Politics

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

21 minutes ago, ewerk said:

How come so many Yanks have it done?

That’s always puzzled me- it’s absolutely the norm, regardless of religion. 

Why? 

What do they think is the benefit? 

 

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

3 minutes ago, NJS said:

I think it was just medically fashionable for decades. 

 

They used to argue it prevented penile cancer but that's so rare its not a justification. 

 

There was another study a few years ago which suggested it reduced aids infection but it was debunked I think. 

 

 

I'm with Fist - if I started a religion and said I wanted to lop off something a lot less useful like ear lobes I'd be jailed ten seconds after the first op - say its 6000 years old and it's somehow okay. 

This is precisely the argument I’ve long used against it- imagine the Church of England suddenly decreeing that earlobes must removed, without anaesthetic, eight days after birth. 

But only for boys. 

 

The worldwide chorus of “ FUCK RIGHT OFF!” would be deafening. 

[NJS 4386]

Same applies to halal/kosher - legal exemption for traditional barbarism. 

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

It’s almost as if the world would be a less barbaric, fucked up place without religious mentalism. 

Who’d a thunk it ? 😂

[PaddockLad 17279]

1 hour ago, ewerk said:

How come so many Yanks have it done?

 

Me and  a mate were born within 3 months of each other in the same UK NHS hospital in 1969 and neither of us has a foreskin  

 

His mum died in the 90s,mine is 83 and a bit mad. Guess we’ll never know  

[Dr Gloom 21924]

5 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

Cheers bud. 

 

We’ll agree to disagree on the level of barbarity though- whipping off your son’s pullover without anaesthetic is just as brutal as FGM, I reckon. 

 

I’m a pretty staunch atheist, but I respect people’s right to believe in whichever sky fairy they want, but,  when it means mutilating kids in the name of that sky fairy, that’s when I draw the line. 

Can you see the ridiculousness of outlawing FGM, but still allowing religious circumcision ? 

 

 I’m assuming, of course, that as a right-thinking chap you didn’t have your laddie’s penis mutilated in the name of religion, did you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I certainly did not. Religious customs can do one for me. As can religion full stop. A load of mumbo jumbo nonsense for those who are scared of the dark. 

I was circumcised because my mother felt family pressure to do it. I resent that that decision was made for me and I felt no pressure to do the same to my boy. I still don’t think it’s quite as awful because my knob is still functional. FGM is barbaric in its savagery.  

 

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

@Dr Gloom, Good on you man. 

 

I’ve got to be honest here, though, I don’t understand how you can see a difference between religious circumcision and FGM? 

It’s all mutilation in the name of whatever God they choose. 

Chopping the lips off of some poor lass, and whipping the foreskin off of an 8 day old lad is equally barbaric in my eyes. 

I suspect that circumcision gets away with it because in some cases, it’s an acceptable procedure - however, they use anaesthetic and its a last resort. 

 There’s no acceptable reason to cut away a girl’s labial structures. 

 

Here’s a question though- how much do you think fear of being labelled anti-Semitic has hampered the cause of not circumcising innocent baby boys? 

 I fully realise how this might come across.

All I can say is I’m neither racist, anti-Semitic, or whatever. but I want people to stop cutting their baby’s cocks to pieces, regardless of their beliefs. 

 

Edit; Beer… lots

[Dr Gloom 21924]

42 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

@Dr Gloom, Good on you man. 

 

I’ve got to be honest here, though, I don’t understand how you can see a difference between religious circumcision and FGM? 

It’s all mutilation in the name of whatever God they choose. 

Chopping the lips off of some poor lass, and whipping the foreskin off of an 8 day old lad is equally barbaric in my eyes. 

I suspect that circumcision gets away with it because in some cases, it’s an acceptable procedure - however, they use anaesthetic and its a last resort. 

 There’s no acceptable reason to cut away a girl’s labial structures. 

 

Here’s a question though- how much do you think fear of being labelled anti-Semitic has hampered the cause of not circumcising innocent baby boys? 

 I fully realise how this might come across.

All I can say is I’m neither racist, anti-Semitic, or whatever. but I want people to stop cutting their baby’s cocks to pieces, regardless of their beliefs. 

 

Edit; Beer… lots

You can argue both are mutilation. I think you can make a distinction because a circumcised dick is still fully functional. I can whack off to my heart’s content. Some women even prefer the look of a circumcised cock. Some men might prefer the look of a circumcised fanny but I’d say they’re sadistic fucks. And in some countries like the US, circumcised cocks are the cultural norm, it’s the preferred aesthetic and has little to do with religion.

FGM is barbaric because it deprives a woman-to-be of her sexuality. The clit is lobbed off during this procedure man. It’s practically female castration. I think it’s immoral and rightly illegal.

