Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision
Director Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon takes a personal - and local - look at the controversy involving infant male circumcision in his documentary, Cut.
A graduate of the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, Ungar-Sargon interviews professors from that school and from the University of Chicago as he examines the pros and cons, ethical and physical, of a procedure that, for Jews, has signified the covenant between God and Abraham for centuries.
It's a relative newcomer in the United States, routinely performed only since the post-Civil War/Victorian period in the belief it discouraged masturbation and prostitution. On-camera experts debunk more recent health benefit claims.
Ungar-Sargon queries his Orthodox Jewish father and brother as he wrestles with his own feelings about the procedure, which some consider a human rights violation; he also calls on mohels and rabbis, mothers and fathers who follow the tradition and men who regret their circumcisions (the footage of the foreskin-regenerating Tugger device alone makes this unsuitable for younger audiences).
Viewers are left with a pretty clear notion of what the Orthodox Ungar-Sargon will do if and when he has a son, but in this informative and thought-provoking film, he gives both sides their say.
I would like to restore my penis.. my family circumsised me as a baby ..they deprived me of sexual pleasure
I disagree with forced circumcisions on infants with the exception of actual medical necessity. I was circumcised incorrectly at 1 or 2 days old resulting in over an inch long skin bridge because not all of the foreskin was removed and it attached to the glans. I have to clean with a Q-tip. I also have a skin tag and have discomfort sometimes. Considering what happened the first time I don't trust the doctors to perform a corrective surgery. Not trying to be explicit but when I was about 10 I discovered self pleasuring before puberty because of the shower head hit the exposed head creating a pleasurable feeling but I only did it that one time until puberty. I've been ashamed of the botched circumcision since late childhood/early teens and I'm reluctant to have sex as I only became sexually active at 28. I'm 38 now and only had sex around 6 times. I self pleasured when puberty started here and there and I noticed that I had sensation through my teens but going into my 20s I lost almost pretty much all sensation. I've never actually enjoyed sex and have never actually tried to date or even get into a relationship because of the disfigurement and lack of enjoying sex. Nobody studies the long term effects of circumcision of all scenarios to have an informed view scientifically. It's just considered automatically right in all situations and people in my situation are overlooked and the worse off that the people (luckily the number very small but still just as sad) that were partially degloved or amputated. From what I've read about individuals that were degloved by the partial degloving that had to heal that way they don't really have sex and of course the amputees have to be asexual. I feel the worst for them. For the individuals claiming it's not mutilation apparently it is when the individuals life is severly altered and can't or won't because of their condition.
all yall crying about circumcision are silly. if you had an ample amount of penis, you would not cry about loosing a little flap of skin. fact of the matter is that an uncircumcised penis creates wetness (much like a vagina) and causes increased amounts of bacterial and fungal infections. many will argue that a natural penis is more pleasurable than a skinned prick, but im telling you that if you say all the right things, you can satisfy your lady before you ever even involve your penis and the presence of your foreskin will be the least of your worries, just like you dont care if she is on birth control.. love dont care about a foreskin. sheesh...
In its natural state, the human penis is a varied and complex piece of erogenous machinery that, when doing what it was designed to do, is poetry in motion. Eliminating the foreskin takes away the whole essence of this, one of nature's most artful solutions to having one part of one's body enter a part of someone else's. The foreskin eliminates the friction of A penetrating B by introducing a sleeve — the foreskin — between the moving parts.
What's not said in this documentary is that Americans have been taught that circumcised males are cleaner, and that a distinction between middle-class males and those who work with their hands is circumcision.
Any form of genital mutilation is barbaric to me, especially when it is done to those who can't speak or defend themselves. Even the manipulative genital surgeries doctors do on new borns to force them into either being a boy or a girl, because they were born intersexed (or hermaphrodite), is disgusting and violation of human rights and dignity. Why can't adults just leave the private parts of children alone? Gesh... what a bunch of pedophiles, always needing to touch children in the so-called naughty place. >_> Sorry if my comment is offensive in any way, but when it comes to altering a childs' body in order to fit some ideal, especially when it's done without anesthesia, it agitates me a lot. Most of these adults need to allow the child to grow up and allow him/herself to make the choice whether to have the procedure or not. Anyways thank you for posting this video. It's good to see docs about men and their private parts, since there are so many on women and their private parts.
Now to those who are stating that male genital mutilation is the same as female. It's not. With female circumcision there isn't one type (there are actually four basic types), whereas for males there is just one/two...the removal of the foreskin and another one where the penis is split down the middle of the shaft. Another thing after the circumcision, the man can still have an orgasm, whereas the woman (depending on which procedure was done on her) cannot. Not to say that it isn't wrong (I think all forms of forced body mutilation should be do away with, especially if we want to evolve into a better species), I'm only correcting those of you who are stating that female genital mutilation is the same as the males. Please do some in-depth research on the subject of male and female genital mutilation before posting or stating such things as facts.
Female and male genital mutilation are the same, in that they are BOTH genital mutilation. Procedural details don't really matter since no one should be cutting children for non-medical reasons.
Parents make all sorts of decisions for their children and the choice of whether or not to circumcise a male is no different. Next you will say it is mutilation to give a girl pierced ears. Of those circumcised as adults and having had experiences both intact and circumcised report highly positive results. No smegma can accumulate on a circumcised penis - they are cleaner and they are less prone to disease. If you don't want to do it to your son that is fine - just don't tell me how to raise mine. I get to make all sorts of decisions for him and in the grand scheme of things circumcision is a minor one. Now stop deciding for me or others and concentrate on your own situation thanks very much.
The choice of "circumcision" better described as genital mutilation is very different from the other choices you will make for your child. Will any of your other choices include the forced removal of any part of your child's body? Take some time to read about the psychological impact of mutilating one of the most sensitive areas of a child's body in early stages of development. 80% of the world isn't mutilated and they're dong just fine.
Hopefully you can get over your feelings of barbarism - Many women love circumcised penises and do not look at them as being mutilated at all - they happen to work just fine.
they dont see it as being a mutilation because culture had dictated it normal and "clean."
Here in the UK doctors will only perform a circumcision as a last resort treatment for medical reasons, after all other options are exhausted. How they can say it doesn't really hurt that much is beyond me. I'm sure most of these people would baulk at the idea of female circumcision, what's the difference? How can anyone put their baby through that ?
How can they put their baby through that? Easily - for a life time of benefits - it is an EASY decision to make for your son and his future wife.
i am having a lot of trouble watching this and i have been working up to it for a few weeks because i knew it would be hard..
the fact that anyone can think this is acceptable in any way is frightening, it just goes to show the insane things people will do in the name of tradition. Even plenty of non religious people do it so we cant blame religion totally, its a sign of how idiotic people are about going against the grain, or how willing they are to accept authority figures judgements.
So what if its part of peoples culture, some cultures used to hunt heads, others treat their women as property and circumsize them, it was part of white peoples culture to commit genocide against natives and forcibly convert them, just because you have a meme does not make you justified in carrying it out! duh!
I'll admit I can't watch this right now because this subject makes me so upset. I just wanted to add my voice to the chorus of people who see child circumcision for what it really is: a barbaric act of genital mutilation. People act like it's an issue of freedom of "choice" to have their babies circumcised but they never mention the fact that the child being mutilated has no choice at all and will be the one who will have to live with their parents decision for the rest of their lives. This practice should be outlawed just as female circumcision is outlawed in most of the civilized world. Just because children are minors does not negate the fact that their bodies are their own!
Circumcision should be made illegal. It's gross and barbaric, and the fact that so many women want/prefer their partners and their sons to be circumcised just shows how horrible, shallow, egotistical and ignorant they are.
Those women who are pro-circumcision should have their clitoral hood removed and their labia minora cut short. Then maybe they would realize what they're demanding of men and what they're doing to their sons.
Today, there are NO valid and scientifically proven reasons to why it's more hygienic to remove the foreskin. None at all.
There has been made invalid, poor and insufficient studies that show that circumcision reduces the risk of certain diseases and infections, but those studies have so many flaws that I don't even know where to begin. I suspect that they're fake, or else the people who made the study must be complete retards.
In order to reduce the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV, the World Health Organization (WHO) is encouraging male circumcision. They have the following on their website:
"There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%. Three randomized controlled trials have shown that male circumcision provided by well trained health professionals in properly equipped settings is safe. WHO/UNAIDS recommendations emphasize that male circumcision should be considered an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention in countries and regions with heterosexual epidemics, high HIV and low male circumcision prevalence.
