| Author |
 Topic  |
|
GHcool 
"Forever a curious character."
|
 Posted - 07/26/2007 : 07:14:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
Although I have no way of proving this, I suspect that most circumcized males are greatful (or at least not angry) about being circumcized once they reach adulthood.
I think most don't mind. I doubt they are grateful, since in cultures (like Britain) where few babies are circumcised, few adults choose to be (even though this can be done with anaesthetic etc.). Even if many were grateful, this is no reason to circumcise en masse, since those ones could choose circumcision in adulthood rather than impose it on the majority.
I could be wrong about this, but I don't think any government in the modern world enforce traditional circumcision laws.
There are 6.6 billion people on the planet. Roughly half of them (3.3 billion) are males.
There are 1.3 billion Muslims on the planet. Roughly half of them (0.7 billion) are males. For the sake of this argument, we shall say that 10% of them are unobservant and uncircumcized. That leaves 0.6 billion circumcized Muslim males.
Simply by counting Muslim males, we are talking about roughly 18% of the planet's males as being circumcised.
I don't know much about British circumcision demographics, but I do know that the United States has a large percentage of circumcised males. I don't know the exact figures, but for the sake of this argument, we'll pretend that Americans are like Muslims and that 90% of its 0.2 billion males are circumcised, but we'll round it up again to 0.2 billion.
Just by counting Muslims and Americans (the overlap here is insignificant), we are talking about roughly 24% of the world's male population being circumcized.
A random selection of 100 circumcized males would bring 75 Muslims (worldwide) and 25 Americans (of varying religions). I doubt that even 5% of the Muslims in this hypothetical survey would testify that they felt angry or reluctant that they were circumcised at a young age. The Americans might have a larger rate of discomfort with the idea because it may or may not be a religious/cultural rite of passage for them, but I still doubt that more than 5% of Americans would testify that they felt angry or reluctant about it.
|
 |
|
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 07:40:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
I could be wrong about this, but I don't think any government in the modern world enforce traditional circumcision laws.
Well, there certainly isn't a law of manditory circumcision here in Israel. I don't know about Muslim countries, however.
|
|
|
|
Conan The Westy
"Father, Faithful Friend, Fwiffer"
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 08:54:16
|
At 42, it has now dawned on me, the root of my deep-seated hostility to my parents.  |
|
|
|
thefoxboy 
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 10:01:13
|
| At the hospital that thefoxcub was born, they had only had 2 snips in 12 months. That was about 2% of the males born there. |
|
|
|
lemmycaution
"Long mired in film"
|
|
|
Tori
"I don't get it...."
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 19:04:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by thefoxboy
At the hospital that thefoxcub was born, they had only had 2 snips in 12 months. That was about 2% of the males born there.
Wow. |
|
|
|
TitanPa
"Here four more"
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 21:51:59
|
It just baffles me. There was an opening for a joke in Bafta's long speech and noone took it. Well if you ask me.......
This thread is just in Poor Taste
And while Im still talking while you guys are rolling your eyes.
It's just there. I dont think about it. Its just a common thing. Iv'e always been this way. I wouldnt have it any other way. Its just the tip of the iceberg. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 21:59:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by TitanPa
Its just the tip of the iceberg.
Declined. Similar to another joke.
|
|
|
|
BiggerBoat 
"Pass me the harpoon"
|
Posted - 07/26/2007 : 23:51:28
|
So, if GOD created us in HIS image, and HE being all-knowing and all-powerful and all the other 'alls', then surely would it not be some kind of defilement, or desecration, for us to alter that image HE took so long to perfect? Yes, I know HE created us in one day (when I say "us" I mean Adam of course), and any project that is rushed through is always going to have one or two problems later down the line, but surely, as far as HE is concerned, were we not created perfectly?
Or, did HE in HIS infinite wisdom, late on in HIS magnificent infinite lifetime, decide that HE too would have the snip performed on HIMSELF? Now, because HE alone is light and life and all that jazz, and being the one and only TRUE GOD, have to perform the operation on HIMSELF, or was there some kind of angelic surgery HE booked HIMSELF into to have the procedure performed. And, again, was that a problem, HIM being omnipresent and all, actually finding the holy foreskin? And if HE did have the procedure performed, is there, somewhere out there in the great ephemeral expanse, a holy schmuck floating about? And should we worship this holy schmuck, or was it cast aside as an example of how perfection can be perfected?
Seeing as none of this was covered in any of the holy books, and being devoid of any kind of religous sentiment myself, how am I supposed to know whether this act is right or wrong (that's GOOD or EVIL to you religous types I guess)? The scientific exploration of this matter is always going to be difficult, although if you're crazy enough to believe in evolution you might suppose that this little flap is there for a reason, so where does that leave us?
