIW, I basically agree. All natural here, no skin timed off, no piercings, no metal jewelry at all, and no tattoos. I know, boring. I actually kind of dig some tats on some people, I've just never been motivated to get one myself. And piercings? No F'n way. I can't *stand* metal being in contact with my body.
I sympathize with him but also found him annoying. I think he just talks to people on the internet rather than in real life given the stereotypes he was coming up with which sounded to me to come from privileged college age and younger people (though some might fancy themselves "social justice warriors" or some rot like that). Some of what he said got my mind veering way off topic and wanting to yell at him but I won't share that. Just that I don't know how convincing he is to people who promote circumcision for males, but he succeeded in alienating me (though I empathize with what was done to him and know that sometimes it gets botched a lot worse than it was with him) though I'm still against male circumcision (as I was before I heard him).
A woman (and a feminist, btw) I used to be close to decided against circumcision for her son because she was a nurse and saw how infants screamed when they were being circumcised (and was aware of accidents that damaged and sometimes severed the penis, admittedly very rare but why play Russian Roulette with a boy's penis who gets no say?) and saw no point in it (unless you blindly followed a religion she held in contempt) and also dismissed arguments about hygiene as plenty of men do just fine without circumcision and how much harder is it to teach males how to clean their pubic regions than females? (Not surprising to me as I'm aware of more females than males who are opposed to male circumcision, many of whom are also feminists. Some like to ask how God or nature could be so wrong that an entire gender had to be surgically modified at birth.)
As a response the male doctor had her drugged right after she gave birth and while she was konked out the doctor then pressured the husband to sign a consent form to have the infant son circumcised which was then done.
Don't even get me started on this topic....I'll keep my post short and sweet though. Male circumcision on an unconsenting infant is absolutely genital mutilation and is completely wrong, plain and simple.
[MENTION=20947]MikeW[/MENTION],I should post this on your "Mysteries of the Universe" thread: I just don't get why more men aren't enraged about it.
Jettalove Wrote:Don't even get me started on this topic....I'll keep my post short and sweet though. Male circumcision on an unconsenting infant is absolutely genital mutilation and is completely wrong, plain and simple.
[MENTION=20947]MikeW[/MENTION],I should post this on your "Mysteries of the Universe" thread: I just don't get why more men aren't enraged about it.
I'm with you on that Jetta. My maternal grand dad, now 90 is a retired old school MD. He comes from the days when hospitals in South Dakota were in only four cities. He did it all from delivering babies (in his own house for people too poor to afford hospitals or their own homes).... all the way to amputations and surgery and pulling teeth to hauling coffins. When I was about 14 he gave me the lowdown on circumcision, and pulled out the medical books and old medical journals to prove it.
The whole craze in the US about circumcision started with James Kellogg the bonehead doctor, 7th Day Adventist and inventor of Corn Flakes that he marketed as a preventative for masturbation... and circumcision just to be sure. He followed Sylvester Graham, the presbyterian minister who invented Graham Crackers to control masturbation. It was accepted as modern medical fact back then by almost all protestant doctors and some Catholics.
What a load of horse crap!
Let's put some light hearted spin on this before we all go on a rage.
Here's one of my heroes from my teen days... Jamie Stroud, three days younger than me, who grew up to become porn star Chip Tanner and many other amazing things. Circumcision is one of his big issues but he's funny about it.
08-02-2015, 08:04 AM (Edited 08-02-2015, 08:11 AM by meridannight.)
i'm not gonna watch the video (i never watch online videos; can't stand that form of input), but i agree that circumcision is a mutilation, have always thought it was. and i agree it's done by a sexually repressed civilization on people who should have a say in the decision themselves.
Virge Wrote:that he marketed as a preventative for masturbation
see, this is what's disturbing. aesthetic reasons i can understand, actually. so the parents think it's better-looking when it's circumcised -- it's still mutilation and shouldn't be their call -- but i get that. but this --- a need to change a male in a way that will lead to preventing him from masturbating?? how is this anything a sane and a healthy mind can conjure up? it isn't. it's a product of some psychological dysfunction comparable to wanting to take someone else's life. not kidding. wanting to fundamentally reduce another person's quality of life is comparable to wanting to physically take it.
people should be ashamed for coming up with BS such as this. and for others to follow and not recognize complete moronic crap when it's presented to them -- what the hell is the matter with these people?
In one episode of "Sex in the City" one of the female characters expressed reservations about sleeping with a guy because he wasn't circumcised. So, can the continued custom of circumcision partly be backed by women who seem to support it more than men?
"You can be young without money but you can't be old without money"
Maggie the Cat from "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof." by Tennessee Williams
You're absolutely right, [MENTION=18457]LONDONER[/MENTION] - a lot of the women I've talked to about this might sort of start to agree about how it should be the guys' decision, but then are quick to joke about how "ugly" an intact penis is (I disagree and I think it's such bullshit). Even worse, they then proceed to completely defer to their partners on the decision of whether to circumcise their son, who often cite aesthetics or "they want their son to look like they do", or not wanting them to be made fun of, as the main reason for their decision.
FWIW, though, SATC was written and created by Darren Star, an openly gay man. He could've had a direct influence on the direction of popular opinion on this, and he chose not to.
Jettalove Wrote:You're absolutely right, [MENTION=18457]LONDONER[/MENTION] - a lot of the women I've talked to about this might sort of start to agree about how it should be the guys' decision, but then are quick to joke about how "ugly" an intact penis is (I disagree and I think it's such bullshit). Even worse, they then proceed to completely defer to their partners on the decision of whether to circumcise their son, who often cite aesthetics or "they want their son to look like they do", or not wanting them to be made fun of, as the main reason for their decision.
FWIW, though, SATC was written and created by Darren Star, an openly gay man. He could've had a direct influence on the direction of popular opinion on this, and he chose not to.
Maybe if the shoe were on the other foot and it were FGM that we were talking about, no doubt women would be outraged at the thought. So, why is it OK for males but not for females? Women should have no say in this matter whatsoever. Until such time that women have penises they will have absolutely no idea what damage it does.
"You can be young without money but you can't be old without money"
Maggie the Cat from "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof." by Tennessee Williams
Capricorn
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
Sagittarius
