I feel the same way . I'm not circumcised and I really don't care . My girlfriend loves me for how I am . Just cause there isn't skin over your penis doesn't mean your a better boyfriend .
@firegirl221 "that doesn't happen. At all" If you are referring to removal of the clitoral hood & trimming the labia minora, you are wrong. These two proceedures are in vogue for those women who want a so called designer vagina. Labia plasty is one of the fastest growing cosmetic surgeries.
If referring to the collection of smegma, blood, urine, semen, bacteria, fungi and feminine hygiene product debris collecting under and around the clitoral hood & between the labia minora--FALSE
Women have clitoral hoods and inner labias, where smegma collects, and that can trap urine. Should they have them trimmed? If you think not, then you ARE sexist. I used to live in a country where they use "toilet showers", in USA you don't use them and you circumcise "for hygiene"? That's plain ridiculous. A little plumbing to prevent smelly anuses, penises and pussies (as a bi, penis is by far the less smelly).
@firegirl221 The female prepuce or clitoral hood is the exact homologus structure to the male prepuce or foreskin. They are maded up of the same kind of tissue and nerves. They serve the same purpose and function.
Next time you go to your drug store, survey the number of femine odor products and feminine yeast products.
"Women can only do so much to keep them as clean as possible"
lol, American women don't care enough to install toilet showers, but you see them whining about uncut penises being "dirty" and men having to hack off a piece of their penis xD Jeez, do you realize how ridiculous this is? You were unlucky with the one uncut penis you had, that's all.
@firegirl221, you silly girl, it's not about penises! Males and females have a PREPUCE or FORESKIN. If the male foreskin is intrinsically "dirty", why would you think that the female foreskin is not equally so? As a woman and nurse, I can say without any doubt that female genital hygiene is harder, and women are more prone to UTIs and genital infections than males.
I've had experience with one and it was absolutely disgusting. it smelled like rotting fruit, even though it appeared to be clean.
As for vaginas being disgusting, yes i know they are. But what surgical procedure is there to make vaginas more hygienic? None! They will always be gross. Women can only do so much to keep them as clean as possible.
@firegirl221 Well if you really believe that circumcision makes for a cleaner less odorous penis, you should have your clitoral hood removed and have your labia minor trimmed down which will prevent smegma, blood, feminine hygiene products, urine, bacteria, fungi, and semen from collecting under and around the clitoral hood and inbetween the labia minora and majora.
A sample of one uncircumcised penis means nothing and has no validity in supporting your biased, sexist claims
@firegirl221, sounds like you have good taste. But worse than an uncircumcised penis is an uncircumcised vagina. If the labia are nicely trimmed down, there is normally no gross smell around the vagina, and there isn't the bitter taste of smegma. Also, bacteria don't thrive around the circumcised vagina, so guys are much less likely to get STDs or oral Herpes from it. The hottest girls with the sweetest vaginas are from Indonesia, which has loads of circ'd women - a real paradise!
@firegirl221 It is obscenely ironic and hypocitical for a woman to make such claims. Here are a few facts/questions for you. How many OTC products for masculine odor are on the market vs how many feminine odor products? From the time of birth through adulthood, which gender gets more UTI's? Which gender gets more yeast and other fungal infections? What is the homologus structure/tissue to the male prepuce/foreskin? Which gender produces and collects more smegma?
@firegirl221 Not unless you are a urologist, fluffer, or professional felationist in a predominatly uncircumcised nation, I question how many uncircmcised pensises you have first hand and eye to eye experience with. Care to give us a legit honest number? Remember this has to be your own personal hands on or face to face experience with an adult uncircumcised penis. We are waiting for your answer. Are you ready to woman up and give us an honest answer?
And while studies in Africa found that circumcision reduced the risk of a man's becoming infected by an H.I.V.-positive female partner, it is not clear that a circumcised man with H.I.V. would be less likely to infect a woman.
It's unlikely circumcision is a useful strategy against HIV in developed nations. 3 African RCTs found a protective effect for female to male HIV transmission. The WHO recommends circumcision "for countries with high rates of heterosexual HIV infection and low male circumcision rates". U.S. men are already mostly circumcised, and the HIV epidemic is concentrated in MSM (and drug abusers). But European men are mostly uncircumcised, and as for USA, MSM is the vulnerable group.
@slauertura77, since you like checking things, here's another interesting reference: USAID investigated HIV against circumcision in eighteen African countries in 2009. From the 3 African RCT results, they expected to find that HIV infection would predominate in the uncircumcised men. But that wasn't the study finding! In TEN of the 18 African countries investigated, it found that HIV was commoner in the CIRCUMCISED men.