Male circumcision provides only partial protection, and therefore should be only one element of a comprehensive HIV prevention package which includes:
- the provision of HIV testing and counseling services;
- treatment for sexually transmitted infections;
- the promotion of safer sex practices;
- the provision of male and female condoms and promotion of their correct and consistent use."
Any questions please ask the WHO.
compelling evidence? extra skin on the penis = more skin on the penis. if it's in a condom & doesn't come in contact with an infected person & the person washes regularly... what difference does it make to have foreskin?
I remember the first time I masturbated by looking at a sexy, shapely model pictured in the newspaper. Now, I am circumcised and I almost fainted that day.
I cannot imagine feeling any more pleasure. I am very visual and that's what gives me pleasure, not so much how I feel down there. Thus, I'm looking forward to buy me one of those expensive RealDolls, because only women way out of my league turn me on lol. But I digress. Maybe circumcision is a bad idea for adults because their nerve endings have already been formed and dispensed with, crippling their sensation, but when one is very young, in my case probably 5 years old, then maybe the nerve endings continue repairing themselves or perhaps even new nerves are created.
I really like the conclusion the filmmaker came to at the end.
I am utterly horrified. I cried a couple of times. I am the mother of a 15 year old boy. Like it was yesterday, I can remember the day the doctor came in to take my baby for circumcision and how horrified I was when he told me they used no anesthetic for the procedure. I was very torn about what to do, but he assured me it was quick and no big deal. I was a young kid, and had just given birth. I wish someone would have been there to inform me. I remember how I cried when they took him away, and now know this I feel absolutely terrible! I feel like I failed my son in this decision, and now he can never get that foreskin back! Awful, sick, barbaric!
I cried so many times, its just awful! This system we live in is complete BS with all the lies they tell us. I hear you, i dont have children now, but if and when i do I will never do this to them. Just awful, period.
You had your sons penis mutilated. You should be ashamed of being an inhumane, abusive and terrible mother
This is completely barbaric!!
Anybody with an ounce of common sense should automatically accept that circumcision has no place other than as a final medical resort. As if it were needed, here's just another barbaric, shameful, twisted side-product of f*cking religion.
It's time we rational, scientifically, logically-minded non-theists stood up and took back the asylum from the lunatics.
F*cking religion makes me want to puke into my hat. Religious types can kiss my lovely cheesy helmet.
Muslims seem to be forgotten. They follow the same practice for the same reason. They took it from the Jews as Islam was created. They and the Jews and Christians are People of the Book. Just a piece of skin.
I was medically circumcised at age 8. No big deal at the time. Preferred that operation over a visit to the dentist. I hated the dentist.
I really enjoy sex. It doesn't seem possible that it could even be more enjoyable. Maybe it's true but...oh well.
I have never felt mutilated or deformed. It's just something that is.
My son was circumcised at birth. It was standard practice at the time. I suppose they should have asked. My son is comfortable with it. If asked today I probably would have said no. No reason other than why do something that is unnecessary.
Today cosmetic surgery is quite common. No one suggests that it should be against the law despite the many cases of complications from the surgery.
Many responses seem to be of an emotional nature and some have a rabid anti religious fervor to them. A decision made emotionally or through bias is not an objective opinion. Leave it as a choice to the parents. Honestly, circumcision is not as traumatic as some of theses posts make it out to be.
Cosmetic surgery on babies would not be any better than circumcision on baby boys....unless for MEDICAL REASONS. Plain and Simple.
Other than that it is just a TREND that has existed way too long.
az
Good point on the cosmetic surgery for babies. I guess being circumcised has just never bothered me so I don't feel all that strongly about it. Also, being old enough to remember when it happened to me and not really giving it much thought, even at the time, has led to an ambiguous attitude concerning the issue. I may be wrong in my attitude, but that attitude does rise from personal experience. I just have not found it a debilitating or an enhancing aspect of my life....at all.
@StillRV:
Yes, a lot of concerted and biased attempts to discredit and destroy Allegros discoveries over the years, and still going strong.
Allegro himself was a Christian minister when he made these discoveries.
This issue is still not resolved from Allegro's flat out statement that "Jesus was a mushroom."
I wont go any further on this Mushroom topic, am played out on it, but if anybody else wants to, knock yourself out. A lot of info on the subject, even youtube videos.
Barbaric. Yea someone needs to get out more. Genocide continues in Darfur but when a man without foreskin takes 5 minutes to nut as opposed to the 5 minutes the uncliped man takes that is a down right horror. If it somehow crippled the sex drive or incapacitated the man ok but dicks have been having a grand old time for quite some time without their hoodies on. Ohh and for you folks who rage and call it mutilation What about piercings? Ban them? Even ears on little girls?
"If it somehow crippled the sex drive or incapacitated the man ok"
Yeah, lets talk about that....
In one hospital in Long Island, in October 2003, four baby boys contracted antibiotic-resistant staph. infections after being circumcised. One man has been severely disabled for life as a result of a staphlococcal infection from circumcision, resulting in, among other things, the removal of half his brain.
Taken from a paper by Doctors Opposing Circumcision :-
"The advent of MRSA in epidemic proportions increases risks associated with male neonatal circumcision beyond those previously contemplated and further increases the desirability of the non-circumcision option. MRSA and other antibiotic-resistant varieties of SA, such as vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA), increase risk, including death, to newborn circumcised boys. In view of this increased risk, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists should review their policy (2002) of offering elective medically unnecessary non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision at parental request.
... Medical practitioners must consider the epidemic status of MRSA and exercise their independent judgment regarding the performance of non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision. There is an ethical duty to not perform scientifically invalid medical treatment, especially when it puts the patient at risk."
Taken from Men's Health magazine :-
"In my practice, as a pediatric urologist, I manage the complications of neonatal circumcision. For example, in a two year period, I was referred 275 newborns and toddlers with complications of neonatal circumcision. None of these were 'revisions' because of appearance, which I do not do. 45% required corrective surgery (minor as well as major, especially for amputative injury), whereupon some could be treated locally without surgery.
Complications of this unnecessary procedure are often not reported, but of 300 pediatric urologists in this country who have practices similar to mine...well, one can do the math, to understand the scope of this problem...let alone, to understand the adverse cost-benefit aspect of complications (>$750,000) in this unfortunate group of infants and young children. Fortunately, neonatal circumcision is on the decline as parents become educated...but the complications still continue.
Until the time that the USA falls in step with the rest of the planet who does not submit newborns to neonatal circumcision, ACOG should assure that the training of obstetricians to perform this procedure is adequate, particularly in avoiding and managing complications of a procedure that is unnecessary, and that obstetricians learn to obtain proper informed consent from parents who have no idea of the problems that can ensue."
M.David Gibbons, MD
Ya know, I could go on here....but trust me, you really don't want to see the pictures of babies that have had the lower half of their torsos eaten away by infection....
So instead, I'll leave you with a question. Given that we now know there are approx. 300 urologists in the USA, who spend a large part of their working lives trying to put right the damage caused by this totally unnecessary procedure, to thousands of babies every year, how many babies need to suffer disfigurement, pain and suffering, or even death, before the risk becomes too great? Give me a number, draw a line in the sand, 'cos I'm really curious. At what point will you say that the risk is too great?
I'll tell you where I draw that line - it's at zero. Not one single baby should be put at unnecessary risk.
Couln't agree more.
This is a religion debate.
This is a health debate.
This is a sexual debate.
This is a US debate.
This is a child abuse debate.
This is a nonsense debate.
az
Az. I respect you greatly. However on this I do not. You have never struck me as the type to crusade against abortion and if I am right in that assumption you are not now nor ever could be the great crusader for babies rights.
I would only crusade against my own abortion if i felt like a crusade is necessary and an abortion is not.
I think cutting the end of a penis is barbaric. I think if religion did not exist this trend would have never taken.
And i tend to believe that being circumcised meant to be circumcircle in the bible originally. The penis may have been modified to look like a mushroom or acorn (a symbol we see in ancient monument and buildings). I don't have much thoughts for the reason why is came to be, but i have many reasons why is should stop.
az
@Azilda:
You say you do not know why the penis may have been modified to look like a mushroom. It may have been because of the "Amanita Muscaria" mushroom that brought religious epiphanies to the users, some evidence that it may have been helpful as a religion starter.
Az, look deeper. Many many tribes performed and even today perform things such as this. It is their culture and not an outsiders to control. Neck stretching lip piercing foot binding penis splitting nose piercing head binding etc etc etc. so many cultures so many customs why pick this one? Are you any better on this note the an old time red coat condemning the savages?
