Penn & Teller on Circumcision (NSFW)

[Todeswind]

Come to think of it I'm pretty sure I remember a kid who used to get bullied pretty badly for having an uncut penis. It never went further than name calling but they seriously fucked with that kid's head. The locker room is intimidating enough to begin with.

[LaCroix]

Come to think of it I'm pretty sure I remember a kid who used to get bullied pretty badly for having an uncut penis. It never went further than name calling but they seriously fucked with that kid's head. The locker room is intimidating enough to begin with.

The very same will happen if his junk is either smaller of bigger than his classmates'. Is there routine reduction/extension surgery for that?

I seriously have to laugh when somebody brings the locker room up. My usual response is in the lines of "You are seriously basing your decision on the fact that his bits will be ogled and he might look at other people's dicks? You expect this to become a past-time of him or what?" The usual response to this is a blushing stammer.

[GreylockDS2]

just to bring something to the table , a question is cutting of the foreskin enough reason to gamble with your kids life. It is a surgery like any other and death can be a possible outcome. To hijack the locker room analogy for a moment i would much rather have my kid be picked on , then not have him alive to be picked on. Don''t be-leave it can happen , here are some links

http://www.circumstitions.com/death.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/b ... zFo5peoIgQ
http://www.cirp.org/library/death/

It may seem cold of me , but these deaths are based on choice , a choice of the parent and of the doctor... there is one person who was never consulted , the kid ... You could defend by saying well your kid could die by crossing the street , and i would say yes its true , but you have to cross the street to live your life . Where you don't need to cut a piece of your pecker off to live your life .

[DudeGuyMan]

Circumcized at birth and don't care. This looks like an issue for people who want to be morally outraged at something but couldn't think of anything good for some reason. It's a weird cultural quirk that will die out, or not, or whatever.

[Todeswind]

In fairness it is a reasonable analogue to the female general circumcision that happens in Africa and the Middle east, and done for much the same reasons historically. Taking a knife to your child's generals really does deserve discussion.

[Spoonist]

Circumcized at birth and don't care. This looks like an issue for people who want to be morally outraged at something but couldn't think of anything good for some reason. It's a weird cultural quirk that will die out, or not, or whatever.

This attitude I just don't get. It's worse than the religiously motivated one.
I can understand the "I don't care" bit, but why the denialism of trying to diminish the issue? Is it some sort of weird projection of castration anxiety? Is this some other latent part of misdirected machismo that I don't get?
Did you even bother to look into the issue before dismissing it as a mere 'moral outrage'?

[PeZook]

This attitude I just don't get. It's worse than the religiously motivated one.
I can understand the "I don't care" bit, but why the denialism of trying to diminish the issue? Is it some sort of weird projection of castration anxiety? Is this some other latent part of misdirected machismo that I don't get?
Did you even bother to look into the issue before dismissing it as a mere 'moral outrage'?

It's exactly like people who go "I was spanked all the time and I turned out okay, what's with all the goddamned drama?"

Cultural quirk indeed.

[GreylockDS2]

In fairness it is a reasonable analogue to the female general circumcision that happens in Africa and the Middle east, and done for much the same reasons historically. Taking a knife to your child's generals really does deserve discussion.

What they do to girls is more like castration than snipping the foreskin.

I'm not ok with either, but the female version is MUCH worse.

From what i understand this is not necessarily true most of the time, and that the majority of female gentile mutilations are very similar to male circumcision (i wont call it mutilation here because people get sensitive to that). the form of female Circumcision where tribal leaders hack away at the genitals leaving little behind is the least common .. and if we are just talking about Clitorectomy or Infibulation i would agree with you , you cant compare that at all to what is done to males. It is pure barbarism , no excuse .. and nuttery, but there is also two other types actually the most common types that are still female circumcision ..

the most mild form of female circumcision is the pricking method where, the clitoris is pricked or scraped with the tip of a knife, I be leave this practice is most commonly done in Indonesia. A pricking method is becoming more common for Jewish boys. With the idea that their parents want a "bris" without putting their child in the most pain he has ever experienced.

The next and most common type is the removal of the female prepuce. This type of circumcision can include the labia or clitoral hood. These parts have a similar function as the male foreskin. The purpose of this flesh in both genders is to cover the glans. For the girl this is the clitoral glans, for the boy this is the head of his penis. Now the results of either form of circumcision is also similar , it drys out those regions and leaves them calloused.