See USAID report 2009 "Levels and spread of HIV" (p.109).
"it is not clear that a circumcised man with H.I.V. would be less likely to infect a woman."
At some point of a trial, they found females with circumcised patners were 50% MORE likely to have been infected. Guess what? The trial was stopped early for "lack of benefit"... = before the result could get statistically significant, so they can still claim nothing is proven. Interestingly, noone cared to investigate further ( vs THREE trials about women>men transmission)
@dandydosbest : I found a NY times article that cites 80%.
Some 80 percent of American men are circumcised, one of the highest rates in the developed world. Yet even advocates of circumcision acknowledge that an aggressive circumcision drive in the United States would be unlikely to have a drastic impact on H.I.V. rates here, since the procedure does not seem to protect those at greatest risk, men who have sex with men.
@dandydosbest : No, geography is not confusing. Where are you getting your 80% claim from. Because 1) The only place I have see that # is from Wikipedia's circ page.( if that is your source, it is not creditable) 2) 19 states don't even keep records of circumcision rates, in newborns discharged from hospitals. Soooooo, you might want to rethink the 80% thing.
@slauertura77, here is the very source that your CDC relies upon to estimate that 79% of U.S. men are circumcised:
Xu, F, L Markowitz, M Sternberg, and S Aral (2006). Prevalence of circumcision in men in the United States: data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 1999–2002.
If you think you have a more reliable source, let me know.
As a European, I find that staggering! In Europe infant circumcision is uncommon. It belongs to the Victorian era.
@mzorzor : Are the studies flawed because you say so? Prove they are flawed. Oh I see, the studies are flawed, because they don't agree with your point of view and no matter how many factual pieces of info that are out there, you still won't believe it. Cool, I'm done with this discussion.
To begin with, these studies assumed ALL new HIV infections were acquired through heterosexual contact (even when men reported no sexual partners...), which is more than unlikely. As I said, they have been "stopped early for benefit", which is proven to exagerate the effect of a treatment. They didn't take into account the fact that cut men couldn't have sex for 1-2 months after circumcision (it would have been easy, why didn't they do it?).
@mzorzor excellent point. All three of the infamous RCT's that were performed in Sub-Saharan Africa which are the source of of the claims of a 60% reduction in HIV transmission from an HIV+ female to an HIV- male lacked some key controls. 1st they did not control for the practice of "dry sex". 2. They did not control for the use of sex workers. 3. The male subjects who were circumcised were not able to have as many sexual encounters during the trials as they had to abstain inorder to heal.
@mzorzor The three RCTs also did not control for anal sex whether it be MM or MF. They did not control for the number of sexual partners. They did nothing to assure that condom use was equal between both groups.
Here is the part that I find morally reprehensible-in order for these studies to have any meaning, subjects had to be encouraged whether overtly or covertly to not use condoms 100% of the time.
These studies purposely spread HIV & have NOT been replicated in any modern country
@dandydosbest : I beg to differ. Avert.org (Avert is an international HIV/AIDS charity organization) has world wide stats on all STD's, from the same time frame (2000's) that you cite and Europe has much higher rates of STDs than the U.S. Does across the board.
@slauertura77, I like avert.org, but it doesn't substantaite what you claim!
Perhaps geography confuses you: "North America" comprizes both USA and Canada. Did you separate the two? NB. Canada is about 33% circ'd, the USA is about 80%.circ'd.
Give me ANY STD percentage (or rate) from Avert that shows the USA fares better than Europe or the UK! Your own CDC says:
"STDs in the U.S. and abortion rates are substantially higher than those of other western industrialized nations".
@dandydosbest : Why was your comment taken down? Did you forget what screen name you signed into and you wanted to use a different one? Or was all of your info just B.S. And the administrator was smart enough to know that. What is the APA, because I cannot find what you cited to me, from the APA at all.
@slauertura77, no, I removed my comment while I searched the reference for my quotation. Here it is (remove brackets): ww(.)apa(.)org/divisions/div42/primepsych/std01(.)htm
The CDC makes the SAME comment, i.e. that the USA has a much higher level of STDs than European countries.
The original source for the APA's statement is (online):
"Family Planning Perspectives Volume 32, Number 1, January/February 2000
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Among Adolescents in Developed Countries"
@mzorzor : BTW you do understand "surveys" are not clinical studies, right? I could go to a KKK meeting and take a survey to see how many people there hate Afro-Americans. Then make the assumption that all white people hate black people base on that survey. Which would not be true. Survey info is biased, because surveys are based on opinion, so that survey info is garbage.
