FabSwingers.com > Forums > Ireland > Cut or uncut
Cut or uncut
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"This always happens when this thread comes up… some langball that is so insecure and fearful of the idea that someone might have a preference for a penis type that differs wildly to his, chooses to use the most disparaging language - genital mutilation - to stigmatise others (many like me who required it medically) and to denigrate ‘outsider’ cultures. The parallel drawn is also shockingly disrespectful to real victims of FGM, who suffer diametrically different impacts for obscenely different nefarious motives than circumcised men. Should men opt for the procedure voluntarily (reasons other than medical necessity or cultural significance), the motives are surely no different to women who choose cosmetic alterations (/ enhancements) to their genitalia, or indeed other parts of their bodies for that matter. These men shouldn’t be disrespected with such outrageous language or parallels either." All of the above is true. It is still a little strange though, how it gets discussed as if its a presence and general cosmetic choice. The large majority of men with circ's did so for medical reasons It certainly should not be viewed as mutilation, which it probbaly was in the past. From some viewing on here there are a lot of men that probably need or needed one when they were younger! | |||
"This always happens when this thread comes up… some langball that is so insecure and fearful of the idea that someone might have a preference for a penis type that differs wildly to his, chooses to use the most disparaging language - genital mutilation - to stigmatise others (many like me who required it medically) and to denigrate ‘outsider’ cultures. The parallel drawn is also shockingly disrespectful to real victims of FGM, who suffer diametrically different impacts for obscenely different nefarious motives than circumcised men. Should men opt for the procedure voluntarily (reasons other than medical necessity or cultural significance), the motives are surely no different to women who choose cosmetic alterations (/ enhancements) to their genitalia, or indeed other parts of their bodies for that matter. These men shouldn’t be disrespected with such outrageous language or parallels either." Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If one person sees the removal of penis parts for religious/beliefs etc reasons , in the same light as removal of vigina parts for beliefs etc why are they wrong ? | |||
"This always happens when this thread comes up… some langball that is so insecure and fearful of the idea that someone might have a preference for a penis type that differs wildly to his, chooses to use the most disparaging language - genital mutilation - to stigmatise others (many like me who required it medically) and to denigrate ‘outsider’ cultures. The parallel drawn is also shockingly disrespectful to real victims of FGM, who suffer diametrically different impacts for obscenely different nefarious motives than circumcised men. Should men opt for the procedure voluntarily (reasons other than medical necessity or cultural significance), the motives are surely no different to women who choose cosmetic alterations (/ enhancements) to their genitalia, or indeed other parts of their bodies for that matter. These men shouldn’t be disrespected with such outrageous language or parallels either. All of the above is true. It is still a little strange though, how it gets discussed as if its a presence and general cosmetic choice. The large majority of men with circ's did so for medical reasons It certainly should not be viewed as mutilation, which it probbaly was in the past. From some viewing on here there are a lot of men that probably need or needed one when they were younger!" All of the above isn't true . "Circumcision is a religious or cultural ritual for many Jewish and Islamic families, as well as certain aboriginal tribes in Africa and Australia. Circumcision can also be a matter of family tradition, personal hygiene or preventive health care." | |||
"This always happens when this thread comes up… some langball that is so insecure and fearful of the idea that someone might have a preference for a penis type that differs wildly to his, chooses to use the most disparaging language - genital mutilation - to stigmatise others (many like me who required it medically) and to denigrate ‘outsider’ cultures. The parallel drawn is also shockingly disrespectful to real victims of FGM, who suffer diametrically different impacts for obscenely different nefarious motives than circumcised men. Should men opt for the procedure voluntarily (reasons other than medical necessity or cultural significance), the motives are surely no different to women who choose cosmetic alterations (/ enhancements) to their genitalia, or indeed other parts of their bodies for that matter. These men shouldn’t be disrespected with such outrageous language or parallels either. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If one person sees the removal of penis parts for religious/beliefs etc reasons , in the same light as removal of vigina parts for beliefs etc why are they wrong ? " Because female and male genital mutilation is wrong for a start Circumcision is sometimes necessary for a man Cutting up a female child is never necessary | |||
| |||
