Circumcision as a criminal act

[yoko]

If anyone has seen Sevensins and I clash they definitely can't label us as buddies or supporters.

But in his defense I do think it is a legitimate question. It did come out kind of focused on one person. But as a general question to all females I don't see anything wrong with it.

I as a female I can say I don't have any issues keeping clean. Yes we have different parts but I don't see how being a specific gender makes you that incapable of keeping yourself clean.

EDITED: For some reason I had extra words So edited to remove them.

 

[stardogs]

Yes we have different parts but I don't see how being a specific gender makes you that more incapable of keeping yourself clean.

^This.

 

[~Jessie~]

LOL... honestly, I think that's because he's a dude! We're so used to other women's posts that it's easy to feel like the one guy here is abrasive. When in reality, my BF would be sooo much more annoying & rude if he was a Chaz member. ^_ ~ He would be banned instantaneously. Blue has a similar blunt, abrasive character to his responses. But both of them are pretty hilarious most of the time! You have to love them. And Sevensins seems to have actual knowledge behind his opinions, which is always nice.

Sevensins has definitely tried to make me feel like a dummy, but I don't take it personally. There's a big difference between being blunt or sarcastic to get the point across because you're passionate about the subject, rather than just being a troll for the sake of being a troll.

This.

I as a female I can say I don't have any issues keeping clean. Yes we have different parts but I don't see how being a specific gender makes you that more incapable of keeping yourself clean.

And this.

Cut or uncut (and that goes for BOTH sexes), I don't see why either would have any issues keeping themselves clean. If cleanliness and being uncut REALLY is an issue, than most of the world must be pretty unsanitary. We're one of the only industrialized countries where circumcision is a social "norm." I know Americans are pompous, but it's ridiculous to think we need to circumcise in order to be clean!

 

[PWCorgi]

LOL... honestly, I think that's because he's a dude! We're so used to other women's posts that it's easy to feel like the one guy here is abrasive. When in reality, my BF would be sooo much more annoying & rude if he was a Chaz member. ^_ ~ He would be banned instantaneously. Blue has a similar blunt, abrasive character to his responses. But both of them are pretty hilarious most of the time! You have to love them. And Sevensins seems to have actual knowledge behind his opinions, which is always nice.

Sevensins has definitely tried to make me feel like a dummy, but I don't take it personally. There's a big difference between being blunt or sarcastic to get the point across because you're passionate about the subject, rather than just being a troll for the sake of being a troll.

I'd just like to again say THIS!

Go to a car forum (or any other mainly male forum) and there is way less niceties, everything is more blunt, and if you are sensitive then you don't really feel comfortable there (hence why I rarely visit my car forums anymore ).

 

[yoko]

I'd just like to again say THIS!

Go to a car forum (or any other mainly male forum) and there is way less niceties, everything is more blunt, and if you are sensitive then you don't really feel comfortable there (hence why I rarely visit my car forums anymore ).

Honestly after all my years being a female gamer I didn't even think his example of a bad wording was that wrong XD

 

[Danefied]

Show of hands, who think Seven knew what he was doing when using the expression “beat around the bush�

Okay, seriously...
If you’re enough of a grown-up to post on this kind of thread, you’re grown up enough to suck it up and deal when it gets uncomfortable.

I didn’t find anything rude or obnoxious about Seven’s question (and believe me, I know rude, and I know Seven’s kind of rude, and that ain’t it). If we’re going to say circumcision aids cleanliness, then by golly be ready to support and defend that! That’s the point of a discussion no? To either cement your own beliefs or see holes in them that may lead you to decide to re-examine them.
What is that great saying? The point of a discussion isn’t to prove who’s right or who’s wrong but to make progress.

 

[Kaydee]

Okay I believe we established
A That some people perceive genitalia, regardless of gender, as inherently "dirty" regardless of it's realistic bacterial content.
B A rare complication of circumcision is death and/or one's hootie falling off, however car accidents, poisoning and drowning certainly top the list.
C As a non-observant Jew the point doesn't offend me, but certainly for religious reasons I believe parents have the right to choose circumcision for male children. Said male children do have every right to ask for their foreskins back should they turn away from their faith later in life...
D However, this does not equal the right for religious reasons to sexually mutilate female children. FGM-Female genital mutilation and male circumcision are carried out for very different reasons under totally different circumstances. Without complex surgical intervention FGM leaves a woman with lifetime health problems. The same can not be said of male circumcision barring possible rare complications.
E We have to respect each others opinions regarding docking, cropping and of course circumcising our children, fur or otherwise, do dogs even HAVE foreskins, I never looked...

 

[Xandra]

Okay I believe we established
C As a non-observant Jew the point doesn't offend me, but certainly for religious reasons I believe parents have the right to choose circumcision for male children. Said male children do have every right to ask for their foreskins back should they turn away from their faith later in life...
D However, this does not equal the right for religious reasons to sexually mutilate female children. FGM-Female genital mutilation and male circumcision are carried out for very different reasons under totally different circumstances. Without complex surgical intervention FGM leaves a woman with lifetime health problems. The same can not be said of male circumcision barring possible rare complications.

I don't think we've established D at all and I think that is a pretty huge hole in the pro-circumcision position. Unless you mean that removing labia and/or the clitoral hood is not mutilation anymore than removing the foreskin is (which I would agree with). Again... NOT talking about clitoridectomy or sewing the labia shut. Only removing labia and/or clitoral hood.

I also think "religious beliefs" are a terrible reason to allow something that is otherwise wrong. The whole point of the argument (at least to me) is that people should be able to choose for themselves whether or not they keep all of their body parts. If a people have a right to their own body parts then I don't see why their parents being religious should change that principle.

