4 absolutely true, pro-circumcision facts

---

Your personal experience is worthless because you're drawing conclusions from a sample of one and assuming that it has any relationship to the norm. It's an invalid assumption. There's nothing between the lines to read. You don't know how far from the norm you and your friend lie.

> Have you talked to many medical professionals when it comes to cosmetically and cleanliness when it comes to uncut penises?

There's data on the subject available. Where do you think medical professionals get their information? Not many of them are in the lab, running experiments. How about if you do some research before falling back on your personal experience?

If you insist on relying on personal experience though, there are a lot of uncircumcised people who post, and who contradict your difficult-to-clean conclusion.

> Because something is being studied does not make it fact. They are/have done studies on sensitivity being hereditary.. does that make that a fact too?

We could just say that it's an unanswerable question. Or we can go with the accumulated experiences of people who were circumcised as teens or adults. Or we can go with the biological evidence (what nerves and nerve endings are where, and what happens when the nerves are severed, etc. In the end it's all pretty subjective. It's not like weighing rocks.

Here's an example. Suppose it was the convention that everyone wore sunglasses. Even so, there would be some people who are so sensitive to light that bright lights would bother them even though they were wearing sunglasses. One of those sensitive people might then say how silly it would be for people not to wear sunglasses. Does that make sense?

That was my reason for saying it's a stupid, fucked up question! You still don't get the idea of a rhetorical question. It's something like sarcasm. Does everything have to be layed out in a direct and literal manner for you to be able to get it? Even if it's explained to you?

Liamcny: It is noble of you to express your concern about the threat to life as a consequence of HIV infection and AIDS. However, if we would not submit ourselves to a risky, life-threatening act, it is unconscionable for us to recommending the procedure for anyone else. Whether or not the statement claiming circumcision has been demonstrated to have a protective effect against HIV infection is correct or somewhat in error, we must be terribly cautious, as exactly the opposite conditions are now beginning to threaten the life and health of African men ... and women.Medscape has reported that circumcised African men have begun having more and more unprotected sex, as they have been led to believe that circumcision protects them against HIV transmission. Nothing could be further from the truth. That is why Steve asked the rhetorical question. So I again ask: Would you continue to suggest that African men submit themselves for circumcision, knowing these facts, and knowing that in Africa such procedures are typically carried out by traditional healers and unskilled health care workers, who perform under unsanitary condtiions, placing their "patients" at risk for sepsis, hemorrhage, tetanus, hepatitis B, HIV infection, partial penile amputation, and death?You deny being an advocate for genital mutilation, or "circumcision", as you euphemistically term the procedure. Continue to recommend it for all, for whatever reason, and we must begin to doubt the veracity of your claim. Certainly we can see that the question transcends any simple statement, baldly made. Things are far more complex than we would suppose. One might be led to believe that you are attempting to justify your decision to genitally mutilate yourself by shifting the responsibility upon largely helpless and medically ignorant African natives. Heaven forbid that you should believe the propaganda and put yourself at risk.There is no simple solution to the terrible problem of the AIDS pandemic, and to suggest that genital mutilation will help solve them is erroneous and highly hubristic, at best. We have no right to ask African men and women to be guinea pigs, while we sit back, comfortable in our prejudices.Korydon

Lord you certainly are an interesting person Steve that you even have the gal to simply state someone’s experiences are worthless. I can give you examples of other people that are cut who are also sensitive (Another is my boyfriend, we actually talk about this thread last night as we watched TV). You are basing your "facts" on a few studies that have been preformed. Okay great, glad you have some evidence to back you up some. But as I have stated before there are plenty of people that ARE cut who still suffer from extreme sensitivity as well as people who are uncut who are the opposite.>There's data on the subject available. Where do you think medical professionals get their information? Not many of them are in the lab, running experiments. How about if you do some research before falling back on your personal experience?First off, I have a very close relationship with my family physician and we talk about things all the time. One of the things being my extreme sensitivity. We talked about uncut and being cut. He told me more horror stories than I'd like to admit about people not taking the simple time to clean properly. Secondly, I work for a Doc office as well and my boss has also told me some stories. So though these might not be MY experiences, they are experiences of medical professionals. (And before you say anything.. no I do not let the Doc I work for be my treating Doc because I don't feel it's proper to have my boss as my treated Doctor since I work for him as well.. just my personal feelings).>In the end it's all pretty subjectiveEXACTLY MY POINT!! I was happy when I read that statement. When it comes to being cut and uncut its all subjective material. Because one person might be less sensitive because he was cut, there’s always going to be another person who’s cut who is sensitive to equal it out.And Steve I am not trying to be a jerk either, just trying to make it clear not everything is black and white. There’s a whole spectrum of color on every topic.Korydon~ I know I have stated this in another thread but I think its rather bold and presumptuous to call Circumcision Mutilation. Personally Mutilation is a rather strong word, esp when there are plenty of people like myself who are VERY happy we are circumcised.

