Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

Really? Grow new ones where? The skin is gone, the Glans aren't gonna change their structure to allow new nerves once it detects the loss of the foreskin, the body does not work like that! It's the opposite actually, loss of foreskin can cause loss of feeling in the Glans, not more. The consequence isn't small, it has risks, it causes permanent loss of feeling.

'The consequences are small" is not an argument, you need to have a good reason to permanently alter another's body without their consent, which these is none. You can't just chop off body parts saying "It's ok, he won't miss it"

So the slim chance of contracting Posthitis, phimosis, balanoposthitis, Or penile cancer is just bullshit.

It isn't fully proven that circumcision reduces the risk of those diseases either.

But the slim chance of losing sensation

If there are nerves in the foreskin, removing it will remove the nerves 100% of the time.

is solid proof circumcision is bad?

It's solid proof that circumcision isn't fully understood to be safe enough to be routinely performed on nonconsenting minors, as I see it.

We already posted links saying the penal cancer is bullshit, and the infection thing is negligible or in dispute. Please read them.

Also we posted studies showing the losing sensation in the glans isn't slim, and losing sensation in the foreskin in universal.

…

Going back to my original post, I'm just going to pose this question right now. Is there a good, solid reason that the foreskin needs to be removed at birth. Forget the whole loss of sensation or complication argument for a minute. Is there a good, solid reason that is not in dispute or negligible for it to be done in the first place? If the consequences are small either way, then why not leave it as it is? Tradition and religion are not good reasons. Why is it necessary to alter the penis at birth without the child's consent? If you can't give me a good, solid, not in dispute reason why the foreskin has to go, then there is no reason to keep supporting newborn circumcision.

First off, the nerves regrow on the head.
Secondly, according to the American academy of paediatrics the benefits far outweigh the risks. I am not a doctor so I don't know why but it's very likely for good reason based on comprehensive scientific data. They are far more credible than a lot of articles you submit.

Secondly, according to the American academy of paediatrics the benefits far outweigh the risks. I am not a doctor so I don’t know why but it’s very likely for good reason based on comprehensive scientific data. They are far more credible than a lot of articles you submit.

What makes them so much more credible then other government funded scientific studies?

Even the World Health Organization admits that sort of viewpoint is contentious.

@jarbox

Uh, I just read this and I can say it is neutral with circumcision. All it does is point out risks and benefits.

First – How?
Second – Source?
Third – Then why did I and others lose feeling?

In response to the link, i read the reasons they listed, the HIV one I already posted a link debunking it, the urinary track infection is listed as "slightly" Also, from that link "however, existing scientific evidence is not sufficient to recommend routine circumcision." They don't recommend it actually.

I asked for reasons, not people who support it, that is Appeal to Authority my friend.

No they don't.
And let me point out an aspect of this that no one's brought up yet- in the US, circumcision is practically an industry. If not today (I'm not sure), then at least quite recently, it was the most common surgical procedure performed. In Europe, you'll find that the majority of the medical community is at the forefront of the anti-postnatal circumcision push.

Here's a video for people who are raising the "I'm circumcised and I'm fine." argument.

What I don't understand about the pro-circumcision people is why they can't just wait until they're adults if that's what they wanted. The problem is that you can't reverse a circumcision and it's not an operation that has any purpose other than religious purposes.

Circumcision of infants in my opinion should be banned because there's no reason for it. It's really weird to hear about people talk about botched surgeries about their own kid like "oh they cut your wee wee wrong, we're gonna cut it again to make it right!" like oh my god that put shivers down my spine when I heard that.

Reasons why its bad

It ruins sex and fapping

It can be botched and lead to forced SRS (David reimer)
Babies die from it too

The best reasons I've seen people give for infant circumcision is "why the hell not?" which isn't exactly a reason. Like I tried to stress in my first post it's an issue of consent of what to do with your body. The people advocating for circumcision has the burden of consent in this debate you you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that fhe benefits outweigh the cots and the value of consent.

For example, vaccinations of a child against their will. The kid can't consent, but all vaccines do is cause temporary pain and a prick that heals in a few days with no scarring and is proven to save lives and purge diseases from society. Has anyone proven in this thread that circumcisions provide even close to the same benefits compared to costs? I think not. "Because why not" isn't a reason.

@Starscream

For one, I am circumcised and mine works fine as I said but I wish I had the option and will never know what those nerves could have done for me. I just wish I could have chosen what to do but now it's too late as I can't ever get it back. One of the people in this thread arguing against it doesn't even have a penis. And with the "I'm fine with it" argument check the video Spider-byte posted.

And thinking it looks better circumcised is not an argument. I actually think they look better circumcised too but that's not the issue in the slightest. Hell maybe we think foreskins look ugly because we're so unused to them. Lots of people aren't even sure if they're circumcised or not because they've never actually seen an uncircumcised one.

