Circumcision, hip or lame? (17 Viewers)

[Seven]

But Jack, there are almost no medical or practical reasons for removing the foreskin.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Martin]

And my arguments are not stemming at all from a religious point of view.

Well, neither are mine. They are stemming from ethics. And I told you I would criticize circumcision whether or not it was religiously motivated. Which very often it is.

 

[Dinsdale]

No it isn't, it's still about personal freedom. If you can inject people with thoughts and behaviors that are not harmful to them, just because you want to, then according to your original rationale, there's nothing wrong with this. I disagree, I think this kind of control is immoral, and performing surgery on their body without their consent (except in medical emergency) is just as wrong.

Oh, and brainwashing your kid, without surgery, also wrong.

That's why I added that nuance, because I also believe those things are wrong. Brainwashing is wrong, because you're redefining your child, which is way heavier than just encouraging certain behavior (raising). As I said before, it all depends on where you draw the line, and I'm not expert enough in ethics to determine how that line should be defined. But don't you agree that there is a big difference between circumcizing and brainwashing a child? In what way can circumcizion alter someone's life?

 

[Martin]

That's why I added that nuance, because I also believe those things are wrong. Brainwashing is wrong, because you're redefining your child, which is way heavier than just encouraging certain behavior (raising). As I said before, it all depends on where you draw the line, and I'm not expert enough in ethics to determine how that line should be defined. But don't you agree that there is a big difference between circumcizing and brainwashing a child? In what way can circumcizion alter someone's life?

A difference yes, but both are an invasion into personal freedom. I mean two things don't have to be identical to both be wrong.

Btw to expand on this a bit, I think some types of manipulation are justifiable. Parents do tend to push their kids in directions where they think they need to be pushed. Of course the word "push" here is very imprecise, but basically encouraging certain interests, certain behaviors, it's hard to imagine parenting without it. And I don't think that's wrong per se. Not when you do this with the kid considered as an individual.

It's when you're pushing the kid according to some ideology or belief system that there's a nasty conflict of interest. Your interest of passing on your ideology vs what the kid actually needs. Again, this in itself doesn't make it wrong. You can front some ideology and still act morally. But it's when the ideology conflicts with the situation your kid is in that there's a problem (there are no gay Christians, that sort of thing). This is what conflict of interest means, and there's a very good reason to be suspicious.

 

[Dinsdale]

Btw to expand on this a bit, I think some types of manipulation are justifiable. Parents do tend to push their kids in directions where they think they need to be pushed. Of course the word "push" here is very imprecise, but basically encouraging certain interests, certain behaviors, it's hard to imagine parenting without it. And I don't think that's wrong per se. Not when you do this with the kid considered as an individual.

It's when you're pushing the kid according to some ideology or belief system that there's a nasty conflict of interest. Your interest of passing on your ideology vs what the kid actually needs. Again, this in itself doesn't make it wrong. You can front some ideology and still act morally. But it's when the ideology conflicts with the situation your kid is in that there's a problem (there are no gay Christians, that sort of thing). This is what conflict of interest means, and there's a very good reason to be suspicious.

I fully agree with all of this, but... how does it relate to circumcision? What real effect does it have on a person? How can it be an invasion into personal freedom if it doesn't change anything at all in someone's life? I guess, like I said in the beginning, you're attaching a negative meaning/purpose to circumcision. But that's your personal viewpoint and and it sure isn't universal.

 

[Martin]

I fully agree with all of this, but... how does it relate to circumcision? What real effect does it have on a person? How can it be an invasion into personal freedom if it doesn't change anything at all in someone's life? I guess, like I said in the beginning, you're attaching a negative meaning/purpose to circumcision. But that's your personal viewpoint and and it sure isn't universal.

It's control, don't you get it? Picture this. You're on the subway and all of a sudden from behind you feel some stranger's hands around your neck. Now there's no reason to panic, right? Maybe he just wants to give you a neck rub? But we think this kind of thing is very uncomfortable, because even if control could be used for good, it doesn't have to be. And noone is going to make sure that it is.

And this is precisely the specialty of religion. Come to us, our intentions are pure, we'll tell you how to live, what to do. We'll tell you to circumcise your kids and to send them to Sunday school. Yes, we are reaching our hands around your neck but only with the sweetest of intentions.

Circumcision is a religious/cultural ritual. It's performed to promote the traditions and convictions of the parents. It's also a surgical procedure that does not elicit consent from the victim. And it's by no means a medical imperative. Whether or not it makes a difference to the kid's life is secondary. The first problem is that it's stretching your hands where they don't belong.

 

[Azzurri7]

You don't think it's disturbing to cut people up?

Not at all. It's not like someone strange doing it for you. Your parents decides since a baby isn't capable of speaking and understanding.

Another thing, a baby doesn't feel any pain nor it affects him cutting it off. Scientifically, it is much cleaner cutting it.

But Jack, there are almost no medical or practical reasons for removing the foreskin.

Oh there is. Ask your parents, since they're doctors, I'm sure they know whether it's cleaner to cut it off or to keep it.

 

[Seven]

Not at all. It's not like someone strange doing it for you. Your parents decides since a baby isn't capable of speaking and understanding.

Another thing, a baby doesn't feel any pain nor it affects him cutting it off. Scientifically, it is much cleaner cutting it.



Oh there is. Ask your parents, since they're doctors, I'm sure they know whether it's cleaner to cut it off or to keep it.

Not really, Rab. You could cut it off to prevent certain medical conditions, but all in all.. if you take care of yourself there is no reason the foreskin should present any significant problem. And like I said, it does have a function: it protects the head and supposedly provides more sexual pleasure.