@slauertura77, circumcision does NOT protect from STDs!
Researchers Nigel Dickson et al. published their investigation of STDs/ Circumcision in J. of Pediatrics, March 2008 (see online!)
They found NO circumcision benefit for either bacterial or viral STDs! The study concludes:
"Our findings agree with other similar recent medical studies from developed countries... it appears unlikely that circumcision protects against common STDs".
Maybe I misused the word "survey", but nothing to do with opinion, I meant you measure the percentage of men with some STD or STI in real world. In many African countries cut men have as much or more HIV than uncut ones.
I'm really really interested in those trials that were NOT conducted in third world. Reference please?
So you made your son undergo a surgery right at birth in case he'd become a "f-cking moron" who doesn't practice safe sex? :-(
@mzorzor : 1) You're an "F" ing Moron if you think being cut means not having to practice safe sex. 2) The scientific stat I found on a medical site, that is backed up by clinical trials mentions nothing about African countries and third world nations. 3) Until you show me where I can find the info you speak of, what you say is conjecture and means nothing.
@mzorzor : That is straight off webmd.net. I believe practicing safe sex is a mans best bet. But if my boy decides not to practice safe sex, it's nice to know I gave him a better chance of not getting an STD.
"if my boy decides not to practice safe sex, it's nice to know I gave him a better chance of not getting an STD."
You also gave him an excuse not to practice safe sex... Again, surveys in first world indicate little to no correlation between STDs and circumcision ( which is why it's abandonned in Canada/Australia/NZ imo), so most likely you only gave him an excuse, not an actual protection
@mzorzor : Regarding newborn circumcision, most physicians today agree with the practice of informing parents of the risks and benefits of the procedure in an unbiased manner. Recently, however, several large studies revealed a 60% decrease in HIV transmission in circumcised males compared to uncircumcised males. This may ultimately influence some changes in recommendations in the near future.
In Europe physicians don't even "inform" parents of anything, because it's obviously a cultural practice and nothing more.
Regarding HIV, those studies were flawed and conducted in countries that lack running water. Let's talk about USA and developped world in general, if cut men had half the HIV rate of uncut ones, don't you think we would hear about that, and not about trials conducted in Africa?
"several large studies revealed a 60% decrease in HIV transmission in circumcised males compared to uncircumcised males."
Apparently that's news to you, but those 3 large (and largely flawed) studies were all conducted in Africa, and were all "stopped early for benefit", a practice which has been proven to far exaggerate the effect of a treatment. ("Stopping Randomized Trials Early for Benefit and Estimation of Treatment Effects")
@ mzorzor : don't take it out on me bro, I'm just the messenger. You could probably have you anteater fixed, but I bet that would hurt like an SOB. Me, I don't have that problem. J had it done when I was a new born and don't remember a thing. No pain no, no nothing.
( saying you have circ envy is my opinion, so was everything after that. I have no facts to back that up.) That is an example of facts vs fiction. Hope you learned something. Please cite facts in the future.
Apparently, USA is tie with Switzerland ; all other western/northern European countries have lower HIV rates. Nice job protecting your kids via circumcision. Is that enough of a "fact" for you biggot?
@mzorzor : I'm not gonna go back and do all the re search again, just for you. Everything I said is backed up by scientific studies and facts. Show me where to find what you're are saying about Europe. Because citing what you heard from a friend does not count. Your opinion and the little Canadian girls opinion hold no merit. Facts are the only thing that hold water. I'm sorry you have a complex about having a funny lookin penis.
Oh, so it's up to ME to go back and do all the search again? Try "HIV prevalence by country", as an example. My dick doesn't look "funny", that's how most dicks look where I live. Accusing me of "circumcision envy" is pathetically childish.
Flooding again, but I want to point out something. Non-religious circumcision is widespread in USA, and only in USA, is it because 1) Americans do it as a cultural tradition, and rationalize it through medical BS ( I remind you that circumcision has been said to cure epilepsy, tuberculosis and masturbation, among other things ), or 2) the rest of the world doesn't care about STDs and the "bunch of problems" caused by foreskin. Pick the likelier.
@tipoomaster Circumcision is about controlling male sexuality. It's a lesser form of castration. People have known for years that it reduces ability to have sex and masturbate. That's why they still circumcise males. It simply has to stop
Girls girls girls let me tell you something :) when I was born, and my brother was born my father wanted both of us circumcised (We aren't muslims any of us) and the fact why he wanted it was because when he was young he suffered from a foreskin that was to tight and had pain each and every day with it, and my mother didn't agree to do it... At the age of 16 my brother and I had the exact same problem. Now who was the one looking stupid? It's actually healthy for your penis to be circumcised.
