The Daily Roxette discussions forum has been closed. The forum is only available as a read-only archive.
Circumcision
66 replies
Invisible_man said on July 5, 2006 16:43:
Hmmm? Are you? Does it really make a difference?
What do women think? Men?
lol is Per?
——————
KRAMER:
You should call this off, Elaine. It’s a barbaric ritual.
ELAINE:
Perhaps one day when the pigmen roam free it will be stopped. Until then, off with their heads.
Invisible_man said on July 5, 2006 22:22:
lol not just Seinfeld, but Sex and the City. they had an interesting episode on that... 30-something dude got it ouch!!
btw Why it that ick?
rox-kuryliw said on July 5, 2006 22:23:
i swear we have done this before ?! ! over all depends what part of the world your from.
ncurran said on July 5, 2006 22:26:
circumcision is unnecessary and stupid in this day and age.
*waits for coyboy to come and defend the millions of americans who have been mutilated*
Invisible_man said on July 5, 2006 22:27:
So what about females here... hmm or gay males. I know both of those demographics are here. What do you prefer?
ncurran said on July 5, 2006 22:30:
I am gay, and i couldnt care less really but to me an uncircumcised penis is more natural. I am very glad that i am uncut....i still have the full sensation down there, if you know what i mean
TinyBubbles said on July 5, 2006 23:29:
No i dont know what you mean ...*makes more notes in the notepad*
:P
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 06:50:
TB, basically, the head of the penis is extemely sensitive, as you prob already know. However, when men are circumcised, the head loses some of its sensitivity as the head is exposed to outer elements and develops extra layers of skin. Not only that, but the foreskin itsself is supposed to be as sensitive as a fingertip, so when an uncircumcised man has sex, you have the added sensation of both these parts of the penis. Circumcision also causes an unnatural dryness of the penile shaft which can in extreme cases cause breaks in the skin and increased chance of transmission of STDs. Ever noticed american porn movies where even to masturbate the men use lubricant? With an uncircumcised penis this is unnecessary
kachina008 said on July 6, 2006 11:18:
but why do guys get circumsized? is there really a reason that ppl are given, besides the obviuos religious angle? I think every male child in the States gets circumsized...why?
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 12:38:
The myth is that it is more hygenic. But that is rubbish. Whether you have a foreskin or not, you keep clean if you wash yourself down there!
Jewish/Muslims get circumcised more as a kind of religious ritual which is pretty sick if you ask me. Its basically an old tradition that most of the world have disregarded moving into modern times. There is no medical reason for circumcision
rox-kuryliw said on July 6, 2006 13:06:
i totally agree. I do hope people who are cut wash as much as the uncut folk lol. makes no difference at all. i wouldnt like to be cut, i think its not right taking away a human right.
Now female circumsion , thats a totally different matter but does it have the same ideas, isnt it taking something away without the humans choice ?
kachina008 said on July 6, 2006 14:12:
ncurran: old? like i said, every baby boy in the States is circumcized. it is common practise.
ally77 said on July 6, 2006 14:14:
I remembering studying or talking about it once in class when we where studying Jewish Religion... I really don’t see the point of it myself!
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 14:45:
yes kachina it is an old tradition. Unfortunately it has continued up until now in the US. I am surprised that the medical profession in america havent spoken out against it actually. I mean, who would actually want to subject their new born baby to that when it is unnecessary? Probably just because it is a delicate subject and people have fear of offending muslims and jews....but parents should really know the truth
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 20:16:
“And obviously it controls syphilis(compare ratio of this disease in different regions of the world) and I read it that veneral diseases were found less in people who were circumcised rather than in non-circumcised people”
ANOTHER MYTH
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 21:01:
Medical science hasnt proven anything about it. Do a quick google search and you will find out who first claimed that it prevented syphilis: Jonathon Hutcheson in 1855. This ’scientist’ also claimed that ’Jews were immune to syphilis; circumcision of male infants was necessary to discourage masturbation and promote continence; contraception was morally objectionable and physically harmful; and leprosy was a form of tuberculosis, caused by eating bad fish.’
