Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy
    #5710608 - 06/04/06 09:58 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/01/news/health.php

Study tracks genital cutting's deadly legacy
By Elisabeth Rosenthal

International Herald Tribune

FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 2006

The first large medical study of female genital mutilation has found that the procedure has deadly consequences when a woman gives birth, raising by more than 50 percent the likelihood that the woman or her baby would die.

Rates of serious medical complications surrounding childbirth, such as bleeding, also rose dramatically in women who had undergone genital cutting, according to the research published Friday in the British medical journal Lancet.

"Reliable evidence about its harmful effects, especially on reproduction, should contribute to the abandonment of the practice," write the study's authors, all members of the World Health Organization Study Group on Female Genital Mutilation and Obstetrical Outcome.

While women's groups and human rights organizations have long campaigned against genital mutilation as a rights issue, the study provides the first conclusive medical evidence of long-term physical harm, taking the debate further into the public health arena.

"Finally we have data to prove what health workers have long known: That female genital mutilation is a health issue, a killer of women and children, as well as a human rights issue," said Adrienne Germain, president of the International Women's Health Coalition in New York.

She added: "This should greatly help advocates overcome arguments that genital mutilation is an untouchable cultural practice."

Previous studies to document the long-term medical effects of genital mutilation - also called female circumcision - were far smaller and produced inconsistent or unreliable results, largely because of the logistical difficulties of collecting large amounts of hard data in the poor countries where the practice is traditional.

In a commentary accompanying the study in Lancet, N Eke and K.E.O. Nkanginierne, doctors at the University of Port Harcourt in Nigeria, called the study group's report "a landmark."

In a number of African cultures, genital mutilation is part of a coming- of-age ceremony, and defenders have contended that it is a cultural practice, like male circumcision in the Jewish religion, with few, if any, proven long- term health consequences.

With new, concrete evidence of the procedure's deadly aftereffects, Eke and Nkanginierne suggest that genital mutilation "should now be included among critical health indices for less developed countries."

The study was conducted with the help of more than 28,000 women in six African nations from 2001 to 2003. The women were examined to document the degree of genital damage and followed until after they had given birth to children.

More than 100 million women worldwide have undergone genital mutilation, mostly in childhood, often without anesthesia or sterile technique. Pain, bleeding and infection are immediate consequences. Doctors suspect that the procedure is also linked to a later risk of urinary infections.

The procedure varies in severity, from a full excision of the clitoris and labia, to a lesser procedure in which only the former is removed.

In either case, the study found, women who have undergone genital cutting and their babies were more likely to die during childbirth. More extensive genital mutilation procedures produced the highest rates of maternal and infant death during childbirth many years later.

The minor forms of mutilation caused about a 20 percent rise in death rates, while extensive procedures caused rises of over 50 percent.

By almost all measures studied by the World Health Organization, a history of genital mutilation put both mother and baby at risk. Mothers who had had the procedure had longer hospital stays, experienced more blood loss and were more likely to need a Caesarean section. Babies were nearly twice as likely to require resuscitation.

Worse still, the researchers noted, the study almost certainly underestimates the potential for death and damage, since it only included women who delivered their babies in hospitals.

Many women in the African nations where genital mutilation is practiced deliver their babies at home, where medical complications like severe bleeding cannot be treated and an ailing newborn cannot be resuscitated.

Although the exact reason for the rise in mortality was not clear, the researchers noted that it made anatomical sense: Genital mutilation results in severe scarring of the vagina and surrounding area, so it might make it more difficult for babies to emerge.

In the study countries, rates of genital mutilation ranged from a high of 83 percent, in Sudan, to a low of about 40 percent, in Ghana. One country involved in the study, Senegal, outlawed the more extensive form of the procedure in 1998.

And many doctors expressed hope that the new medical evidence would push others to follow.

Wrote Eke and Nkanginierne: "There is hope that female genital mutilation will face the fate of past cultural rituals such as the rejection of twins, the African slave trade, Chinese foot- binding and Victorian chastity belts."

The first large medical study of female genital mutilation has found that the procedure has deadly consequences when a woman gives birth, raising by more than 50 percent the likelihood that the woman or her baby would die.

Rates of serious medical complications surrounding childbirth, such as bleeding, also rose dramatically in women who had undergone genital cutting, according to the research published Friday in the British medical journal Lancet.

"Reliable evidence about its harmful effects, especially on reproduction, should contribute to the abandonment of the practice," write the study's authors, all members of the World Health Organization Study Group on Female Genital Mutilation and Obstetrical Outcome.

While women's groups and human rights organizations have long campaigned against genital mutilation as a rights issue, the study provides the first conclusive medical evidence of long-term physical harm, taking the debate further into the public health arena.

"Finally we have data to prove what health workers have long known: That female genital mutilation is a health issue, a killer of women and children, as well as a human rights issue," said Adrienne Germain, president of the International Women's Health Coalition in New York.

She added: "This should greatly help advocates overcome arguments that genital mutilation is an untouchable cultural practice."

Previous studies to document the long-term medical effects of genital mutilation - also called female circumcision - were far smaller and produced inconsistent or unreliable results, largely because of the logistical difficulties of collecting large amounts of hard data in the poor countries where the practice is traditional.

In a commentary accompanying the study in Lancet, N Eke and K.E.O. Nkanginierne, doctors at the University of Port Harcourt in Nigeria, called the study group's report "a landmark."

In a number of African cultures, genital mutilation is part of a coming- of-age ceremony, and defenders have contended that it is a cultural practice, like male circumcision in the Jewish religion, with few, if any, proven long- term health consequences.

With new, concrete evidence of the procedure's deadly aftereffects, Eke and Nkanginierne suggest that genital mutilation "should now be included among critical health indices for less developed countries."

The study was conducted with the help of more than 28,000 women in six African nations from 2001 to 2003. The women were examined to document the degree of genital damage and followed until after they had given birth to children.

More than 100 million women worldwide have undergone genital mutilation, mostly in childhood, often without anesthesia or sterile technique. Pain, bleeding and infection are immediate consequences. Doctors suspect that the procedure is also linked to a later risk of urinary infections.

The procedure varies in severity, from a full excision of the clitoris and labia, to a lesser procedure in which only the former is removed.

In either case, the study found, women who have undergone genital cutting and their babies were more likely to die during childbirth. More extensive genital mutilation procedures produced the highest rates of maternal and infant death during childbirth many years later.

The minor forms of mutilation caused about a 20 percent rise in death rates, while extensive procedures caused rises of over 50 percent.

By almost all measures studied by the World Health Organization, a history of genital mutilation put both mother and baby at risk. Mothers who had had the procedure had longer hospital stays, experienced more blood loss and were more likely to need a Caesarean section. Babies were nearly twice as likely to require resuscitation.

Worse still, the researchers noted, the study almost certainly underestimates the potential for death and damage, since it only included women who delivered their babies in hospitals.

Many women in the African nations where genital mutilation is practiced deliver their babies at home, where medical complications like severe bleeding cannot be treated and an ailing newborn cannot be resuscitated.

Although the exact reason for the rise in mortality was not clear, the researchers noted that it made anatomical sense: Genital mutilation results in severe scarring of the vagina and surrounding area, so it might make it more difficult for babies to emerge.