"This always happens when this thread comes up… some langball that is so insecure and fearful of the idea that someone might have a preference for a penis type that differs wildly to his, chooses to use the most disparaging language - genital mutilation - to stigmatise others (many like me who required it medically) and to denigrate ‘outsider’ cultures. The parallel drawn is also shockingly disrespectful to real victims of FGM, who suffer diametrically different impacts for obscenely different nefarious motives than circumcised men. Should men opt for the procedure voluntarily (reasons other than medical necessity or cultural significance), the motives are surely no different to women who choose cosmetic alterations (/ enhancements) to their genitalia, or indeed other parts of their bodies for that matter. These men shouldn’t be disrespected with such outrageous language or parallels either. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If one person sees the removal of penis parts for religious/beliefs etc reasons , in the same light as removal of vigina parts for beliefs etc why are they wrong ? Because female and male genital mutilation is wrong for a start Circumcision is sometimes necessary for a man Cutting up a female child is never necessary " The majority of current Circumcisions happen as infants | |||
"I can’t imagine too many ‘men’ on here rushing to admonish females opting for elective labiaplasty, clitoral hood reduction and vaginoplasty procedures… certainly unlikely that they’ll be accused of ‘genital mutilation’ for doing so. Then there’s the consequent attitude towards genital targeted procedures amongst those that may be transitioning - a larger proportion on this site than in general society perhaps. The insecure men deriding the humble circumcision may do well to think through their opinions fully." You're comparing apples with oranges those that choose have circumcisions and those to have circumcisions imposed on them as infants are 2 very different categories | |||
"I can’t imagine too many ‘men’ on here rushing to admonish females opting for elective labiaplasty, clitoral hood reduction and vaginoplasty procedures… certainly unlikely that they’ll be accused of ‘genital mutilation’ for doing so. Then there’s the consequent attitude towards genital targeted procedures amongst those that may be transitioning - a larger proportion on this site than in general society perhaps. The insecure men deriding the humble circumcision may do well to think through their opinions fully." | |||
"I can’t imagine too many ‘men’ on here rushing to admonish females opting for elective labiaplasty, clitoral hood reduction and vaginoplasty procedures… certainly unlikely that they’ll be accused of ‘genital mutilation’ for doing so. Then there’s the consequent attitude towards genital targeted procedures amongst those that may be transitioning - a larger proportion on this site than in general society perhaps. The insecure men deriding the humble circumcision may do well to think through their opinions fully." I might add labeling people as insecure because you differ in opinion highlights your inabiletty to be secure with other people who think differently | |||
| |||
"Ah here we go… the anti circumcision crusaders are actually the good guys who care about the babies… billions of those babies have grown up into adulthood, and unencumbered by any socio cultural silencing in a male dominated world, I am unaware of any ‘victims’ movement to ban the practice. The same cannot be said for victims of FGM - those victims actively campaigning to stop the practice or those silenced victims who cannot / dare not / will not campaign or speak out. There is no equivocacy - FGM and circumcision are not the same thing in any way, not least the traditional motives underlying each and the physical & psychological impacts. Show me a cohort of self identifying victims of child circumcision and identify a single adult women electing to undergo FGM and I may reconsider." No one really cares whether you reconsider or not it was just important to point you place your opinion in the spot of fact. The facts are most people whether female or male do not choose have their genitalia altered. I would strongly believe that if there was an adverse reaction to circumcisions as there is female alterations then you would have large cohorts of males protesting against the practice on children. It's glaringly obvious from your posts you believe that everyone should see things the way you do. Disguising your opinions as some sort of faclearly highlights your own personal agenda on the topic. Maybe it's time you considered Hawaii E you feel you are right and why you must deem others who take different as wrong. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Us circumcised men, do not need or want men from the foreskin tribe to fight any battle on our behalf. The vast majority of us circumcised men would prefer that the horrendous issue and vile practice of FGM not be diluted or minimised by parallels with a largely harmless, and rarely regretted, cultural / ceremonial practice, an oft necessitated medical procedure, and an increasingly sought after cosmetic intervention." Omg another self-appointed leader of his kind  are you actually serious ... Your so called facts are not more than personal opinions. There is no data to backup your claim that most circumcisions are for medical reasons in fact it's quite the opposite Hence the proposal to ban in many countries.