 

[JCK]

But Jack, there are almost no medical or practical reasons for removing the foreskin.

I didn't say there's a reason to remove it, all I am saying is that it's more hygienic.

I don't have the foreskin because apparently my parents decided on me. If one day I'll have a child, I won't remove it for him as I don't care if it should be done or not.

 

[Seven]

I didn't say there's a reason to remove it, all I am saying is that it's more hygienic.

I don't have the foreskin because apparently my parents decided on me. If one day I'll have a child, I won't remove it for him as I don't care if it should be done or not.

Jesus fucking Christ. I typed in circumcision on Google (in Dutch), randomly opened a site and the first thing I saw was a penis drenched in blood. The guy had his foreskin taken away for aesthetic reasons. Apparently it takes six weeks to heal? Man that's long.

My parents decided the same for me, but decided against it with my brothers. I don't really know why though.

 

[Dinsdale]

It's control, don't you get it? Picture this. You're on the subway and all of a sudden from behind you feel some stranger's hands around your neck. Now there's no reason to panic, right? Maybe he just wants to give you a neck rub? But we think this kind of thing is very uncomfortable, because even if control could be used for good, it doesn't have to be. And noone is going to make sure that it is.

And this is precisely the specialty of religion. Come to us, our intentions are pure, we'll tell you how to live, what to do. We'll tell you to circumcise your kids and to send them to Sunday school. Yes, we are reaching our hands around your neck but only with the sweetest of intentions.

Circumcision is a religious/cultural ritual. It's performed to promote the traditions and convictions of the parents. It's also a surgical procedure that does not elicit consent from the victim. And it's by no means a medical imperative. Whether or not it makes a difference to the kid's life is secondary. The first problem is that it's stretching your hands where they don't belong.

It sure is control. But in my opinion it's a very minor/harmless form of control, and that's where we differ. I also believe that a being that is dependent of other beings, is inevitably subject to control.

If I had to choose for a child I care about to be raised by trailer trash parents, or by decent, civilized parents who apply circumcision, I sure know where I would want the child to grow up.

 

[Azzurri7]

Not really, Rab. You could cut it off to prevent certain medical conditions, but all in all.. if you take care of yourself there is no reason the foreskin should present any significant problem. And like I said, it does have a function: it protects the head and supposedly provides more sexual pleasure.

In what way it protects the head?

Don't know about the sexual pleasure though, don't have to tell the difference. But even without it, I can tell you that I'm having the maximum pleasure TBH.

 

[Martin]

Not at all. It's not like someone strange doing it for you. Your parents decides since a baby isn't capable of speaking and understanding.

Another thing, a baby doesn't feel any pain nor it affects him cutting it off. Scientifically, it is much cleaner cutting it.

Like I said, maybe if you live in the desert you have trouble maintaining hygiene. Otherwise, what exactly is the difficulty?

 

[Seven]

In what way it protects the head?

Don't know about the sexual pleasure though, don't have to tell the difference. But even without it, I can tell you that I'm having the maximum pleasure TBH.

I think the difference is minimal. It protects the head simply because it provides a rougher skin.

The baby does feel pain by the way. The risks involved with the operation are also more direct than the risks of having a foreskin.

 

[JCK]

Jesus fucking Christ. I typed in circumcision on Google (in Dutch), randomly opened a site and the first thing I saw was a penis drenched in blood. The guy had his foreskin taken away for aesthetic reasons. Apparently it takes six weeks to heal? Man that's long.

My parents decided the same for me, but decided against it with my brothers. I don't really know why though.

The thing is that if it has to be done it is much better done at young age, I heard it's extremely difficult when adult.

 

[Seven]

The thing is that if it has to be done it is much better done at young age, I heard it's extremely difficult when adult.

Yeah, I heard the same. It's probably true. To be honest with you, I don't particularly care about circumcision. I think it looks cleaner if it is circumcised, that's all.

I do think it is very gay to have a circumcision done when you're a grown up though.

 

[Martin]

It sure is control. But in my opinion it's a very minor/harmless form of control, and that's where we differ. I also believe that a being that is dependent of other beings, is inevitably subject to control.

Isn't that like saying "well child abuse, it's bound to happen, there's nothing you can do"? But there is something we can do, we have institutions to deal with this kind of thing. I don't dispute that parents are in control the way I don't dispute a forum admin is in control of a forum. But the ruler always has a choice whether to exercise control or not. And he's responsible for that choice.

If I had to choose for a child I care about to be raised by trailer trash parents, or by decent, civilized parents who apply circumcision, I sure know where I would want the child to grow up.

Now you're just talking damage control. "Well he's gonna be hurt worse with those people, so let's just minimize the damage." Is this an official admission that circumcision, whether in the exercise of control or the act itself, is harmful?

 

[Enron]

Anyone without a foreskin is a Zionist sympathizer.

 

[Seven]

Isn't that like saying "well child abuse, it's bound to happen, there's nothing you can do"? But there is something we can do, we have institutions to deal with this kind of thing. I don't dispute that parents are in control the way I don't dispute a forum admin is in control of a forum. But the ruler always has a choice whether to exercise control or not. And he's responsible for that choice.



Now you're just talking damage control. "Well he's gonna be hurt worse with those people, so let's just minimize the damage." Is this an official admission that circumcision, whether in the exercise of control or the act itself, is harmful?

We do far more invasive surgeries on under age children than circumcision and those are perfectly legal.

 

[Seven]

Anyone without a foreskin is a Zionist sympathizer.

I have no problem with that.