Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Circumcision does not reduce sensitivity
Posts
No. Not really.
--
I know a girl who is considering getting toes removed so she can wear some fancy shoes. Also some ribs for corsets.
Clearly her mother should have gotten those removed FOR her. (And, yes, you can get along just fine with those all taken out.)
I would imagine that it would be nice to save a slight bit of discomfort in rare situations, yes.
While you're saving him from an action which is totally his choice and gives him a massive amount of pain.
Also, no numbers, I officially believe that this is done by masochists and weirdos until you provide numbers which can prove otherwise. Afterall, if it is understood how it is done it should be easy to find how many people in a country are doing it, right? Right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlUsiKfeDfo&eurl=http://areasofmyexpertise.blogspot.com/
http://www.ugo.com/movies/babylon-ad-video-gallery/?cur=vin-diesel-dungeons-and-dragons&morepics=1
You are absolutely, unequivocally wrong.
Because holy shit, according to you, child abuse doesn't exist.
In this thread, Ketchum_Ash reveals he doesn't understand evolution and believes kids don't deserve rights.
I can do the same thing, trust me.
Until the have a sense of whats right and wrong, the person who created a baby has the right to the kid. The state didn't create the baby two people who came into a union and decided to create on did. Until that kid is able to stand on his own legs and knows the rights and wrongs the parents will be responsible for the kid.
Of course this comes under s few rules, namely schooling is required and such, but thats dealing with semantics.
unattractive deformity is subjective.
Toe is a bad analogy, but there are many kinds of surgery that we can apply to an individual that are equally as simple and cosmetic/pointless.
Why can't I take a part of my babies ear lobe off?
Why can't you install this lip ring?
The question shouldn't be why can't I but,
WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU!?
So, kids should have all of the same rights that adults do? The right to the same choices, etc?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlUsiKfeDfo&eurl=http://areasofmyexpertise.blogspot.com/
http://www.ugo.com/movies/babylon-ad-video-gallery/?cur=vin-diesel-dungeons-and-dragons&morepics=1
No you have a position of power granted by the mechanics of biology. Your rights extend exactly as far as the state will grant for all practical purposes.
So, is this the real issue? You guys think people are insulting your parents?
Well, thats what exactly is going on here with the added function of them all saying "haha I wouldn't listen to you because lalal I got fingers in my ears."
I have yet to see any evidence of anythign else than a physical distincion over having foreskin.
What can I say, I'm a nut.
http://www.cirp.org/news/thepost01-12-01/
Thousands just for that one group.
And I don't think doctors screen for masochism.
Because everyone wants their penis surgery to be on the record.
Now Fallout swoops in to K_A's defense because hey, that means he can disagree with me some more!
K_A literally stated that children do not deserve rights until they are able to comprehend said rights. We're not talking about specific rights, here. We're talking rights in general.
Didn't know that about America.
Okay, so.
Uses of foreskin: More convienient fapping.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlUsiKfeDfo&eurl=http://areasofmyexpertise.blogspot.com/
http://www.ugo.com/movies/babylon-ad-video-gallery/?cur=vin-diesel-dungeons-and-dragons&morepics=1
You are why we have child services.
It's the same for Canada.
The parents feel like it? Eliminating a hygiene issue from the kid's life entirely at the cost of a temporary bit of pain that they will never remember or care about unless their minds unhinge later in life?
Also cutting a baby's ear lobe off would be causing an unattractive deformity to a highly visible part of the kid that would negatively impact them for the rest of their life to no gain whatsoever.
A lip ring... if it stays in for a long time might make the baby's lip grow weird? I don't know, who gives a rat's ass?
Exactly, I can't figure out why people keep going back to that.
What the fuck? I just fucking told you that there is no difference whatsoever between our techniques.
Ok so you gave rights to children. Right? Right.
So now that armed 5 year old shoots his sibiling and parents, because hey, he owned a gun because thats his right!
So will you be the one to start handing guns out because he in America it a right for anyone to have guns correct?
If we were in a world of no circumcision a cutted penis would belong into the realm of weird fetiches that would freaked off most people.
"Unatractive deformity" is entirely subjective, if everyone cutted the pinkies of babies no one would see it as "deformed".
Which is exactly why circumcision was so promoted by the writers of health books around the turn of the century. It was to prevent your child from sexual deviancy!
"A remedy [for masturbation] which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision...The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind...In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement. " -- Dr. John Harvey Kellogg
lol.
Are you unwilling to understand that there's not a 0% risk on circumcisions?
It is SURGERY that is medically UNNECESSARY. In any other case you would agree that is a bad thing, in this case , for some reason, you will not.
So there's a, what, .003% risk?
I AM SUDDENLY MORALLY OUTRAGED
THOSE POOR BABYCOCKS
Are you even trying at this point?
The issue is not with a specific body modification it's with the logic behind it. I would assume most doctors would NOT perform random cosmetic procedures on babies because there is no medical grounds for this to occur, I don't see how foreskin is any different.
If the only reason for removing foreskin is a hygiene issue, that's pretty weak and probably not a medical condition, being dirty that is. I agree that the pain inflicted on a child that age is not relevant tho. I'm not saying that has anything to do with this.
I'm just saying if you can't be trusted to wash your dick they might as well lobotomize you at birth while you're at it, joking!
Sort of.
I never called anybody a monster. I merely thing it's wrong. Wrong =/= monster. You're strawmanning.
I'm asking you this in all seriousness. Are you a troll?
Tell that to someone who has half a penis.
You did not say "children do not deserve the all the rights of an adult".
You said they did not deserve rights, period.
This is, in fact, exactly what I said to Fallout, but you seemed not to have read my post before responding to it.
As I mentioned before: 2-10%. 35% if profuse bleeding is considered a complication. 55% according to at least one study.