Of course if you have particular religous/cultural beliefs, then you might well try to take the work of such ’scientists’ to justify your standpoint, but it doesnt make it a scientific fact.
and yes there are studies which have given some indication that there MAY be a reduced risk of STDs in circumcised males (unsurprisingly by american scientists), but even if that IS the case it is a pathetic argument for circumcision. The best protection against STDs is. 1. Only having sexual relations with a stable partner. 2. Using a condom!
kachina008 said on July 6, 2006 21:21:
For scientific journals and papers:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
I did a search on “male circumcision and health”...it came up with several pages of research papers. I have to preface this by saying that these are statistical studies on human subjects, meaning that these studies are never fool proof, and only based on statistical relevance, which can be faulty.
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 21:22:
Some more information from the NHS website (which i trust more than ’research’ by scientists with ulterior motives). Interesting to note that the US has the highest rate of penile cancer, even though it also has one of the highest rates of circumcision, and also that penile warts and urethritis are more common in circumcised men
Sometimes circumcision is carried out for religious reasons. Other cultures practice circumcision because they think the foreskin is unhygienic, unnecessary, or causes health problems.
Many people have strong views on whether circumcision should be carried out or not. It isn’t routinely performed in the UK because there is no clear clinical evidence that it is has medical benefit. Some studies suggest circumcision may help to prevent cancer of the penis and reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases (STIs). However, good personal hygiene, not smoking and practicing safe sex are more important.
* Cancer of the penis:
Some studies suggest that circumcision can help to prevent cancer of the penis. This is an extremely rare type of cancer, and circumcision may only offer protection if done in childhood, not during puberty. However, poor personal hygiene, smoking, and catching a sexually transmitted infection (STI) called human papilloma virus (HPV) are more important reasons in the development of penile cancer. Countries with the highest rate of circumcision, such as America, also have the highest rate of penile cancer.
* Sexually transmitted infections:
Some types of sexually transmitted infections are more common in uncircumcised than circumcised men. Men who aren’t circumcised may be less likely to notice the symptoms of STIs that cause warts or ulcers on the genitals such as herpes or syphilis. The symptoms of chlamydia can also be less obvious, making it more likely for men to pass on the infection without realising. However, infections such as penile warts and urethritis are more common in circumcised men, and yeast infections such as thrush affect circumcised and uncircumcised men equally.
The best and safest way to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted infections is to practice safe sex, use a condom and get yourself checked for any STIs before sleeping with a new partner or stopping using condoms.
* HIV/ AIDS:
Research into whether HIV is less likely in circumcised men has produced mixed evidence. In the UK, results in favour of circumcision do not outweigh the protection offered by practising safe sex and using condoms.
It is very important that parents considering having their son circumcised are fully aware of the issues and risks involved, including pain, bleeding, and the possibility of surgical error. Most doctors also urge parents to think about what is best for the child, and where possible consider the child’s interests.
Recovery
In babies, the foreskin takes around seven to ten days to heal up after circumcision. It can take up to three weeks in older boys and men.
Stitches that dissolve by themselves are normally used to close up the wound, and don’t need to be removed. Circumcision is painful and painkillers such as paracetamol or ibuprofen will need to be taken for at least the first three days.
Circumcision exposes the sensitive skin of the glans. In babies, nappies can rub against it and make it sore, so make sure you tuck down your baby’s penis before putting the nappy in place. The penis will be red and swollen for a few days after circumcision and children and adults may find it more comfortable to wear lose clothing for a while. Petroleum ointment put directly on the area can reduce the irritation.
After a child has been circumcised, it is important to make sure the child does not ride a bike or use other sit-on toys until the swelling has completely gone down. They should be able to return to school about a week after being circumcised, and you should tell your child’s teacher about the operation.
Consult your GP if:
* there is bleeding from your child’s penis,
* your child’s penis stays swollen after two weeks, or
* your child still finds passing urine painful a few days after the operation.
Risks
As with all types of surgical operation, circumcision has some risks. The rate of complications for circumcision carried out for medical reasons in this country is low, but problems with religious or cultural circumcisions may not always be reported.
