Speaking out against child mutilation is now a hate crime.

Offensive to Islam my ass.

There are many Christian that do so, and more often than not circumcision is a cultural and regional happening rather than a religious one.

But well, I guess I would find myself in the "against" pile in this one.

 

I was mutilated as an infant, so I don't remember the indignity personally. I do, however, wish that I was given a choice as to whether or not I wanted to keep that protective sleeve over my glans.
It's not even a matter of hygiene any more, it's a matter of personal preference. If you want to cut a piece of yourself off, go for it. I personally would have kept it on, had I been given the option at an age where I could decide for myself.

 

You know, I don't know that I've ever heard anyone lament the loss of a foreskin they don't even remember having.

 

I know it might seem odd or selfish, but if girls are allowed to keep their clitorati, then I want to keep my foreskin.

 

Not to rub it in for Gross (pun not intended), but foreskin really is a pretty sweet thing to have.

My stance on bodily modification is the same as yours Dark Elf. I disagree with modifying baby bodies in anyway, including traditional circumcision, because that's not necessarily what the kiddo wants. You would think that a left-wing country like Sweden would be able to understand this. Unfortunately, left wing politics finds itself divided on whether the child or the parent should get to decide on what happens to the kid (though, by definition of the left wing stereotype, it should be the child). This is why we get stupid things like midgets doing genetic modification to make their kids grow up (not really grow up) to be midgets as well. It's bullshit.

 

Isn't there an urban legend of somesorts that the tool looks bigger without the protective layer?

 

I never bothered to look into it, but I heard that keeping the foreskin makes you more prone to infection, thus making it a case of hygiene. But I wouldn't know personally.

 

Like any body part, the foreskin can be prone to skin infections if it's not washed regularly. It's not like we don't have access to running water and soap.
And yes, the lack of a foreskin can make it look bigger, but that's as far as it gets. It only looks bigger.

 

Geez, that's a whole new kind of special. Who the fuck comes up with this shit and who then lets them air it in public?

 

Re: Speaking out against child mutilation is now a hate crim

Historically, I believe, it was done for cleanliness. In fact in some countries in Africa, it's illegal to not circumsize a child, simply because it's a cleanliness issue. I know that isn't a valid argument here, since I'm fairly certain we all bathe daily, but I thought it to be worth pointing out. I don't know what being circumsized is like, but by the gods, do I love sex.

 

Actually, guys, circumcision is LESS hygienic. The foreskin protects against bacteria. This realization simultaneously made doctors kick themselves and stop whipping out the scissors every time there was a birth. Infections come from laziness.

 

A lot of things can be prevented with daily bathing. Laziness is no excuse for cutting off a part of a penis.
Besides, the foreskin is equivalent to the sheath present in the majority of mammals. Can you imagine what it would be like for a dog if the entire sheath was removed?

 

Grakelin, unless you can provide yourself with some form of legitimate looking page/etc. for support, I'm calling bollocks upon this argument, and as such it will be declared hearsay, and invalid until corrected. I also know that,* without proper cleaning, and daily care, it does get rather gross. This happens to be an issue in most of the parts of the world where cleaning isn't possible on a daily basis.

*I has a foreskin!

 

Wikipedia
The fold of the prepuce maintains sub-preputial wetness, which mixes with exfoliated skin to form smegma. Some authors believe that smegma contains antibacterial enzymes,[29] though their theory has been challenged.[30] The American Academy of Pediatrics state that "No controlled scientific data are available regarding differing immune function in a penis with or without a foreskin."[31] Inferior hygiene has been associated with balanitis,[32] though excessive washing can cause non-specific dermatitis.[33]

Let me find some more, will edit them in.

here.

here.

"8. Immunological defense. The soft mucosa of the inner foreskin produces plasma cells, which secrete immunoglobulin antibodies, and antibacterial and antiviral proteins [7, 14], such as the pathogen-killing enzyme called lysozyme [15 and Blue_ArrowD096.gif (140 bytes)see explanation]. All of the human mucosa (the linings of the mouth, eyelids, vagina, foreskin and anus) are the body's first line of defense against disease. This benefit of the foreskin could be one possible explanation why intact men are at lower risk of chlamydia and other sexually transmitted diseases [16-21]."

I guess while we're attacking eachother's sources, I should ask who told you that circumcision was supposed to be hygienic? Of course the foreskin protects against bacteria, mate, all of our skin is an anti-disease barrier.