@Achems, we may be onto something!
article on the net:
Jesus as a symbol of the mushroom
Jesus is portrayed as the Son of God, sent to fulfil the role of Messiah or 'Anointed One' - literally, 'one smeared with semen'. As a mushroom, the amanita muscaria does not disseminate seeds as plants do, but ejaculates microscopic spores which create a threadlike fungal network at the base of conifer trees from which thunderstorms elicit more mushrooms. Prior to knowledge of spores, lightning was thought to be the source of mushrooms and lightning was considered the fiery progenitive spears of God, hence the phallic fungi were called 'Sons of God'.
The mushroom's spore ejaculate leaves an oily film on the blood-red cap spotted with white thorns, hence the term 'Messiah' ('Anointed One') and allusions to thistle-entwined, bloody-browed sacrifices, such as the miraculous 'Ram' of Abraham (Genesis 22:13) and Jesus the thorn-crowned 'Lamb of God'.
'Mushrooms were also seen as "winged" creatures, or crowned by a cloudy cap or "halo", each carrying a "message" from God'
the very definition of an 'Angel'. Some mushrooms were 'good' or nutritious, some were 'evil' or poisonous, but amanita muscaria was considered 'blessed' and capable of bestowing health, strength, inspiration and the power of prognostication.
Ingestion of the amanita muscaria can revive the deathly ill and enables people to perform unusual feats of strength. The Gnostics used the mushroom to access 'gnosis' or 'sacred knowledge' and become privy to seeing the 'Kingdom at hand.'
The experience can also result in a very deep sleep, giving the appearance that the partaker has died, only to be 'resurrected' as the effect wears off. The decaying mushroom smells like rotting flesh thus attracting flies, hence another term for the mushroom, 'fly agaric'. Flies seem to die on contact with the mushroom, but if observed for a period of about 12 hours, however, the insects experience 'resurrection' and fly away.
As John Allegro points out, the 'Cross' is merely the cuneiform symbol of the mushroom, just as the 'Asclepius', or snake-entwined staff topped by a winged disc found on nearly all medical facilities, is also just an ancient symbol of the mushroom.
az
@Azilda:
I have many posts about "Amanita Muscaria" on TDF went sort of in depth on the subject.
There is reference to the mushroom in the dead sea scrolls that Allegro was deciphering the hieroglyphics for the Vatican until they pulled him off.
@StillRV
You write:"It is their culture and not an outsiders to control. Neck stretching lip piercing foot binding penis splitting nose piercing head binding etc etc etc. so many cultures so many customs why pick this one?"
It is my culture and an opinion. Why pick this one?
Because this doc is about this one.
az
Az; Granted and point taken..you are just so vehement. Honestly who cares?
Achems;
Biblical scholar John Marco Allegro controversially proposed that the Roman Theology was derived from a sex and psychedelic mushroom cult in his 1970 book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross,[104] although his theory has found little support by scholars outside the field of ethnomycology. The book was roundly discredited by academics and theologians, including Sir Godfrey Driver, Emeritus Professor of Semitic Philology at Oxford University, and Henry Chadwick, the Dean of Christ Church College, Oxford.[105] Christian author John C. King wrote a detailed rebuttal of Allegro's theory in the 1970 book A Christian View of the Mushroom Myth; he notes neither fly agarics nor their host trees are found in the middle east, and highlights the tenuous nature of the links between biblical and Sumerian names coined by Allegro. He concludes that if the theory was true, the use of the mushroom must have been "the best kept secret in the world" as it was so well concealed for all this time
Also the penis was nit modified to look like a mushroom. Whether the foreskin is intact or not the head of the penis has the same shape. the actual physical shape of the penis itself is not changed by the process.
There's a difference between an adult choosing to get a piercing and a child having his genitals cut up by adults for absolutely no good reason. That doesn't undermine genocide, but if you want to read about that then go to a documentary about it. This is about circumcision, so that's what we're discussing.
Don't forget forced piercings on little girls. ;)
I guess you did not watch the same doc that I did but then again you are probably American (just like me -thank you country for taking my nerve endings off my penis, so I cannot get the sexual pleasure that I should). Dicks, as you so eloquently put it, have been having a good time for a long time (my dick included) but these dicks could be having an even better time if we had our whole penis (plus it feels better for the girls too - or as you would probably say so eloquently "it is fun for pussies too"). Piercings are slightly different, although you obviously do not have the intelligence nor the mental capacity to see that. For the sake of your almost infantile argument, I shall oblige you. 1)Piercings in the ears do not completely remove permanently, nerve endings which are a critical function to the male penis. 2) Piercings can be removed at any time and the holes will close (my penis and other males penis' cannot get our foreskin back (see a slight difference yet, or are you still not able to mentally function correctly?) I have so much more to say to someone like you but we must take baby steps in attempting to grow a persons mental capacity, so I will leave it at this for now because I know your brain can only process small amounts of information at a time.
Hahaha, great reply. Reminds me of something Dr Cox would say and in the same fashion as he'd say it on the tv show Scrubs.No pun intended mentioning his name.
Coming from a European background though born in Australia. I was lucky to be kept intact.In 1979,circumcisions were common practice here but my parents refused it.Unlike the US,thank goodness it was not "standard practice" like it was/is in the US as "Jack1952" said.
On occasion I think about a circimcision only because my helmet gets too sensitive during sex where I would ejaculate quickly or struggle to hold back because of my sensitive knob.
I think about a circumcision then but mostly I think I am lucky.
A lot of you guys who are cut wish you were like me AND you guys are NOT sensitive down there like I am. I can only imagine,if you felt the sensations down there like I do,it would feel like heaven on Earth. That nice sensitive sensation IS quite orgasmic.
Do I want that or a dick where I have to work really hard to achieve a sensation half as good and also at 32 how can I live the rest of my life with a memory of what I had knowing it will never be the same? If I was a young child,then that would be a different story.
I think I'll stay as I am because I'm lucky to be 100% complete.
If I wanted less sensation down there, I could walk around with my foreskin permanently retracted.
I have a choice.
Geez its never been a subject to bother me. Some guys have such an emotional reaction to it, come on its useless skin on the dick get over it. If some want to call it barbaric then I think you should re-check the things in the world because its really not even worthy of being on the barbaric list
Just because worse things are being done, it doesn't follow that it's okay to let this smaller bad thing keep happening. It is barbaric to mutilate the genitals of a child out of superstition.
Yeah I'm a woman, but I don't see the big deal. You don't remember it even happening and I'd much rather put a circumcised dick in my mouth than an uncircumcised one....uncircumcised ones (in my experience) have the grossest smell and taste D= My fiance's circumcised and he's not Jewish and if we ever have a kid and it's a son we're having him circumcised.
But in all seriousness....
Getting a useless flap of skin cut off is WAAAAY different than getting a woman's clitoris cut off. They have female circumcision in Africa and some parts of Asia where they basically mutilate the female vagina to prevent sexual acts for pleasure. Many women have it done against their will, as adults or teenagers, the equipment used is not sterile and many of the women die from infection.
Quit your bitching.
If you had an unpleasant sexual experience with someone who wasn't circumcised, then it's because your partner had poor personal hygiene. Female genitalia, if not cleaned properly is likely to be even more unpleasant, but something tells me, you'd not advocate routinely cutting bits off girls genitalia. Because, as I'm sure you'd agree, a reasonable person would teach their children about personal hygiene, rather than chop bits off them.
If the foreskin is as you suggest, "a useless flap of skin" why is it that men who were circumcised as adults, say that sex afterwards is less pleasurable, and that they regret getting it done? Doesn't that tell you something? It's an incredibly sensitive part of the body, and it's anything but "useless".
And here's a thought for you - if you're so keen to get any future sons you may have, circumcised, and you really think it's no big deal, perhaps when you get them cut, you should put yourself through something with a similar degree of pain. That way, you can know for sure that it's no big deal. So take a nice sharp toothpick, and ram it nice and firmly into the skin under one of your fingernails and give it a good waggle around in there. Because that's the degree of pain you will be inflicting on your infant.
A child's body belongs to that child, not to it's guardian. If they want to get circumcised when they reach maturity, because they think it's no big deal, and it's just a useless flap of skin, then fine, they can do it, they have that right.
There's a very good reason this practice isn't widely carried out in the rest of the world - because it's barbaric and it's completely unnecessary.
EVERY ONE SHOULD READ this....
az
yes i completely aggree, this is just horrifying!
