Why do parents keep doing this?

Sarah Vaughan wrote:




I shall look forward to hearing your sample size, in that case. ;-)


Sarah



I don't have a sample size, I have good sources. Why two of them post
right hear to the group. Maybe they will help you out with the detail.

Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Briar Rabbit
writes

We know that the prime movers behind this so-called anti-circ movement
are primarily men (the majority being gay).


And your problem with this would be........?




Oh I have no problem with gay people, I do however have a problem with
the gay skin freaks who are psychosexually obsessed with tonguing out
foreskins and try to pass the their opposition to circumcision off as
"child rights activism".



"What, if any, is the intrinsic value of the foreskin which is
sufficient to override the religious, cultural and medical
considerations relating to a circumcision decision?"


I think a more important question would be "What, if any, is the
intrinsic value of infant circumcision which is sufficient to override
the principles that

a) people have a certain right to bodily autonomy,
and


Does that extend to vaccinations too? I believe there is a growing body
of opinion that people resent that their parents made a decision to
compromise their natural immune system. Are immune systems as important
as foreskins? Or are foreskins the alpha and the omega?


b) your rights as a parent do not include a blanket right to make
any and all decisions affecting your child?"



It seems that you skin feaks are happy with all parental decisions
except the fate of the foreskin. So do me a favor and stop talking about
rights when all you are really trying to do is save a few foreskins.



What it all comes down to is the speculative possibility of a sexual
function for the foreskin.

It is obvious that the only expert opinion on this matter are those
men circumcised as adults who are able to subjectively report on their
own experience.

Depending on the source (either pro or anti websites) we find
conflicting testimonials. Some say sex is a lot better, some say sex
is a lot worse, and a lot say there is a difference maybe but neither
better nor worse. And chirping from the bleachers we have
uncircumcised men shouting at the top of their voices how WONDERFUL
their foreskins are. So where do we look for the truth?



We look towards those circumcisied as adults after having experienced
penetrative sexual activity. The skin freaks don't like these statistics
because it calls the lie to the propaganda they have built around there
psychosexual fetish.

Read here about how little these 380 men missed their foreskins ...

===============================

Conference Abstract number: TuPeB4648

Adult male circumcision in Kenya: safety and patient satisfaction

C J O Opeya1, B O Ayieko1, A Kawango1, M O Onyango1, S Moses2, R C
Bailey3, J O Ndinya-Achola4, J N Krieger5
1UNIM Project, Kisumu, Kenya; 2University of Manitoba, Winipeg,
Canada; 3University of Illinois, Chicago, United States; 4University
of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya; 5University of Washington, Seattle, United
States


Background: There is growing interest in male circumcision as a method
of reducing HIV transmission. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of
male circumcision (MC) to reduce HIV incidence is underway in Kenya.
If MC is found to be efficacious in reducing HIV incidence, then the
rates and severity of complications must still be weighed against
benefits of the procedure. We report frequency of adverse events (AEs)
and satisfaction resulting from circumcisions performed during the
initial phase of the RCT.


Methods: Healthy, 18-24 year-old, consenting men are randomized to
circumcision and control arms. Those in the circumcision arm undergo
surgery using local anesthesia (maximum 15 ml 2% lidocaine). They are
followed up at 3, 8, 30, and 90 days post operatively, or whenever
they need to return to the clinic.


Results: Among the first 380 circumcisions, there were
14procedure-related AEs (3.6%) from 13 participants: 4 bleeding; 3
post-operative site infections; 3 other infections; and 4 other
complications. Nine AEs (2.4%) were definitely related, 3 probably
related and 2 possibly related to the surgery. All were mild or
moderate and resolved within hours or several days of detection. Most
AEs occurred in the first 3 months of the study. At 30 days
post-surgery, 99.3% of men reported being very satisfied and 0.7%
somewhat satisfied with circumcision. None were dissatisfied. Men
reported returning to work after a median of 3 days (range 0-21) and
to general activities after a median of 1 day (0-3 days). All sexual
partners who were aware of the man's new circumcision status were very
satisfied with the results.


Conclusions: Circumcisions can be performed safely in this setting
with no serious or lasting complications and with high levels of
patient satisfaction. Lessons learned from this trial will be useful
if MC is to be introduced widely as an intervention.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unasha...rc/message/419

Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Briar Rabbit
writes

Cervical Cancer

It is often stated by those who oppose circumcision that the low
incidence of cervical cancer in Europe undermines the finding that
circumcision reduces the incidence of cervical cancer.