Improved understanding of the normal anatomy of the infant foreskin means there is now rarely a therapeutic indication for infant circumcision,1 and the procedure is not supported by international medical opinion.2 Ritual (non-therapeutic) male circumcision, however, continues unchecked throughout the world, long after female circumcision, facial scarification, and other ritual forms of infant abuse have been made illegal. The law and principles pertaining to child protection should apply equally to both sexes, so why do society and the medical profession collude with this unnecessary mutilating practice?
If you choose as an adult whether female or male for your own personal reasons to make these decisions fan fair plenty and I hope it goes well. If somebody imposes that choice on you as an infant whether male or female that's wrong. If you find yourself in a position defending how right something is because it was done to you as a child, thats cultural conditioning. | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"I couldn’t imagine referring to an amputee as a mutilée. I couldn’t imagine attributing genital mutilation to a woman having electively undergone labiaplasty. I couldn’t imagine saying to a victim of FGM, “I know how you feel girl, sure aren’t I circumcised”. "  | |||
"Bitmeagain, I never said majority of circumcisions were medically necessitated. Quite the opposite would be my understanding. I’ve not used the word ‘fact’ either. I have, however, outlined the truths as I understand them - from my own experience, anecdotally from other circumcised men and from working with victims of FGM - to make two basic arguments: 1) circumcision cannot be fairly described as mutilation on the basis that some of us required it as a medical necessity as children, and many adult men choose it electively. This description is unfair and stigmatising to both these cohorts. The description, and broad basis for such, is also indirectly insulting to women choosing genital cosmetic procedures and those transitioned or transitioning sex who choose genital augmentation procedures. 2) Circumcision, even for cultural / religious reasons, is vastly different than FGM in terms of the motivation (historic cultural beginnings of each practice), the impact on the individual, the societal legacy and the existence of self identifying victims opposing the practice. Any parallels between any circumcision, whatever the reason, and FGM is disrespectful to the latter on that basis. You have missed the target on both of these in your direct responses." You can't deem all Circumcisions as being the same just because some people elect for them and some people require them medically. The majority of people have them performed as infants unnecessarily due to religious or cultural beliefs. The unnecessary removal of body parts forcefully is considered mutilation. The cultural aspects behind board are quite different that doesn't excuse the fact that both are considered mutilation by many . The terms genital modification and genital mutilation can refer to permanent or temporary changes to human sex organs. Some forms of genital alteration are performed on adults with their informed consent at their own behest, usually for aesthetic reasons or to enhance stimulation. However, other forms are performed on people who do not give informed consent, including infants or children. Any of these procedures may be considered modifications or mutilations in different cultural contexts and by different groups of people. Your presumption that anyone who considers forced Circumcision of infant males is being disrespectful to sufferers of female genital mutilation is simply an expression of your internal views of others. Not at all based in facts. To voice one wrong is not to be little or no that's just how you see it! Your repeated attempts to lump in people who choose to get circumcised with the forceful circumcision of children is in itself belittling of the topic | |||
"I couldn’t imagine referring to an amputee as a mutilée. I couldn’t imagine attributing genital mutilation to a woman having electively undergone labiaplasty. I couldn’t imagine saying to a victim of FGM, “I know how you feel girl, sure aren’t I circumcised”. " And what would you imagine yourself saying to a young man who felt his body was changed beyond his control and without his concent and felt devastated as a result ? | |||
"I couldn’t imagine referring to an amputee as a mutilée. I couldn’t imagine attributing genital mutilation to a woman having electively undergone labiaplasty. I couldn’t imagine saying to a victim of FGM, “I know how you feel girl, sure aren’t I circumcised”. And what would you imagine yourself saying to a young man who felt his body was changed beyond his control and without his concent and felt devastated as a result ? " circumsisions often done for medical reasons when they are babies/young kids. | |||