In some cases male circumcision has to be performed for medical reasons, this is true. I have non Jewish friends who have been through it. This is rightly legal. I don’t think there are ever legal grounds for femal circumcision.

I’m not sure I follow your last question. Where does antisemitism come into it?

Edited March 8, 2019 by Dr Gloom

[NJS 4386]

46 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

@Dr Gloom, Good on you man. 

 

I’ve got to be honest here, though, I don’t understand how you can see a difference between religious circumcision and FGM? 

It’s all mutilation in the name of whatever God they choose. 

Chopping the lips off of some poor lass, and whipping the foreskin off of an 8 day old lad is equally barbaric in my eyes. 

I suspect that circumcision gets away with it because in some cases, it’s an acceptable procedure - however, they use anaesthetic and its a last resort. 

 There’s no acceptable reason to cut away a girl’s labial structures. 

 

Here’s a question though- how much do you think fear of being labelled anti-Semitic has hampered the cause of not circumcising innocent baby boys? 

 I fully realise how this might come across.

All I can say is I’m neither racist, anti-Semitic, or whatever. but I want people to stop cutting their baby’s cocks to pieces, regardless of their beliefs. 

 

Edit; Beer… lots

Germany had a go at talking about bannig male circumcision about five years ago I think and the argument never got as far as mutilation, consent or health - it was just deemed anti-semitic/islamaphobic straight away. 

 

Probably not the right country to try like.... 

[Dr Gloom 21924]

Oh, right. I get it now. Also a few beers deep.

 

[Dr Gloom 21924]

I just don’t think there’s as much of a movement for it. Culturally it’s more accepted, rightly or wrongly.

I do agree it’s unfair on the atheist kids like me, who would have been perfectly happy to still have a foreskin, not that I think being deprived of one has hindered me in any way. Less knob cheddar for starters. But it would be nice to have been able to decide for myself. 

[NJS 4386]

The argument is not missing what you never really had but nobody can deny the nerve ending loss. 

 

A mate of mine had it done at 17 due to phimosis and said wanking wasn't as good without but I dont think he'd had enough sex pre-op to really know if it made that much of a difference. 

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

Gloomy, 

sorry mate, in

1 minute ago, Dr Gloom said:

I just don’t think there’s as much of a movement for it. Culturally it’s more accepted, rightly or wrongly.

I do agree it’s unfair on the atheist kids like me, who would have been perfectly happy to still have a foreskin, not that I think being deprived of one has hindered me in any way. Less knob cheddar for starters. But it would be nice to have been able to decide for myself. 

This is my point, basically…

 

I understand that FGM is a brutal mutilation, carried out primarily to establish control, ownership, etc:

Circumcision seems to me to be a much more accepted form of genital mutilation, and I really struggle to see why (it’s accepted). 

There are clear reasons/ circumstances why you’d take circumcision as a medical option, and in those circumstances , fair play. 

But, otherwise, there’s really no good reason to mutilate your child’s cock, beyond believing in some fucked up shit. 

 

 

DON’T CUT YOUR SON’S FORESKIN OFF! 

[acrossthepond 877]

3 hours ago, Monkeys Fist said:

That’s always puzzled me- it’s absolutely the norm, regardless of religion. 

Why? 

What do they think is the benefit? 

 

It's the result of decades of pseudoscientific bullshit here in the U.S. - some quack around the turn of the century started spouting that circumcision would lead to a reduction in masturbation and a decline in certain nervous diseases. The "theory" gained widespread popularity and the practice calcified, even though most doctors here now know that there is no real benefit at all. 

Neither myself, my son, nor my father is circumcised. The practice is extremely widespread (for both males and females) in Egypt, and so I don't actually know how it came about that my father missed out on that procedure, but I'm happy he did, as I'm sure it contributed to his decision to not have it done to me or my brothers. I do know that my family would be considered fairly moderate Muslims (by middle eastern standards.) As far as I know, none of my female relatives have had it done either, which I am very grateful for (not as much as they are, I reckon.) 

@Gloom: please do not think I'm trying to defend the horrific, monstrous practice of FGM. But I do want you to know that in most cases the entire clitoris is not removed, nor any part of the labia. In an actual "circumcision", it is just the hood of the clitoris that is taken off. Again, there is no reason to do this and the practice should be drummed out of existence. 

[Monkeys Fist 42458]

@acrossthepond 

 

Good on you man! 

I’m a white, Anglo Saxon, bit of Viking, bit of Norman, bit of Celt, bit of North African. 

All of the above is defined by DNA. 

 

My penile skin folds are intact. 

 

 

 

 

 

 DON’T MUTILATE YOUR CHILDREN’S GENITALS!!!!!!!!

[strawb 4260]

They nearly cut mine off when I was a toddler, I kept playing with it so they thought something was wrong with it. 

