The Foreskin and Chris's Ass Thread

[*Asterisk*]

Welcome to the foreskin thread!

View attachment 54630

See that guy up there? He doesn't care about children's well-being and safety.

Circumcision has a wide variety of benefits including (but not limited to)

• Reducing the risk of H.I.V infections
• Reducing the risk of sexually transmitted diseases overall.
• Reduces the risk of penile cancers
• Increases sensitivity (and pleasure)
• Reduces chance of penile injury later in life.

Circumcision should be heavily suggested right after birth. Some people think it's bad because Muslims and Jews do it, but the evidence clearly reveals the real world benefits.

Anyone else care to voice their opinions?

You're like Jesus, but better.

@*Asterisk* @Watcher

Are you guys circumcised or uncircumcised?

You're worse than the goat Hitler knocked up on a drunken bender.

Also, you're fat, and I would not have sex with you.

 

[autisticdragonkin]

I have no idea how you can get that off topic in a thread about dick skin.

That is the argument used by advocates of female circumcision. No pleasure means no desire which means more mental energy for motherhood

 

[GS 281]

5 pages in 2 days. On foreskin. Really guys?

 

[Len Kagamoney]

Also, if you have a foreskin you can fill it with CO2 and participate in an action called "foreskin blimping"

Spoiler

ignore the snake or whatever

 

[Ification]

Also, if you have a foreskin you can fill it with CO2 and participate in an action called "foreskin blimping"

Spoiler

ignore the snake or whatever

Well there goes my will to live.

 

[RV 229]

If circumcision really has all these benefits, then we need to bring the practice back for girls. We don't need our clitoral hoods, amirite, ladies?

 

[Flowers For Sonichu]

My friend got circumcised when he was 8.

It traumatized him.

 

[Malleus Narcissus]

Removing it may ruin my appreciation of lovely Ludwig van...

Of course, it would save me money on lubricants. And I wouldn't miss a single scene when I'm watching my "The Golden Girls" box set again.

So....worth considering. For the children!

 

[Conrix]

My dick is free from Jewish mutilation





















Ladies.

Uncut pride worldwide, motherfuckers.

Except in places where it's easier to get diseases like Africa.

 

[*Asterisk*]

If circumcision really has all these benefits, then we need to bring the practice back for girls. We don't need our clitoral hoods, amirite, ladies?

The hood removal has never been what those crazy African witch doctors and Islamofascists have advocated. It's always been an advocation of the removal of the clitoris at best, or the removal of all external female genitalia at worst. The male equivalent of this would be if circumcision removed the head at best, or a penectomy at worst. Penectomies, by the way, look like this:

Spoiler: NSFW

Horrific, eh. This is why people oppose FGM, because it performs the female equivalent of the above on them for no medical benefit. The only reasons penectomies are ever performed is because of penile cancer, a disease which has about a zero percent chance of happening to circumcised men.

 

[Ariel]

Cases like this are why i'm against circumcision
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-11814300

 

[*Asterisk*]

Cases like this are why i'm against circumcision
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-11814300

This was because of the experimental procedure used. Had they performed the operation with a normal technique, things would've been fine. The one at fault is the quack urologist who thought cauterization would be a good means of performing a circumcision.

 

[AnOminous]

Horrific, eh. This is why people oppose FGM, because it performs the female equivalent of the above on them for no medical benefit. The only reasons penectomies are ever performed is because of penile cancer

Or because you're Dorian Thorn, who literally cut his dick off for attention and asspats.

 

[Ariel]

This was because of the experimental procedure used. Had they performed the operation with a normal technique, things would've been fine. The one at fault is the quack urologist who thought cauterization would be a good means of performing a circumcision.

It just shouldn't be done at all.
I can't believe you would advocate something that harms men like this. It's shocking!

 

[*Asterisk*]

It just shouldn't be done at all.
I can't believe you would advocate something that harms men like this. It's shocking!

You've yet to post any serious evidence for this in the numerous times we've debated this topic. At least attempt to make a real point.

 

[Ariel]

You've yet to post any serious evidence for this in the numerous times we've debated this topic. At least attempt to make a real point.

I did both on this very page. You suffer from some extreme cognitive dissonance!

 

[LordAzazel]

The hood removal has never been what those crazy African witch doctors and Islamofascists have advocated. It's always been an advocation of the removal of the clitoris at best, or the removal of all external female genitalia at worst. The male equivalent of this would be if circumcision removed the head at best, or a penectomy at worst. Penectomies, by the way, look like this:

Horrific, eh. This is why people oppose FGM, because it performs the female equivalent of the above on them for no medical benefit. The only reasons penectomies are ever performed is because of penile cancer, a disease which has about a zero percent chance of happening to circumcised men.