The most common problem is bleeding and infection in the area that has been circumcised. Other complications include:
* decrease in sensation (feeling) in the penis – particularly during sex;
* damage to the urethra (urine tube in the penis) causing the urine tube to become narrow and making it hard to pass urine;
* accidental amputation of the glans (head of the penis) – (this is very rare); and
* blood infection or blood poisoning (septicaemia).
ncurran said on July 6, 2006 21:30:
I agree, but what i am saying is that i would trust an independent body such as the NHS rather than a group of scientists that have a religious agenda, which i believe is the basis for all of these arguments for male circumcision. The truth is that the majority of british men are not circumcised and we are not all plagued with genital warts and sypilis and dying from AIDS because of this....despite probably being more promiscuous than american men
kachina008 said on July 7, 2006 07:43:
yeah I can imagine that, but then, a lot of the papers that Pubmed pulls up are from all over the world. Just a note, Pubmed is regualrly used by the medical/biological community for reports and papers on their field. I consider it a very credible source of scientific information.
ncurran said on July 7, 2006 08:06:
“Men who aren’t circumcised may be less likely to notice the symptoms of STIs that cause warts or ulcers on the genitals such as herpes or syphilis. The symptoms of chlamydia can also be less obvious, making it more likely for men to pass on the infection without realising. However, infections such as penile warts and urethritis are more common in circumcised men, and yeast infections such as thrush affect circumcised and uncircumcised men equally.”
Hmm, so would I rather have syphilis or penile warts? It may be the case that certain infections are more common in both circumcised and uncircumcised men, but i take these scientific studies with a pinch of salt. No, I am not a scientist, but i find it hard to believe that a reliable study can be done to test this. So you can take 1000 men, 500 circumcised and 500 uncircumcised and maybe 20 uncircumcised and 15 circumcised men have syphilis, but there are so many variables that i dont see how they can carry out a reliable study. Do they have protected sex? Do they have sex at all?
The bottom line is that if i have sex with anyone, I would use a condom, so I am less at risk than any circumcised man who doesnt use a condom! And so much for circumcision reducing the risk on penile cancer, as America has the highest rate of penile cancer in the world. I do not claim, however that that has anything to do with americans being circumcised, as there could be countless reasons for this, probably lifestyle and health choices being the main one.
Zargo said on July 7, 2006 13:11:
I’m circumcised...
Had it done when I was 2, because my foreskin was too tight, apparently.
ncurran said on July 7, 2006 13:48:
Yes, and that is a different story altogether Zargo. Sometimes, men even in adulthood have to be circumcised because their foreskin is too tight, but at least then there is a medical reason for it.
ncurran said on July 8, 2006 08:30:
well, i should be a politician when it comes to this. It just really pisses me off that in this day and age people do this to their children when there is no medical reason for it.
TinyBubbles said on July 8, 2006 09:41:
Female circumcision?!?!?! Eeeeeeeek!! *throws away the notebook*
Ah, if i ever have a son, i’d never have it done to him - it just dont seem natural to me. Not that there is anything wrong with men who have been circumsized.. i just dont see the need for it outside of religious practices..
[edit] plz explain female circumsion...:O
rox-kuryliw said on July 8, 2006 14:38:
ncurran i do agree.
female circumcision is very wrong but is still dont to this day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting
link for info, not very nice. :-S
ncurran said on July 8, 2006 15:20:
Thats the thing with female circumcision. It is actually illegal now in Scotland (I assume it is also outlawed in England) for being inhumane, although it is carried out in different parts of the world for religious/cultural reasons. So why do we tolerate male circumcision because of the religious connotations, but female circumcision is considered barbaric and inhumane?! In my opinion both should be banned unless there are genuine medical reasons for it.
rox-kuryliw said on July 8, 2006 15:31:
i agree, i guess bloody religon and all that bla that runs this stupid world. not common sence.
kachina008 said on July 9, 2006 11:57:
“The fact that many diseases are not present in Muslims and Jews speak out loud for itself.”
Which medical specialist told you that?!
rox-kuryliw said on July 9, 2006 14:01:
indian people have the highest depth rate from cholestrol related illnesses worldwide due to they high bad fat in currys and indian food.
rox-kuryliw said on July 9, 2006 14:04:
lawyer are u for real ?
quote
’but in fact there aren’t any except for the baldness’
kachina008 said on July 9, 2006 14:05:
Depth rate? :D
(rox: are you taking the piss? :)
Actually I do believe there are doctors who have stated that Indian ppl have lower cancer etc just because of the spices that are used in Indian cooking, which have anti-oxidant properties. Besides, Indian cooking in reality is VERY different from the rich curries you get in restaurants :P
rox-kuryliw said on July 9, 2006 20:26:
nope i live in bradford and we have one of biggest records of heart problems in britian due to the city being half asian and having very poor diets due to curry shops all over, my ex boyfriend teaches at the uni hostpital for doctors and tells me it all. so no not taking piss, cos i always thought indian people where meant to be healthy but he told me that the fat they use in currys make them so unhealthy, Cos i said asian people are not mega fat , he said u dont have to be fat to have high cholestrol.