I don't know about you but in the cases which are the most commonly done to girls I can compare them quite well ... I know you said you don't agree with either , but i figured i may give a bit more information on the subject.

[Todeswind]

Circumcized at birth and don't care. This looks like an issue for people who want to be morally outraged at something but couldn't think of anything good for some reason. It's a weird cultural quirk that will die out, or not, or whatever.

This attitude I just don't get. It's worse than the religiously motivated one.
I can understand the "I don't care" bit, but why the denialism of trying to diminish the issue? Is it some sort of weird projection of castration anxiety? Is this some other latent part of misdirected machismo that I don't get?
Did you even bother to look into the issue before dismissing it as a mere 'moral outrage'?

People don't like to think of themselves as being abused or mutilated. If the cultural standard is to do something wholly illogical most people will chose to perpetuate the illogical action rather than acting out against the group, even if the action is something that would be morally repugnant out of context.

You're trying to tell somebody that a body modification done to the VAST majority of privileged american males is an act of barbarism. Because the procedure is so sterile and practiced largely in the more "civilized" (America and Canada) parts of the world people assume that it must be both normal and progressive.

[DudeGuyMan]

Yeah I'm over here in denial of my horrible mutilation because priveliged american males blah blah blah etcetera. Totally. Cluebat, I don't care that it was snipped, I wouldn't care if it hadn't been, and ultimately I'm just not prepared to lose my shit because OMG "knife" and "genitals" turned up in the same sentence. It doesn't seem to really hurt anything so whatever.

[PeZook]

Yeah I'm over here in denial of my horrible mutilation because priveliged american males blah blah blah etcetera. Totally. Cluebat, I don't care that it was snipped, I wouldn't care if it hadn't been, and ultimately I'm just not prepared to lose my shit because OMG "knife" and "genitals" turned up in the same sentence. It doesn't seem to really hurt anything so whatever.

Actually, it kills a number of babies yearly due to complications, has no medical benefits, and ending it wouldn't put any burden or cost whatsoever on existing institutions.

Are there more important issues? Hell yeah. Does this mean people shouldn't point out circumcision is bullshit and has to end? Why? Is there a finite amount of outrage, so we should only care about the grand and sweeping problems, and ignore the small ones?

[Spoonist]

Yeah I'm over here in denial of my horrible mutilation because priveliged american males blah blah blah etcetera. Totally. Cluebat, I don't care that it was snipped, I wouldn't care if it hadn't been, and ultimately I'm just not prepared to lose my shit because OMG "knife" and "genitals" turned up in the same sentence. It doesn't seem to really hurt anything so whatever.

Meeeep. Wrong. It hurts like hell, that is why they use so much anaesthetic that they kill at least one baby a year from that alone. You see the parents who are just as willfully ignorant as you get a wee chock that their baby will be in constant pain for days. Leading to practicioners overdosing the anaesthesia for the stupid parents sake. Worse if its the old judean tradition of dipping the post-cut baby's penis in wine, (sometimes in the rabbi's mouth) which gives a new soaring burning sensation. etc
It hurts, in the pain sense, in the medical sense, in the morality sense and of course for those with botched jobs it hurts for the rests of their lives - whether you lost functionality

So thank you for confirming that you didn't read up on the issue before going machismo on it. Again your attitude is uninformed and lazy - but still you think that your opinion should count as much as those who have read up on the topic, why? What's with the projection?

To top off PeZook's comments. I'd say that you should wait another 20 years so that you can experience the most common side effect of male circ - penile disfunction or impotence. You see the desensitivity that so many appreciate in their youth becomes a not so fun disability with age. But there are blue pills for that so you don't need to worry too much.

[DudeGuyMan]

Has that speech ever successfully lured a girl back to bed after she said your dick looked gross and bailed out?

[PeZook]

Has that speech ever successfully lured a girl back to bed after she said your dick looked gross and bailed out?

Really? LOL girls won't sleep with you haha?

[DudeGuyMan]

I didn't get that vibe until Spoonist's last post, but yeah, that's not just a generic jibe, that's legitimately the sense I get.

To top off PeZook's comments. I'd say that you should wait another 20 years so that you can experience the most common side effect of male circ - penile disfunction or impotence. You see the desensitivity that so many appreciate in their youth becomes a not so fun disability with age. But there are blue pills for that so you don't need to worry too much.

This isn't some shit he objects to in the sort of impersonal way people object to assholes in Africa hacking off clits or something. This dude has a chip on his shoulder, but it's not the "I'm circumcized yet I wish I were not!" chip, and that really narrows it down.