It should absolutely be done when the baby is too young to remember, so much better than forcing them to experience it later, when it will hurt a lot more, and besides it's just a useless flap of skin. For these excellent reasons, all infant girls should have their hymens sliced open by doctors inserting blades into their vaginas before they leave the hospital. They'll thank you for it later. What's the big deal? I don't get why so many people get so emotional about it. Who cares about your silly feeling of being violated? Quit your bitching.
ridiculous religions!
Waaaaaaaahhhh! Momma I want my foreskin back and my body to be clean of forced vaccines in my youth by you and the school! So many mistakes...
If it prevents you from getting the clap even once its prob worth it...
As has already been pointed out many times in this thread, unless there is a specific medical condition that requires it, there is no good science that suggests any health benefits whatsoever associated with circumcision. But so long as people keep perpetuating disinformation about it, perfectly healthy babies will continue to be mutilated.
From the HIV studies in Africa, apparently being cut does seems to lessen your chance of getting HIV by 60%...
Source- CDC
The studies that I am aware of that make this claim about circumcision are :-
1 Auvert B, Taljaard D, Lagarde E, et. al. Randomized controlled intervention trial of male circumcision for reduction of HIV infection risk: the ANRS 1265 trial. PLoS Med. 2005;12: 298.
2 Gray RH and colleagues. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda: a randomised trial. Lancet,2007:369;657-666.
3 Bailey RC and colleagues. Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda: a randomised trial. Lancet,2007:369;643-656.
These studies have been roundly criticised and rigorous peer review has been made impossible, since those involved refuse to share their data, thus making any of the studies impossible to validate. Interestingly, prior to these studies, the researchers were known to be biassed since they had previously published work advocating male circumcision for the prevention of HIV in Africa.
"Overall evidence of the relationship between circumcision and HIV in Africa is contradictory and does not show any overall reduction in HIV due to circumcision" - Garenne M. Long-term population effect of male circumcision in generalised HIV epidemics in sub-Saharan Africa. African Journal of AIDS Research 2008
By contrast :-
"The US is the only country in the developed world to circumcise most of its boys for non-religious reasons but this has not prevented it from becoming the developed nation most burdened with HIV" - GW Dowsett, M Couch. Reproductive Health Matters 2007
"A British study of gay men found a higher rate of HIV among those who were circumcised than those who were normal" - Reid D, Weatherburn P, Hickson F, Stephens M. Know the score. Findings from the National Gay Men’s Sex Survey 2001
So overall, I see no good evidence to support the claim that circumcision has any medical efficacy whatsoever, in relation to the prevention of HIV. On the contrary, peer reviewed papers would seem to actually disprove this claim.
@Jack _Burton
Why would it? Can you think of one reason? Can anyone?
az
I'd like to see these women be so willing to cut off their daughter's clitorises.
How can that woman doctor commentate about circumcision? Does she have a foreskin? It's like male doctors telling women that they should have their clitorises or breasts removed. I've got one and I've not always been religious about cleaning it regularly but I've NEVER had a problem with it. It's great, I love my foreskin.
Circumcision. Marijuana. Coca. Magic mushrooms. Jeez, God made a helluva lot of mistakes, didn't he? He must be an idiot.
Mutilators. Child abusers. They should be in prison. How is circumcision normal while merely touching a child is the worst thing in the world? How is showing breasts on TV terrible while showing rape and murder on TV is fine? The world is seriously f--ked up.
I was having a really good day until I found out I am missing strings to my orchestra. Im not Jewish why the hell I'm i circumcised. Damn this world and its stupid cultural tendencies. We should stick with science alone!!!
Ill never have sex the same now... crashed!
If it wasn't already abundantly clear how sick and depraved religion is, just look at how they mutilate newborn children. Sick, sadistic psychopaths
Oh, come on! I'm tremendously happy and glad that I was circumcised at birth. Mom and dad made the right decision for me. I think I'll let my son make that decision himself later as boys here in this country do about age 10 to 13. I would prefer to have him circumcised however, I think.
Why would you prefer to have him circumcised? You think it would make you better? In line with your religion?
You are tremendouslty happy because the end of your penis doesn't have it's protecting skin?????
I am tremendously happy that you are not my father. As for your son, i am sure he trust you for now!
az
Yes, be very happy C_and_N not your father, or "heavens to mergatroid" might be circumcision on a female?? Argh! just joking of course!
Okay I'm sorry I was being a bit too aggressive there. But I still think it's wrong. As rightly pointed out by another person here: what's the difference between that and female genital mutilation that goes on in Africa? They're both just mutilations, and doing it in the name of superstitious beliefs doesn't make it right.
@Oklima
No, you're right. Unwarranted infant genital mutilation is sick, depraved, sadistic, and psychopathic. I'm circumcised, and I would never do it to my child unless there were special medical circumstances - which is highly unlikely.
its not even worth responding to such an uneducated comment, but G od didn't create this world perfectly, in order for us to work hard and fix it. Does that mean we 'hate' G od's creation because we change it?!
edit: oops, that was supposed to be a reply to Hash Hashi, i think it was
Continuously, the bible tells us to be circumcised within our hearts for the LORD. Yet, in the old testament, it was and still does remain the covenant in which GOD made with Abraham and the Jewish people. Just as sacrifice was to them for sin, so Christ became sacrifice for our sins. In other words, where circumcision was the covenant between GOD and Abraham and the Jewish people before Christ (the word became flesh and dwelt amongst us), so our circumcision has come THROUGH Christ within our hearts...of those who believe....... Also, sacrificial animals and grains were offered as atonement for sin in the old testament (before Christ), yet now THROUGH Christ, all things have been made new and HE (Christ) took it upon himself to be the perfect sacrifice for all of our sins. The LORD calls upon his people to that which is circumcised of and within our hearts.......Set apart from the world and worldly ways.
Is that why your death wish "Lord" sanctions, nay demands that mortals drink his blood and eat his flesh??
I ain't sacrificing "anything" for your cannibalistic invisible telepathic deity.
What?
Do you wish to expand on your "What?", if so, ask..... or continue your reply........
What?
az
This is some of the most irrational gobbledy-gook I've ever heard. What does it even mean to be circumcised in your heart?
Hi Cody; to be circumcised in your heart means that Christ has set you apart from the rest of the world with and by the faith in GODS' love. Basically, it means being changed through the faith in Jesus. Like shedding a coat of worldly ways and putting on a new one that Christ has now given you to wear, because of GODS' love for each and everyone who chooses to see the truth in that love.
LOL GOBBLEDY-GOOK I GOTTA REMEMBER THAT ONE!
I am against circumcision unless for medical reasons.
It is basically done for religious reasons, it should be illegal as should be forced vaccinations for the very young.
Oh yeah? so perhaps you want to give up your right to vote, etc., because this would be banning religion, freedom of religion, a basic human right
It's "not the circumcisions so much as the mucking around? (to quote the mohelet) The baby minds its diaper being moved by not its flesh being cut in such a sensitive area? Its one of the most painful things in the world I assure you. Just look at videos on 'circumcision trauma'
and did you look at any of the SCIENTIFIC reports by neuroscientists and the like who say that the pain receptors down there are not yet developed on a baby that young
@ 50 minutes...lets get our baby drunk then mutilate him...in the name of God. Well so daddy can feel good about being in a covenant. Why not go ahead and pierce his tallywhacker while you're there.
"it's not my fault I didn't do it" Really you're cutting the baby.
There is at least one medical reason for circumcision, which is actually quite common. If the foreskin is too tight, it can cause problems for the sexual performance of a man, often making sex painful. It can also affect a man's ability to urinate, which can do damage to the urinary tract and bladder, and possibly lead to infections.
The problem with circumcision is the lack of freedom of choice, so it shouldn't be done if the person wanting/needing the procedure hasn't made the choice. But please stop acting as if there's no use/need for circumcision, as it can be used to improve the lives of many in situations such as those mentioned above.
Where'd you get that info, and what's the evidence?
Need proof? Google it. I don't have the time to collect links, if that's what you need. My little brother had the operation done few years ago, and before undergoing surgery, he researched the matter and found out that the procedure for the specific problem of a tight foreskin wasn't uncommon.
The decisive reasoning for his choice was that with all types of performed surgical or non-surgical modifications done to the penis, there's a risk of causing permanent damage, so he wanted a quick operation that had already been done to others and proven to have cured the condition, as opposed to manually stretching the skin several times a day to maybe get a temporary relief, and in the best case a permanent one.
I'm not saying it's the only solution, but it is a valid option providing a permanent solution. Another surgical measure is preputioplasty, which basically is just an incision to the foreskin to help widen the opening close to the tip.