@Paradoxicful If the foreskin is tight - it is a normal condition called phimosis - easily curable by stretching exercises - no biggie. Google it up - you can find lots of helpful links. And yeah, i think that your mother did the right thing by preventing your circumcision - saved you a lot of pain over nothing. Peace.
@randomshoelaces Let me tell you this much :) Phimosis is not easily cureable, been there tried that, did not work at all. You have to remember it depends from penis to penis how the situation is, and honestly I went through more physical and mental pain WITH foreskin than without so I believe your argument is invalid. Maybe you should try it for yourself before coming up with such strong opinions :) just saying.
@Paradoxicful Did it already - took some time and effort but it worked out eventually. And yeah, thanks for the input - i thought stretching works for everyone - i guess not. So, would you rather circumcise a baby or would you wait till he grows older and give him the choice? I'd go with giving him the opportunity - mostly it won't hurt him in the future - if it did, a preputioplasty would help him out.
@neechee5150 I'm from Denmark, with highly educated doctors and surgeons and medical staff, now I have to admit I only took half a circumcision because it was optional, and I could always return if the result wasn't good.
@Paradoxicful Then it seems that the medical community in Denmark is better trained and educated in caring for natural male genitialia and as a result they offer alternatives and education instead of cutting and asking questions later.
@mzorzor The fact is this can happen to everyone; and the fact is that it's actually healthy for your penis to be without foreskin, you don't need it :) however people saying it reduces the feeling with sex, they aren't always right. I gotta admit I like sex even more without foreskin so yes it depends from person to person. But going for whats best for your penis I have to admit being without foreskin is the way to go.. You also wouldn't get a problem with your foreskin in any case then.
You had phimosis, no wonder you like sex better without foreskin.... But that's not relevant for your average male with retractable foreskin.
"you don't need it"
It's handy to masturbate at the very least. You only need one kindey ( 1% of people are born with only one, many die without even noticing), that doesn't mean it's healthy to remove one. ANY part of your body can go wrong.
I'm glad you are against it, as it is a terrible practice. But really, of all the arguments against it, the only one you talk about is appearance? Look at the study I posted, there is demonstrable sexual harm as well.
The foreskin contains more nerve endings than any other part of the penis, that's just fact. In the largest study on circumcision in South Korea, Seoul University found 33% of men who were circumcised reported difficulty attaining sexual gratification, 63% said masturbation less enjoyable, and 11% had "frequent" orgasm difficulties.
@major9211 Why should we trust you and your claims that circumcision is good? What medical or scientific credentials do you have that are relevant? What legit medical and scientific research and literature have you cited to support your position?
Im going to send you a link to a yahoo answer (COMPLETETLY REINFORECED BY FACTS AND RESEARCH) that should make you reconsider what you think about circumcision.
Smart women here... I am an uncircumcised aryan male, circumcision is a JEWISH habit. FUCK the jewish penis mutilators, I am proud of my grandfather who was in the SS and helped rid the world of those monsters.
@YiuTeub comparing an umbilical cord and placenta with a foreskin is ridiculous. Do u not realize that the umbilical cord and placenta will detach from the baby in about 10 days? ur right in the fact that leaving it attached to the infant until it detaches on it's own is healthy for the infant and the baby actually knows when it detaches and mourns its loss. google and you tube search "lotus birth" to lean more. it's very interesting :)
@2live42day So since I lost the tip of my toe in a cycling accident should mean that I have mental stress now? I do not remember losing mine and to suggest so is stupid. I mourn the loss of my calluses too.
@YiuTeub you brought up the umbilical cord thinking you were so clever to do so lol. i'm sure you think your foot functions fine without the tip of your toe. u want ur son to match u don't u? so the logical thing to do is to amputate part of his toe to match yours. after all that is a main reason that parents circumcise their sons. so baby can match daddy and daddy doesn't have to feel bad about himself and his penis and as for the calluses work hard and u could get them back so...
@2live42day I wish they removed my tonsils and appendix etc etc. I don't need them. I looked up positives and negatives about it before I choose to have it done. And I refrained from talking to bias people such as yourself. Great crusade by the way.
