The doctor doing the circumcision says the pay is  crap but he gets a lot of tips ????

Alex Shteynshlyuger, director of urology at New York Urology Specialists. A 2016 study confirmed this, finding that men who were circumcised experienced the same level of sexual pleasure as men who were not.31 Jan 2023

 

https://www.menshealth.com/health/a21287604/circumcision-sex-penises/

1 minute ago, bignok said:

What the studies show. You cannot accept the truth.

 

"They analyzed 29 studies that dealt with circumcision in various countries around the world. The data came from various countries in North America, Europe, Australia, Asia and Africa."

 

https://www.dr-kuehhas.at/en/women-prefer-circumcised-men/#:~:text=The authors found that the,found circumcised men more attractive.

 

The truth??

  Look,  if I had ever experienced any such anti foreskin sentiment or indeed found the possession of my foreskin in anyway a hindrance to sexual encounters with women I would have had it removed years ago  But that has never been the case and I have never heard of anybody else ever who has felt the need to do so.

 

If you are happy with being "less than complete" and it works for you that's fine but it does not give you the right to advocate the "procedure" being inflicted on non consenting children 

Am I right or wrong ?

3 minutes ago, bignok said:

Alex Shteynshlyuger, director of urology at New York Urology Specialists. A 2016 study confirmed this, finding that men who were circumcised experienced the same level of sexual pleasure as men who were not.31 Jan 2023

 

https://www.menshealth.com/health/a21287604/circumcision-sex-penises/

From your article.....

 

"And some guys still do think that their sexual partners prefer circumcised penises to uncircumcised ones. But when it comes down to it, that's probably not the case".

3 minutes ago, bignok said:

Alex Shteynshlyuger, director of urology at New York Urology Specialists. A 2016 study confirmed this, finding that men who were circumcised experienced the same level of sexual pleasure as men who were not.31 Jan 2023

 

https://www.menshealth.com/health/a21287604/circumcision-sex-penises/

Must be true then I'm surprised a study was even considered necessary

15 minutes ago, scorecard said:

Why would they? Also, do Japanese and  Korean girls demand an inspection before going home?

Do they ssume that boys/men who are cut personally made the decision to have it cut?

 

Circumcisum is still practced widely for nwborn boys in many countries, meaning that hundreds of boys are cut every day.

 

Additionally muslim boys are required by their religions to be cut and 99% are cut just after birth.

 

That's probably only because it's more difficult to do before birth

2 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

Go find for yourself I have pulled dozens. I didn't have a choice and don't miss it or remember the trauma of it.  My nephews generation not so. It is their choice now

Women really don't care, most are ambivalent,

1 minute ago, n00dle said:

what tempest in a teapot. Many on this site should give other mens cocks less consideration,

You are probably right, but its not the cocks its the unconsented mutilation of them that is winding me up. However enough is enough I've got stuff to do, ....after I've washed my filthy foreskin of course, and offered my apologies to the missis and any other women who I've made to feel nauseous over the past 40+ years

I was born in USA and almost all were circumsized at birth or soon after back in the late 40s as well as having tonsils removed.

47 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

Women really don't care, most are ambivalent,

It's not only women and I think people have preferences often linked to what they're used to. Also fetishes.

I would pay a lot of money NOT to have my foreskin restored.

9 hours ago, scorecard said:

I have wonderful / extreme pleasure from sex and from masturbation.

OK.  But it is less than if you weren't cut.

 

9 hours ago, scorecard said:

I have no concerns that being cut has damaged my sex pleasures.

Good for you, but it has.

 

????‍♂️

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It's totally OK for parents to make this decision either way for baby boys.

Absolutely not.

 

If there is not a severe medical condition at play, parents (and doctors) should absolutely not be given the right to remove parts of a child that cannot consent to it.

 

Infants don't have a religion.

 

It is irreversible mutilation of a non-consenting human, plain and simple.

13 minutes ago, JeffersLos said:

Absolutely not.

 

If there is not a severe medical condition at play, parents (and doctors) should absolutely not be given the right to remove parts of a child that cannot consent to it.

 

Infants don't have a religion.

 

It is irreversible mutilation of a non-consenting human, plain and simple.

Parents have every right to make medical decisions for their children. How far do you want to take such inanity? Not giving a child a vaccine because the child might grow up to be an anti-vax conspiracy nutter? Come on man. Get real. 

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Parents have every right to make medical decisions for their children. How far do you want to take such inanity? Not giving a child a vaccine because the child might grow up to be an anti-vax conspiracy nutter? Come on man. Get real. 

It is not a medical decision.

That is a smokescreen.

 

It is a religious practice, and that is the reason it still exists.

I don't have any problem with people advocating against circumcision if that's their opinion.

But it's this totally ridiculous exaggeration and extremism about the issue that just seems completely out of proportion to what male circumcision really is. 

Just now, JimmyJ said:

It is not a medical decision.

That is a smokescreen.

 

It is a religious practice, and that is the reason it still exists.

The story here is about Muslims.

Yes Jews and Muslims do it for religious reasons. 

Tribal cultures do it probably for religious or quasi religious (cultural) reasons.