I'll google that specific condition (I'm ignorant of it), but I've heard a lot of debunking of myths surrounding the positive effects of circumcision on infection/urinary tract damage. I think what you're saying is perhaps that circumcision can, under circumstances, be necessary to correct certain medical/physical conditions? Not that, because this is true, it's okay to do it to children indiscriminately?
Exactly, there are few situations when circumcision is beneficial. But no, it shouldn't be acceptable to perform a circumcision on an infant. Also, if a condition would require some kind of altering to be done to the foreskin of a child, in my opinion, circumcision should be the last option.
And the cause for the forskin to be too tight may be that certain parents do not let their children naked enough in which by instinct, a baby boy will play a lot with his penis and loosen the foreskin. Parents should also help the child if this is not done properly instinctively.
It is hygiene not Sexual Molestation!
Circumcision is for those who have a religion regulated life and sexual hang up. (Edit)...and yes the occasional necessary procedure because of medical reasons.
az
I've gone through your previous statements, and pretty much laughed at all of them. This one is no exception. Your first explanation for this tight foreskin thing is that the kids weren't allowed to play with their dicks enough? lol. I'm curious, what other explanations do you have?
You commented that you're not gonna watch the documentary, then you mock circumcised penises and now this? Hahaha, what a combination. And tell me, how do you first feel sorry for males that have had the procedure done without their consent (religion related or not), and then inform that you wouldn't personally handle a "mushroom looking injured dickeroo" :D? Sympathy and disgust? Again, what a combination!
Circumcision is for people capable of reviewing all options, people that know what is going to happen with the procedure and acknowledge the risks, for people that also seek for professional advice and ultimately have the surgery done by a medical professional. Doesn't have to do anything with religion or sexual hang ups.
That being said, I've seen dozens of your simple and narrow minded comments for various vids on this site. Are you a site troll of some sort? Must be a hobby at least.
starting by the end first.
I am a troll to some and not so "trolly" to others.
I am a troll to you obviously.
I, on the other hand have not read much from you....this is creating curiosity...will see.
Concerning the forskin...i said "may be", it is a fact that babies are very rarely naked in our society, and yes a baby boy does have a reflect to "fix himself" and in the event that this does not happen, i think it is to the parents (normally the mom in most situation) to take care of this hygiene procedure until the child is explained how to pull it himself and then wash himself. We still live in a society where parents don't teach the basic hygiene to their kids, specially if it's sexual!
I didn't say i wouldn't, i said i prefer: Quote:"And who ever said women like circumcised men more...not once they liberate themself from this shite belief. And for 1, i much prefer to give head to a natural penis than to an injured dickeroo!" I have been in love with both "type" and prefer the natural way.
I agree, i could have turned that phrases a little sweeter! My usual excuse is that i am French, raw, and unhabashed.
You want to have that done when you are an adult...Go for it!
I am completely against doing this to a child!
Also....my photograph is easy to see at a distance. Skipping over my post is made easy for anyone!
az
edited for Klingklong and others
sorry if some felt i was impolite!
@TheKlingonFarmer, i checked and ....
Until you prove more interesting, i will also skip your few comments.
Thanks for taking the time.
az
@AlfBeta
I, on the other hand do not think you are a troll. I may learn a thing or two from you.
az
They must really hate god to mutilate their beautiful god given body. Can't believe this is happening in this age, very cruel.
ahahahah i think its funny that its the men on the site defending circumcision by saying girls like more, yet all the women on here say they like uncut better.
Thank God not me or my sons, My parents were from Europe and Roman Catholic's .... Magyar's and I can't say enough about how pleasurable it has been for me and all the ladies in my life. I am sixty and still going strong thanks in good measure to my natural state...... Thank You very much.
Common sense dictates that mutilating a babies genitals is barbaric; the child goes into utter shock and automatic disconnect with trust of his body, his parents, his environment. Thus he is easily implanted with insane philosophies, neurotic rituals and psychotic perversions as he grows. All part of the utter insanity of The Jews.
aaaa f*** this s*** im glad im mexxxican! ;)
Wow, reading some of these comments truly makes me feel sick, "JoeChange" ->Circumcision makes the mind more complicated< giving greater intelligence ?? hmmm isn't that a contradiction right there??
com·pli·cat·ed?
–adjective
1. difficult to analyze, understand, explain, etc.: a complicated problem.
in·tel·li·gence? ?
–noun
1. capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.
2. the faculty of understanding.
So a "complicated mind" has difficulty to understand, and greater intelligence has a "greater" capacity for learning. DO U GET MY POINT?
Look the truth is, the sooner we become less ignorant and start working off nothing but facts, the sooner the world around u will open up. We will be doomed 2 live the way someone eles tells us 2 if we continue with this ignorance.
ig·no·rance?
–noun
the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.
this is a very small subject in the grand scheme of things, but just as important when u make it acceptable 2 Mutilate a defenseless child, you can open people to extreme ethics violations, there 4 making other forms of supprestion "Necessary for the improvement of man".
Gosh, so sorry about my comment making you feel sick!
Maybe my choice of adjective instead of "complicated" should have been "complex" which an online dictionary, TheFreeDictionary, offers for its definition number 2.: "Involved or intricate, as in structure; complicated". Does that help any?
Seriously, don't you get it? Or don't you want to get it?
I trust you would agree that if I am correct that circumcision is so beneficial to neural development, then the surgery involved would not be considered unethical mutilation. Doing it early would thus make more sense than waiting for choice in adulthood when it would not have the benefit of increasing neural network complexity.
I certainly get it, Joe.
It's like, a blind person's hearing is so much better than a sighted one that we should surgically remove everyone's eyes at birth to enhance the hearing neural network?
But wait. Circumcision is a sexually-determined surgery.
When it's done to females it entails removing *all* of the sexual nerve endings. (As pointed out elsewhere it's done for the purpose of preventing sexual pleasure entirely.)
If I understand your theory correctly, women's brainpower would be so enhanced by removing all those nerve endings that the only way men's could be any better would be if the whole penis was amputated.
So did I get it right?
@Kateye70 and 1jeti.
I like your humour with such difficult subject, it reminds me of "Life is Beautiful the movie". I haven't laughed this loud in a while!
And of course after i was able to regain my composure...i agreed with you.
az
Keep learning Joe! I'm proud u have put this much thought into it! Keep up the good work! & always remember 2 keep learning!
a man that thinks this "complex" should c the bigger picture one day... or would he have 2 remove his whole penis first from birth? I'll let u decide... cheers =)
o wate, i repli over hear. well let me tell u joeychange. i aint circummized but i can tell u, i iz got a brain.
I'm pretty sure everyone "gets it" JoeChange. I've spent a little time (all it's worth) searching for anything that substantiates your claims and have come up with zero, zilch, Nada!
I learned the hard way that the intelligent people who post on this site will not let unsubstantiated claims go unchallenged. I also learned that if you post challenging facts and informed opinions then the likely outcome will be a lively and educational discussion.
I can only assume that you expect everyone here to accept your statements solely because of a superior intelligence brought about by your circumcision. What a farce!
I iz juzt a simpl man. I ain't circumscribed but i sure can tell u i has a brain. now i aint hear to say i iz tha smartist preson in tha world, but i think that juzt cuz i em diffrnt dont mean i iz wurse.
"The role of infant circumcision in the United States of America is mysterious. The US is the only country in the world where the majority of baby boys have part of their penises cut off for non-religious reasons. Yet this extraordinary custom is very much taken for granted. If it were being introduced today, it would certainly be rejected as barbaric and un-American."
Taken from the site "Circumcision in the US".
While people from the developing countries (the US being first once again) are the loudest to condemn the practice of woman genital cutting in the third world, they on the other hand see nothing wrong with men circumcision , actually most don't even question it.
And who ever said women like circumcised men more...not once they liberate themself from this shite belief. And for 1, i much prefer to give head to a natural penis than an injured dickeroo!
az
Female circumcision is done so that the clitoris is removed ensuring that the women will have no pleasure during intercourse. this was done so that she will not "stray" or have a desire for sex. it is a practice by men who think that women are nothing but another item in their possession to enjoy. women's feelings are not valued. therefore it is an inhuman act - cause the motive is not keeping the women's interest.
Male circumcision has health benefits (for the person who is circumcised.)
no idea about the enjoying intercourse more, cause there is no real way to compare a before and after...
if a woman like someone cause their are circumcised or not, that's a pretty pathetic relationship - bound to fail.
there is also the religious intent behind it. after all it is practiced by the three major religions. Islam, Christianity and Judaism.
probably someone who does not subscribe to any of these faiths may not have a choice in un-circumcising themselves, but at least no one is forcing them to circumcise their son.
circumcision done in infancy is far better. my son was circumcised the day he was born. made no fuss during or after the procedure (tough guy) my cousin was circumcised at 7 years and suffered for three to four weeks. unable to walk or wear usual cloths.