In the study countries, rates of genital mutilation ranged from a high of 83 percent, in Sudan, to a low of about 40 percent, in Ghana. One country involved in the study, Senegal, outlawed the more extensive form of the procedure in 1998.

And many doctors expressed hope that the new medical evidence would push others to follow.

Wrote Eke and Nkanginierne: "There is hope that female genital mutilation will face the fate of past cultural rituals such as the rejection of twins, the African slave trade, Chinese foot- binding and Victorian chastity belts."

The first large medical study of female genital mutilation has found that the procedure has deadly consequences when a woman gives birth, raising by more than 50 percent the likelihood that the woman or her baby would die.

Rates of serious medical complications surrounding childbirth, such as bleeding, also rose dramatically in women who had undergone genital cutting, according to the research published Friday in the British medical journal Lancet.

"Reliable evidence about its harmful effects, especially on reproduction, should contribute to the abandonment of the practice," write the study's authors, all members of the World Health Organization Study Group on Female Genital Mutilation and Obstetrical Outcome.

While women's groups and human rights organizations have long campaigned against genital mutilation as a rights issue, the study provides the first conclusive medical evidence of long-term physical harm, taking the debate further into the public health arena.

"Finally we have data to prove what health workers have long known: That female genital mutilation is a health issue, a killer of women and children, as well as a human rights issue," said Adrienne Germain, president of the International Women's Health Coalition in New York.

She added: "This should greatly help advocates overcome arguments that genital mutilation is an untouchable cultural practice."

Previous studies to document the long-term medical effects of genital mutilation - also called female circumcision - were far smaller and produced inconsistent or unreliable results, largely because of the logistical difficulties of collecting large amounts of hard data in the poor countries where the practice is traditional.

In a commentary accompanying the study in Lancet, N Eke and K.E.O. Nkanginierne, doctors at the University of Port Harcourt in Nigeria, called the study group's report "a landmark."

In a number of African cultures, genital mutilation is part of a coming- of-age ceremony, and defenders have contended that it is a cultural practice, like male circumcision in the Jewish religion, with few, if any, proven long- term health consequences.

With new, concrete evidence of the procedure's deadly aftereffects, Eke and Nkanginierne suggest that genital mutilation "should now be included among critical health indices for less developed countries."

The study was conducted with the help of more than 28,000 women in six African nations from 2001 to 2003. The women were examined to document the degree of genital damage and followed until after they had given birth to children.

More than 100 million women worldwide have undergone genital mutilation, mostly in childhood, often without anesthesia or sterile technique. Pain, bleeding and infection are immediate consequences. Doctors suspect that the procedure is also linked to a later risk of urinary infections.

The procedure varies in severity, from a full excision of the clitoris and labia, to a lesser procedure in which only the former is removed.

In either case, the study found, women who have undergone genital cutting and their babies were more likely to die during childbirth. More extensive genital mutilation procedures produced the highest rates of maternal and infant death during childbirth many years later.

The minor forms of mutilation caused about a 20 percent rise in death rates, while extensive procedures caused rises of over 50 percent.

By almost all measures studied by the World Health Organization, a history of genital mutilation put both mother and baby at risk. Mothers who had had the procedure had longer hospital stays, experienced more blood loss and were more likely to need a Caesarean section. Babies were nearly twice as likely to require resuscitation.

Worse still, the researchers noted, the study almost certainly underestimates the potential for death and damage, since it only included women who delivered their babies in hospitals.

Many women in the African nations where genital mutilation is practiced deliver their babies at home, where medical complications like severe bleeding cannot be treated and an ailing newborn cannot be resuscitated.

Although the exact reason for the rise in mortality was not clear, the researchers noted that it made anatomical sense: Genital mutilation results in severe scarring of the vagina and surrounding area, so it might make it more difficult for babies to emerge.

In the study countries, rates of genital mutilation ranged from a high of 83 percent, in Sudan, to a low of about 40 percent, in Ghana. One country involved in the study, Senegal, outlawed the more extensive form of the procedure in 1998.

And many doctors expressed hope that the new medical evidence would push others to follow.

Wrote Eke and Nkanginierne: "There is hope that female genital mutilation will face the fate of past cultural rituals such as the rejection of twins, the African slave trade, Chinese foot- binding and Victorian chastity belts."

The first large medical study of female genital mutilation has found that the procedure has deadly consequences when a woman gives birth, raising by more than 50 percent the likelihood that the woman or her baby would die.

Rates of serious medical complications surrounding childbirth, such as bleeding, also rose dramatically in women who had undergone genital cutting, according to the research published Friday in the British medical journal Lancet.

"Reliable evidence about its harmful effects, especially on reproduction, should contribute to the abandonment of the practice," write the study's authors, all members of the World Health Organization Study Group on Female Genital Mutilation and Obstetrical Outcome.

While women's groups and human rights organizations have long campaigned against genital mutilation as a rights issue, the study provides the first conclusive medical evidence of long-term physical harm, taking the debate further into the public health arena.

"Finally we have data to prove what health workers have long known: That female genital mutilation is a health issue, a killer of women and children, as well as a human rights issue," said Adrienne Germain, president of the International Women's Health Coalition in New York.

She added: "This should greatly help advocates overcome arguments that genital mutilation is an untouchable cultural practice."

Previous studies to document the long-term medical effects of genital mutilation - also called female circumcision - were far smaller and produced inconsistent or unreliable results, largely because of the logistical difficulties of collecting large amounts of hard data in the poor countries where the practice is traditional.

In a commentary accompanying the study in Lancet, N Eke and K.E.O. Nkanginierne, doctors at the University of Port Harcourt in Nigeria, called the study group's report "a landmark."

In a number of African cultures, genital mutilation is part of a coming- of-age ceremony, and defenders have contended that it is a cultural practice, like male circumcision in the Jewish religion, with few, if any, proven long- term health consequences.

With new, concrete evidence of the procedure's deadly aftereffects, Eke and Nkanginierne suggest that genital mutilation "should now be included among critical health indices for less developed countries."

The study was conducted with the help of more than 28,000 women in six African nations from 2001 to 2003. The women were examined to document the degree of genital damage and followed until after they had given birth to children.

More than 100 million women worldwide have undergone genital mutilation, mostly in childhood, often without anesthesia or sterile technique. Pain, bleeding and infection are immediate consequences. Doctors suspect that the procedure is also linked to a later risk of urinary infections.

The procedure varies in severity, from a full excision of the clitoris and labia, to a lesser procedure in which only the former is removed.

In either case, the study found, women who have undergone genital cutting and their babies were more likely to die during childbirth. More extensive genital mutilation procedures produced the highest rates of maternal and infant death during childbirth many years later.

The minor forms of mutilation caused about a 20 percent rise in death rates, while extensive procedures caused rises of over 50 percent.

By almost all measures studied by the World Health Organization, a history of genital mutilation put both mother and baby at risk. Mothers who had had the procedure had longer hospital stays, experienced more blood loss and were more likely to need a Caesarean section. Babies were nearly twice as likely to require resuscitation.

Worse still, the researchers noted, the study almost certainly underestimates the potential for death and damage, since it only included women who delivered their babies in hospitals.

Many women in the African nations where genital mutilation is practiced deliver their babies at home, where medical complications like severe bleeding cannot be treated and an ailing newborn cannot be resuscitated.

Although the exact reason for the rise in mortality was not clear, the researchers noted that it made anatomical sense: Genital mutilation results in severe scarring of the vagina and surrounding area, so it might make it more difficult for babies to emerge.

