Circumsized or uncircumsized?

Just Google "Circumcision Damage" and prepare to recoil in horror. You will see all-too-common disfigurements which are not included in any stats about complications or botched infant jobs.

Cheers,
-Ron

(or just go straight here: http://www.circumstitions.com/Restric/Botched1sb.html)

 

well that was gross. I am cut and my son is cut. I am not too sure if I would have it done if I ever have another boy.

 

OK. That made me decide not to get my kid circumsized...

 

Again, your odds of having to get circumcised later in life due to foreskin problems(which is a really low odd) is still more then the risk of having something go wrong with circumcision at birth.

 

In high school, they called Obama "turkey neck."

 

I disagree with that. The number who ever medically need circumcision is about 1 in 10,000 according to Swedish studies.

The typical understated number reported for infant circ complications ranges from 1% to 6%. In fact it's a lot worse. No good recent studies have been done counting circ-related MRSA cases, but a recent article about a Boston hospital cited MRSA as a significant infant circ complication. A couple hundred US infants die per year, but those aside, unintened results from infant circ are common for a obvious reasons. They do a shitty job simply because the patient is small and hard to work on, the patient can't complain, and many of the problems (again, Google "circumcision damage") don't manifest until after puberty. Even then, the patient may not associate the problem with the cause, and is not likely to have the ability or confidence to speak up and track down the perpetrator.

Why do I say they do a shitty job? Just go to a college bookstore and compare the urologist's technique for a circumcision on an older child or adult to the procedure an obstetrician (they do 70% of US infant circs) will see in his/her text for infant circumcision.

The infant version involves tearing the still-fused skin from the glans with a gouging blunt probe (like forcing fingernails from a nailbed), cutting longways on top from the end of the skin tube to the point of amputation, then clamping the skin and cutting around (or using a ligature to induce necrosis). No stitches. After the amputation, the infant gets to heal haphazardly in a foul diaper with no ability to communicate about what doesn't feel just right in the healing process. The wound can heal mal-opposed, all lumpy with bulgy truncated veins, or with adhesions between the incision line and other skin or between the raw bloody glans and the skin or the incision. Of course a few cases make headlines every year with part of the glans being severed, but losing the exquisitely pleasure-receptive foreskin is bad enough.

When the infant procedure is done the infant penis may be shriveled from the cold operating room or puffed up from the handling, the surgeon doesn't know. The penile apportionment at birth varies from person to person, so the cutter has no idea how big the penis will become and how much skin will be needed to cover an erection comfortably. The penis grows into the foreskin during the first few years. Then normally the synechial fusion between the glans and foreskin causes the skin to grow (so the cut kid grows less skin). Then at puberty, the penis grows some more and if the skin is tight plenty of hair-bearing skin is displaced onto the shaft during erections. If the tightness is excessive, the lack of skin can curve or impede the erection painfully.

The proper adult procedure involves first consulting with the patient about any preference regarding the location or tightness of the cut (and the result is predictable since growth has occured). Then the skin and dartos muscle layer are cut separately and conspicuous veins are re-routed or cauterized. The muscle and skin are sutured separately with a stagger for less bulge to the scar. The adult manages his own pain during recovery.

The infant or adult heals in about 2 weeks. 998 out of 1000 intact adult men choose to keep their foreskins.

A recent study in Georgia found that most circs were being done by OB/GYN residents 1-4 years out of med school. 80% reported their training consisted of watching one circumcision. Half reported they they had no confidence or preparation to deal with complications or anything unexpected during the procedure. Many circs are done off-shift with a single nurse assisting.

There's just no reason to cut an infant. An adult gets a better cut (on the odd chance he chooses that). The infant cutting rate in the US is about 50/50 today (fewer than 25% are cut in the 4 Western state) so I think the odds are that he won't feel odd being intact like our parents might have, so it will probably never come up.

-Ron

 

My pig still has it's blanket.......I'm not circumsized if you didn't get it.

 

I feel phantom pain in my amputated foreskin. Is that normal?

 

Q: What is "minor surgery" ?

A: "Minor surgery" can be defined as any surgery that's being performed on OTHER PEOPLE.

Q: What is "major surgery" ?

A: "Major surgery" can be defined as any surgery that's being performed on YOU.

 

It all comes back to schoolyard ethics:

If they do it to somebody else, it's "minor," but if they do it to YOU that's when it becomes "major."

 

I don't know about the truthfulness of this caller but given the history of the myths about the benefits of circumcision it seem mostly likely it could hold some weight. Doctors today are not the most ethical people in the western world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AfPajxmfbE&feature=sdig&et=1242480268

 

Uncut, the head doesn't become desensitized that way. Just pulling back my foreskin and exposing it to air feels pleasurable alone. Also, without lube, i don't get how you can masturbate without foreskin.

 

Basically the same way.

 

Reminds me of Reggie Hammond in 48 Hours - "I've been in prison for two years. My dick gets hard when the wind blows."

Every U.S. President has been circumcised. That should pretty much end this lopsided debate.

 

As stated earlier, the sex drive is at its greatest during the early stages of a man's life, and that it gradually declines with advancing age.

I can't say that I've ever heard of Mr. Hammond, but I'm assuming that he must be either very young or genitally intact.

- I seriously doubt that all forty-some-odd US presidents were sexually hobbled at birth by the butcher's knife, given that many of them were born prior to the War Between the States. In fact, circumcision was first introduced into US medical practice around that time (circa late 1860s) by an army surgeon named Lewis A. Sayre.

- The principle effect of circumcision is that it hobbles the sexual act and renders it far less pleasurable. It does this by destroying the mobile pleasure mechanism of the penis.

- If you were circumcised as an infant, it means that your ability to enjoy sex is seriously and permanently impaired. It means that you can still have sex, but you just cannot enjoy sex to the same extent as normal men who aren't sexually mutilated.

- I agree that this debate is totally lopsided against the practice of circumcision.

 

FALSE. Debate sustained, I guess.

http://Circumstitions.com/Famous1.html

-Ron

 

How the hell do they know about the penises of the Presidents??

 

All presidents have autopsy upon death. It's recorded just like any obvious surgery, but should be private.

 

I think it has more to do with him being in prison for 2 years.

 

Mobile pleasure mechanism! I'm borrowing that one. You got some talent there, Captain Foreskin. Don't waste it all on penis-ish threads.

BTW, there is a reason that the Boston Celtics have 17 banners up in the rafters. Yup, you guessed it.