I find it odd that when talking about FGM we're always talking about the worst cases.
Did you know the AAP recommended loosening the law on FGM to permit a ritual cut of the clitoris of girls?
They thought such a symbolic circumcision ('cause it wouldn't cause any permanent damage) would reduce the rate of the worst cases of FGM.
Civilised America threw up a stinker though, and wondered how the AAP could recommend such a barbaric custom.

And you know, why would you like to cut babies? If it truly reduces HIV infection rates, why not wait until they can make an informed decision?
Recommended reading btw: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23514832
Intact men use condoms more frequently. Which is the best protection against HIV we have.

You're welcome.

Here's some more circumcision facts.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/circumcision-rates-declining-health-risks-rising-study-says/

View attachment 54698

Can I respectfully ask where this epidemic of foreskin related issues are in Europe?
When you decide a foreskin is gross, every disease looks like an uncut penis. I'd daresay most foreskin issues in America are caused by doctors.
I've heard cases where infants were retracted because they had an ear infection! (spoiler: The foreskin is fused to the glans as a child, ripping it off is as if you lift up a fingernail to check under it for diseases and then act surprised when the finger gets irritated and infected)

 

[JU 199]

You've yet to post any serious evidence for this in the numerous times we've debated this topic. At least attempt to make a real point.

I don't understand what your point is Asterisk, could you articulate it again?

Here's some more circumcision facts!

 

[*Asterisk*]

I find it odd that when talking about FGM we're always talking about the worst cases.
Did you know the AAP recommended loosening the law on FGM to permit a ritual cut of the clitoris of girls?
They thought such a symbolic circumcision ('cause it wouldn't cause any permanent damage) would reduce the rate of the worst cases of FGM.
Civilised America threw up a stinker though, and wondered how the AAP could recommend such a barbaric custom.

Personally, I would be fine if all the witch doctors and Islamofascists wanted to do was a hood removal. The clitoral hood's the female equivalent of the male foreskin anyway, and like the foreskin, really doesn't serve any purpose other than to get infected. But I've yet to here of any FGM performers advocate just the removal of the hood. As you can see on page 47 of this report (or, if you're looking at the PDF page number, page 55) the overwhelming majority perform either a removal of the clitoris and large chunks of external genitalia, all external genitalia, or what I mentioned before while sewing the wound together.

And you know, why would you like to cut babies? If it truly reduces HIV infection rates, why not wait until they can make an informed decision?
Recommended reading btw: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23514832
Intact men use condoms more frequently. Which is the best protection against HIV we have.

I have many reasons. But the biggest one is that the risks of waiting are greater than the risks of complications of the procedure when performed on infants using local anesthesia, or even without using local anesthesia. Penile cancer, for instance, is not a common illness, but it does have a higher chance of happening and leading to a fatal or mutilatory outcome than the risks of a circumcision procedure, and circumcision reduces your chances of contracting it to essentially zero. Hell, the risks of being put under general anesthesia for any procedure are higher than the risks of circumcision as a child under local anesthetic.

The human body is quite flawed, and the foreskin is not the only part which serves no function other than to get infected. The appendix and wisdom teeth have the same problems as well, and if there was a way to remove them or prevent them from coming to be that could be performed on an infant that had a lower risk of complications than being put under general anesthesia as an adult, I'd advocate performing those operations as well.

Can I respectfully ask where this epidemic of foreskin related issues are in Europe?

Something doesn't have to be epidemic to be a medical problem. UTIs are a pain, but they won't kill you. Phimosis is a pain, but it won't kill you. A higher risk of STDs is a pain, but you can help counter that by being careful. Penile cancer sucks, but it's not particularly common. The risks that come with not being circumcised aren't the same as the risks you get when you take medical advice from an Alex Jones or a Kent Hovind, but they're still there. You saying this is like saying that because Europeans have higher rates of alcohol consumptions than North Africans but have a longer life expectency, drinking must raise your life expectancy.

Plus, when you add this insane stigma to the procedure, you make people feel like freaks when they actually do need it by the time an issue comes up when they're an adult even though the stigma is completely unwarranted.

When you decide a foreskin is gross, every disease looks like an uncut penis. I'd daresay most foreskin issues in America are caused by doctors.
I've heard cases where infants were retracted because they had an ear infection! (spoiler: The foreskin is fused to the glans as a child, ripping it off is as if you lift up a fingernail to check under it for diseases and then act surprised when the finger gets irritated and infected)

This is really autistic and you've cited absolutely nothing in this part of your post to boot. What the hell are you going on about here?

 

[Sanae Kochiya]

... Are you guys seriously having an intense debate in Off-Topic?