.....
in case you are wondering. i was a Muslim and now i am a christian.
"Male circumcision has health benefits (for the person who is circumcised"
As I said elsewhere in this thread, provide links to peer reviewed papers which confirm this, or it's purely supposition on your part.
"no idea about the enjoying intercourse more, cause there is no real way to compare a before and after"
As I said elsewhere in this thread, it is possible to compare sensitivity in adults who elected to be circumcised after having reached maturity. Quite predictably, there are reports of loss of sensitivity, and a feeling of regret at having had the procedure.
"if a woman like someone cause their are circumcised or not, that's a pretty pathetic relationship - bound to fail"
Don't confuse liking/loving someone, with a preference for the state of their genitalia.
"there is also the religious intent behind it. after all it is practiced by the three major religions. Islam, Christianity and Judaism"
Fine, if you want to cut bits off yourself to appease your deity, then you should be free to do that. The key there is "free". It is barbaric in this day and age to assume that right over a child, regardless of your hopes or desires for their future adherence, or lack of, to your chosen faith. What's wrong with letting your offspring reach maturity intact, so that they can decide how they feel about it themselves?
"probably someone who does not subscribe to any of these faiths may not have a choice in un-circumcising themselves, but at least no one is forcing them to circumcise their son"
It seems quite clear that ignorance. peer pressure, and misinformation can and does pressure people into mutilating their babies.
"circumcision done in infancy is far better. my son was circumcised the day he was born. made no fuss during or after the procedure (tough guy) my cousin was circumcised at 7 years and suffered for three to four weeks. unable to walk or wear usual cloths"
I repeat, unless there is a medical condition that needs treating, there is no good science that demonstrates any efficacy in circumcision. "Better" would be not cutting bits off children unnecessarily.
@earthwinger
it's like you took the words out of me!
Thumbs up! Skin on!
az
Christianity doesn't subscribe to circumcision. that was one of the first major differences between the two religions.
it's not that mysterious really. - its history is well documented and (just insane that it's legal) I know a girl who just had her new born son's foreskin amputated and the only (idiotic) reason she gave was 'my brother and dad both had it done. That's the only reason I wanna do it' Can you imagine? What an idiot!
When you get right down to it most people are simple-minded and act like automatons in concert with upbringing more than in any thoughtful or critical way.
While I detest the practice of circumcising babies I refuse to poke at a mother that has to make this decision. As a mother you want your child to be as happy as possible, to fit in and have friends, to be accepted. When you live in a society where the vast majority of males are cut, where almost every picture of a penis you have seen has been circumcised, you can't help but worry your child will resent not having it done. You know he is going to feel odd about being different from everyone else, that children are mean and love to tease, that sometimes having a hang up about something to do with sex can really mess a person up. You also know that most males come through the procedure with no problems either physical or mental. I can see how, even if you thought it was a useless procedure, you might have it done just so your child would be considered "normal". The bottom line is that you are making a decision with potentially serious consequences for someone that can't make it for themselves, someone you love and desperately want to do the right thing for- and that can never be easy.
Also, as a man my definition of women was formed by the women around me while growing up. What ever characteristics they had, what ever tendencies they displayed, etc. that became what "Woman" was to me. Of course as I grew older and met more women that changed somewhat, but mostly it stayed the same. This is the way human intellect works, we set up definitions of what it means to be man or women good or bad, based on the experiences around us as our brains are developing. Then as we experience life we measure what we perceive against those first perceptions.
This is why your friend felt she needed to cut her son to match her father and brother, so he would fit in with her conception of a man. Once he fits her definition of a man she will know how to interact with him, what to expect of the worlds interaction with him, how to gauge his reactions to other things, etc. Its the brains way of categorizing the world, once it is neatly categorized everything becomes predictable. This is why we have such a natural aversion to things that do not fit into a category neatly- like homosexuals. This is a very very difficult instinct to rise above. We all practice it to some degree, even when we think we aren't.
In otherwords... God made a mistake when creating humans and now the Jewish belief has the correction....
Don't expect both sides of the story with this one.
It is so mindless to damage a child in the name of a belief. Jewish or not, it should be included as a crime, just as it is when the cultural traditions of Africans who do a similar exercise to thier women, in the name of a senseless belief. Just remember, your inhuman cultural belief, and because you may belong in the majority of those who make up the laws - in most cases - places this cultural group in a position to continue to harm and forever damage their young males. I was totally shocked when I first seen this exercise done. Please change this antiquated cultural practice so that no more young males are damaged in this way. This is just as stupid as what Russell Peters (the comedian) joked about, where cultures are affected because of senseless practices. He said an entire cultural group speak with a lisp, to this day, because their Ruler, at one time, spoke with a lisp. I could not pass this one by without adding a comment. It is too shocking and unbelievable, and to think, wine is toasted while it is being done, just adds to the the mindshock!
You are correct - WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AFRICA - an AIDS/HIV prevalent society. Is America an AIDS/HIV prevalent society? No they are not. It's also quite humorous you bring this up while ignoring the scientific studies conducted in America which show evidential contradicts to your position.
Don't cut foreskin, don't run it over! Let it live its life and then it gets older.
Sorry if this pops some corks, but I offer this theory in favor of circumcision: it makes for greater intelligence! Circumcision makes the mind more complicated, more sophisticated, smarter, as opposed to simple-minded.
It introduces more stimulation, sexual stimulation, into the neural core of the developing mind's neural networking, like in the brainstem, medula oblongata, the reticular activating system, and the hypothalamus, which Nature otherwise largely postpones until adolescence when the penis is so often erected and extending out of the isolation of the foreskin.
A more developed, more complicated core of a neural network leads to greater, richer, branching of the neural network as the infant grows. Sex is more deeply integrated into the core of the developing self.
It probably leads to deeper bonding with the mother who then often touches the sensitive parts of the exposed penis in changing diapers, bathing, etc.
If, as I am arguing, there is this benefit of increasing intelligence, it makes sense for parents to make this choice for their child. Then, arguably, it is morally defensible for Jews and Muslims to have been doing this for so long, and Americans generally since World War 2.
Getting hung up on the procedure itself, surgery involving some pain, blood and crying is missing the point. The argument that the baby never gets over the trauma is contradicted by history, but we now have the means with anesthetics to minimize or even eliminate such pain, which is probably the better way to go about it.
The discussion in the Bible about Abraham doing it, offers the notion that it will provide such advantage as to create a special people that will spread all over the earth.
The filmmaker apparently didn't consider such benefit, nor those he interviewed, nor those commenting here. Defenders' justifications have been either for health reasons or just because of Abraham's deal with the divine.
Speaking of popping some corks. My child is uncut with an IQ above 150, I am cut with an IQ above 150. I'm thinking genetics may play some small role in intelligence.
And the scientific basis for your claims, sir? Or are you simply making a plea to emotions as every single proponent of circumcision is reduced to (since there is literally no logically or morally valid argument in favor of it?)
As I tried to make clear in my reply to Earthwinger, my plea is to reason, not emotion. Your assertion of their being no logically or morally valid argument is squarely challenged by my offering a logical reason for circumcision actually improving the human condition by making men more thoughtful, mindful, intellectual, brainy.
Among the purposes of the foreskin is postponement of a male's sexual considerations until puberty when all that the individual has learned until that time is then to be applied to getting laid. Circumcision was intended as a civilizing improvement on that dynamic.
Link to a peer reviewed study, or it didn't happen. :P
Yes, in our culture peer reviewed literature is considered the only gate to being regarded as scientific, scientifically true.
There is some politics in the process. There is time delay before truths are recognized. Seems I may have to write up an article and go thru the submitting process, maybe jointly with someone with credentials. Altho I have studied neurology some, and have engaged in other neural theorizing I believe important, my degree is in electrical engineering.
Here I am appealing to reason and putting together what we already know from peer reviewed literature and text books about the human nervous system and networking theory generally. More stimulation early on causes more neural growth, more neural network interconnections. Can that be challenged?
Early sexual stimulations, added to the other sensations of the neonate and developing child, like sucking, swallowing, light, heat, touch, sound, one would conclude makes for a richer core of neural network interconnections which, in turn, leads to richer branching onward from the core. That is straightforward application of what we know about human neural networking.
The usual comeback is to argue the destructive effects and trauma. But that really does not address the points made here.