In the study countries, rates of genital mutilation ranged from a high of 83 percent, in Sudan, to a low of about 40 percent, in Ghana. One country involved in the study, Senegal, outlawed the more extensive form of the procedure in 1998.

And many doctors expressed hope that the new medical evidence would push others to follow.

Wrote Eke and Nkanginierne: "There is hope that female genital mutilation will face the fate of past cultural rituals such as the rejection of twins, the African slave trade, Chinese foot- binding and Victorian chastity belts."


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5714097 - 06/05/06 07:12 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I understand that brutal circumcisions are wrong.

If they were done under anesthesia, with a MD there to properly remove the woman's clit.

Would that be OK, if the parents want it, and were willing to pay for it?


--------------------
Live for the moment you are in now
Don't be bogged down by your past
Don't be afraid of what lies in your future


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: niteowl]
    #5714307 - 06/05/06 09:46 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yeah, it would be just as OK as parents paying an MD to cut off the head of their infant son's penis, ensuring that he would experience almost no sexual pleasure for the rest of his life.  :thumbup:

Female circumcision and male circumcision are not equivalent.  Removing the foreskin results in reduced sensitivity of the glans, whereas removing the clitoris (and often the inner and outer lips of the vulva), and then stitching up the entire genital area except for a tiny hole for urine and menstrual fluid, results in a lifetime of pain, frequent infections, and near-elimination of the woman's ability to experience sexual pleasure.

This is child abuse and mutilation, whether an MD performs the surgery or not.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5714309 - 06/05/06 09:47 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
ensuring that he would experience almost no sexual pleasure for the rest of his life.  :thumbup:



False


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Silversoul]
    #5714327 - 06/05/06 09:53 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

It is false that a man would experience almost no sexual pleasure without the head of his penis? Most of the nerve endings are concentrated in the glans, frenulum and prepuce (foreskin), so his penis would not be very erogenous after such an operation. Are you referring to stimulation of the prostate?


Edited by Veritas (06/05/06 10:01 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,587
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 8 hours, 53 minutes
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5714334 - 06/05/06 09:58 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

This is child abuse. People who support it should be shot in the face IMHO. It's on the same level as assraping a 3 year old.


--------------------
Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ
(•_•)
<) )~  ANTIFA
/ \
\(•_•)
( (>    SUPER
/ \
(•_•)
<) )>    SOLDIERS
  / \


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5714339 - 06/05/06 10:02 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
Are you referring to stimulation of the prostate?




Ewww..


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #5714341 - 06/05/06 10:05 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Don't knock it 'til you try it, Randal.  :naughty:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5714347 - 06/05/06 10:10 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
Don't knock it 'til you try it, Randal.  :naughty:




Well....I guess I'd let you do it to me.  But, nobody else could even think about it.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #5714349 - 06/05/06 10:11 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

They might be thinking about it RIGHT NOW!!  :rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5714382 - 06/05/06 10:32 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
It is false that a man would experience almost no sexual pleasure without the head of his penis? Most of the nerve endings are concentrated in the glans, frenulum and prepuce (foreskin), so his penis would not be very erogenous after such an operation. Are you referring to stimulation of the prostate?



I'm referring to the fact that I am circumsized, and am perfectly capable of experiencing sexual pleasure.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Silversoul]
    #5714396 - 06/05/06 10:36 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Silversoul said:
I'm referring to the fact that I am circumsized, and am perfectly capable of experiencing sexual pleasure.




If you ever have sex again.  :smirk:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #5714400 - 06/05/06 10:38 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

RandalFlagg said:
Quote:

Silversoul said:
I'm referring to the fact that I am circumsized, and am perfectly capable of experiencing sexual pleasure.




If you ever have sex again.  :smirk:



Another person isn't necessary to experience sexual pleasure.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Silversoul]
    #5714407 - 06/05/06 10:39 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yes, but female circumcision and male circumcision are not equivalent.

Quote:

parents paying an MD to cut off the head of their infant son's penis, ensuring that he would experience almost no sexual pleasure for the rest of his life.




Male circumcision removes the foreskin and sometimes the frenulum, but leaves the sensitive glans intact. Removing the entire clitoris (female circumcision) is the equivalent of cutting off the head of the penis.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5714414 - 06/05/06 10:42 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Oh woops, I seem to have read your post wrong. I thought you had just been referring to the removal of the foreskin. Yes, if I had the head of my penis cut off, I would not be a happy camper.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Silversoul]
    #5714417 - 06/05/06 10:43 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

There is quite a bit of evidence that male circumcision reduces sexual pleasure, but it certainly does not eliminate it.  :grin:

Neither of my sons has been circumcised--I think it is a barbaric practice.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5714453 - 06/05/06 10:56 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I definately want my foreskin back.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #5714465 - 06/05/06 11:00 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

:lol: I don't think it would be of much use to you at this point.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,460
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 2 hours, 2 minutes
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5715422 - 06/05/06 03:05 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

There is no excuse for this shit.


--------------------
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledemiu5
humans, lol
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium Flag
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5715621 - 06/05/06 03:49 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I never even knew couples/mothers/whatever had the clitoris etc. removed from their daughters at birth.

What's the point of removal?


--------------------
channel your inner Larry David


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledownforpot
Stranger
Male
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Silversoul]
    #5715958 - 06/05/06 05:41 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Silversoul said:
Quote:

Veritas said:
It is false that a man would experience almost no sexual pleasure without the head of his penis? Most of the nerve endings are concentrated in the glans, frenulum and prepuce (foreskin), so his penis would not be very erogenous after such an operation. Are you referring to stimulation of the prostate?



I'm referring to the fact that I am circumsized, and am perfectly capable of experiencing sexual pleasure.




You should ask grown men who had their foreskin removed when they were adults. LOL. A lot of men are actually filing lawsuits because they were circumcized at birth.


--------------------



http://www.myspace.com/4th25


"And I don't care if he was handcuffed
Then shot in his head
All I know is dead bodies
Can't fuck with me again"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: downforpot]
    #5715963 - 06/05/06 05:43 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Whatever.  I like my penis just the way it is.  :shrug:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledownforpot
Stranger
Male
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Silversoul]
    #5715997 - 06/05/06 05:58 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

If any1 puts a scalpel to my dick, I will kill them and their entire family.


--------------------



http://www.myspace.com/4th25


"And I don't care if he was handcuffed
Then shot in his head
All I know is dead bodies
Can't fuck with me again"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEkstaza
stranger than most
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/10/03
Posts: 4,324
Loc: Around the corner
Last seen: 9 months, 23 days
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: demiu5]
    #5716220 - 06/05/06 07:06 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

demius said:
I never even knew couples/mothers/whatever had the clitoris etc. removed from their daughters at birth.

What's the point of removal?



I believe it has to do in part with removing sexual temptation from the female who is being mutilated. Basically if you remove sin from the woman, you make her virtuous. Sexual longing is considered sinful in many cultures.


--------------------
YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ANY GIVEN DRUG ISN'T THE DEFINITIVE MEASURE OF THE DRUGS EFFECTS.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledemiu5
humans, lol
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium Flag
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Ekstaza]
    #5716530 - 06/05/06 08:28 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Thanks for answering my question.