But the generation of Americans that I'm part of was overwhelmingly circumcised and only a tiny percentage of them are Jews or Muslims.

It has been promoted in Africa for health reasons.

So you're objectively WRONG.

"New YorkCNN — 

Two more infants have contracted the herpes virus after undergoing an ultra-Orthodox Jewish type of circumcision, which has been linked to the spread of the potentially deadly virus to newborn boys, according to the New York City Health Department."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2013/04/07/health/new-york-neonatal-herpes/index.html

2 hours ago, bignok said:

Based on what reasons?

Common sense.

2 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

"New YorkCNN — 

Two more infants have contracted the herpes virus after undergoing an ultra-Orthodox Jewish type of circumcision, which has been linked to the spread of the potentially deadly virus to newborn boys, according to the New York City Health Department."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2013/04/07/health/new-york-neonatal-herpes/index.html

You're getting into a loaded tangential issue there.

Personally I think religious circumcisions need to have public health oversight.

"Religious liberty" extremists (who have the power now in the US) think differently. 

But that really isn't about circumcision per se which is very very safe as a medical procedure.

Just now, quake said:

He killed himself in the end.

Way to go, idiot doctors. 

So make public policy for the entire world to change based on rare cases of f--- ups? That's massively stupid.

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

So make public policy for the entire world to change based on rare cases of f--- ups? That's massively stupid.

If people left the kids alone.

this sort of thing would not happen.

2 minutes ago, quake said:

If people left the kids alone.

this sort of thing would not happen.

There are benefits of circumcision so it's a choice parents have every right to make. You're not going to change that except perhaps in some Northern European countries whose motivations to try to ban circumcision is rooted in religious intolerance.

15 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

The story here is about Muslims.

Yes Jews and Muslims do it for religious reasons. 

Tribal cultures do it probably for religious or quasi religious (cultural) reasons.

But the generation of Americans that I'm part of was overwhelmingly circumcised and only a tiny percentage of them are Jews or Muslims.

It has been promoted in Africa for health reasons.

So you're objectively WRONG.

 The generation of Americans you refer to were also snipped due to religious reasons in many cases , It was alleged to discourage masturbation, that obviously has its roots in religion,  Quakers, Puritans etc

  it wasn't only a cleanliness issue that was just another excuse the god botherers came up with to validate their real reason

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

There are benefits of circumcision so it's a choice parents have every right to make. 

No

I don't think any parent has the right to sanction child abuse on there children.

As for the rest of the world.

Hey religious nuts,  leave those kids alone.

 

 

The reason for this barbaric and backward procedure is to reduce sexual pleasure for males. 

 

Religions use it to try to control the sexual behaviour of men in their society.

 

They want to take pleasure out of sex and masturbarion as they believe it is a sin. 

 

I have no problem with them wanting to do it to concenting adults, but to do it to babies is clearly child abuse. 

 

Any man here who is intact wish to get the operation?  I don't think so.

 

Those that are circumcised might want to ask themselves why that is. The reason is it takes away sensation and pleasure.  

 

As for being cleaner that is a dumb argument. If a guy is washing and showering, it will be as clean as the rest of him.  

 

Also  women do not prefer it.  The only women who prefer it are those from cultures where all the men are cut. That is all they know and they think that is what it is normal to look, feel like. 

 

Ask women from countries where men are not cut and they will tell you the don't prefer circumcised guys. 

 

 

10 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

I am surprised at your stance on this issue...most out of character for you. 

I had the same thought when I saw this comment last night.  He's all over the liberal, progressive LGBT stuff, so it seems a little "off-brand" to say that parents should be able to circumcise their children without their consent.

 

I was going to comment that he's likely cut and therefore cannot allow himself to accept that there is anything wrong with it, then I saw today that he is indeed cut.  His behaviour even fits into the pattern of cognitive dissonance with actually hating the foreskin and saying how dirty it is, even though there is no truth to that.

 

I guess the pro LGBT stuff is simply because he is LGBT and therefore he supports it, but he is also cut, so suddenly progressivism and the rights of the individual go out of the window.  People are sadly very prone to bias and irrationality, only really thinking of themselves.

 

You would think that his angle would be that anyone should be able to choose to be circumcised if they want, but no one should be circumcised without their informed consent.  But he goes for the exact opposite, likely due to his own trauma related to being cut. ????‍♂️

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

There are benefits of circumcision

This is simply not true.

12 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

 The generation of Americans you refer to were also snipped due to religious reasons in many cases , It was alleged to discourage masturbation, that obviously has its roots in religion,  Quakers, Puritans etc

  it wasn't only a cleanliness issue that was just another excuse the god botherers came up with to validate their real reason

You're wrong. There was nothing religious about it for the vast majority. I don't know about American Muslims but even among American Jews the medical procedure is often done in a hospital rather than a bris ceremony.

Currently I think it's about 50 50 as the medical establishment has taken a more neutral stance on the topic.

10 minutes ago, quake said:

No

I don't think any parent has the right to sanction child abuse on there children.

As for the rest of the world.

Hey religious nuts,  leave those kids alone.

 

 

It's not abuse.