Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 6,439
- Location
- SE England
Have you ever asked yourself why? Properly thought about it?
Exactly my point of my post you quoted.
How on earth is circumcision legal?
- Thread starter Pate
- Start date
Have you ever asked yourself why? Properly thought about it?
Exactly my point of my post you quoted.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
. . . for the habitually unhygienic
If you don't wash. For the rest of us, it isn't relevant.
What's funny is those who had it done to them as a baby for no good reason saying they have no problem with it or are even glad.
Hmm, could that be because the alternative is to acknowledge that your parents wronged you? Yes, I can see how the former attitude is a hell of a lot easier to convince yourself of.
Hmm, could that be because the alternative is to acknowledge that your parents wronged you? Yes, I can see how the former attitude is a hell of a lot easier to convince yourself of.
One of my mates had one recently, only 2 months ago or so, he's 20, all he said was '''something was wrong so it had to be done'', wasn't without complications either, bleeding wouldn't stop and had to go back the day after. Think he didn't do anything 2 weeks after lol, the first days he could barely walk.
But anyhow, it's sometimes needed for medical reasons.
But anyhow, it's sometimes needed for medical reasons.
I doubt there are that many people here who've experienced adulthood/sex with both. I can safely say that the most sensitive part still remains to be the glans penis (The bulbous part) and not the foreskin which has been removed.
If anything, it has become more sensitive and the possibility it may reduce remains to be seen.
Definitely cleaner (more easily at least) and my girlfriend has the same view.
Add my wife to the list of women who prefer the little chap "commando"
Add my wife to the list of women who prefer the little chap "commando"
Do you think that or do you think it doesn't really matter and your wife is hardly going to tell you she doesn't like your little solider?
I know that. My wife and I are completely honest with each other in every aspect. If she says it looks better without then it does (In her opinion of course). If she thought it didn't look better I'm 100% sure she would let me know.
how can it become more sensitive? the human body adapts.
still people suggesting its cleaner its not hard to pull your foreskin back and rinse it with the shower when you have a wash its basicly the same thing you do when you dont have a foreskin
indeed I'm rather getting the impression that the cut chaps don't wash it as they expect it to be self cleaning
Either that, or everybody who's actually had it done is happy about it, and the only people who are kicking up a fuss are those still with flesh-johnnies.
I'm sure it's probably been pointed out already - nobody in this thread who's been circumcised, either as a baby or later in life, thinks there's anything off about it. It's only those with the least experience on the subject who are throwing a wobbler about "mutilating children". Seems a pretty pertinent observation, to me.
Thats my point.
It's humanly convenient for all parties involved to remain happy about something in the instance where the child had no control over it, because the alternative is anger and family confrontation later in life.
So it's a good example of truth vs. an easy life.
It's humanly convenient for all parties involved to remain happy about something in the instance where the child had no control over it, because the alternative is anger and family confrontation later in life.
So it's a good example of truth vs. an easy life.
Last edited:
I'm afraid you're wrong, take a look at the British Journal of Urology.
If you do a google search you'll see a million websites campaigning against it, full of people who are against if after having it forced on them as a child. A single thread on ocuk is hardly a large sample size.
Last edited:
A friend of mine had his whipped off at the urging of his doctor as he kept getting nasty surprises from nights in with dirty women. It has been around for that long now that it is accepted (a lot like booze and fags are acceptable to society at large as they are part of the fabric of life)
Would you rather people do it under close supervision and acceptance, perhaps even performed by a doctor. Or would you rather make it illegal and have people do it on the back of a dark alley somewhere?
It's a tradition from a massive religion and unfortunately you can't just ignore that. People are gonna do what they gotta do when it comes to religion, legal or not.
It's a tradition from a massive religion and unfortunately you can't just ignore that. People are gonna do what they gotta do when it comes to religion, legal or not.
No, he's right. ChrisJSY claimed that the most sensitive part is removed, which is wrong - the most sensitive part either way is the glans, and only the foreskin is removed, which isn't very sensitive by comparison. The glans becomes less sensitive, but that's a different issue.
Those opposed are still in a minority to those who couldn't care either way, at least amongst those who have been circumcised. I'd go so far as to say that many of the opposition are objecting out of affront rather than practical issues, but that's purely conjecture. While I agree in that I don't think circumcision should be imposed upon babies, I disagree that it should be outlawed - it's too important to some people's creed to ban on the basis of public opinion. That path is lined with more dubious restrictions on people's faith and lifestyle, and ultimately the physical risk is simply not significant - especially in a medically advanced culture, where the practice is more safe and uncomplicated than anywhere else in the world.