Uhhh, no. Learned nothing. All I got was "Its bad because i say its bad"
Sure she, had the argument that "It can kill kids if done wrong". you know what else can kill kids if the doctor messes up? Delivering a baby. What if the doctor drops the baby while delivering it possibly killing it? Should we stop having kids? I'm still not convinced in anyway that circumcision is bad, maybe I am missing out but thats not really an issue. I still feel pleasure, just not as much, boohoo. Oh wait I can get infections? But I can do that by simply living or still having that forseskin, so eh? And I'll say it again, if you don't want your kids being circumcised don't get them circumcised, no one will ever force you to do so. The end.
Also I love how much the woman exaggerated it like someone at a church would so they can brain wash people into feeling super sad. Really useful video it was.

@NON

You didn't prove anything more with your post. I already addressed the cost benefit thing. You know what the cost to delivering a baby is? Having a friggin baby and new life. Circumcisions… They look nicer and maybe prevent infections which are still gotten without a foreskin and is prevented with safe sex and just cleaning the thing which circumcised people should be doing anyways?

Like legitimately you're peddling the "why not" thing. You even say "not as much pleasure boohoo". Just because you don't care doesn't mean you can decide for others let someone have the option for crying out loud why is that so bad?

if you don’t want your kids being circumcised don’t get them circumcised

Yeah sure but it's not like I or like millions of other people out there even had a choice for themselves which is the point of this debate from my side.

@Sam, its more of a "why complain" matter because…. why complain? Yea we lose pleasure, more power to the people who don't, but these people in this thread are going off the wall for such simple matter. The video stated that the infants are "forced on a table having their foreskin hacked off while they scream in agony until they are silenced" when its more of "Doctors cut off a part of the dick and if they screw up the could kill the baby, but otherwise doing it really doesn't effect them.". Just calm down, its just a limb, sorry I don't feel pleasure like others do, but you should be complaining about this in a manner of "that seems kinda pointless' not "THIS IS HORRIBLE AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL"

You have a point that people like to sensationalize the issue (probably even me even just in this thread) but that doesn't devalue the points or make the practice any more acceptable. Like there's still yet to be a single reason other than religion for this to be done and that can be countered with "let them grow into the religion and choose for themselves". Generally there's no big deal with people choosing to do it for themselves because they're choosing it for themselves. The other side has a problem with "this has to be done immediately it's like a vaccine or babies being born who knows the catastrophe if everyone has some extra skin on their peens for couple of years".

Why complain? Because it has more drawbacks then benefits and it's permanently altering a psychologically important part of the body without the effected's consent for the reason "Tradition" or "Why not?"

>permanently altering a psychologically important part of the body
No
Its not
Its a flap of skin
That provides pleasure
People get it cut off
Live with it
I'm done here
This is pointless.

If extra pleasure is "essential" then wouldn't eating a chocolate bar also count as essential?

NON wrote:

I still feel pleasure, just not as much, boohoo.

Yea we lose pleasure…

You know, believe it or not, I have this empathetic desire for people to generally experience as much joy in their lives as they possibly can. And I think a lot of other people do as well- if you look at the systems of morality proposed and practiced throughout human history, you'll find that idea as a core objective, if not the core objective.
It is a fact that circumcisions fuck some guys up, plain and simple. It may very well be a minority, but not a minuscule one. Knowing this, the burden of proof falls 100% on the proponents of the procedure as to why there is a significant purpose behind performing it that cannot be achieved with alternate, less severe methods (such as practicing safe sex). While I believe adults should essentially be allowed to do whatever they want with their own bodies, minors must be protected under the law.

You guys are not getting it, it has nothing to do with be "essential" Your Ear is not essential, your fingers are not essential, your eyes are not essential, your nose is not essential, should we not be allowed to complain when someone else cuts it off without your permission?

It's clear that you guys never read the links showing the purpose of the foreskin. It's not a useless piece of skin. And NON, I'm not sure if you realize this but a lot of men actually care about their penises Enough that they are troubled by routine mutilation of it. A good portion of the brain is wired around it, hence "psychologically important".

Do you guys realize your argument is basically "I don't care about this issue at all, so everyone stop complaining about it!" If you don't care, whether or not circumcisions are done on babies, let the discussion be held by people who do care. If you do think babies should be circumcised, please give a better reason than "Who cares?" or "Tradition" or "parents should be able to alter their child to their fancy" None of them are arguments

(First paragraph)
When we say the foreskin is non-essential we mean it's function is relatively unimportant compared to the rest of the bodily functions. Like fingers are used to pick up and build, arguably something humanity needs.Your eyes help to guide you as you travel and as such can see up to 2 miles away. To say that the foreskin is just as important as these functions are is ludicrous as it's only function is sexual pleasure. It's like removing an earlobe, it is not particularly useful and does not affect you if you remove it.

