i wish i would have sliceed one of moms tits off for chopping my ladie killer. " you mean you have too much cock"? jack black. Year one.
Circumcision banned in Germany - it's about time.
by Joey Jo-Jo 57 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
caliber
A US survey of new mothers:
In a survey of new mothers in the USA, hygiene and appearance were the two major reasons for choosing to have their newborn son circumcised [Williamson & Williamson, 1988]. There was a strong correlation between their son's circumcision status and the woman's ideal male partner's circumcision status for intercourse. Thus by being circumcised they thought that their sons would likewise be more attractive to a future sexual partner (with the implication that they would be at an advantage in passing on their, and therefore the mother's, genes to the subsequent generation). Their own preference thus affected their choice for their sons.
In this US study, 92% said the circumcised penis was cleaner, 90% said it looked "sexier", 85% it felt nicer to touch and 55% smelled more pleasant. Even women who had only ever had uncircumcised partners preferred the look of the circumcised penis. versus uncircumcised was 71% versus 6%, respectively; manual stimulation, 75% versus 5%; visual appeal, 76% versus 4%.
What then is sexier about a circumcised penis? Quite likely it is that the glans is exposed in both the erect and un-erect state.
http://www.circinfo.net/socio_sexual_aspects.html
Canadian survey of mothers:
In Canada the reasons mothers gave for getting their infant boys circumcised were health or hygiene 44.4%, to be like their father, siblings or peers 35.6%, religion 17.3% and other reasons 2.7%
Australian survey of parents:
A survey in 2007 of parents who were having their sons circumcised in a circumcision clinic in Melbourne found that the most common perceived benefit was hygiene (96%) [Xu & Goldman, 2008]. Other reasons were family tradition (57%), medical benefit (36%) and esthetics, with 14% believing it improved sexual performance/enjoyment as an adult and looked better to women
Women’s preferences and sexual satisfaction:
As mentioned above, the gold standard of epidemiological evidence is the randomized controlled trial. One, involving 455 women, found that the overwhelming majority (97%) of women reported either no change (57%) or improved (40%) sexual satisfaction after their male partners had been circumcised [Kigozi et al., 2009a]. The authors concluded that male circumcision has no deleterious effect on female sexual satisfaction, and that it might, moreover, have social benefits in addition to the established health benefits. Speculation about any possible adverse effect on female sexual satisfaction was dispelled.
Women with circumcised lovers were more likely to reach a simultaneous climax - 29% vs. 17% of the study population grouped across the orgasmic spectrum of boxes for ticking labeled "together", "man first", "man after" and "never come"; some ticked more than one box.
-
Joey Jo-Jo
As I wrote these statistics are disregarded in peer review papers as bias, I dont think anyone here understands on how empirical data should be constructed and why these surveys surve for no purpose.
Razziel wrote : Many of us already climax fast enough as it is, no added sensitivity needed, thanks! Exactly my point, circumcised people dont have a clue what they are talking about.
-
caliber
In the United States, the male circumcision rate is falling just when a gathering body of evidence suggests the procedure could reduce the transmission risk for HIV and STDs.
And while Medicaid reimburses one-third of all circumcisions annually, sixteen states, including California, Florida and Maine, have cut such coverage. From 1993 to 2003, circumcision rates have declined from 63.5 percent to 55.9 percent. In the 1960s, nine of 10 boys were circumcised.
A recent randomized trial involving 3,200 men in South Africa found such overwhelming evidence that circumcision was associated with lower HIV risk that the study was ended early. Other smaller studies suggested the procedure protects against gonorrhea and syphilis. In 2003, a review of 2,000 male inner-city STD clinic patients found uncircumcised men were twice as likely as circumcised men to have either or both infections.
-
FlyingHighNow
how on earth can you compare mutilation to piercing, cutting the foreskin is like cutting the ear flap completly off, they both have functions.
I asked if any of you have had your infant or little girls' ears pierced. If she was under a certain age, she really could not have chosen to have itdone. It does hurt and the little girl will have some discomfort as the ear lobes heal. No, it is not as traumatic as removing the foreskin. I told you, my son's circumcision at 4 months old was very painful and traumatic for him. He also had several bloody diapers. Male circumcision isn't exactly mutilation though. It is not designed to render the penis incapable of functioning. Done properly, it does not make the appearance horrible. Male circumcision is not done to keep the child under sexual control. It is not done to keep the boy from enjoying sex later in life. It is not done to keep him a virgin and pure for his future wife.
I am not a big fan of doing this to baby boys. I do think though, that it would be interesting to hear from all of you guys. Were you circumcised as an infant? Are you sorry you were? Are you mad at your parents? If you weren't circumcised, do you wish your parents had chosen to have this procedure done to you?
-
FlyingHighNow
It is of note that the Egyptians practiced circumcision before the Jews did. The Jews probably got the idea to do it while captive in Egypt. It isn't really known where the practice began and whether it began as a cultural practice or a religious practice.
-
kurtbethel
Germany, huh? Haltzenklippen der dikkenchoppen.
-
Band on the Run
I agree that male circumcision makes rare sense in medical terms. This ruling is not binding so who really cares. Germany, with its antiSemitism and antiMoslem problems, can't afford to bar circumcision for Jews and Moslems. Circumcision is an immense practice in both religions.
I read a prior post on circumcision that you probably posted. When I read a linked article, I found that the medical profession has swayed both ways. First, circumcision is proven to prevent every bodily and social ill. Now it is proven to be bad for health, dignity and psyche. The pendulum will swing the other way.
Hitler would love such a ruling.
-
cofty
Hitler would love such a ruling.
BOTR - Godwin's law?
-
FlyingHighNow
Hitler would love such a ruling.
BOTR - Godwin's law?
In BOTR's case no. There are times that Hitler and Nazi ideals are a fair and legitimate comparison. I think that what she is trying to say is that it would make Hitler happy that the ban on circumcision would upset Jewish parents who still practice it.