I wouldn't have said anything but... those above points haven't been established at all imo!

(I will also add that I am talking about whether or not I think it should be allowed in theory... in practice may be different)

 

[Greenmagick]

I don't think we've established D at all and I think that is a pretty huge hole in the pro-circumcision position. Unless you mean that removing labia and/or the clitoral hood is not mutilation anymore than removing the foreskin is (which I would agree with). Again... NOT talking about clitoridectomy or sewing the labia shut. Only removing labia and/or clitoral hood.

I also think "religious beliefs" is a terrible reason to allow something that is otherwise wrong.

I wouldn't have said anything but... those above points haven't been established at all imo!

EXACTLY!

Very good post that explains the misconceptions held about BOTH Male and female genital mutilation. http://www.drmomma.org/2011/04/male-and-female-circumcision.html

 

[GipsyQueen]

I don't think we've established D at all and I think that is a pretty huge hole in the pro-circumcision position. Unless you mean that removing labia and/or the clitoral hood is not mutilation anymore than removing the foreskin is (which I would agree with). Again... NOT talking about clitoridectomy or sewing the labia shut. Only removing labia and/or clitoral hood.

I also think "religious beliefs" are a terrible reason to allow something that is otherwise wrong. The whole point of the argument (at least to me) is that people should be able to choose for themselves whether or not they keep all of their body parts. If a people have a right to their own body parts then I don't see why their parents being religious should change that principle.

I wouldn't have said anything but... those above points haven't been established at all imo!

(I will also add that I am talking about whether or not I think it should be allowed in theory... in practice may be different)

But exactly THAT is why the legislation here (in Germany) is being discussed again. Not because people should have a choice to circ their baby, because of social acceptance or because of hygiene.
It's being discussed again because it goes against religios freedom.
Parents don't circ. their boys here unless they are either jewish or muslim. Often it's done illegally because many doctors refuse to.

 

[Barbara!]

I also think "religious beliefs" are a terrible reason to allow something that is otherwise wrong.

It being wrong is your opinion, not fact.

 

[puppydog]

If we are truly talking of cleanliness then all babies should have the tips of their fingers removed. It is well known that the place that harbour the most germs on a human being is right under the finger nails. This too can be remedied with washing.

 

[Xandra]

But exactly THAT is why the legislation here (in Germany) is being discussed again. Not because people should have a choice to circ their baby, because of social acceptance or because of hygiene.
It's being discussed again because it goes against religios freedom.
Parents don't circ. their boys here unless they are either jewish or muslim. Often it's done illegally because many doctors refuse to.

I actually did skim that article, that's one of the reasons I commented on the religion thing a couple of times... just think it is bad reasoning.

It being wrong is your opinion, not fact.

Yup I know that, I thought in the context of the quote and the rest of my paragraph I could probably get away with not fully expounding on that one. Guess not

What I was getting at was that I see the crux of the debate as whether or not it is wrong for parents to remove non-vital, but functioning parts of their kids' sexual organs. It's determining whether that's acceptable or not that I think should be discussed more (due to it NOT being a fact), with emphasis on why people seem in favor of female children having the right to reach adulthood with their genitalia intact, but not males.

When I said "to allow something that is otherwise wrong" if I meant as a general rule, if something is determined to be "wrong" or too detrimental to do for other reasons, then it shouldn't be excused just because people have religious reasons for doing it.

 

[Romy]

When I said "to allow something that is otherwise wrong" if I meant as a general rule, if something is determined to be "wrong" or too detrimental to do for other reasons, then it shouldn't be excused just because people have religious reasons for doing it.

I agree, if the only benefit is a religious reason. Not all children grow up to share their parent's religious beliefs when they're old enough to choose. Any permanent body modification shouldn't be forced on children unless it's for a medical reason (braces to correct malocclusion, surgery for cleft palate, etc.). I guess the debate then is whether there's a good enough medical reason for circumcision to justify performing it on people who can't give consent.

If someone's religion dictated they have their baby tattooed, would people be okay with that? Even if it was a discreet tattoo?

 

[Dizzy]

Religion should not supersede human rights.

When does an individuals body become their own, to make decisions about religion and cosmetics on their own grounds?????

Medical decisions are very different.

 

[GipsyQueen]

Oh, I'm not saying it's correct - it's not - I'm just saying that's the reason it's up for discusion.

So while I don't think circumcision should be legislated, I don't think the argument "religious reasons" pulls.

 

[ACooper]

On the issue of hygiene and comparing men/woman...........I would remind everyone that woman WIPE after every trip to the bathroom, at least the woman I know. Many of us even use a moist towelette or baby wipe after as well (as mentioned in another thread not long ago, LOL)

On the flip side, men I know shake unless it's a number 2. So imagine just for a moment ladies that you pee and give yourself a good shake, pull up your pants and call it good! Think of all the lovely infections you'd have after doing that for a while........

 

[sparks19]

"shake it more than three times and you're playing with it"

lol

 

[Dizzy]

On the issue of hygiene and comparing men/woman...........I would remind everyone that woman WIPE after every trip to the bathroom, at least the woman I know. Many of us even use a moist towelette or baby wipe after as well (as mentioned in another thread not long ago, LOL)

On the flip side, men I know shake unless it's a number 2. So imagine just for a moment ladies that you pee and give yourself a good shake, pull up your pants and call it good! Think of all the lovely infections you'd have after doing that for a while........

But....... Its not down to hygiene, its down to the length of the urethra. I've never met a man with a uti.

 

[sparks19]

I can't say I've never met a man with a UTI. I wouldn't know. It's not really a question I ask lol. "Hey I just met you... and this is crazy... but do you get infections in your weenie?" LOL