kachina008 said on July 9, 2006 20:39:
yep that could be, but if u look at ppl in India, the story is different my friend ;)
rox-kuryliw said on July 9, 2006 21:55:
ow i sure it is, im just going on what iv read and told. i think i forget to clarify on what contents i was meaning. Iv been to indian twice and i know they is some EXTREMLY poor people there, but i also saw some VERY rich aswell. i was meaning the more wealthy better off people. ( infact my brother is on about marrying his gf there they like it that much )
rox-kuryliw said on July 9, 2006 22:11:
In 2003, the five countries with the largest numbers of people with diabetes were India (35.5 million), China (23.8 million), the United States (16 million), Russia (9.7 million) and Japan (6.7 million). per ratio.
taken from ’International Diabetes Federatio’
For Type 2 Diabetes it is less clear however insulin resistance is a strong factor in developing this type of diabetes. You are far more likely to develop it too if you are overweight and take little exercise.
What are the possible underlying conditions of Diabetes?
Following is a list of underlying conditions (see also Misdiagnosis of underlying causes of Diabetes) that could possibly cause Diabetes includes:
Metabolic syndrome - a syndrome with 4 key features (diabetes, hypertension, obesity/overweight, and high cholesterol).
Insulin resistance
Hemochromatosis - iron overload causes pancreas damage that can mimic Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes.
Chronic pancreatitis - pancreas damage that can mimic diabetes.
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) - ovary cysts inhibit natural female hormones causing insulin resistance
Carcinoid syndrome - glucose intolerance, protean manifestations, serotonin inhibits insulin production
Pancreas surgery
Pancreas trauma (type of Pancreas conditions)
Overactive pituitary gland
Overactive adrenal glands
Pancreatic insufficiency (see Pancreas symptoms)
Acromegaly
Cushing’s disease (type of Cushing’s syndrome)
Cystic fibrosis
Leprechaunism
Rabson-Mendenhall syndrome
Type B insulin resistance - insulin receptor antibodies can inhibit insulin action.
Stiff Man syndrome - about half have Glutamic Acid Decarboxylase (GAD) antibodies and get Type 1 diabetes.
all very interesting though, i should put his books away i end of self diognoising myself with all sorts of cancer’s LOL
ally77 said on July 10, 2006 07:40:
kachina008, rox-kuryliw is right! There was an article recently in the national news here in the UK about High Cholesterol in Muslins in this country because of there bad diets and that they also had the worse controlled Diabetes Type 2, they where basically saying that they made no effort in there diet control whatsoever… however I think the article was biased as I am pretty sure for every muslin person there is some white person or another creed who does not control there diabetes!
Being a Type 2 Diabetic for the past 12 months, I know how hard it is to control what you eat, and I’ve only just started this past couple of months to take heed in what I do. I ignored it for many months, but then again I got little support and advice, it was only through me using websites and forums and talking to others when I learnt what I needed to do!
Also being overweight though since I was about 13 I actually have perfect Cholesterol at 4!
I think me and kachina008 can give advice on Insulin Resistance lol ;)
My mother is perfect weight and height, yet developed type 2 diabetes about 9 years ago, it was caused by her being a renal patient and the sugar used within her dialysis bags which she used 4 times a day… normally people with Diabetes get Renal Failure, but sometimes it can work the other way around! Sadly for my mum tablets and diet control didn’t work, and she uses insulin twice a day!
As for Circumcision It’s not something I would do to a boy if I had one, but then I am not religious in the way that it’s something I would do…. I suppose if I was Jewish etc then I would do it, I really don’t know how it would affect me at all then.
By the way anyone remember the film East is East…. Oh god that was funny when the poor lad got circumcised!
kachina008 said on July 10, 2006 08:22:
Yeah I can see where you are coming from....altho’ to back up what I said, I think food in India is still a lot less processed than it is in the West. Perhaps that is the reason? ofc you need an iron stomach to eat things in India.... :D
As for Diabetes, I can see that happening, India has an incredible sweet tooth! look at all the sweets that we make lolz.