 

Just like playing with it tbh

[Renton 21627]

21 minutes ago, strawb said:

They nearly cut mine off when I was a toddler, I kept playing with it so they thought something was wrong with it. 

 

Just like playing with it tbh

 

Seems a bit harsh to cut your penis off because you like to fiddle with it.

[Dr Gloom 21924]

7 hours ago, acrossthepond said:

It's the result of decades of pseudoscientific bullshit here in the U.S. - some quack around the turn of the century started spouting that circumcision would lead to a reduction in masturbation and a decline in certain nervous diseases. The "theory" gained widespread popularity and the practice calcified, even though most doctors here now know that there is no real benefit at all. 

Neither myself, my son, nor my father is circumcised. The practice is extremely widespread (for both males and females) in Egypt, and so I don't actually know how it came about that my father missed out on that procedure, but I'm happy he did, as I'm sure it contributed to his decision to not have it done to me or my brothers. I do know that my family would be considered fairly moderate Muslims (by middle eastern standards.) As far as I know, none of my female relatives have had it done either, which I am very grateful for (not as much as they are, I reckon.) 

@Gloom: please do not think I'm trying to defend the horrific, monstrous practice of FGM. But I do want you to know that in most cases the entire clitoris is not removed, nor any part of the labia. In an actual "circumcision", it is just the hood of the clitoris that is taken off. Again, there is no reason to do this and the practice should be drummed out of existence. 

Are you sure about that? Wikipedia suggests otherwise 

Typically carried out by a traditional circumciser using a blade, FGM is conducted from days after birth to puberty and beyond. In half the countries for which national figures are available, most girls are cut before the age of five.^[6] Procedures differ according to the country or ethnic group. They include removal of the clitoral hood and clitoral glans; removal of the inner labia; and removal of the inner and outer labia and closure of the vulva. In this last procedure, known as infibulation, a small hole is left for the passage of urine and menstrual fluid; the vagina is opened for intercourse and opened further for childbirth.^[7]

The practice is rooted in gender inequality, attempts to control women's sexuality, and ideas about purity, modesty and beauty. It is usually initiated and carried out by women, who see it as a source of honour and fear that failing to have their daughters and granddaughters cut will expose the girls to social exclusion.^[8]Adverse health effects depend on the type of procedure; they can include recurrent infections, difficulty urinating and passing menstrual flow, chronic pain, the development of cysts, an inability to get pregnant, complications during childbirth, and fatal bleeding.^[7] There are no known health benefits.^[9]

[Dr Gloom 21924]

8 hours ago, Monkeys Fist said:

Gloomy, 

sorry mate, in

This is my point, basically…

 

I understand that FGM is a brutal mutilation, carried out primarily to establish control, ownership, etc:

Circumcision seems to me to be a much more accepted form of genital mutilation, and I really struggle to see why (it’s accepted). 

There are clear reasons/ circumstances why you’d take circumcision as a medical option, and in those circumstances , fair play. 

But, otherwise, there’s really no good reason to mutilate your child’s cock, beyond believing in some fucked up shit. 

 

 

DON’T CUT YOUR SON’S FORESKIN OFF! 

Yeah. I agree, it’s a completely pointless practice, and it’s cruel too because it’s made without the child’s consent, but I don’t think it will be made illegal anytime soon because it’s so culturally engrained. 

As for reduced sensitivity, I have no idea as I’ve nothing to compare it to but my Johnson has always seemed to function as it should. The same can’t be said for FGM if you read the description from Wikipedia.

[Dr Gloom 21924]

I should add I don’t think there’s anything antisemitic about saying circumcision is cruel or calling for it to be made illegal.

[ewerk 30616]

Quote

It was too dangerous to send British officials to rescue Shamima Begum's baby son in Syria, Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has said.

The child died in a refugee camp after his mother, who joined IS in 2015, was stripped of UK citizenship.

The boy was a UK citizen - but Mr Hunt told the BBC that any rescuers' lives would have been at risk in the camp.

"The mother chose to leave a free country to join a terrorist organisation," he said.

 

I don’t really have a position on this but ffs, what a load of shit.

[NJS 4386]

It's the question of citizenship I find interesting - I'd have sympathy with the view she gave up hers when she joined up as it were - I know that's not exactly international law though.

 

It's also callous to say that none of the childrens lives in those camps matter as has been proven previously by the response to Syrian refugees in general but this one is somehow upgraded because of its mother.

 

 

[Sonatine 11387]

 

[Meenzer 15531]

In amongst all the Brexshit, let's not overlook Boris Johnson complaining about investigations into historic child abuse being money "spaffed up the wall".

 

[Renton 21627]

10 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

In amongst all the Brexshit, let's not overlook Boris Johnson complaining about investigations into historic child abuse being money "spaffed up the wall".

 

Fuck business and fuck children. Literally.