(Second paragraph)
Lubrication and pleasure, that's it. It does not have any other important functions. Also you are unaware of the concept of neuroplasticity. Because these people grew up with their foreskins and have become attached to them. Thus the brain does develop for it.

(Third paragraph)
You are demanding that we ban circumcision, how can we not say what we think about this? There is a very low risk to circumcision, but here you are ranting and demanding how bad this is and how it should be illegal. Circumcision injuries come from bad doctors and it is not even that common. As for the people that do care they are uncircumcised people who interpret it as shocking, when there really is no physical harm.

• You are missing the point. The point is that a body part shouldn't be removed based on how important it is.

• And protection of the Glans, to protect it from going numb like a lot of people have. People grow up attached to their penises and then become disturbed when they realize what has happened to them.

• We are not asking to ban circumcision, just that the practice wait until the person can consent. There is physical harm, that's whole point. The risks aren't as low as a you think, and even if they are low, a low risk still outweighs no tangible benefit. If there is no tangible benefit, even a slim chance is still enough to warrant not doing it, not on someone who can't control what's about to happen to them.

• Also, please ignore my repeated question of why this should be allowed on babies. What tangible benefit warrants it? If there is no reason that the foreskin has to be removed, then why should we remove it?

You are missing the point. The point is that a body part shouldn’t be removed based on how important it is.

"Even if they have no important functions, they are still very important" don't twist words to suit your meaning. If something should not be removed that would imply that it is important. It clearly isn't. If you are arguing about how attached one may be to his foreskin than getting attached takes years and as such removing it at an early age the person would grow up and not care about his foreskin (me for example).

Also the glands in the penis are also useless since their function is specifically for the foreskin.

Infant circumcision is not traumatic since the baby won't remember it. If we take it to a later age it would be traumatic, as they have experienced a "loss".
Infant circumcision is

• physically harmless
• psychologically harmless
  And when the baby grows up he just doesn't care about the foreskin because he did not grew up with it.

I can see why some people say you can endure debates, even if you get refuted multiple times you don't give up. It is not about truthfulness it is about winning to you.

Infant circumcision is physically harmless

Ignoring every single piece of evidence posted in this thread that it isn't…

And when the baby grows up he just doesn’t care about the foreskin because he did not grew up with it.

Ignoring all the people who do care that posted in this thread…

Infant circumcision is

* physically harmless
* psychologically harmless

Except when it isn't.

You know when people say something is so improbable it is impossible. That is the logic behind the statement.

And jarbox, most drawbacks from circumcision result from bad surgeons.

How have I been refuted? I posted multiple links regarding the risks and why the benefits are not true or in dispute, while continually asking why it should be removed in the first place with everyone continues to ignore this essential question and keep peddling this "It's useless, who cares?" narrative that has been refuted like seven times already.

Let me ask you this, although given your track record here I don't expect an answer, but if people would only grow attached to their foreskin if they grew up with it, why are so many people who were circumcised at birth upset about it? That alone blows that whole "only people who grow up with their foreskin will miss it" narrative out of the water.

If you can't tell give me a solid answer to "Why should the foreskin be removed in the first place?" without resorting to "Who cares?" (a lot of people actually) how can you say I've been refuted? You ignore the biggest part of my argument then claim I'm refuted? And I'm the one only trying to win?

This isn't about "winning" It's about discussion of something many people find appalling while you keep saying "Why do you care? Shut up"

most drawbacks from circumcision result from bad surgeons.

Except the loss of feeling, mental trauma of losing part of you genitals, and the risk of infection that can happen even if the circumcision is done right. And please keep ignoring our "Even slight risks outweigh no reward" argument.

I and many other people it seems aren't understanding your argument. I haven't seen why it should be allowed. Can you please explain why? Furthermore, you say most drawbacks from circumcision result from bad surgeons. This was a bad statement to make without a reason for allowing it, as
A) You just admitted it has drawbacks without bad surgeons, meaning, overall, the operation is negative. Unless you can provide a reason as to why it should be a thing, you basically just said only bad things happen when done, even if it's minor.
B) You admitted botched circumcisions happen. This is a huge thing, because, as demonstrated, people can lose massive amounts of feeling or even parts of their penis because of it. Once again, I haven't seen a reason why.
Your argument so far chalks up to "It's only slightly bad, except in those .1% of cases where it's REALLY bad, so we should allow it." Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, every surgery will have times where it gets fucked up. This is just another reason to not do a procedure when there isn't a real, legitimate purpose.

While we're at it, let's cut out all the other "pretty much" useless parts of the anatomy before they present problems as well.

Tonsils
Appendix
Hair
Male nipples
Taste buds
Ears
Nose
Pancreas
1 kidney
Gallbladder
Spleen
1 lung
Colon
Stomach
1/2 brain

Better safe than sorry!