I knew that some cultures did not believe women should have pleasure from sex, but I did not know they went as far as to remove the sensitive organ(s).


--------------------
channel your inner Larry David


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDirtMcgirt
in a pinch
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 2,213
Loc: city of angels
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5717575 - 06/06/06 12:34 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

There is quite a bit of evidence that male circumcision reduces sexual pleasure, but it certainly does not eliminate it.





And there is evidence that says the exact opposite. In all, reading and believing studies about something as dubious and unmeasurable as sexual pleasure is really nothing more than a masturbating your belief system akin to something, like, I don't know:

Quote:

I think it is a barbaric practice




--------------------
"And we, inhabitants of the great coral of the Cosmos, believe the atom (which still we cannot see) to be full matter, whereas, it too, like everything else, is but an embroidery of voids in the Void, and we give the name of being, dense and even eternal, to that dance of inconsistencies, that infinite extension that is identified with absolute Nothingness and that spins from its own non-being the illusion of everything."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5717887 - 06/06/06 03:04 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Any form of forced circumcision...male or female...IMO, is wrong.

For some to get on their stump, and rant about one and not the other, is ignorance.


--------------------
Live for the moment you are in now
Don't be bogged down by your past
Don't be afraid of what lies in your future


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: demiu5]
    #5718297 - 06/06/06 09:19 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

demius said:
I knew that some cultures did not believe women should have pleasure from sex,




......

Quote:


but I did not know they went as far as to remove the sensitive organ(s).




Hhm.. if women should not have pleasure from sex, then perhaps they would not have sensitive organs in the first place. :lol: You really have to admire religious belief. :lol:

:earth: :sun: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5718670 - 06/06/06 11:53 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

There is evidence that removing a man's foreskin, and thereby eliminating a nerve-rich portion of his anatomy, plus exposing his glans to constant contact with his clothing, increases his potential for sexual pleasure??

:lol:

Pleasure may be difficult to measure with any precision, but it is a no-brainer that the glans would lose some sensitivity when the protective foreskin is removed in infancy.  Additionally, some circumcision surgeries will remove the sensitive frenulum along with the foreskin.

Circumcision, whether the accepted "hygienic" removal of an infant boy's foreskin, or the controversial mutilation of a girl's entire external genitalia, is unnecessary, abusive, and barbaric.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledownforpot
Stranger
Male
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5719374 - 06/06/06 03:19 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Doctors in America are currently phasing out circumcision.


--------------------



http://www.myspace.com/4th25


"And I don't care if he was handcuffed
Then shot in his head
All I know is dead bodies
Can't fuck with me again"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: downforpot]
    #5720030 - 06/06/06 06:12 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

There has been a slow decline in the circumcision rate, but I would not call that "phasing out."  It has officially been defined as "non-therapeutic" since 1999, but more than 60% of American boys still have their foreskins cut off.  :thumbdown:

http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/

Only the West Coast has a circumcision rate below 50%...this is absurdly high for non-therapeutic genital surgery.  What are people thinking???


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5720602 - 06/06/06 08:41 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

What are people thinking???

In a nutshell, they're thinking God wants this done and watches to make sure. :thumbdown:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5721961 - 06/07/06 04:31 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> In a nutshell, they're thinking God wants this done and watches to make sure.

And I thought the guy next door was a pervert... sheesh!


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineEkstaza
stranger than most
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/10/03
Posts: 4,324
Loc: Around the corner
Last seen: 9 months, 23 days
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Seuss]
    #5721998 - 06/07/06 05:20 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> In a nutshell, they're thinking God wants this done and watches to make sure.

And I thought the guy next door was a pervert... sheesh!



Apparently god is the ultimate voyeur. :eek:


--------------------
YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ANY GIVEN DRUG ISN'T THE DEFINITIVE MEASURE OF THE DRUGS EFFECTS.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDirtMcgirt
in a pinch
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 2,213
Loc: city of angels
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5725843 - 06/08/06 05:59 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I hate quoting wikipedia, but:

Quote:

The American Academy of Pediatrics states "a survey of adult males using self-report suggests more varied sexual practice and less sexual dysfunction in circumcised adult men. There are anecdotal reports that penile sensation and sexual satisfaction are decreased for circumcised males."[93] The American Academy of Family Physicians states "no valid evidence to date, however, supports the notion that being circumcised affects sexual sensation or satisfaction."




So slimjim, how do you respond to something as simple and surface as wikipedia offering conflicting evidence? You know as well as I do that sexual pleasure is far more than just nerve endings or I will suggest you have a whole line of very unsatisfied female partners behind you.

And how much, percentage-wise, of nerves does the foreskin compose? Give me a valid, peer-supported study that tells me that something more than like .0025% of the nerves that compose the penis are part of the foreskin. In all, what does .0025% (my guesstimation, please show me otherwise) matter when sexual pleasure is concerned?


Tell your kids, tell yourself, whatever you want. I don't care if you circumcise them or not. If it works for you, great. To me, personally, it is negligible. Who cares? It is not my matter. But don't ejaculate your assumptions all over this message board without relevant data to back it up.


--------------------
"And we, inhabitants of the great coral of the Cosmos, believe the atom (which still we cannot see) to be full matter, whereas, it too, like everything else, is but an embroidery of voids in the Void, and we give the name of being, dense and even eternal, to that dance of inconsistencies, that infinite extension that is identified with absolute Nothingness and that spins from its own non-being the illusion of everything."


Edited by DirtMcgirt (06/08/06 06:00 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinededjam
Electro Penguin
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 12/14/05
Posts: 2,139
Loc: Moralton, Statesota
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: downforpot]
    #5726543 - 06/08/06 12:21 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

downforpot said:
Doctors in America are currently phasing out circumcision.




False.

Many people who arent circumcized are doing so later in life now actually. Ill try to find the report as it also interviews people who have gone through a circumcision as an adult most agree that there is no noticeable difference in sexual pleasure and that the benefits are overall favorable...

This means nothing without the article though, ill see what I can find...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5726630 - 06/08/06 12:54 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

The AAP's position on circumcision is based upon non-scientific data.  Laumann did not conduct an anatomical study of the foreskin, he handed out a survey to a thousand men.  Self-reports are statistically interesting, but not conclusive.  Please review the following:

Quote:

Depending on the amount of skin cut off, circumcision robs a male of as much as 80 percent or more of his penile skin. Depending on the foreskin's length, cutting it off makes the penis as much as 25 percent or more shorter.

Careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off more than 3 feet of veins, arteries, and capillaries, 240 feet of nerves, and more than 20,000 nerve endings. The foreskin's muscles, glands, mucous membrane, and epithelial tissue are destroyed, as well.

Circumcision desensitizes: Circumcision desensitizes the penis radically. Foreskin amputation means severing the rich nerve network and all the nerve receptors in the foreskin itself. Circumcision almost always damages or destroys the frenulum.

The loss of the protective foreskin desensitizes the glans. Because the membrane covering the permanently externalized glans is now subjected to constant abrasion and irritation, it keratinizes, becoming dry and tough. The nerve endings in the glans, which in the intact penis are just beneath the surface of the mucous membrane, are now buried by successive layers of keratinization. The denuded glans takes on a dull, grayish, sclerotic appearance.




http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/fleiss.html

Quote:

The prepuce is usually tethered at the bottom by the frenulum. The frenulum's function is to provide pleasure by stretching during sexual intercourse. In fact, the frenulum is coloquially known as the "sex nerve" in France and perhaps throughout Europe.