I am done here. Continue the smack talk without me :)
@YiuTeub doctors don't remove those parts for no reason anymore and those parts do have a function so...i'm biased because i don't believe in altering the genitals of healthy baby boys? i don't think so because i have no problem with adults choosing cosmetic surgery for themselves. they can do whatever they want to their own bodies as far as i am concerned but to do it to children is barbaric. speaking for those who can't speak for themselves is great. bye :)
How does an uncirced guy know his is more sensitive than a circed guy? How does anyone know? And whats with the preventing discomfort thing. I have never had discomfort with mine. And I wouldnt want anymore sensitivity than I already have. Its low maintenance. Plus, It has a face, a personality. LONG LIVE CIRCUMCISIONS!!!!!
@FuzieKiller -"so what if we lose a LITTLE sensitivity and skin, but we last longer in bed than you do haha"
Sorry, the opposite is usually true. We intact men have more control over ejaculatory response. We don't need to "jackhammer" our way to climax like circ'd men do.
Also, since the intact organ has more skin to "grow into" during puberty, an intact man's erect length is on average a half-inch MORE than a circ'd man's.
It doesnt make you any less of a man or good at sex, so if a women is choosing there mate based on if they are circumsized or not then thats pretty shallow
Dude, no one cares that you like uncircumcised dicks. Its not different coloured when circumcised? Its a child for god sake. you girls are dumb. of course when its circumsized for the first time it will be 'coloured' for a bit. BTW, why are you looking at babys weiners? Lmfao slutty freaks.
And our body obviously still has a purpose for it or we would have cases of children born without it such as with other useless body parts. (appendix, wisdom teeth, etc.)
The foreskin is useful for preventing discomfort later in life. If it will naturally separate and retract, then what is the purpose of cutting it off? It literally serves no logical purpose other than cosmetics.
erm I know several boys born without the foreskin. Foreskin is not necessary. In areas where there his high HIV incidence those who are circumcized have much lower incidence of infection. Hmmmm.
"In areas where there his high HIV incidence those who are circumcized have much lower incidence of infection."
Absolutely not, in many African countries cut men have more HIV than uncut men, it's actually quite random, obviously if circumcision has any incidence it's pretty minor.
@RabbiZvi Once again you are distorting the claims (which are highly suspect) that are based upon the infamous three sub-saharan random controlled trials. Once again, prior to making your posts/claims about HIV and circumcision, did you actually read the three RCT's that you are basing these claims upon? A simple Yes or No will do.
@zxThisGuyxz wow how can they be arguing with you, ur presenting great info! and then they play the GOD card??? bullshit evolution made a foreskin for unclothed creatures who needed to have protected genitals, circumcision just removes an unnessesary part from our bodies, just like when a baby is born with an extra finger or toe, its removed. and in truth, circ on a baby is not painful, its called anestesia and since babys are not sexually active, the recovery doesnt bother them
@thephallus4all Tell that to your keratinized glans, because of it's constant rubbing against fabric. We should probably take the baby's tonsils and pancreas right off too, right? It's not like they're going to need them anyway... (¬,¬)
fuck, y u 2 are just stupid a circ is healthier it prevents some Painful shit from happening, men seem to understand this so much better, WOMEN should NOT state opinions on this, unless thrre trannies or hermaphros they dont seem to understand how delicate it os down there, and how damaging disease can be prevented by circ
@thephallus4all -"fuck, y u 2 are just stupid a circ is healthier it prevents some Painful shit from happening, men seem to understand this so much better"
I'm a man and I think you're dumbass fucktard circ-fetishist.
@zxThisGuyxz when you circumcise a baby you rob an adult man of his foreskin duh. it doesn't grow back. it's gone forever and we took your other comment down because it is spam and we don't like spam and this is our video and we are deleting this comment too because you put the same link in it. we don't go for pro circumcision links.
@zxThisGuyxz the other side of the argument? these quacks rob little boys and future men of the best part of their penises. i read this and all the other pro circ info long ago so trust me you are not sending anything new our way and if adult men want circumcision they can get it any time in their lives but once a foreskin is gone it is gone forever. the man who was robbed as a baby can never get that specialized erogenous tissue back.
@CanadianGirlsTalk "The foreskin contains sensory nerve receptors as are prevalent over the rest of the penis. There is no scientific evidence that the extra complement of these in uncircumcised men leads to greater sexual pleasure. In fact, some uncircumcised men have been known to complain that their penis is too sensitive, leading to pain, and seek circumcision to relieve this." From that circumcision website written by "quacks": Professor Brian J. Morris, PhD
@zxThisGuyxz that quack is not even respected in his own country and the AMA is against circumcision of babies. if an adult man wants to choose circumcision for himself good for him. we're all for that. that is who the choice belongs to. we shouldn't cut the foreskins from little boys just because no more than we should trim the labias of little girls just because she might want it one day. that is ridiculous, are you for cutting the genitals of little girls too?
