Switch
Captain
You don't have to "make a decision" not to take a blade to someone's penis unless you're Norman Bates.
Let's cut bits off of babies, yes?
- Thread starter Deranged Nasat
- Start date
You don't have to "make a decision" not to take a blade to someone's penis unless you're Norman Bates.
Oh don't be ridiculous.
Some people have suggested that the law in Tasmania could equally apply to the piecing of ears as it does to circumcision i.e. it is an unnecessary procedure which should not be carried out until the child is old enough to ask for it. The question then becomes 'how old does the child have to be for he/she can grant permission".
In Tasmania it is difficult to find anyone who will pierce a baby's ears. Some refuse to pierce a child's ears before they are teenagers.
A child have to have adult teeth for braces to be fitted and that suggests an age of 10-14 years before they should be fitted. I think at 10 some children are quite capable of making such a decision and nearly all are by about 14.
Cosmetic surgery due to birth defects and injuries is usually a medical necessity (even if it is done for psychological reasons) and therefore do not fall under non-therapeutic surgeries.
Or Lorena Bobbit.
Ear piercing is different. I have never had that done, but I am just going to hazard a guess that it doesn't hurt quite as much as circumcision. So waiting to adulthood until piercing ears does not appear to be a big deal. Furthermore, ear piercing is an absolutely cosmetic procedure. There's never even been a *claim* that it has health benefits. Whereas with circumcision, there are those who claim that it does have medical benefits (and have the data to back it up) and also those who claim zero benefits (and also have data to back *that* up). So there is debate over circumcision's benefits to the body, but nobody's ever claimed that *ear piercing* has any such benefits. Something that superficial is obviously an adult choice, and so there's no reason on God's green earth to do it to a baby...unlike circumcision, where it's possible to make that claim that it should be done. So I don't see how the two procedures can be compared logically.
Also, like I said, the pain that a baby does feel in being circumcised is going to be quickly forgotten, and never remembered again as long as that person lives. (Don't anyone here even TRY to tell me that you remember how it felt.) But being circumcised as an adult is going to hurt a LOT, and that pain will be REMEMBERED. So tell me, which is going to cause more pain? Doing it to a baby who won't remember it, or to an adult who will?
There is no way of knowing whether the pain the baby feels is greater, lesser or the same as an adult would feel.
However an adult consents to the pain, the baby does not.
Muslim boys often do not get circumcised to they are 7 years old or older. For example in Malaysia boys are usually circumcised between the age of 10-12. If 7+ year old Muslim boys can cope with the pain I see no reason why a grown man cannot.
However an adult consents to the pain, the baby does not.
Muslim boys often do not get circumcised to they are 7 years old or older. For example in Malaysia boys are usually circumcised between the age of 10-12. If 7+ year old Muslim boys can cope with the pain I see no reason why a grown man cannot.
If you're talking the severity of the pain, then yes, I agree with that. But I repeat: The baby may cry for a short time but afterward the pain will be FORGOTTEN. The kid will grow into adulthood without remembering what it felt like. So again, what's the big deal?
I admit I didn't know that. Is that a part of Islamic law?
The age varies from country to country, from region to region and from family to family. There is no set age that it has to be done and in fact it isn't compulsory for a Muslim to have it done, it is encouraged but it isn't enforced.
I altered my post above to mention the trend in Malaysia. In that country circimcision is seen as a rite that marks the boy leaving childhood and going into manhood.
I altered my post above to mention the trend in Malaysia. In that country circimcision is seen as a rite that marks the boy leaving childhood and going into manhood.
"Pain and pain! What is pain?!?" 
Just chiming in here after skimming 17 pages...
Ultimately, I think parents just want their kids to be normal. In America, it's normal for boys to be circumcised. I'd wager that the majority of men in the United States were circumcised as newborns. Parents don't want their kids in Sex Ed or Gym Class wondering why their penis looks different from other boys'. When they grow up and start having sex, they don't want their partners wondering why their son has all this "extra" skin hanging off the end of their penis. It's weird.
I'm not saying it's right or that there is any good reason to continue the practice, but parents do it because of their own insecurities regarding their children. Parents do it because it's what they grew up with and what they know.
Odd as it sounds, the American penis looks a certain way. It doesn't have excess foreskin. People don't expect to see foreskin when they see a penis in this country. It's bizarre, I agree, but it's the way we do things.
And yes, it may hurt, but we really don't remember the pain, and we certainly don't miss the foreskin.
Ultimately, I think parents just want their kids to be normal. In America, it's normal for boys to be circumcised. I'd wager that the majority of men in the United States were circumcised as newborns. Parents don't want their kids in Sex Ed or Gym Class wondering why their penis looks different from other boys'. When they grow up and start having sex, they don't want their partners wondering why their son has all this "extra" skin hanging off the end of their penis. It's weird.
I'm not saying it's right or that there is any good reason to continue the practice, but parents do it because of their own insecurities regarding their children. Parents do it because it's what they grew up with and what they know.
Odd as it sounds, the American penis looks a certain way. It doesn't have excess foreskin. People don't expect to see foreskin when they see a penis in this country. It's bizarre, I agree, but it's the way we do things.
And yes, it may hurt, but we really don't remember the pain, and we certainly don't miss the foreskin.
I am surprised to know that American boys look at other boys' penises long enough and hard enough to realise that some look different from theirs.
Well, I don't know how often that happens, really, but kids can be curious. Even if they're not looking at anything, they still might talk about it. They might learn about circumcision in class and decide to "compare notes." Who knows?
I mean, my Sex Ed teacher told us that masturbation was a sign of homosexuality, so it's certainly possible to get some misinformation.
I mean, my Sex Ed teacher told us that masturbation was a sign of homosexuality, so it's certainly possible to get some misinformation.
Procedures to correct birth defects or injuries are therapeutic, not cosmetic.
That's the first I've ever heard anything like that.
You were doing fine until you used 'clearly' instead of 'apparently'.
LOL
ST-One
Vice Admiral
The Vatican museum seems to be a good place to start looking for... 'uncut' examples...
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:VaticanMuseums_Greek_God_Statue.jpg
http://img5.imagebanana.com/img/gys7zq4l/VaticanMuseums_Greek_God_Statue.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
Also, orthodontia is usually performed for more than just cosmetic reasons. It’s done to align teeth for proper occlusion (bite), thereby helping to prevent tooth decay, gum disease, bone destruction and chewing and digestive difficulties.
In locker rooms and communal showers, it’s kind of hard not to notice other boys’ penises -- at least once in a while.
Only if you do it to a picture of David Beckham in his underwear.
Uh, you wanna reduce the size of that image a bit, or just make it a link? I feel like it’s coming at me in 3-D!
Which is ever funnier since David, being the King of Israel, was most probably cut.