"I couldn’t imagine referring to an amputee as a mutilée. I couldn’t imagine attributing genital mutilation to a woman having electively undergone labiaplasty. I couldn’t imagine saying to a victim of FGM, “I know how you feel girl, sure aren’t I circumcised”. " It is clear you feel that because your ok with it, all men,boys should be ok with it as its not a big a deal as what some woman go through . Comparing how people may feel wronged and choosing to see the unnecessary alterations of children's genitalia as acceptable based on sex is stunningly insensitive imo . | |||
| |||
"Op back to your question......think there's ugly battered sausage looking dicks and also dicks that are a thing of beauty ....and beauty is in the eye of the beholder However some dicks on here really should get circumcised because there's no way their owner is able to have sex with the foreskin so tight " On a less divisive note ... this | |||
"And what would you imagine yourself saying to a young man who felt his body was changed beyond his control and without his concent and felt devastated as a result ? " Yes, yes I will engage with the ridiculous… Firstly I’d appeal for you to show me that man, or any critical mass of men who feels like the young man you describe and I will listen to his reasons for feeling that way. I simply have never encountered what you are describing. All we have, bizarrely, and repeatedly, is the occasional non affected (non circumcised) man making the impassioned defence of a non-existent ‘victim’ group. If you have infact encountered such a young man as you describe, and I very much doubt that you have, it would be obvious to me that the hypothetical man simply requires psychological assurance of some sort. I would assure this hypothetical character that a very large proportion of the world’s male population share a childhood circumcision, and he is not unusual in any way and cannot be described as a freak of any sort. I would explain that even if he is divorced from, or disenfranchised with, the religious or cultural background that resulted in his particular circumcision, that many many other boys and men have required it medically in their youth and that he could attribute his circumcision to a medical requirement, without fear of contradiction, if it is a cultural identity issue / cultural embarrassment for the man. I would assure this hypothetical man you are concerned so much for, that none of his penal functions (urinary or sexual) are adversely impacted by his circumcision and that there are in fact many men in the western world today electing to have a circumcision for sexual self / body confidence reasons. I would assure him that the vast vast majority of women (or bisexual and gay men) will not reject him as a lover or partner on the basis of his circumcision. I would finish by acknowledging and warning the man that he will come across some (predominantly) men, who should have no interest in his penis, that’ll try and stigmatise him with unhelpful language and comparisons, but that this is driven by ignorance, insecurity and possibly a mixture of underlying anti-semitism, racism and sectarianism. If the hypothetical young man was not assured by any of the above, I would recommend him to see a psychologist, but to make extensive enquiries as this condition of childhood circumcision regret or trauma is likely to be extremely rare personal difficultly that is not commonly encountered by psychologists over the course of an average career. | |||
| |||
"And what would you imagine yourself saying to a young man who felt his body was changed beyond his control and without his concent and felt devastated as a result ? Yes, yes I will engage with the ridiculous… Firstly I’d appeal for you to show me that man, or any critical mass of men who feels like the young man you describe and I will listen to his reasons for feeling that way. I simply have never encountered what you are describing. All we have, bizarrely, and repeatedly, is the occasional non affected (non circumcised) man making the impassioned defence of a non-existent ‘victim’ group. If you have infact encountered such a young man as you describe, and I very much doubt that you have, it would be obvious to me that the hypothetical man simply requires psychological assurance of some sort. I would assure this hypothetical character that a very large proportion of the world’s male population share a childhood circumcision, and he is not unusual in any way and cannot be described as a freak of any sort. I would explain that even if he is divorced from, or disenfranchised with, the religious or cultural background that resulted in his particular circumcision, that many many other boys and men have required it medically in their youth and that he could attribute his circumcision to a medical requirement, without fear of contradiction, if it is a cultural identity issue / cultural embarrassment for the man. I would assure this hypothetical man you are concerned so much for, that none of his penal functions (urinary or sexual) are adversely impacted by his circumcision and that there are in fact many men in the western world today electing to have a circumcision for sexual self / body confidence reasons. I would assure him that the vast vast majority of women (or bisexual and gay men) will not reject him as a lover or partner on the basis of his circumcision. I would finish by acknowledging and warning the man that he will come across some (predominantly) men, who should have no interest in his penis, that’ll try and stigmatise him with unhelpful language and comparisons, but that this is driven by ignorance, insecurity and possibly a mixture of underlying anti-semitism, racism and sectarianism. If the hypothetical young man was not assured by any of the above, I would recommend him to see a psychologist, but to make extensive enquiries as this condition of childhood circumcision regret or trauma is likely to be extremely rare personal difficultly that is not commonly encountered by psychologists over the course of an average career." It seems you would tell someone feeling this way " don't worry Noone minds , you still function fine , you can lie about your circumstances and tell people it was a medical procedure. You would advise him that he may encounter people who a sympathetic to his feelings , but beware as they have hidden negative agendas . You would go on to explain To him how if his mind hasn't been put at ease by your views and opinions on his feelings that he should talk to somebody in the professional field all be bearing in mind that not many of them will understand just because they haven't encountered it. As far as I can tell from your replies you seem to be of the opinion that it is in no way wrong to have this put upon infant boys without their consand and in no way is similar to what happens to infant girl ? Because this is your opinion it seems you feel that anybody even a boy/man who may find themselves in these circumstances is wrong or over exaggerating their own feelings. You make the assumption in your previous statement that Annie boy or man who finds themselves feeling this way is only because they are disenfranchised from their religion or cultural background and not because they are offended and or traumatized by the fact that their genitalia was altered as a child without their consent. I get that you feel passionately about how wrong what happens to infant young women and married women is in regards to female genital mutilation. What I don't guess is how you can disregard the notion that some men may very well feel the same about the genital alterations that have taken place in them as infants and not for medical reasons. I also don't get that you feel that your views are correct and that people who don't see things the same way must be wrong. You constantly cling on to the for" medical reasons for medical reasons" to make you grand stand a declaration for all who have been Circumcised . According to Hay & Levin, 2012, around 50% of all circumcisions worldwide are performed for reasons of prophylactic healthcare, while the other 50% are predominately performed for religious or cultural reasons. This i dictates that approx 1 in 2 Circumcised males Had procedure done not for medical reasons and in the majority of cases as infants without consenting. That's 1/6 of the world's population of males have had their genitals altered unnecessarily most without choice. I believe having your genitals altered unnecessarily and forcefully is mutilation regardless of your sex. | |||
| |||
"The two of ye are going to get some land when ye discover hardcore porn. Hope your revulsion at, and sympathy for, all the circumcised cocks don’t ruin too many of your wanks." I genuinely can't watch porn with a mutilated penis. Thankfully the Europeans make plenty too. | |||
| |||
"The two of ye are going to get some land when ye discover hardcore porn. Hope your revulsion at, and sympathy for, all the circumcised cocks don’t ruin too many of your wanks." Honestly Turning the entire situation into a joke because you think you views are facts and anyone different is wrong, speaks volumes about your views on the world. | |||
| |||
"God that was draining ... I asked people’s Preferences not for people to go on the tonight show with Vincent brown for a debate " You'd miss Vincent Brown all the same | |||
| |||
"God that was draining ... I asked people’s Preferences not for people to go on the tonight show with Vincent brown for a debate " Preference would be more suitable for something like; do you prefer a shaved pubic area, not surgery. | |||
"God that was draining ... I asked people’s Preferences not for people to go on the tonight show with Vincent brown for a debate " Welcome to the joys of the forums. Everyone has an opinion. | |||
| |||
"God that was draining ... I asked people’s Preferences not for people to go on the tonight show with Vincent brown for a debate " Is Vincent brown still going ??? | |||