@CanadianGirlsTalk From the AMA website: "There is strong evidence documenting the health benefits of male circumcision, and it is a low-risk procedure, said Peter W. Carmel, M.D., AMA president. "Today the AMA again made it clear that it will oppose any attempts to intrude into legitimate medical practice and the informed choices of patients." Notice all I'm speaking of is MALE circumcision, I am against female circumcision and that has nothing to do with this video or comments.
@zxThisGuyxz i was talking about Australia because you brought morris into it and he is Australian.. show me one medical association that recommends male circumcision. it's cosmetic surgery and why are baby boys of less value than baby girls? are you aware that blue cross was paying for female circumcision until 1977 and they found
health benefits for it too. you claim u watched all our vids and we did on on why are girls better than boys and can boys wash so if it's good for one...
@zxThisGuyxz President Carmel's statement was a response the ballot initiatives in CA which would have made infant circmcision illegal. His comments are not the official circumcision policy statement of the AMA. His comments were to let the people involved in the political process in CA know that the AMA would not support the ballot initiatives or other measures.
The AMA and AAP policy statements are very clear-routine (non theraputic) circumcision is NOT recomended.
@zxThisGuyxz According to the UN/WHO there are five types/degrees of female circumcision or FGM. FGM Type 1 a is the removal of the remale prepuce or clitoral hood, & it is the exact same process as removal of the male prepuce or circumcision.
FGM type 1 a is justified for all the same reasons as male circumcision-religious beliefs, tradition, hygeine and aesthetics, yet it is illegal. There is no difference between FGM type 1a and infant circumcision except gender and the law.
@zxThisGuyxz Brian J. Morris, PhD is a very biased very unobjective over zealous circumcision advocate who ignores any evidence, doctor or scientist who does not believe as he does. He also provides no documentaton to back up his claims. There are studies that countradict his positions which he routinely choses to ignore
@CanadianGirlsTalk "Current newborn circumcision may be considered a preventative health measure analogous to immunization in that side effects and complications are immediate and usually minor, but benefits accrue for a lifetime" [Schoen, 1993].
@zxThisGuyxz schoen is a sicko that even writes poems about circumcision and he calls circumcision a rape of the phallus and circumcision is a boy's first sexual experience. how sick is that? we know all these quacks and circumcision is cash for them. if they didn't make money from it they wouldn't do. google his poems, he's one sick f**k
@zxThisGuyxz condoms is what prevents HIV AIDS. you're not saying that circumcised men don't have to use condoms are you? babies don't engage in sexual behavior anyway so...
@zxThisGuyxz The S African Med Com stated that it was unethical and illegal to perform circumcision on infant boys in this instance. In particular, they expressed serious concern that not enough scientifically-based evidence was available to confirm that circumcisions prevented HIV contraction and that the public at large was influenced by incorrect and misrepresented information. The Committee reiterated its view that it did not support circumcision to prevent HIV transmission.
@zxThisGuyxz The 3/28/07 WHO document does not even contain the word endorse, and I am willing to bet that you have never read the document itself. The WHO based their recomendations on circumcision on three very controversial and flawed RCTs. In the process of performing these RCT's the WHO/UN doctors and scientists had to covertly or overtly ask subjects to not use condoms and in the process they spread death and disease in the name of science and treated humans worse than animals.
@zxThisGuyxz what a hoax do you live in Africa you savage? They fuck like eight bitches a day and don't bathe. That's why they get aids. Europe has a lower rate of HIV than America and they don't slice cocks. Cutting ignorant people like yourself for HIV purposes will be more prone to HIV because you will think you won't have wear a rubber.You are not smart.
@CanadianGirlsTalk In Jan 2010 an objective review by experts at John's Hopkins University and the National Institutes of Health highlighted the long-standing benefits for neonatal circumcision and concluded that "with mounting evidence that male circumcision decreases viral STIs, genital ulcer disease, and penile inflammatory disorders in men, and bacterial vaginosis, T. vaginalis infection, and genital ulcer disease in their female partners"
@zxThisGuyxz circumcision has always been a cure looking for a disease. it's sad that this is still happening but babies do not engage in sexual behavior and cutting parts of healthy babies of either gender is stupid.
@CanadianGirlsTalk It's more preventative maintenance and is nothing like female circumcision.