By destroying this stretching action, circumcision completely destroys this fundamental means of sexual pleasure in the human male. Taylor hypothesizes that stretching of the frenulum during coitus is provides a stimulus for ejaculation.




http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/

Quote:

The prepuce is profusely innervated especially near the tip in the ridged band area where the mucocutaneous boundary occurs. It is now understood that this junction is the most sensitive and erogenous part of the penis.

...

Taylor's  ridged band is located near the tip of the prepuce on the inner layer of the foreskin near the muco-cutanaeous boundary. The ridged band merges smoothly with the frenulum.  Taylor states that the ridged band is sensitive to motion. The foreskin slides back and forth over the glans during foreplay and intercourse.30  Typically, the ridged band area of the prepuce is stretched when it passes over the glans penis and, by this stretching action, the multitude of pleasure sensors in Taylor's ridged band are stimulated.

The ridged band area, which is stimulated by motion, is the most highly innervated and pleasure producing region of the prepuce. They clearly have an important, but not yet well understood, function in human sexual response. Cold and Taylor (1999) confirmed the structure and innervation of the prepuce, and explained its importance in more detail.

In comparison to the prepuce, the glans penis is much less innervated and sensitive. The corona (rim) is the most highly innervated part of the glans penis. Stimulation of the coronal area of the glans penis may trigger ejaculation. The prepuce of the typical complete male may protect the corona from direct stimulation during intercourse and so tends to prevent premature and unwanted ejaculation.

Winkelmann states, "It is apparent in our material that all the bodies [nerve endings] present have coiled or serpentine form ... Such a form lends itself admirably to the perception of changes in pressure and tension in the tissue, as the coils are oriented in three dimensions."

The prepuce of the human male is an elastic platform for the nerve endings composed of muscle fibers embedded within the skin, so the whole prepuce may be regarded as the principal organ for perceiving the sixth sense of erogeny.




http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/

Quote:

From the Cold and Taylor study published the same year as the AAP statement you quoted from Wikipedia.

The prepuce provides a large and important platform for several nerves and nerve endings. The innervation of the outer skin of the prepuce is impressive; its sensitivity to light touch and pain are similar to that of the skin of the penis as a whole. The glans, by contrast, is insensitive to light touch, heat, cold and, as far as the authors are aware, to pin-prick. Le Gros Clark noted that the glans penis is one of the few areas on the body that enjoys nothing beyond primitive sensory modalities.




http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor/

BTW, I am a woman, and do not have a string of unsatisfied female partners. :grin:  I have studied human sexuality, endocrinology, anatomy and psychology, both independently and within University classrooms.

I find it very interesting that many Americans are shocked and appalled at the idea of female circumcision, but still in denial about male circumcision practices in their own country.  Why mutilate the genitalia of any child, male or female?


Edited by Veritas (06/08/06 04:26 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDirtMcgirt
in a pinch
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 2,213
Loc: city of angels
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5729860 - 06/09/06 06:38 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Ok, I will humor your non-response for a second...

Quote:

Self-reports are statistically interesting, but not conclusive




Of course not. Why do you think self reports are given. Are the researchers blinded by the American cultural oppression you have so easily transcended? Are they trying to justify the genital mutilation that they adore? No. They realize sexual pleasure is far more reliant on the mental state of the subject than a small percentage of nerve endings that have been removed by circumcision. The best way to get results is self reports. They are unreliable, but so is the claim that any particular person has enjoyed sex with their mate. You just have to take their word for it, ya know?


Also, mothers against circumcision is hardly a scientific source. But to humor you:

Quote:

Depending on the amount of skin cut off, circumcision robs a male of as much as 80 percent or more of his penile skin. Depending on the foreskin's length, cutting it off makes the penis as much as 25 percent or more shorter.




ummm. that is a heavy claim that I cannot find support for on the internet. Maybe I have shitty research skills......25% shorter! a flat out lie that cannot be backed up. 80% of the penile skin? Wow..Talk about not conclusive.

Quote:

buried by successive layers of keratinization




The sexual effect of these layers is never even addressed...only leading word usage (dry, rough?). They effect nerve response, but to what degree? This is never addressed. It is assumed to be large and significant because it exists and is left at that.

I could go on, but that would justify your point for you. Which is that sexual pleasure is nothing more than the firing of nerve endings. I will address one more point of yours which, in summation, is two more than you have done for me:

Quote:


The ridged band area, which is stimulated by motion, is the most highly innervated and pleasure producing region of the prepuce.



Here they have conflated innervated and pleasure. Only somebody dryly focusing on the anatomy of sex could make this reaching assumption. So we will go with this assumption and ignore the whole psychological aspect of sex for a second. We will say sex is binary. Stimulus = pleasure. No stimulus = no pleasure. Seems simple, I guess I have made intercourse so much more complicated than it really is. This is the foundation of Taylor's study from my quick reading of it.

one more for fun...

Quote:

he prepuce provides a large and important platform for several nerves and nerve endings. The innervation of the outer skin of the prepuce is impressive; its sensitivity to light touch and pain are similar to that of the skin of the penis as a whole.




Ouch. That seems to blow the whole biased study of the prepuce out of the water! So its sensitivity is similar to the skin of the penis as a whole!!!! But don't circumcised men have the rest of their penis that is so similar to Taylor's prepuce? Unless we accept mother's against circumcision's claim that the practice is done by blind men with chainsaws who chop off 80% of the skin and 25% of the entire penis, this seems to make the resulting loss of nerve endings negligible. Which is what I was saying the whole time...


Quote:

, so the whole prepuce may be regarded as the principal organ for perceiving the sixth sense of erogeny.




And here we see Taylor going from A to B and than to Z all in a flash. The sixth sense of erogeny!? Nobody would believe this wizardry unless they already were on board with Taylor in the first place.






In all, I admit I have not fully researched Taylor's study. Before you cherry pick my response to it please, please, please, please, respond to my claim that the mental state and psychology of a subject is significantly more important than the handful of nerve endings the foreskin contains, however you wish to quantify them. In that same response, since you have studied psychology (me too!) and anatomy (me too!) at the alter of the university, give me a reason why fetishes exist, why rape is not pleasurable, why massaging the prostate during anal sex results in orgasm, or how orgasm can and does occur without any genital stimulus at all. If you don't respond to these phenomenons this time around (or at least respond to the impact of psychology at all on sexual intercourse) I am done with this discussion because at that point it ceases to be one and it is just me talking to a brick wall. Because what you are claiming is that the anatomy of genitailia is more important than the psychology of the subject reaching orgasm. What you are claiming is that a circumcised male receives 12 pleasure units of satisfaction during sex and a uncircumcised male receives 25 units of pleasure satisfaction during sex as if it were possible to quantify sexual gratification.


Do you realize how impossible it is to back that up? Do you realize how subjective such a thing is?

I'm not arguing for or against male circumcision. Every man to his own. A culture, any culture, is a beautiful thing, even with all its illogic. That is what makes humanity, humanity. Dostoevsky figured this out 150 years ago.


What I'm arguing against is your dubious claim that circumcised males achieve less sexual arousal than uncircumcised males. That is stroking your perception in the face of an uncertain reality. To top all of this; you don't even have a penis, but you speak as if you were some kind of expert on the subject because a few undergradute courses lead you to your belief system.