It has always been known that Human Papillomavirus (HPV) causes
cervical cancer. What was not known however is what was the connection
between circumcision or the lack of it and HPV. The breakthrough in
understanding came with the Castellsagué study which found:

"Conclusions: Male circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of
penile HPV infection and, in the case of men with a history of
multiple sexual partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their
current female partners."

[...]

I've always protected myself against HPV and other infections by making
sure the men I've been with have used condoms, which is a much more
effective way. Why should I expect them to get circumcised?



How many men would that be Sarah? Are you a real goer then? ;-)

Actually it is all about facts. The hideous foreskin is a public health
risk. That holds true anyway you care to slice it.

Kaybee wrote:

"Xyzzy" wrote in message
om...

"Kaybee" wrote in message

...

Oh I have read that You can get the foreskin back if you really want it.

Not true. The nerve cells, the frendulum, the muscle and other parts
that were cut away cannot be regrown.


Muscle? the only thing cut is skin



If you listen to the skin freaks they will have you believe that their
dearest foreskin is more anatomically complex than the human brain. Such
is the nature of their psychosexual pathology.

"Kaybee" wrote in message .. .
"Xyzzy" wrote in message
om...
"Kaybee" wrote in message
...
Oh I have read that You can get the foreskin back if you really want it.

Not true. The nerve cells, the frendulum, the muscle and other parts
that were cut away cannot be regrown.

Muscle? the only thing cut is skin


That's one of the myths.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Anatomy.html

"Jamie Clark" wrote in message ...
"Catherine Woodgold" wrote in message
...

"firedancer623" ) writes:
I am all for
free choice and fully support any parent's decision, which ever it may
be. I
chose not to circ my kids because I felt it was in their best interest.
Others may disagree and that is fine. Do I care what they think? Nope.

Well, if parents decide to circumcise a child without asking
the child's permission (e.g. a baby), then it isn't
"free choice" for the child, nor for the adult the child
later becomes.

Trying to get the terminology straight here.
--
Cathy

She was referring to the freedom of choice of the parents.

It's ridiculous to say that we need to ask our children's permission. There
are thousands of parenting decisions that we have to make without consulting
our children,

Yes parents should and must make many decisions for their children.
That doesn't mean that *every* decision they make is okay.

or asking their permission. There is no freedom of choice for
babies or children -- there may be the illusion of choice -- do you want to
wear the blue pants or the red pants, do you want broccoli or carrots

Oddly benign choices for analogy since we were talking about cutting
off part of children's genitals.

for
dinner, but there is not a lot of real choice, and certainly not about
important matters. We are the parents, and we have to do what we think is
best until they are the age of majority. It's that simple.

You're oversimplifying. You may think the best way to teach your
child not to fight in school is to beat him silly at home, but you
leave marks, someone will eventually call social services. You may
think it's best for your baby to have penile reduction surgery, but
you'd be violating his rights.

Parents do not have unlimited rights over their children's bodies, as
you seem to be suggesting. The question here is: does cutting off
part of a baby's penis cross the line. It clearly does, except when
viewed through the lens of culture and tradition.

And different
people are going to have different views on what they feel is best for their
child. Parents make decisions regarding immunizations, circ, ear piercing,
medical treatments, foods they eat or don't eat, clothes they wear, etc.
Parenting is not a democracy.

Neither is it a free-for-all.

Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Jamie Clark
writes
I knew a guy years and years ago who decided at age 27 to have himself
circumcised. He said it was incredibly painful and wished that his
parents had had it done when he was a baby.

Which does not make a lot of sense, since it would have been just as
painful plus he would also have had the distress and fear caused by
having no idea what was going on.

However, he'd have no recollection.

Think of it like this: when you're put under general anaesthesia, you have
no recollection of pain. For all intents and purposes, it never occurred.

Sarah Vaughan wrote in message ...
In message , Briar Rabbit
writes

Cervical Cancer
It is often stated by those who oppose circumcision that the low
incidence of cervical cancer in Europe undermines the finding that
circumcision reduces the incidence of cervical cancer.
It has always been known that Human Papillomavirus (HPV) causes
cervical cancer. What was not known however is what was the connection
between circumcision or the lack of it and HPV. The breakthrough in
understanding came with the Castellsagué study which found:
"Conclusions: Male circumcision is associated with a reduced risk of
penile HPV infection and, in the case of men with a history of
multiple sexual partners, a reduced risk of cervical cancer in their
current female partners." [...]