There are plenty of articles by men who've HAD to be circumcised as adults in order to be able to have sex again (hardened foreskin that wont retract is an excruciatingly painful condition) and they all say the same thing, "I wish I would have had it done as a baby."
No women have ever needed or enjoyed the results of circumcision so the comparison is pretty irresponsible.
@granolanutpunch infant circumcision is cosmetic surgery. the foreskin is protective and belongs on a penis. we have nothing against men choosing it for themselves if that is what they want.many men are restoring but can't get their real foreskin back and are pissed that they were robbed.
google "labiaplasty" a fashionable cosmetic procedure on the female genitals. it's painful but many women love it. should we do it to baby girls? after all genital surgery is genital surgery
@CanadianGirlsTalk Cosmetics is part of it but it's inaccurate to say it's JUST cosmetic surgery when it removes the chance of very painful erections later in life, infections, and reduces the chances of some nasty diseases.
We're not running naked through forests with a 30year life expectancy anymore. Which is why most foreskin problems arise in the 20's or 30's when the surgery is more problematic.
We change and remove a lot of ourselves to adjust to our new environment.
@granolanutpunch "[circumcision] removes the chance of very painful erections later in life" Circumcision has been known to cause very painful erections, bent penis, and skin bridges. the AMA, AAP, CPS and RACP have made it very clear that the potential adverse side effects from circumcision are equal to any alleged benifits, and thus they do not recomend routine circumcision.
"[Circumcision] reduces the chancesof some nasty diseases"
"it removes the chance of very painful erections later in life"
Removing too much skin during a newborn circumcision is a major cause of painful erections (his penis grew more than expected and the skin gets so tense it's painful). And guess what, you can't ADD foreskin to fix this, but you can get cut for a phimosis. If it "reduces the chance of nasty diseases", why are STD/STI rates in USA so bad?
@granolanutpunch There are 5 types/degrees of "female circumcision" or FGM according to the UN/WHO with each type having one or more subtypes. FGM type 1a is exactly the same as male infant circumcision. The prepuce is torn away from the glans penis or glans clitoris & cut off. Those who practice type 1a do so &did so in the US until 1996 for the same reasons for male circumcision- religious beliefs, cultural traditions, alleged health reasons, aesthetics and diminish sexual pleasure.
@neechee5150 -"FGM type 1a is exactly the same as male infant circumcision"
Actually, since the male prepuce is the anatomical equivalent of the clitoral hood _AND_ the inner labia combined, male circ is "exactly the same as" FGM types 1a + 2a (i.e. removal of clitoral hood and labia minora).
Just a minor clarification. (Then again, maybe not so minor.)
@granolanutpunch There are thousands of cases of permanent penile damage due to circumcision and cases of circmcision revision and 1000s of men who wish they were given the ablity to choose for themselves Phimosis is rare and is frequently misdiagnosed particularly by doctors who have not been trained to care for the natural penis.
While we agree that there is no need for female circumcision, those who practice it justify their practices on the basis of religion, aesthetics, hygiene ect
@CanadianGirlsTalk Spam, huh? That's your argument for not listening to the other side of an argument and saying that your opinion is right and is the only opinion to have? And the fact that you won't even look at something that differs from your opinion is a logical fallacy and represents the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Wait, wait a sec....you're telling me that two probably teenage or a little older girls are telling me that circumcision is 'stupid', just because they thought it looked bad? Not taking into account religious, political, family, or sanitary motivations? Seems legit.....
@zxThisGuyxz what about all the men who are the owners of the penis and want their foreskins back? none of that matters? well it does and the only one who has the moral right to alter one's body is the adult owner of that body so...
@CanadianGirlsTalk Look, I'm not saying that I agree with circumcision, or that I'm against it, I would just like to see I better reason to oppose it besides 'it looked bad'. Oh and technically the adult owner of that body at birth is the parent, and I'm not sure there's a lot of men who were circumcised at birth and 20 years later say they want it back.....
@zxThisGuyxz parents don't own their babies' bodies. If they did FGM would still be legal. girls are protected from so much as a simple pinprick.why does the penis belong to the parents and not the vulva? circumcision is the only cosmetic surgery that can be performed on an infant and that is wrong. more than 200 000 men are restoring their foreskins and we get many messages from men who are not happy this was taken away from them. google it and see for yourself.
@CanadianGirlsTalk So how about this hypothetical situation: A baby, just born, begins to show signs of heart failure but it is not certain. You are saying that it is up to that baby to decide whether or not to have surgery to fix that? Parents are legally and morally responsible for their children until they turn eighteen. FGM is different than male circumcision too. And yes there is a percentage of men who do restore their foreskins, I will give you that one.