Personally, I still have that little bit of skin, and, being a realtively clean individual and generally compelled to keeping that part of me dust-free and well presented, I'm not that convinced that going through a lot of pain and potentially losing some sensation in an area where I value sensation is a thing I should go about doing. I suppose all I can really say is that keeping it may have some drawbacks, but I really like those drawbacks. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 00:28:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
I suppose all I can really say is that keeping it may have some drawbacks, but I really like those drawbacks.
 |
|
|
|
MguyX
"X marks the spot"
|
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 02:07:26
|
Did you hear the one about the waiter who became circumcision specialist? He routinely refused direct payment, but he gladly took tips.
[FOUR PAGES of Dickmania! Wow! I'm feelin' kinda proud: I mean fwiffrs come from the four corners of the Earth! So I'm feeling kind of headstrong that the world is so interested in, among those of others, my member. ] |
Edited by - MguyX on 07/27/2007 02:11:03 |
|
|
|
duh 
"catpurrs"
|
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 03:42:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
is there, somewhere out there in the great ephemeral expanse, a holy schmuck floating about?
Again and again, I laugh. And again. |
|
|
|
Koli 
"Striving lackadaisically for perfection."
|
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 05:51:12
|
Salopian questions early edit.
I cannot verify what Baftababe says in the first three-quarters of her post, but I'm sure she's right to draw a big distinction between male and female circumcision.
In fact the latter term is a misnomer, I'm sure she'd agree, and female genital mutilation is a much better description. A while ago I read a couple of books by the Somalian model, Waris Dirie, who writes openly about her appalling experience of being 'circumcised' as a young girl and the long-term effects of the 'operation'. I find it astonishing that a practice such as this still goes on in the 21st century, but the truth is that there are millions of women alive today who have suffered it, and it is still happening in a long list of countries. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 09:24:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tori
quote:
Originally posted by thefoxboy
At the hospital that thefoxcub was born, they had only had 2 snips in 12 months. That was about 2% of the males born there.
Wow.
I can believe this. When I was a young lad (about 30 years ago  ) I recall about 5-10% had had the snip. Now it's a lot lower as few see the point any more, although I think it's still customary among Muslims, Jews, Americans, Philippinos and Koreans (don't ask me how it ended up like that  ).
The way I see it over here, parents have the choice to either:-
a) Alter their son's genitals, or,
b) Not alter their son's genitals.
Most choose to leave their sons the way they were born, or as some would see it, the way god created them. 
I could see some point in circumcision in the old days when washing wasn't terribly common but don't think it's relevant any more. Same applies to other scripture-induced behaviour such as not eating pork, shellfish etc. Even today, if I was somewhere in the Middle-East or wherever, and someone arrived with a horse-and-cartload of shellfish that they'd caught the day before, there's no way would I touch them with a bargepole. And it wouldn't be for scriptural reasons, it would be a case of trying to stay alive. 
I recall a discussion with some of my Muslim employees in Guinea (West Africa) about food (pork and shellfish) and Islam. They were devout Muslims, i.e., faced Mecca five-times daily and prayed, yet they happily ate pork and bottom-dwelling fish we caught in the Niger River. They said that the scriptures prohibited the eating of such food in the old days, but god subsequently invented the refrigerator, preservatives, antiobiotics etc so there was no problem changing behaviour in response to this. In their view god is not illogical, and gave them brains to know how to apply (and update) the wisdom of the past. Quite logical really.  It's a shame the Taleban don't think like that and are stuck in the past with their brains disconnected from reality. 
So I think circumcision - along with the prohibition of the eating of pork and shellfish - was totally rational in the past (hence was written into religious scripture) but no longer applies and is no longer rational. Not that I really care, the less people there are eating the most divine food on the planet (lobsters, prawns etc) the more there is for devout atheists such as me.  |
Edited by - Sean on 07/27/2007 12:34:02 |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 07/27/2007 : 11:16:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
The way I see it over here, parents have the choice to either:-
a) Mutilate their son's genitals, or,
b) Not mutilate their son's genitals.
While I'm sure you didn't mean to, your use of the word "mutilate" is very pejorative and insulting to me in particular. I didn't "mutilate" any part my sons' bodies, I had them circumcised in the Jewish tradition, and I'm very proud of that. While there is nothing wrong with deciding to leave a boy's foreskin as he was born with it, there is also nothing wrong with deciding to remove it, for any reason that the parent (or, in some cases, any adult male) sees fit. There are tons of arguments on both sides of the question as to which state is healthier, all of them backed up by lots of studies, facts and figures. Neither state will prevent your penis from working properly, so let's not judge others (or use judgemental language) for doing or not doing the proceedure.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
circumcision controversies