I've always protected myself against HPV and other infections by making
sure the men I've been with have used condoms, which is a much more
effective way. Why should I expect them to get circumcised?

Sarah, using a condom in conjunction with an absent foreskin, is an
even more effective way to prevent unwanted STDs. Condom use is not
absolute! Even without the use of a condom, circumcised men are still
2-8x less likely to contract HIV. When you have a moist appendage that
dangles from the end of a silly SHLONG, you already have two strikes
against you. The "you" being "you" and your lover! Only a blundering
buffoon would not want to take every precautionary measure to ensure
the well-being of he and his mate. An ounce of prevention is worth a
pound of cure!
You do not wait until "Dirty Johnny" reaches the supposed age of
reason (18) until he is circumcised. By that time, "Dirty Johnny" has
most likely already been knee deep in hanky panky. Not to mention a
greater chance of being exposed to UTIs, penile cancer, phimosis, and
the multitudes of maladies that are almost always associated with the
foreskin. When a dangerous & deadly scab of skin comes before the
health & well-being of an individual, that individual clearly has
emotional problems. -D, NYC "We must study in greater detail than
their neighbors, these numerically and geographically insignificant
Jews, who gave to the world one of its greatest literatures, two of
its most influential religions and so many of its profoundest men" -
WILL DURANT (The Story Of Civilization, Volume I)
http://www.aids.net.au/lemons-news-10-03-04.htm (Circumcision provides
a 2-8 protective fold against HIV)
http://www.ahcpr.gov/data/hcup/commdx/table1a.htm (Most Common Medical
procedures in the US - Circumcision tops list)
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2754/wiswell.html (Neonatal
Circumcision: A Current Appraisal - Dr. Thomas E. Wiswell, FAAP)
http://www.circinfo.net/benefits_of_circumcision.htm (Benefits of
circumcision -Prof. Brian "not Jewish" Morris - 30+ years of unbias
research)
http://www.medicirc.org/meditopics/p...nfo_women.html
(Circumcision - a lifetime of medical benefits: Women's Sexual Penile
Preference, Sexual Activity, Psych Effect)
http://www.drweiss.org/necesary.htm (Neonatal Circumcision Is
Necessary- Dr. Gerald Weiss)
http://www.guinessworldrecords.com/index.asp?id=49870 (Science &
Technology - Buildings - Largest Synagogue in the world - Temple
Emanu-El, NYC)
http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/html/2004a/pr126-04.html (NYC - safest,
largest city in the US - 2004)
http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/poj.htm (The Phenomenon Of The
Jews)
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm (Jews, IQ & Nobel
Laureates)
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Economy/telaviv.html (Tel Aviv - Top
10 High-Tech Cities In the World - Newsweek)
http://www.eonline.com/Features/Specials/Jews (Do Jews run Hollywood?
You bet they do, and what of it? - Ben Stein)

) wrote in message . com...

Sarah, using a condom in conjunction with an absent foreskin, is an
even more effective way to prevent unwanted STDs.

Chapter and verse, please.

Jake Waskett wrote in message . co.uk...
Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Jamie Clark
writes
I knew a guy years and years ago who decided at age 27 to have himself
circumcised. He said it was incredibly painful and wished that his
parents had had it done when he was a baby.

Which does not make a lot of sense, since it would have been just as
painful plus he would also have had the distress and fear caused by
having no idea what was going on.

However, he'd have no recollection.

Not good enough. A child's emotional development is not dependent on
recollection. Children learn about trust & security well before the
age of recollection.


Think of it like this: when you're put under general anaesthesia, you have
no recollection of pain. For all intents and purposes, it never occurred.

So why bother with infant anesthesia for circumcision since it seems
to work just as well without.

And anyway, I think general anesthesia generally prevents the pain
from being experienced in the first place, so there's nothing to
recollect. If the patient experienced the pain, s/he'd be under
incredible physical stress during the operation.

Although I do have a story about a friend who was given an
amnesiogenic drug to have a broken bone set. And retroamnesiogenic
drugs could be a godsend for rape crisis.

Speaking of retroamnesiogenic drugs...