[PeZook]

He's making a rather specific statement that circumcision leads to impotence and erectile dysfunction, you dismiss it with a personal jab and now throw in some armchair psychology to boot. How about you stop, mmkay?

[gigabytelord]

I got chopped and I have issues because of it, as a result I will never allow my son, if/when I have one, to be circumcised, for any reason.

So I agree whole heartily with stopping this procedure from taking place, as it has been proven dangerous, and have to have long term detrimental effects.

[Akhlut]

Yeah I'm over here in denial of my horrible mutilation because priveliged american males blah blah blah etcetera. Totally. Cluebat, I don't care that it was snipped, I wouldn't care if it hadn't been, and ultimately I'm just not prepared to lose my shit because OMG "knife" and "genitals" turned up in the same sentence. It doesn't seem to really hurt anything so whatever.

So, are you totally okay with female circumcision too? I mean, there's no reason to get outraged over that, either, as most women with such circumcisions can still experience orgasms and the side-effects are only as dangerous as they are for male circumcision!

Plus, it's not like we're dealing with issues of bodily integrity here, either. I mean, people getting upset because they never had a choice on whether or not they would receive surgery on their genitals? Really? Who would be upset over that! Especially since it started solely because some crank in the 19th century thought it would reduce masturbatory urges in young boys and was continued solely due to cultural inertia.

[Spoonist]

This is rich.

Hey, DudeGuyMan, lets look back and see the context, GreylockDS2 posted that babies die from this every year needlessly. To which you respond "This looks like an issue for people who want to be morally outraged at something but couldn't think of anything good for some reason."
In that context you have a problem with me pointing out that you are uninformed and have an attitude problem? Plus showing complete ignorance on cause and effect of male circ to the point of taking such facts personally?

Get over yourself - your self esteem issues you can handle somewhere else.

[Spoonist]

This dude has a chip on his shoulder, but it's not the "I'm circumcized yet I wish I were not!" chip, and that really narrows it down.

Or this could be a site that caters to the whole world, including the civilized parts where this sort of thing is frowned upon? Note how much the map below corresponds to fundieland.

[Hillary]

Yeah I'm over here in denial of my horrible mutilation because priveliged american males blah blah blah etcetera. Totally. Cluebat, I don't care that it was snipped, I wouldn't care if it hadn't been, and ultimately I'm just not prepared to lose my shit because OMG "knife" and "genitals" turned up in the same sentence. It doesn't seem to really hurt anything so whatever.

Do you actually have anything other than personal anecdote to back up your argument that circumcision is no big deal? Others have posted about the problems it can cause, both at the time and in later life. If you disagree with what they have said, challenge them with evidence to support it. Otherwise explain why it doesn't matter or concede.

[edaw1982]

Apparantly circumcision was touted for 'cleanliness' reasons, when what the Church really meant was 'We don't want filthy little boys to wank'.
For Jews, and Muslims I suppose it make some weird sense when you've got a shitload of sand and not so much water to wash with, but in America it's like lopping off a doberman's tail or cropping their ears.
It's all about appearances.

I bet those women who are all up for lopping off the foreskin wouldn't be so happy about it if female circumcision were 'The Norm' in America as much as it is for male circumcision.

[Justforfun000]

I have done extensive research on the subject. I had no biased opinion one way or the other originally to be honest..but as a gay male I eventually came into contact with intact people. Over the years I not only have discovered that I GREATLY prefer uncut, but I am also very unhappy that I was circumcised. I think it looks much better, I think the whole feel and integrity of the foreskin is very desirable and it's about the only "fetish" I have in the sexual world. It might even be more accurate to just call it a preference..

I have in the past posted here compelling clinical evidence that shows definite erogenous and tactile sensations, some of them unique on the penis such as Meisner's corpuscles and the ridged bands. Even the frenulum is usually completely removed when you are circumcised as an infant, and I've been told repeatedly by all that possess it that it's the most pleasurable bit!

More compellingly..there are many people who have had the procedure done as an adult and say there is a great DEAL of difference in terms of sensitivity and a variety of special sensations were lost. They tell me I'm lucky I don't know what I lost, they live with the memory of what it was like before. The only times I have ever heard much to the contrary were guys that had an issue with phimosis or frenulum tearing which was interfering with function. They preferred being circumcised, but of course they were trying to use something with functional problems. Not truly a fair comparison ground either.

