Why do parents keep doing this?

Briar Rabbit wrote in message ...

If you were heterosexual you would be aware that the problem odour which
some women have a problem dealing with is vaginal. That means it comes
from within and is useually caused by some infection or other. Women
seem to have no problem in dealing with the external elements of their
genitals, so why do men?

If you would expand your horizon, and move from circumcised men to
uncircumcised men, you would notice men generally do not have any
problems dealing with the odour of their genitials.

Igor van den Hoven wrote:

Next there is the time delay for the loss of sensitivity. People have
reported they keep losing sensitivy over the year, hence someone who
is 25 and circumcised at age 20, will have more sensitivity than
someone who is 50, and circumcised at age 20 as well. It's typical
that the so called pro-circ 'comparison' sites always use men in their
statistics that were circumcised within 1 to 5 years of the survey.

There is a loss of sensitivity due to aging, regardless of circumcision
status. Why do you ignore this?

30 Million men in the USA are said to have erectile and impotence
problems, most of them are over 50 years old. There are only 34
Million men over 50 in the USA.

Now, perhaps you'd like to give us some figures for other countries.

Starting to see a connection yet?

Nope. It's impossible to find connections with such poor data.

Mainly man over 40 link their 'problems' to their infant circumcision.

Nonsense. A few do, sure, but there's no evidence whatsoever to suggest that
they're more than a tiny minority.

Viagra sales sky rocket in the USA compared to Europe. For the
ignorant, routine infant circumcision is not practiced in Europe.

Now, to put this in perspective, almost all drugs sell better in the USA
than in European nations. But that fact isn't very convenient for you, is
it?

Igor van den Hoven wrote:

If you would expand your horizon, and move from circumcised men to
uncircumcised men, you would notice men generally do not have any
problems dealing with the odour of their genitials.

I beg to differ.

wrote:


Briar, you are not dealing with rational minded users!


Sadly, this is true. Its their peculiar interest in the foreskin you see.

The issue here is that there are many men who are intact and would have a
real problem with having been circumcised at birth, and there many people
who are circumcised and have this problem of having been circumcised at
birth. The neonatal surgical alteration of one's genitals is a violation of
human rights. Religion must never have an ability to surpass the protection
of the law.

wrote in message
m...

... In the end, women have no choice
but to put up with their own odoriferous emanations. snip
You also forget that men are led by their noses. We are the horniest
creatures on the planet. As long as we have a warm hole to nestle
inside of, we will generally tolerate anything!eh And that "anything"
includes the fishy-scented snatch! snip
.... Is it quite
possible that you have become so accustomed to gnawing on snagle-tooth
skin that you simply do not know any better!?

You don't really like women very much, do you? Or the human body? Or people?
My goodness, if you described your lover's body like this to her, or judged
her preferences like this, I've a pretty good idea she wouldn't be your
lover for long.

You may disagree with me about the practice of circumcision, but I think
it's becoming very quickly clear which one of us here is merely
'opinionated' and which one has veered well across the line into something
else. Unless what you're doing is trying to use humor to get your point
across. If that's the case, I'm afraid you'll have to try an approach that's
actually funny instead of broadly offensive.

--angela

"Chotii" wrote in message ...
"Briar Rabbit" wrote in message
...
Chotii writes:

It appears to me that these men have benefitted from having their bodies
"restored". Why exactly is this a problem? Why is it "pathetic" for
tuggers to alter their bodies to match their body image? Do you have the
same reaction to women who seek breast augmentation, rhinoplasty, or any
other body alteration?


I feel the same pity.

At least you're consistent. Point in your favor.

No I am consistently unsympathetic to these lunatic "tuggers". If they
just locked themselves in the attic and hung weights from their penises
that would be manageable. They could be placed on the mental health watch
register and managed on a case by case basis. It is when then attempt to
justify there psycho-sexual pathology by waging war against all
circumcision for whatever reason. They then need to be institutionalized
and certainly restricted from contact with children.

Turn that around, sir. If you'd just lock yourself in the attic and enjoy
your cut penis, you'd be manageable. You could be placed on the mental health register and managed. It's when your attempt to justify your psycho-sexual pathology by waging war against all uncircumcision for whatever reason.... then you need to be institutionalised and certainly restricted from contact with children.

Fair? I didn't figure you'd think so.
Of course, your very willingness to label every single man involved in
improving his body to conform with his preferred body-image a 'freak' who
needs to be on a 'mental health register' says a great deal more about you
than it does about them. --angela

