re: #157 Obdicut

Did you ignore Alouette’s link to the WHO recommendation for circumcision as prophylacic against HIV for any specific reason when making this statement?

No, I don’t think I ignored it if we are talking about the same thing. I said that I understand that circumcision could lessen the the risk of HIV transmittal but in this day and age I wouldn’t trust THAT as a benefit when there are clearly better ways to protect yourself from HIV and STDs (.. condoms).

There are medical benefits, and a few medical risks. The studies that have done have, overall, come to no specific conclusion when analyzed in a group; some say there’s some loss of sexual pleasure, others don’t.

Again, I have looked for different articles and I’ll even ask for some studies to prove me wrong: I have found ONLY articles stating that there is most definitely loss of sensitivity through clear sensitivity tests. The only study I have found that says there isn’t a loss of sexual pleasure was one other studies seemed to mock, because it was done to patients who had sexual dysfunctions and got circumcisions to try and alleviate the issues they were having in the first place.

It’s really tiresome to have FGM brought up when talking about male circumcision. It really does trivialize what FGM does, and why it’s done. I would really suggest that if you want to have a rational conversation about male circumcision, you not compare it to a procedure it doesn’t resemble in the least.

Again, there are different types of FGM and some have no effect or a loss of partial sensitivity (which I would consider comparable based on aforementioned circumcision studies), as outlined in that link I posted.
Interesting

Is there any specific reason you’re ignoring that male circumcision is not supposed to have any effect on the male sexuality

I dare say as a male that I could probably enjoy sex if I didn’t even have a penis that felt anything at all… Regardless, again, my point is more towards genital cutting done to infants aren’t even given the option, and because of the fact that everything I have found does say there are strong negative impacts when it comes to male sexual sensitivity… and also complications that can lead to death because of this practice 100 deaths a year in the US because of circumcision. I never once stated that people who have circumcisions can’t be sexual.

—

And I guess, since everyone seems to be centered on the idea that this is an attack on their religion… I should clarify my position on the actual law:

I don’t really think a straight ban on circumcisions is what is called for, and like others have said could make the procedure even more dangerous for people who decide to follow through on it.

I just don’t understand why 80% of boys are circumcised in the United States. Do it if you follow Jewish or Islamic tradition, but why do it you aren’t affiliated with those traditions.. Or I guess the word would be gentiles.