What you describe is at best a bit of a stretch, and the path of scientific history is littered with beautiful theories that were put together by forming a picture put together from "what is known about A, plus what is known about B, etc." which then all too often, were confounded by mother nature. I'm not going to hold my breath, waiting for your peer reviewed paper.
Male genitalia has evolved the way that it has, over many thousands of years, for very good reason - it has been optimized. And not only for the purposes of tempting the male to pro-create, but also to make the process easier, and more comfortable for the female. This is why more sexual lubricants are sold in the USA than anywhere else. Circumcised genitalia does not function as well as that which is fully intact.
It seems quite clear to me that widespread circumcision in the USA (mumbo jumbo aside) is nothing more than a cultural phenomenon, and as of this time, there is no good science that suggests any efficacy to the procedure whatsoever. On the other hand, there is anecdotal evidence from males who were circumcised after having reached sexual maturity, that sensitivity is reduced, leading to less pleasurable sex. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread though, males who were circumcised at birth will of course be blissfully unaware of this, as their only experience is of being circumcised. Unlike mature males who elected for this surgery, their choice was taken away from them at birth, so they don't know any better.
I bet the end of your dick is shaped like a mushroom talking like that!
az
So I guess you are OK with female circumsition as well?
Nero Holo said "So I guess you are OK with female circumsition as well? " That logic escapes me. I was defending removing the foreskin, not the penis, which allows the penis to get a lot of stimulation in infancy, like the early experience in the Garden of Eden.
The switch as HealingBear claims from 70 % sexual sensitivity from foreskin to 80% from penis tip glans still apparently makes sex for circumcized men pleasant enough that procreation happens enough, with the rest of the time spent studying prophets or profits. Probably less sexual pleasure is price paid for more smarts.
In regards to "Special Poeple" aren't there two religions that follow the ritual actually at "war" with each other? Yup I agree truly Special People
I would like to see the scientific research you obtained that supports your theory that cicumcision supports earlier brain development in boys and that "Sex is more deeply integrated into the core of the developing self." As a woman who has been around the block I can tell you that my circumcised partners suffered from premature ejaculation or no ejaculation at all (ever- which is a self esteem kill on both partner's side) and they they were much worse lovers. To get the stimulation they needed, they would just pound and pound my now partner who still has his forskin can take it slow and actually enjoy soft sex.
The head of the penis is massivley desensitized in circumcision, and this has been proven to me just by noticing the difference in stimulation a man with no forskin needs vs a man with a foreskin. I love my uncut boyfriend. And his beautiful foreskin.
plz learn more about history & biology knowledge is the greatest power in the universe. =)
You're reasoning is flawed......the foreskin contains 70%(ROUNDED) of the nerve endings on your penis. After it is removed the glans contains 80%(ROUNDED). If your reasoning is that greater sexual stimulation makes you smarter, by your own reasoning this makes us dumber by removing the majority of the nerve stimulus from the head of your penis. This barbaric and has been shown to make men more aggressive not smarter. Learn human anatomy before you make religious judgments about it.
ahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahh that must be why the average america is so smart. To bad the country is getting less intelligent not smarter. also as pointed out by many on this site and in the documentary its self, removing major nerve ending would reduce stimulation not increase it you retard. by your logic you should masturbate the child from a early age since that would give it much greater stimulation then removing the nerves which give the stimulation in the first place. also their is a difference from good stimulation(pleasure) and bad stimulation(pain).
I'm sorry, but until you can produce scientific correlation between a lack of foreskin and "better manners" as you're essentially positing, then you're just performing mental gymnastics in an effort to justify mutilating a helpless child. And that's just sick.
You're not making an argument from logic because there is no logic behind a single sentence you said. You are making a plea to emotion by CLAIMING an unproven (and flat out illogical) psychological benefit.
I'd be willing to bet money the only reason you defend circumcision is because you're a Jew or a Christian. The reason they came up with circumcision was NOT to help ANYONE, and that is flat out a lie. The way circumcision came about was through "holy inspiration" by "god" through Abraham as explained in Genesis 17. Which religion are you?
To be honest, I had a hard time clicking play on this one due to the subject matter. I had long believed that circumcision was a health issue, one that my parents had bought into, as neither are Jewish, and I wasn't even aware of the religious aspect of it till much later. After seeing, and cringing at this doc, it's no mystery to me why it is done so young. I am happy to report that I don't remember a thing about it, I saw wine being administered, and I'd like to say 'thanks' if I received the same consideration, although I'm sure there wasn't enough wine in France that day. Also, my circumcision happened long before I could throw a punch, no doubt a practice brought forth from ancient wisdom. I harbor no ill will to anyone on either side of this debate, and I am grateful that both sides were represented in this doc.
Nature has constructed certain things for a reason. The practice is completely unnecessary. All it takes, is to study a little anatomy, biology or physiology to understand the purpose and functionality of nature's design. By the way, to the guy below who talks about smegma, he should educate himself a little, before making ignorant comments. Smegma is dead skin cells, oils, and moisture, related to the same process our bodies shed dead skin cells, release oils, and sweat. This is the reason why we need to clean ourselves, wash our hair and take a shower. The dust in our houses is composed of shed dead skin cells. The other reason for the design, is to provide lubrication during sex, amongst other functions. Also, females have smegma! It is an accumulation of sweat, moisture and dead skin cells inside the vagina and around the clitoris. Once again, this is why we clean ourselves, which is what every human being must do, circumcised or uncircumcised, if they don't want to stink.
'Certain things'? Which certain things exactly? Or is it that nature has constructed everything it has for various reasons and we have been tinkering away with them for thousands of years? If so, why are we being bent out of shape about this one?
Because we get carried away, and fix things that aren't broken. Anyway, what is your argument? What do you want to talk about?
Which certain things? The penis.
Yes, we have tinkered with nature and nearly every example of it is a morally deplorable act when examined unbiasedly and logically. Why are we bent out of shape? Because we're talking about mutilating infants. Are you catching on yet? Why would I be willing to blindly bet half my net worth you are not?
@capriciouz
Apparently you have an inflated view of your intelligence and your 'net worth', don't ya? If you consider this mutilation, don't do it. At the meantime, leave those alone who think it has practical purpose to do it.
If it wasn't for us tinkering with nature, this conversation would not be taking place. Stop throwing the baby out with the bath water in your pseudo-intellectual attempt to defend your thinly disguised ideological point of view.
havent watched yet so sorry if this was brought up in this doc, but maybe two months ago on NPR they had a segment on a rabbi in ny,ny gave a child(s) herpes because the custom is for the rabbi to suck off the foreskin with there mouth after its cut??????????????????????????????????????????????????are you f--king kidding me WOW THATS RELIGION FOR YA
thats f--ked up.
Women in the USA do not like un cut men. They dont want any nasty smegma... Most women wont even date a guy uncut... Guess go to Europe lol...
If so many men are cut in the USA, then what are the women basing that judgement on? Sounds to me like nothing more than a cultural influence. It was interesting to note that a woman in the film said that sex with an uncut man was better, as the penis had a piston type action, which mother nature intended, rather than just having something jabbed into them.
As for hygiene, I'm assuming that most men would have the common decency to give themselves a little courtesy rinse before sex, whether they're cut or not.
one of the stupidest thing ive ever herd. you do know that un cut men can pull the foreskin back and make it look cut.
From yor comment I can tell that you never looked closely at a vagina, practically all parts are inside! So why don't we cut women.
Re: Smegma just as women do wash their vagina, please wash your Pipi
I have never had a woman in north america make a statement of me bing INTACT aux contraire.
If you have been MUTULATED, you will never knbow what you are missing!
From your comment I take it that you never looked closely at a vagina, 90%+ parts are inside, so why don’t we cut women and pry back (somehow) the labia minora
Women do wash their vaginas, hence an European invention is the bidet.
I have yet to have a north American woman make a comment about my INTACT penis if they do it is rather nice and erotic.
If you were mutilated without your consent, you have no idea what you are missing out on.
To me this is barbaric
I am dying...please tell us what we're missing. I have always thought I was missing something, but I didn't think that would a foreskin. But you have my curiosity piqued.
@ Clix, for some reason I'm unable to reply directly to your post.
"I am dying...please tell us what we're missing. I have always thought I was missing something, but I didn't think that would a foreskin. But you have my curiosity piqued."