These anti-circers have no respect for anyone's opinion if it disagrees with fixed idea. Even though I've experienced sex both cut and uncut now, I'm sure Korydon, etc. have a reason why my opinion isn't valid,
Here's the truth they can't accept: sex is vitually the same cut or uncut.

So why isn't HIV growing at such an alarming rate elsewhere in the world?

The protective effect of circumcision was first found by comparing HIV rates among Tribes in S. Africa that traditionally circumcise (Zulu) with others that don't. That's where the lower transmission rate was first observed. The further studies have merely confirmed this observation and suggested a reason for it.
Obviously, if surgery isn't carried out under sterile conditions it isn't going to do anyone any good.

If it means free and easy sex, men will hang their hat on any convenient excuse.

> Lord you certainly are an interesting person Steve that you even have the gal to simply state someone's experiences are worthless.

You're just not getting what I'm trying to convey. If you're talking about how good a restaurant is, then one or two people's opinions matter, to the extent your taste concurs with theirs. But in answer to a scientific question, someone's opinion has no validity. You can find more than one person who thinks their cancer was cured by shark cartilage or peach pits. Their opinions are completely worthless in that respect.

I've spoken to different doctors who have conflicting opionions on things for which there is no strong evidence-based data. Whether an individual needs a procedure, for instance. There usually hasn't been extensive scientific studies about individuals. And at the end of it all, with all of their education and training, doctors are often wrong. A researcher in a specific area has access to unpublished information in his area. Everyone else, including practicing doctors, get that information from the same places we do. It's not classified. The journals are available in the library (and on the Web).

(Yes, I know some medical researchers are also practicing doctors.)

No, seriously.

Hey liamcny weren't you the one who recently got circumsized and said sex is still the same?

If so, I believe you were told to come back in a few years or so and then try and say it still feels exactly the same as before you were circ'ed.

Actually Steve I totally understood why you stated my personal experiences were worthless.. but at the same time when you use your personal experiences or opinion you want everyone to take it as worth.Unfortunately Steve I think you and I just have very extreme differences in opinions and thats where the conflict sets in. I don't think you're a bad guy, just someone with a much different prespective than my own.

> Actually Steve I totally understood why you stated my personal experiences were worthless.. but at the same time when you use your personal experiences or opinion you want everyone to take it as worth.

It depends on the context. You are making a sweeping generalization by posting a couple of inidividual's opinions regarding penis sensitivity.

I can point to to several posts here over the past few months of people having bad experiences with adolescent circumcision. But the point would be not that everyone's experience would be bad; just that there are serious risks that can't be discounted.

> Unfortunately Steve I think you and I just have very extreme differences in opinions

The differences are much more in approach than in opinion. I try to look at questions like this scientifically. To the extent that I fail, I should be called on it, or you should show me where I'm wrong, based on something other than your opinion.

Actually Steve not everything I reply with is "opinion" a lot of it was thing I learned during years of college and research. BUT if you wish me to start googling for hyperlinks to post.. than fine sure thing.

I wish you would do something besides telling me what you remember from some class or textbook, however long ago you went to college, especially if what you say seems simplistic and contradicts what I have read. URLs to useful sources of information would be good. It's not that hard to do. There are several good search engines.

And I wish that alot of people around here would stop debating and arguing and attacking and discussing the english language and wantint so ensure that everyone else truly understands their position or their side of the issue. This is getting QUITE old, state you opinions and then move on. For those of you who want to chit chat about things, hash them over and over ... jump to the chit chat thread and do it there. I'd like not to have to read all this "Stuff" all the time between posts..... Just my opinion and you know what they say about those. Go ahed folks, slam me if you'd like but I'll just read it and move on.

Hey bud, where were we discussing the English language? But, point taken.

It's like you aren't allowed to just state your opinion and move on. People now are actually criticizing other's opinion.So you're saying there should be no discussion, just a list of people's opinions? What if someone posts an opionion that's factually wrong?

And that has what do with this thread? Are you equating religious beliefs with opionions on the neurobiology of human infants? In any case, some religious beliefs contradict scientific knowledge.

Before you get yourself so worked up, check the threading and realize that my last comment was in reply to a previous posting. But I disagree with the words of the post in question. Just my opinion.Why do you criticize my opinion positing a relationship between the trauma of rape and the trauma from the pain caused by circumcision? I can point to medically reasonable evidence that circumcision done with no or not enough anasthetic causes trauma, as well, possibly, as the needle stick used to introduce the local anasthetic.Can you cool down and point me to medical information that contradicts that?The ulitmate qestion is one of risk versus benefit. Does the risk of circumcision outweigh the benefit of circumcision? There is a known small risk (maybe not as small as you think) of medical complications; the psychological risks are not definitively known, but no one can just say that they don't exist.I've stated this in so many ways, I don't know what else to say. I give up.