So all in all, the point here is that it's my body, and I was forcibly mutilated on for absolutely no good medical reason. At the time, I had a Jewish doctor and my mother was simply told it was "cleaner". My father is uncircumcised for Christ's sake and you can imagine how I've lambasted him for not stepping in and saying what's good enough for him...Ah well. i try not to be too bitter, but it's not something you can reverse in absolute truth. I know you can "restore", but at best it's the natural equivalent of skin grafting by stretching what's left. You'll never get back the original, unaltered sensation, the esthetic look the natural way it covers and retracts the glans with a convenient zipper-like function.

The penis head (glans) is designed to be protected and moisturized in the identical way the the eyeball is. It's a mucuous membrane. It isn't just another appendage like your finger or toe and the foreskin is not just a "flap of skin".

How we can still know all this... have people vehemently coming forward and decrying this being done without their consent, babies actually being sexually destroyed by botching of the procedure...all in the name of religion or foolish ideas of hygiene or cultural tradition.

I don't care if foreskin removal protected you from SEVENTY-FIVE% of getting an STD like HIV. Isn't 1 in 4 significant enough to worry about? Condom use and/or medical reduction of viral load to undetectable brings the risk down to a damn near 100%. What possible reason could there be in pushing a mutilating operation that has an extremely minimal at best protective effect? What kind of relevance is that for an argument? In every single example of someone getting circumsized for this reason, do they ever say "Now this means you don't need a condom. Congratulations". No! Of course not. Every single one of those people getting cut will still be told to wrap it up. So they have lost their intactiveness and the sensations of the foreskin for life based on an (as yet to be definitely proved ) easier risk of catching HIV in some way that was risky..PRESUMABLY without a condom. Big fucking whoop.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nope. It's like "So this circumcision will protect me??"

(Circ pusher) - "It offers a degree of protection. Yes"

"So I no longer need to use condoms, yes?"

(Circ pusher) - "Oh no, you still need condoms at ALL times. The degree of protection isn't very high"

"Umm...so the condoms offer great protection, yes?"

(Circ pusher) - "Oh yes. Extremely high level of protection. Very rarely fail when used consistently"

"Ok..so how much extra protection will this give me if I circumcise?"

(circ pusher) - "We have no hard data, but meta-analysis studies show cicumcised people are less likely to have HIV"

"Was it a huge difference?"

(circ pusher) "Well...no..in fact it's barely statistically significant and many have criticised the studies as selectional bias, poor controls...but still..we recommend it. Every little bit helps"

"So the operation leaves me with less of a penis, possible risks of infection and loss of sensitivity, absolutely no license whatsoever to have sex without a condom anyway in a sexual encounter that is not monogamous and evaluated as HIV negative between the two of us....What is the reason I'm doing this for"?

(circ pusher) - "Extra protection!"

-------------------------------------------

Yeah, i think it's time for this bit of nonsense to start being called out for the barbarism and irrelevance that it truly is. IF you have a medical issue that circumcision relieves, then by all bloody means, go for it! But there are billions of people in this world that are intact and I'm sure that if any of these dick issues requiring circumcision were even remotely common, it would have caught on all over the world. It's extremely localized within religious ceremonies and certain cultural groups in the main. North America turned it into a common fad thanks to idiots like Dr. Kellogg.

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Changing immigration patterns may influence the trend in the U.S. The largest growing group, Latinos, are almost never circumcised (thank goodness!) I saw an article recently, though I don't recall where, in which some U.S. health official was shocked at the lack of circumcision in Latino men, and wanted to start a campaign to make circumcision the new standard for Latin men. This may have been a few years ago that it was proposed, and nothing became of it that I'm aware of, but it does begin to show Broomstick's point about the attitudes prevailing in the U.S. Some of the more extreme churches favored circumcision as a deterrent to masturbation and recommended it to young men if they were considered too horny (my church, actually, though once again, I was lucky to evade any actual mutilation). They should have just stuck with Graham crackers, which are about as effective and tastier too. As for women, some women actually prefer uncircumcised men now. But I have no idea what sort of statistics there are regarding the prevalence of ether preference. I would imagine that outside of quirky ethnic or religious subcultures that fixate on things like that, that most modern women don't really care.

[Broomstick]

What I find bleakly amusing are the rednecks I know who won't get their male dogs neutered due to too much empathy (and projection) with their dogs' testicles, but insist on getting their sons' foreskins lopped off. When you step back and look at it you go WTF?