Your question is answered in the documentary, but it's a bit of a no-brainer really. The tissue that is removed has a great number of very sensitive nerve endings, so if it's removed, then there's less sensitivity than there would otherwise be. One man interviewed on the docu. has a circumcision performed as an adult, so he was able to compare sex both before and after being cut. He was quite clear in his opinion that sex after being cut was less pleasurable than before. Of course, if you were circumcised as a child, then you're not in a position to know how much better sex could have been if you'd been left intact.
i can guarantee you buddy..... do it good well and they won't care or remember if extra skin was there.. and smegma is there only if you are 11 and havent showered for 3 days...
Jack, if you are having women turn you down for dates, *and* you are uncircumcised, you might be trying to correlate two unrelated bits of data.
My data is purely anecdotal:
--I'm an American woman.
--I don't do a 'penis check' before going out on dates.
--I will have sex with an uncircumcised man.
--I will have sex with a circumcised man.
--The cleanest man I ever knew was uncircumcised. He was fastidious about his personal hygiene. Mmmmm he smelled good! Everywhere!
As stated below, if you know how to use what you've got, the woman will get pleasure.
I leave it to you men to decide what you may or may not be missing from your own experience.
where you hear that? the same chick who told you size didnt matter?
Sorry to inform you Jack but, I haven't had any issues getting women. In fact very few women I have been with ever noticed, as when you are erect it all looks the same. The few women I have been serious with that spent enough time with me that they did notice didn't mind at all. I got tons of teasing from other guys in high school but, I ended up being fairly popular with the ladies. I always wondered why guys were so consumed with their penis any way, they study every possible variation and bump. If they would spend half as much time figuring out the vagina, they would know how to please a women. And trust me, as long as your women is pleased sexually you will be as well- circumcised or not.
I'm a woman born and raised in the USA and I prefer uncut men. I won't date ignorant men who make dumb, broad generalizations, though.
Circumcission reduce HIV transmission by 60%. This was mentioned by Center-of-Disease-Control (CDC). -I think this is why circumcission existed in the first place... to combat STD (but of course maybe it is not relevant now).
Dude, it's a jew thing and nothing more.
Most people have no idea, but Muslims also are commanded in the Quran to circumcise the boys upon birth, so it is not just a Jewish thing. What most people also don't know is that Islam is almost 99% identical to Judaism, almost verbatim, line by line Old Testament and the Quran tally. As far as I am concerned, both religions are such a burden on humanity, and so is Christianity, which was invented by Paul (Jesus was a circumcised Jew and had nothing to do with Christianity at all.) I wish the world would just grow up and get rid of those Bedouin-based mythological religions and let humanity for a change live in peace!
No, actually circumcison has been around for MUCH LONGER than Judaism.
could be aids is worse in third world countries where they are not mutilated no argument 86 just a thought
Or it could just be because they've been very heavily influenced by the catholic church, and told that using condoms is sinful. Combine that with poverty which leads many women into prostitution, and you have a perfect storm.
Just sayin'
oh yes totally true that was my point to his 60% reduction in aids if cut which means western rich win again makes me sad to be American oh ya there is a cure for aids google cure for aids go to videos watch the one with a black guy seated talking at a microphone he will give you the web site and such i went right to it credited to an Israeli something to do with crystals easy to get to
I don't believe there is any good science to back that claim up at all. It was certainly refuted by clinicians in the documentary. One of the points made in the film was that each time one of these sorts of health claims is proven wrong, the pro-circumcision people just move on to make a different bogus claim about it.
All very sad.
There are a lot of voices posting here about the evils of circumcision, and a lot of the remarks are true and right. I'd just like to add my own opinion -
Personally, I'm glad my parents (evangelical Christian, whereas I am agnostic in the Robert Anton Wilson sense of the term) decided to have me circumcised. The doctor who performed the procedure did a very good job and I'm very happy with the result. There was no reduction in size, hygiene is easy and sex is long lasting and pleasurable. Also, my partner prefers it this way.
However, a caveat: I do realize that a positive outcome is not the rule for this procedure, and I too agree that it is barbaric and abusive. I would not do it for my own children. I think that at best it ought to be elective for adults, just like sex changes and body modifications.
There are people out there who like their circumcision, but that doesn't mean it should be done to children.
how do you know you like it better if its all you've ever known?
To be fair, Brandon didn't say that he "liked it better" just that he was happy with the result. He also then goes on to agree with some of the concerns that those of us opposed to circumcision, have expressed. I'm of the opinion that Brandon's position on this is a well thought out, and reasonable one.
@Earthwinger
Why wouldn't he be happy if its all he has known, he has nothing to compare it to. that's like someone born blind saying h its not so bad i dont mind it.
"babies boys are born perfect as they are, no dis-assembly required"
All circumcision of helpless infants and children should be outlawed. Do whatever you wish to yourself but chopping off part of someone elses genitals is wrong on so many levels its hard to see how it's even legal. And morally indefensible/
Thank you for making this doc. many of my Jewish friends have chosen not to do this. And the numbers of Americans doing it to their children has also dropped dramatically in recent years. 80% of males on the planet are intact. So should we all be, except those who chose to do it to themselves once they're old enough.
Here is a little TMI, my mom elected not to have the procedure done on her children. It never has caused any health issues for me or my brothers, just a lot of teasing when I was in high school. You know how it is, you date girls and they talk. Besides you have to dress out for gym and shower after football practice- its impossible to hide it. Boy did I catch a lot of grief over it. I didn't know at the time that I would have fit in perfectly in Europe and many other places around the world, I thought everyone got circumcised. I didn't find out until years and years later that it was a religious practice that really served no logical or utilitarian function. I have always thought for people that live in the jungle or something and cannot bath regularly it might make sense, just for hygienic purposes I mean. But for those of us that live in a modern society and practice regular hygiene I can't see any benefit. Thanks mom, you made the right choice.
Circumcision = Male Genital Mutilation.
I so wish that I had more information when my son was born, I would not have had him circumcised and feel very bad that I agreed to it. :(
I remember being very torn about it and not wanting to do it, of course my husband at the time assured me that it was natural as he is circumcised and the doctor told me of health benefits (he also happened to be Jewish).
I can't watch anymore of this documentary as the guilt is too much.....
I feel for you and the choice you made for your son. Religion once again is responsible for this atrocity!
az
Dianne, Stop the guilt thing, it's not necessary. I grew up just fine minus one foreskin, but plus two loving parents, I feel like I'm way ahead of the game.
I haven't seen the doc.but I'v read a lot here and so far no one has said where circumcision came from.If you look back in history you will see that It was a right of passage for Egyptian boys between the age of 10 to 12 to undergo circumcision for the Transition into manhood,long be for Jews or Mohammedans were ever though of.More Religion, It's all Bull.
From the men I'v known ,that have not been Mutilated,
they say ,they have more cessation on the head of there
junk.After 62 years, I believe what they say.I would never do it to my son.It should be stopped.
As i wrote on an other doc on circumcision:
I always wondered what exactly circumcision originally meant in the bible, was it a practice to cut the penis skin or just a way of being circumcicle energetically. One more thing that perhaps was edited from the original words and came to fit a popular Jewish practice.
az
In the doc, a historian said that it became part of the Rabbinic tradition after the Jewish people returned from Babylon around 500 BCE (iirc).
The explanation he gave (forgive if I'm missing anything here) was that they needed to consolidate their tribes and ensure that they would not lose followers. Therefore they incorporated this practice into the religious teachings: The fathers sacrificing their most precious possession, their sons (who represent their future offspring), would be unlikely to turn away from the rabbis.
The filmmaker's father said at the end that Judaism has a strong culture of "fathers sacrificing their sons." I found that comment to be rather sad. A self-inflicted generational wound that has gone on for so many years it can never be healed.
I am so against circumcision that i won't watch this doc. Pisses me off just thinking about it!
I was once walking in a very remote part of Ghana, came to a lady on her way to a doctor (hours to walk still) with a baby wrapped in a blanket, the boy had had a circumcision done and it was now infected.
Just the thought of that, makes me want to cry as i did then.
az
I couldn't bear to watch the actual scenes of the circumcisions, it was bad enough just hearing the babies cries. No doubt they'll not remember the experience, but even so....I can't imagine many people willingly exposing a newborn puppy or kitten to that sort of trauma, without first giving them an anaesthetic, so why they think it's ok to do it to a newborn baby is just beyond me.
I've no problem with people wanting to mutilate themselves to appease the tooth fairy or whatever, just so long as they're old enough to make an informed decision about it. But for a parent to take away their childs rights over their own body, and mutilate them unnecessarily, when their responsibility is to protect them from harm, is either ignorant, or just plain old barbaric IMO.
In europe, male circumcision is not so common as it is in USA. Let boys be boys, for atheisms sake! :D