--------------------
"And we, inhabitants of the great coral of the Cosmos, believe the atom (which still we cannot see) to be full matter, whereas, it too, like everything else, is but an embroidery of voids in the Void, and we give the name of being, dense and even eternal, to that dance of inconsistencies, that infinite extension that is identified with absolute Nothingness and that spins from its own non-being the illusion of everything."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5729893 - 06/09/06 06:56 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

A very interesting thread. It amazes me how we accept some things without thought and immediately condemn other things that are not really any different. For example, if a child's parents decided to chop their newborns hands and feet off, the public would go crazy condemning the parents. If the same parents decided to chop part of a newborns genitals off, the public would have no problem.

The big question here is do parents own their children? If they do, then they can lop whatever body parts off that they wish. If they do not, then they have no right to lop off any body part at all. Personally, I think any form of child mutilation is wrong. If a consenting adult wants to mutilate their body, fine, but parents do not have the right to make this decision for their children.

My guess is that very few adults, male or female, would voluntarily choose to have part of their genitals removed. Would you?

(What really blows my mind is that number of adult parents that would not allow their own genitals to be mutilated, but will have it done to their newborns/children without a second thought. It is a messed up world we live in...)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Seuss]
    #5730195 - 06/09/06 10:35 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

What really blows my mind is that number of adult parents that would not allow their own genitals to be mutilated, but will have it done to their newborns/children without a second thought. It is a messed up world we live in...

:thumbup:


--------------------
Live for the moment you are in now
Don't be bogged down by your past
Don't be afraid of what lies in your future


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5730404 - 06/09/06 11:48 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

My original statement:

Quote:

There is quite a bit of evidence that male circumcision reduces sexual pleasure, but it certainly does not eliminate it.




Your original statement:

Quote:

And there is evidence that says the exact opposite.




If you want to discuss the psychological aspects of sexuality, fine. I find those aspects much more fascinating than mere anatomical facts. However, that is not what is being discussed in this thread, nor what you said in your original statement, nor what is appropriate to this particular forum. Perhaps you should start a thread in the Physical & Mental Health forum. I would be glad to participate.

Where is your evidence that circumcision increases sexual pleasure? Why are you exempt from backing up your claims, rather than just "ejaculating your assumptions all over this forum"? Post some scientific study, just one which presents actual data which supports your claim that there is just as much evidence to the contrary of my claim. If you cannot, then your assertion is baseless.

My response was to your request about the anatomical significance of the prepuce, or foreskin.

Quote:

And how much, percentage-wise, of nerves does the foreskin compose? Give me a valid, peer-supported study that tells me that something more than like .0025% of the nerves that compose the penis are part of the foreskin.




Mothers Against Circumcision was hosting an article which related the details of an actual, scientific study of the anatomy of the penis. This study was contemporaneous with the non-scientific, anecdotal study which the AAP relied upon for their statement regarding circumcision. I also posted a link to the study itself, which you apparently did not bother to do more than skim before posting an irritable response.

The fact that I do not have a penis does not limit my ability to study the information generated by scientific studies of anatomy and sexuality. You requested actual data, which I provided. You chose to reject it and demand psychological issues be addressed instead. This is unreasonable and an obvious red herring.

Certainly sex is more than physical sensation, just as life is more than physical sensation, but does this mean that we should deliberately and for no therapeutic purpose amputate our foreskin, clitoris, finger tips, eyes, lips, taste buds, etc...?

What exactly are you defending here? That it is OK for all cultures to continue abusive practices, as long as it is their "thing"? I vehemently disagree.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 18 days
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5730657 - 06/09/06 12:48 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

While this is an interesting discussion, I'm having a hard time seeing how the last two dozen or so posts relate to politics or law or activism. Are any of the participants in this thread advocating a government law against circumcision?

If I don't see some kind of tie-in next post I'll move the thread.




Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Phred]
    #5731685 - 06/09/06 06:43 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I'm having a hard time seeing how the last two dozen or so posts relate to politics or law or activism.

Mothers Against Circumcision is an activist organization, and the discussion of late is heavy about them. :shrug:

Are any of the participants in this thread advocating a government law against circumcision?

/me raises hand

We already have laws against mutilating someone who has not given consent. We just conveniently ignore the law when it comes to the most defenseless among us.

By the way, as if mutilating babies isn't bad enough, apparently there is a profit motive behind keeping this practice alive. Amputated foreskins are in demand by pharmaceutical and cosmetics companies who pay hospitals for them. The foreskins are used in the development of skin products and for research into developing therapies for burn victims. I understand that parents are rarely told their babies' body parts are sold after they're amputated.

How can it be that we're so careful to preclude payment for donated human eggs to be used for research, but we have no problem chopping off pieces of babies for use in money-making endeavors.

This makes me sick to my stomach.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Edited by Diploid (06/10/06 10:06 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5731857 - 06/09/06 07:27 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Child abuse is already against the law, so what the U.S. government needs to do is apply the same standard to non-therapeutic (and often non-anesthetized :eek:) genital surgery as it does to other physical abuses perpetrated by adults against children.

If someone cut off the tip of a child's finger, using no anesthesia and for no medical reason, this would be considered abuse.  Cultural bias has blinded people to the fact that genital mutilation is abusive, unnecessary and backward.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDirtMcgirt
in a pinch
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 2,213
Loc: city of angels
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5731870 - 06/09/06 07:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I'm an irratable bastard, especially when met with pretension...

Quote:


My original statement:

    Quote:
    There is quite a bit of evidence that male circumcision reduces sexual pleasure, but it certainly does not eliminate it.



Your original statement:

    Quote:
    And there is evidence that says the exact opposite.



If you want to discuss the psychological aspects of sexuality, fine. I find those aspects much more fascinating than mere anatomical facts. However, that is not what is being discussed in this thread, nor what you said in your original statement, nor what is appropriate to this particular forum. Perhaps you should start a thread in the Physical & Mental Health forum. I would be glad to participate.

Where is your evidence that circumcision increases sexual pleasure?





I have read ancedotal evidence that says post circumcision, adult men have claimed greater sexual stimulation.  That is all I was referring to.  I can dig it out for you but it would be a waste of my time because you still seem to think this is a discussion about anatomy.  I suppose this miscommunication is my fault.  I never claimed to believe or I never set out to show that circumcision increases sexual pleasure.  When I said that, I was implying how riduculous your assertion was by inserting an equally ridiculous one.

You said sexual pleasure-that is different than nerve stimulation.  IF stimulation is what you meant, then go ahead and edit your post.  Otherwise your claim is nothing more than the binary of stimulus=pleasure.  I could not disagree with this more and that is why the psychology has to be brought up.  It is part of the arguement no matter how much you wish to dismiss it.


Quote:

You requested actual data, which I provided.




You did not provide any data that supported your claim that uncircumcised males achieve more sexual pleasure.  Your data pointed out the obvious-that there are nerves in the foreskin, and that these nerves are not there when it has been removed.  It does not address the precentage of nerves that the foreskin composes in regard to the penis as a whole. 