OK bringing the topic firmly back to circumcision...
ally77 said on July 10, 2006 10:46:
I am so sick of processed food..... I really now only try and eat fresh, but now and again I will slip up and have some fast food, but I do always aim to get my 5 lots of fruit and veg!
Okay now back to Circumcision!
rox-kuryliw said on July 10, 2006 10:57:
lol, my brother and his gf can drink that lisee ( i cant spell it ) that sweet yoghurt drink ! although different types , till the cows come home, but there stomachs cant take it and there always sick , and do they learn no lol. Give me a baked spud anyday lol. im simple :-S.
kachina008 i didnt mean to offend you, hope i didnt, i was just putting want my friends work books said, and what i read in my local paper about health.
When i was in india it was a mix bag of food, VERY rich though was nice but couldnt eat much.
ow sorry back to circumcision lol
ncurran said on July 10, 2006 13:08:
lawyer, “Internet is never an authentic way to search for important issues coz you see you find every info without being labelled as true or false, like search for Masturbation and you’ll find a list of disorders that you can get , but in fact there aren’t any except for the baldness.Whenever you get time, go to a medical specialist or to a medical university to ask about it.”
I agree with you, but that depends on which medical specialist or medical university you go to. I can guarantee that no medical specialist in europe would tell you that masturbation causes baldness, thats why the internet can be VERY useful...to enlighten people like you
coyboyusa said on July 10, 2006 20:08:
lol mutilated, i knwo alot of guys who have painful sex lives due to their uncircumncision.
I think my penis is beautiful circumcised, has all the sensation it needs. Besdies, i’ve seen sacks of skin haning off some guys and think its the most horrendous looking thing, i’d never imagine anyone putting it in their mouths or anywhere else :)
and the ratre of penile cancer was never directly correlated to circumcision or lack of it its more due to the enviroment. And yes there are certian higher transmission rates associated with lack of circumcision. In alot of underdeveloped countries uncircumcised men are often taught that the foreskin protects them from reciveing or transmitting hiv....hence the problem africa now faces. The simple fact about stds it either keep it in your pants or wear a rubber....why that eludes so many people is beyond me , especially gay men whom after 20 years of public education shoudl know better by now
ncurran said on July 11, 2006 21:35:
Coyboy, Uncircumcised penises are not ugly. It is simply what you are used to. I have seen both, and to be honest i find uncircumcised ones more attractive, but i think the reason you find them so ugly is that there are so few of them in the USA. We always find things that look ’different’ to us unattractive
rox-kuryliw said on July 11, 2006 21:59:
ugly, whats ugly about something natural ? how strange ? coming from the kindom of cosmetic surgury, beauty is nature. NOT cutting something off ! ! some strange folk around.
sfchemist said on July 17, 2006 22:23:
Wow, its amazing what you can learn from a roxette website...
felicity-brown said on July 19, 2006 18:08:
Well, I would never have my little boy’s messed with - it’s the way it is for a reason. I prefer untouched. Just keep it clean, boys ;)
roxcyn said on July 23, 2006 08:08:
Cowboy:
It’s mean to do because I believe if your maker has given you something you shouldn’t remove it especially if it is not causing any problems.
Example: For every baby born, does the doctor say...let’s operate because we’ve got to remove that appendix before it causes trouble or because it’s “useless mater”? Or let’s remove those vagina lips and clitoris from your baby because she will be cleaner than without?
Sometimes I don’t understand the rationalization of why to cut something from a baby.
To the person who was too tight at age 2:
The foreskin isn’t supposed to move over the head until puberty! It was probably a trick by the doctor to get extra money.
And, yes, I am cut. I think that a natural penis is beautiful because it is what the creator gave you, and you shouldn’t mess with it :).
And yes, I think it is genital mutilation in boys as well in girls. Horray for those that are nature becuase “God made man in his image” :D
PS: Doctors get about 300 USD per every genital mutilation they do. So you can imagine why some would want to be for it. Babies show extreme pain, I am sure that the doctors would allow you to see one done, there are some shown on internet videos.
PPS: Circumcision rates are current around 60% and I hope they get to 0% pronto (those rates were for babies) for USA.
coyboyusa said on July 5, 2006 17:44:
ick why is this even a discussion thread?