[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: I've got blisters on my.....penis!
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:58:32 -0400
From: "O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>No, I'm suggesting that the skin in question is thicker and less
sensitive in circumcised >members.
Perhaps, but it's not on the level of "The increase in sensitivity is
reportedly remarkable".
Sez you. OTOH, from http://www.noharmm.org/reversal.htm: "Men who
restore say the increased sensation is comparable to
"the difference between seeing in black and white and seeing in
color.""
That's a huge distortion, and when you write "reportedly", in all my
research (a bunch by me and even more by my wife), we found only one
account of "increased" sensitivity, or actually "loss" of sensitivity
after having to be circumcised in adulthood. But, it wasn't anything
*near* your exaggerated account as quoted above. *AND* that account
was found on the most militant of anti-circ. sites.
Then I guess we're down to "my evidence can beat up your evidence". I
read reports by individuals who thought enough of the benefits,
including increased sensitivity, to go through a 1-to-3-year
reconstruction process.
Condescension alert! You could, I'll stick with militant.
Loaded-term alert.
Any web site or person who tries to make a person feel like a
criminal on this very personal and difficult decision, and who takes
a tone of "you're stupid", to me, is militant.
Self-contradiction alert. You said I sounded as militant as the sites,
but I've never tried to make you feel like a criminal. I think it's
very unfortunate that a site's tone would work to the disadvantage of
the facts it wants to present.
Come on Alan. There's just a *little* difference in cutting off a
woman's clitoris (as still seen in some African cultures), a viable
organ, than the removal of a tiny piece of unused skin.
I'm not for clitorectomy, either. And I continue to believe it's
simply a mistake to think that the way we're born needs to be
surgically altered. If and when a problem develops that warrants
surgery, then have surgery.
We're not cuttin off the entire penis!
No, that comes later, with the after-effects of a botched
cauterization. Of which I've seen the pictures, I'm not just making it
up.
Don't forget that there are still *many* adult males that are having
to have adult circumcisions due to infections, etc.
I wonder how many "many" is, and that still doesn't mean that millions
of babies should be mutilated (loaded term alert) on the off chance
that a few of them decades later might need the procedure. Hell, why
not just replace both hips at birth? An appreciable percentage of
babies will need *that* surgery eventually, and I'll bet a quarter
right now that it's more than will need circumcision.
Too bad your information source didn't mention it's <smegma> easily
prevented.
Assumption alert!
Denial alert. I really can't imagine why you'd refuse to believe a
simple statement of fact that's readily available in health books and
medical texts. Once again, "daily washing".
Alan, you really seem to get up in arms on this. First off it's
source-*s*. Secondly, it's still a factor. So, what's the smegma
factor after a long day at the office, and then you go to a bar, and a
hot chick picks you up? You hang with her all evening, and then at
around 1am, she wants to pleasure you. Hmmmmm, I'd be wondering how
much smegma was down there. Will she notice? Will it smell? Will it
cause me to be distracted?? Hmmmmm? Hmmmmm? And, more Hmmmmmmm?
Frankly, you'll have to ask someone who's in that situation. I'll just
say that we're not talking about stuff being cranked out by the
armload, and considering that a sizable number of men are NOT
circumcised, and yet pick-ups in bars seem to continue at a healthy
rate all over the world, I'd say you're worrying needlessly.
More fun facts from the site cited above: Circumcision in the U.S.
sprang from an erroneous belief among physicians that it cured
masturbation. The studies about cancer and STDs came later. The only
western countries to adopt universal circumcision were English-speaking
nations like Australia and Canada. Their circumcision rates have now
plummeted to 10% and 25% respectively. Britain stopped routine infant
circumcision in 1949.
Sort of like surgically removing the skin of your armpits at birth
because they will develop an >offensive smell. Oh, unless you wash
occasionally? Yes, I guess you could do that instead...
It might happen, if in adulthood people had to go through a painful
pit skin removal.
I really can't see what you're getting at here. Adults *don't* go
through that process, because they wash instead (or simply smell, which
isn't the end of the world either). And, to continue this silly
example a bit further, there is a condition of extreme sweating which
is treated by surgery. But amazingly, we don't do that surgery on all
babies on the chance they might develop that condition later.
I'm trying to imagine just why a man would actually medically *need*
to get circumcised,
Guess you've got more journal reading to do, since your initial
research didn't go into that part. Or, is it the web sites you're
relying on try to ignore this medical *fact*. I know they do. I read
many that did.
and then how miniscule the probability of that event would be.
Again, do more research. It's not as "miniscule" as you might think.
Care to answer the questions, or are you just going to hold your hands
behind your back and hum? Once again, why is it needed, and how common
is this need?
As for violently painful, it's clearly painful for an infant.
Well, I don't know what you've *read*, but my boy only cried at being
laid out under a light. He calmed quickly down, and even the
injection of painkiller didn't upset him. Not a peep for the rest of
the procedure. Now, daddy, on the other hand was doing the pee-pee
dance! "Did that hurt, it *looked* real painful." (Eddie Murphy in
48hours.) Oh, and I don't remember a thing before the age of about
3.......or after college. ;-)
I'll leave it to specialists in brain development to compare the
experience in a 6-day-old brain >vs. that of a grown man.
Not really a fair comparison to claim that it's violently painful for
men, but no big deal for a baby IF PAINKILLER IS INJECTED, is it?
Try wearing jeans with no underwear every day for a week or so.
I do all the time.
You'll notice the difference the first day
Not.
Then take it to the next level. Sew a piece of burlap into the crotch.
Or fine-grit sandpaper. You'll get there.
With this, I am going to have mercy on the list. Anyone who wants to
receive my side of this dialogue, should it continue, offline, e-mail
me privately.
Cheers,
Alan
"the average Texan...carries not just a gun but a SHOTGUN." --Pete
Townshend, 1967