Quote:

You chose to reject it and demand psychological issues be addressed instead. This is unreasonable and an obvious red herring




Hardly because that is what I've been getting at the whole time.  I may not have made this clear, it is my fault.  If a male is circumcised before sexual maturity, he knows not the difference and his sexual pleasure will be equal to a uncircumcised male during intercourse because I feel sexual pleasure is mostly psychological.  IE:  I can grab my penis right now and feel no pleasure until I start dropping the names of the various college courses I have taken.:naughty:


The only way to study circumcision's realworld effects is the self report of those who have had the procedure done after sexual maturity, but you throw these out as unscientific, and they conveiniently contradict your claim of a highented sexual pleasure for uncircumcised males.  But it is all that there is to go on in this debate for me


Quote:

does this mean that we should deliberately and for no therapeutic purpose amputate our foreskin, clitoris, finger tips, eyes, lips, taste buds, etc...?





It doesn't mean anything.  Why do we wear earring?  Get Tattoos?  IF you think about it these things have no logical value either.  But they play a part in the therapy of identity.  Just like circumcision, it is stupid, but It does carry the value of idetity, even if such a thing is imagined.

Quote:


What exactly are you defending here? That it is OK for all cultures to continue abusive practices, as long as it is their "thing"? I vehemently disagree.




I'm defending circumcision, not abuse.  You call it abuse, I call it culture.  I say to each his own.  If male circumcision is abuse-than it should be outlawed when done without concent, correct?  I think not.  I argue against this idea.  A parent has the right to choose to send his or her child to preschool or to home teach them becasue they want to mold them how they feel is best for the child.  A parent has the right to impose their culture their children-it happens anyways.  They threfore have the right to circumcise their son if they feel it is important on the level of their identity.  It has no real negative effects.  It does have positive effects, though--identity.  Ask your nearest jewish person the importance of identity in their lives even if they practice silly rituals for no "scientific" positive effect.


--------------------
"And we, inhabitants of the great coral of the Cosmos, believe the atom (which still we cannot see) to be full matter, whereas, it too, like everything else, is but an embroidery of voids in the Void, and we give the name of being, dense and even eternal, to that dance of inconsistencies, that infinite extension that is identified with absolute Nothingness and that spins from its own non-being the illusion of everything."


Edited by DirtMcgirt (06/09/06 07:36 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5731942 - 06/09/06 07:59 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

You call it abuse, I call it culture.

Would you still call it culture if we were talking about branding a baby with a hot iron?

How about a partial castration, leaving one testicle behind so the child could still reproduce and is not functionally harmed?

How about the removal of a kidney. The child can live with just one, after all. Would this also be acceptable if the parents' culture demanded it?

Where do you draw the line?


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Edited by Diploid (06/09/06 08:07 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,460
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 2 hours, 2 minutes
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5732061 - 06/09/06 08:30 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Female circumcision is done INTENTIONALLY to eliminate sexual pleasure.


Male circumcision is done....but not for that specific reason.


--------------------
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: SirTripAlot]
    #5732858 - 06/10/06 12:49 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Female circumcision is done INTENTIONALLY to eliminate sexual pleasure.

Male circumcision is done....but not for that specific reason.


:rolleyes:


"It's done for health reasons. God created an imperfect body and we have to fix it."

:whatever:


--------------------
Live for the moment you are in now
Don't be bogged down by your past
Don't be afraid of what lies in your future


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDirtMcgirt
in a pinch
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 2,213
Loc: city of angels
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5733211 - 06/10/06 03:49 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

where would you draw the line




Good question and it is not for me to decide, or YOU. As it stands the majority of people on this planet feel male circumcision is not abuse. I feel the majority of people believe it is a pointless and minor alteration on male genetalia. A silly novelty. It is hardly parallel to the extreame of chopping off testicles or even removing the clitoris. Those things are much, much more serious, practically surgery. Stay on subject


Personally I don't know if I will circumcize my son if I ever have one. I've never really thought about it but I probably won't-seems pointless. However, It shouldn't be outlawed. That is stupid. That is pushing your beliefs on others-something I oppose. You can shout down circumcision and call it stupid all you want but when you start forcing people to conform to your beliefs that is far more barbaric than slicing off a little bit of skin ever could be. Human variety is what makes humankind so...human


--------------------
"And we, inhabitants of the great coral of the Cosmos, believe the atom (which still we cannot see) to be full matter, whereas, it too, like everything else, is but an embroidery of voids in the Void, and we give the name of being, dense and even eternal, to that dance of inconsistencies, that infinite extension that is identified with absolute Nothingness and that spins from its own non-being the illusion of everything."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5733542 - 06/10/06 08:54 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

It is hardly parallel to the extreame of chopping off testicles or even removing the clitoris. Those things are much, much more serious, practically surgery.

So, it's culture or abuse depending on where you personally draw an arbitrary line?

Stay on subject

I AM on topic. Circumcision is surgery.

Personally I don't know if I will circumcise my son if I ever have one

Considering how permanent the procedure is, shouldn't the decision be left for the boy to make when he's older? Seems the lowest of selfish to deny a person that chance by irreversibly force-feeding your son a culture he may eventually reject.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDirtMcgirt
in a pinch
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 2,213
Loc: city of angels
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Diploid]
    #5734561 - 06/10/06 03:05 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

So, it's culture or abuse depending on where you personally draw an arbitrary line?





Of course, everybody is going to draw a personal line somewhere. That is why these things are gray. Is cutting the infant's hair abuse(remember islam), is spanking abuse? Is sending your child to private school abuse? We can call it abuse if you like, arguing semantics is pointelss, but that doesn't change the effect of the procedure.


Quote:

considering how permanent the procedure is, shouldn't the decision be left for the boy to make when he's older?




And what would be a good age for consent in your opinion? 2? 5? 10? 18? You do have a point there, it is permanent. That is a good reason not to do it. But the procedure is so arbitrary that it doesn't make much a difference to those who do choose to circumcise their son or to all but a small handful of people who have been circumcised. Permanent and without consent, yes, important and life altering, no.


Quote:

Seems the lowest of selfish to deny a person that chance by irreversibly force-feeding your son a culture he may eventually reject.




You, all of us, are force fed and swallowed our parent's culture no matter how much you may think you've trandscended it. Wheather or not one is cicumcised makes little difference to that.


Like I already said:
Quote:

You can shout down circumcision and call it stupid all you want but when you start forcing people to conform to your beliefs that is far more barbaric than slicing off a little bit of skin ever could be




That is the lowest of selfish, to force your opinion about an arbitrary procedure onto others who don't share it.

I'm done with this because I'm not arguing for circumcision, people do for their own personal reasons. I'm arguing for the right to do it. You have skirted around actually saying you want it outlawed. Do you? If you really believe it to be abuse--back up your opinion and state it should be outlawed and stopped.

This is going nowhere and personally I don't even care about circumcision-I just hate it when people make false claims to strengthen their position(like veritas has done) or try to force their worldview onto others when it is over something as silly as the foreskin of the penis (which is what you will be doing if you say it should be outlawed).


You may have the last word.

Live and let live...


Edited by DirtMcgirt (06/10/06 03:13 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,460
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 2 hours, 2 minutes
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: niteowl]
    #5735464 - 06/10/06 08:20 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

niteowl said:
Female circumcision is done INTENTIONALLY to eliminate sexual pleasure.

Male circumcision is done....but not for that specific reason.


:rolleyes:


"It's done for health reasons. God created an imperfect body and we have to fix it."

:whatever:





Many cultures circumcise woman specifically for the purpose of taking away the woman's sexual desire.