Angela, mucking up a perfectly functioning penis by adding on an
impediment is an improvement to you!? LOL! If you want to talk about
true mutilation, foreskin restoration fits the bill! DOH! Angela, have
you ever heard of the term "partialism?" It's a psychopathology term
that fits the anti-circ's sexual obsession with the prepuce, and is
found in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic &
Statistical Manual 4th Revision (better known as the ‘DSM-IV'). It is
located under "Paraphilia not Otherwise Specified" in the sexual and
gender Identity Disorders Section. The ICD-9 code for Paraphilia NOS
is 302.9. The diagnosis is made for paraphilia if "the behavior,
sexual urges, or fantasies cause clinically significant distress or
impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of
functioning." The simplest definition of partialism is "exclusive
focus on part of the body."
Angela, these mental defectives have been studied in detail. If you
do not take our word for it, at least listen to Professor Brian "not
Jewish" Morris, who has over 30+ years of unbias research on the
benefits of circumcision, as well as combating the anti-circ ilk. Here
are his findings on foreskin restoration: "There are also groups such
as 'UNCIRC' and 'NORM' (National Organization of Restoring Men) that
promote procedures to reverse circumcision, by, for example,
stretching the loose skin on the shaft of the retracted penis or the
use of surgery. This has led to genital mutilation [192]. Claimed
benefits of 'increased sensitivity' in reality appear to be a result
of the friction of the foreskin, whether intact or newly created, on
the moist or sweaty glans and undersurface of the prepuce in the
un-aroused state and would obviously in the 're-uncircumcised' penis
have nothing to do with an increase in touch receptors. Indeed, nerves
do not regenerate. Moreover, the sensitivity during sexual intercourse
is in fact identical, according to men circumcised as adults. In the
first detailed professional analysis of psychiatric aspects eight
patients seeking prepuce restoration were studied and several
psychological disorders were noted [117]. These included narcissistic
and exhibitionistic body image, depressions, major defects in early
mothering, and ego pathology. These men had a preoccupation with their
absent foreskin and represented a subgroup within the homosexual
community [117]. Subsequently some "skin-stretchers" can now be found
amongst heterosexuals, representing 10% of the 1,200 members of one
'uncirc.' organization (cf. 80% homosexual and 10% bisexual), with 65%
uncircumcised, 30% circumcised, and 5% partially circumcised. Although
many were happy with the result (thus justifying to themselves the
decision to undertake this ordeal), others disliked their new genital
status, even choosing to undergo re-circumcision [164]. The practice
was promoted recently by James Bigelow claims men mourn their lost
foreskin. Dr Yehuda Nir, a psychoanalyst who was head of child
psychiatry at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Hospital says he has never
observed "circumcision trauma', stating "The only thing men are
concerned about with regard to the penis is its size." -D, NYC "Born
imperfect, made perfect on the eighth day"
http://www.circinfo.net/benefits_of_circumcision.htm (Benefits of
circumcision - Prof. Brian Morris - 30+ years of unbias research)
http://www.aids.net.au/lemons-news-10-03-04.htm (Circumcision provides
a 2-8 protective fold against HIV)
http://www.drweiss.org/necesary.htm (Neonatal Circumcision Is
Necessary)
http://www.medicirc.org/meditopics/p...nfo_women.html
(Circumcision - A Lifetime Of Medical Benefits - Women's Sexual Penile
Preference, Sexual Activity, Psych Effect)

In message , Briar Rabbit
writes
Sarah Vaughan wrote:

In message , Briar Rabbit

Sensible you say? To "be" one of the minority just to be so?
No. To be one of the uncircumcised, regardless of whether that's
the minority or the majority, because it avoids unnecessary harm and
discomfort.



Harm? What harm would that be?

Possible infections including sepsis, urinary retention, and damage to
the rest of the penis.

The discomfort of the post circumcision period is minor and should not
be exaggerated

According to the study you quoted below, it took up to three weeks for
men to get back to work. So it sounds to me as though it causes
significant discomfort in at least some cases. Now, of course,

... unless you have an agenda?



I don't know, as I haven't heard the wild psychosexual reasons. Of
course, I've heard from several men who support keeping the foreskin
because sex is more pleasurable with a foreskin, but making sex more
pleasurable doesn't strike me as a wild reason.



These several men? They were circumcised as adults and now are able to
make a valid comparison?

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/309/6955/676/a

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/309/6955/679/a#43654

If that is the group (you are talking about) then the findings are the
opposite of what you claim.

http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/fink1/

You are not deliberately trying to deceive people are you?

Read this one for starters then:

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

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

--
"I once requested an urgent admission for a homeopath who had become depressed
and taken a massive underdose" - Phil Peverley

"The only thing men are concerned about with regard to the penis is its
size."

Uh, gliding mechanism?
A circumcised penis can be readily replaced by molded plastic.
The natural penis is a precision instrument.

wrote in message
...

...have
you ever heard of the term "partialism?" It's a psychopathology term
that fits the anti-circ's sexual obsession with the prepuce, and is
found in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic &
Statistical Manual 4th Revision (better known as the 'DSM-IV'). It is
located under "Paraphilia not Otherwise Specified" in the sexual and
gender Identity Disorders Section. The ICD-9 code for Paraphilia NOS
is 302.9. The diagnosis is made for paraphilia if "the behavior,
sexual urges, or fantasies cause clinically significant distress or
impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of
functioning." The simplest definition of partialism is "exclusive
focus on part of the body."

You're funny. Keep talking, because you know, this definition doesn't fit
your very long, detailed posts at all....does it?

--angela