In the USA, men are circumcised, for a variety of reasons, whether it be wrong or right. BUT THEY ARE NOT CIRCUMCISED INTENTIONALLY TO TAKE AWAY SEXUAL PLEASURE.

NO SHIT!!!!!!


--------------------
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5735611 - 06/10/06 09:00 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Permanent and without consent, yes, important and life altering, no.

Many circumcised men disagree with you on the 'life altering' part.

You have skirted around actually saying you want it outlawed. Do you?

It already IS outlawed, but the law isn't applied. Be that as it may, if cutting babies with a sharp knife were not already illegal, then yes, I would be in favor of a law specifically prohibiting it.

You may have the last word.

I'll leave the last word to you:

Quote:

You do have a point there, it is permanent. That is a good reason not to do it.




--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5735877 - 06/10/06 10:06 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

I just hate it when people make false claims to strengthen their position(like veritas has done)




You have not disproved my claim, nor supported your own. Until you have done so, keep your baseless accusations out of this forum.

Just to clarify:

Quote:

Pleasure (relevant definition)
sensual gratification




Eliminate a nerve-rich portion of an erogenous organ = reduced sensation. Reduced sensation = reduced potential for sensual gratification.

No need for me to edit my original post, as it is already accurately worded and subsequently backed up by scientific data. Your discussion of the psychology of eroticism is off-topic and irrelevant to the point currently at issue. As I said, it is an interesting subject, but not germane to "circumcision: pro or con."


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHeavyToilet
The Heaviest OfThem All
Male

Registered: 08/06/03
Posts: 9,458
Loc: British Columbia
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5736020 - 06/10/06 10:33 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

As an uncircumcised male, I can tell you that if my foreskin wasn't there, the sensitivity would be lowered substantially in the head. It really can't even be argued about, it's a known fact, and I think every uncut male who has experimented with their dick can testify to this.


Edited by HeavyToilet (06/10/06 10:35 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleHeavyToilet
The Heaviest OfThem All
Male

Registered: 08/06/03
Posts: 9,458
Loc: British Columbia
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: Veritas]
    #5736061 - 06/10/06 10:41 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Another thing that hasn't been pointed out yet is the fact that it is a traumatic experience.

Traumatic experiences don't just 'go away', they can affect someone for their entire life. That's a permanent change in the brain. Just because the kid doesn't remember it doesn't mean it hasn't caused a significant disturbance in the brain.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: HeavyToilet]
    #5736141 - 06/10/06 10:58 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Thanks for your first-person account. :grin:

This incredible article on Male Genital Mutilation (as circumcision should rightfully be known)addresses the neurological changes you refer to, as well as describing the surgical procedure:

Quote:

Now let's examine how a typical medical circumcision is performed.

First the child, after 9 months in the fetal position, is tied down spreadeagled and straight-backed in a circumstraint, a plastic board molded to the outline of an infant's body, which is equipped with velcro straps.

Next he is covered with a sheet which has a hole through which his penis is threaded. Then his penis is thoroughly swabbed with sterilizing solution. Naturally, this frequently provokes an erection. Some physicians deliberately provoke erections in order to judge the "cutoff line" and to aid in the surgery itself.

In any case, in the infant's brand new, wide-open, pre-verbal consciousness, this is his first sexual experience: a torturous nightmare.

Because the foreskin of an infant is attached to the head of the penis by the same tissue that bonds a fingernail to a finger, it must be skinned away before it can be cut off. So the doctor forces a metal probe between the foreskin and the head and tears apart this flesh (called synechia) which bonds them together. Next, the doctor has several options for the actual amputation.

One commonly used device for this step is called a gomco clamp. This essentially functions as a thumbscrew for the foreskin. I am not making this up.

Surgical scissors are used to cut a slit along the length of the foreskin in order to insert the metal "bell" which serves as one jaw of the clamp. The foreskin is pulled over the bell and the other jaw of the clamp is attached.

Then, by tightening a screw, the foreskin, one of the most densely innervated tissues of the body, is audibly crushed along two lines (inner and outer foreskin) around its circumference.

(Since all the nerves of the foreskin pass through this crush line, the pain perception may be similar to that of putting virtually the entire erogenous surface of the penis in a vise.)

The clamp is left on for a few minutes to promote blood clotting, then the foreskin is cut off at the crush line.

Afterwards, the raw, bleeding, formerly internal organ is wrapped in bandages and a diaper, and then repeatedly burned with urine and its breakdown product, ammonia, and exposed to infectious fecal matter while healing.

For many years the mainstream medical orthodoxy, put forth after it was no longer acceptable to torture children in the name of "moral hygiene," was that babies don't feel pain. It wasn't until 1978 that researchers even suggested using anesthetic during circumcision, and even today, most medical circumcisions are performed without anesthesia, according to the AMA.




http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html

The line must be drawn between respecting cultural differences and condoning child abuse.  Perhaps many of the U.S. parents who circumcise their sons do so out of ignorance, rather than as a nod to their cultural/religious beliefs.  If so, education would expose this practice for what it is: cruel mutilation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblebuckwheat
Cynically Insane

Registered: 12/09/02
Posts: 11,179
Loc: Not Enough Characters to ...
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: DirtMcgirt]
    #5736194 - 06/10/06 11:11 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

DirtMcgirt said:

You did not provide any data that supported your claim that uncircumcised males achieve more sexual pleasure. Your data pointed out the obvious-that there are nerves in the foreskin, and that these nerves are not there when it has been removed. It does not address the precentage of nerves that the foreskin composes in regard to the penis as a whole.





Knock yourself out.

http://www.noharmm.org/morepages.htm


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleVeritas
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
Re: Forced Female Circumcision's Legacy [Re: buckwheat]
    #5737453 - 06/11/06 10:23 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yes, that page includes the same study (conducted by Taylor) which I linked to in my post.  Apparently the scientific examination and measurement of foreskins is not relevant, however, as it does not address the psychology of eroticism.  :rolleyes:

And, of course, if my cultural beliefs included the ritual removal of my son's eyelids, the relevant issue would not be the function or benefit of having intact eyelids, but the psychology of sight.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Feminized Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Cluster bombs: The deadly legacy Alex213 420 0 11/21/05 12:11 AM
by Alex213
* Force and Deception
( 1 2 all )
DoctorJ 2,495 25 07/14/04 05:19 PM
by zappaisgod
* PA Continues to Laud Female Suicide Bomber as Role Model lonestar2004 613 2 07/07/05 02:34 PM
by lonestar2004
* Torture, Force-Feeding, and Darkness at Noon: Welcome to Gitmo SquattingMarmot 411 0 02/27/06 04:27 AM
by SquattingMarmot
* Brokaw says 1960s' legacy still unknown Bridgeburner 625 1 11/28/07 04:34 PM
by vividavis
* Another female hostage found murdered - dismembered, disembowled, throat slit
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
HagbardCeline 10,002 104 11/25/04 12:01 PM
by zahudulallah
* The Clinton Legacy lives on
( 1 2 all )
Phred 3,537 31 07/26/04 07:23 PM
by zappaisgod
* The Clinton Legacy is 9/11/01.
( 1 2 all )
Ellis Dee 4,584 24 02/14/02 08:28 PM
by PGF

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
3,278 topic views. 3 members, 4 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.052 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 14 queries.