@zxThisGuyxz heart surgery is not cosmetic surgery but circumcision is. a simple pinprick to a vulva is not as invasive as cutting off the infant foreskin (this grows to 4 x 6 inches on a man) from a baby boy so why are girls protected?. not one medical organization in the world recommends circumcision including Israel's. genital cutting is genital cutting and it wrong to do it on children of either gender. it shouldn't hurt to be born a boy and the foreskin belongs on the penis.
@CanadianGirlsTalk I wasn't referring directly to the form of surgery but whose decision it would be to have that surgery. With your reasoning, it would be the babies decision because he/she owns his/her body. In reality, it would be the parents decision because they are the legal guardian of that baby. For now, I'll refer back to my 1st and 2nd comment. Before going completely against something, can you present some facts/reasons to be against it besides 'it looks bad'?
@zxThisGuyxz fyi this is not our only video about circumcision. we have many others. it does look bad on a baby and the baby who was circumcised in the video we refer was circumcised because daddy wanted it. parents cannot refuse to have life saving surgery on their children. if they do the courts step in, the child is apprehended and lifesaving surgery is performed or lifesaving treatment is given so...
@CanadianGirlsTalk I watched your other videos and I didn't find a single piece of evidence to oppose circumcision besides 'it looks bad'. And to your probable response of 'go look at this horrible circumcision video and see what happened', that was more than likely an isolated incident. Every surgery/procedure has possible consequences and risk associated with it. Life's tough sometimes so get over it.
@zxThisGuyxz from the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons
Many adult men are increasingly concerned about whether their parents had the right to give consent for infant male circumcision. They claim that an infants rights should take priority over any parental rights to make such a decision. This procedure should be delayed to a later date when the child can make his own informed decision. Parental preference alone does not justify a non-therapeutic procedure.
@CanadianGirlsTalk You know what? I'm tired of this conversation. All I've done is presented factual evidence to back up my claims and you have just replied with subjective crap you call information. Goodbye, I'm ashamed to have even given your video the small amount of time and thought processes I gave it. May God bless your soul.
@zxThisGuyxz you know what? when God made the penis He knew what He was doing and He designed it perfectly. i'm sure He doesn't want babies being hurt because i heard he loves children including baby boys.
@zxThisGuyxz sanirtary motivations? what else should we cut from little boys? are little girls really that much more trustworthy that they can be trusted to wash? political? new one so now we have the right to hurt boys for political reasons
@RabbiZvi Have you read the three Random Controlled Trials conducted in sub-saharan Africa upon which this 60% claim is based upon? Have you read any of the countless critiques by doctors and scientists who have found flaws in these RCT's?
It is also a blatant distortion of the suspect claims from these RCT's to claim as you have that circumcision reduced HIV infection by 60%. If you are going to cite these studies and their suspect claims at least do it accurately.
I feel the same way . I'm not circumcised and I really don't care . My girlfriend loves me for how I am . Just cause there isn't skin over your penis doesn't mean your a better boyfriend .
FelixIrizarrySkates 1 week ago
you are stupid.
Ninjadelusion 1 week ago
Um that doesn't happen. At all.
And it's not a sexist claim because only men have penises. If women had penises id say they should be circumcised too.
firegirl221 1 week ago
@firegirl221 "that doesn't happen. At all" If you are referring to removal of the clitoral hood & trimming the labia minora, you are wrong. These two proceedures are in vogue for those women who want a so called designer vagina. Labia plasty is one of the fastest growing cosmetic surgeries.
If referring to the collection of smegma, blood, urine, semen, bacteria, fungi and feminine hygiene product debris collecting under and around the clitoral hood & between the labia minora--FALSE
neechee5150 1 week ago
@firegirl221
Women have clitoral hoods and inner labias, where smegma collects, and that can trap urine. Should they have them trimmed? If you think not, then you ARE sexist. I used to live in a country where they use "toilet showers", in USA you don't use them and you circumcise "for hygiene"? That's plain ridiculous. A little plumbing to prevent smelly anuses, penises and pussies (as a bi, penis is by far the less smelly).
mzorzor 1 week ago
@firegirl221 The female prepuce or clitoral hood is the exact homologus structure to the male prepuce or foreskin. They are maded up of the same kind of tissue and nerves. They serve the same purpose and function.
Next time you go to your drug store, survey the number of femine odor products and feminine yeast products.
neechee5150 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@firegirl221
"Women can only do so much to keep them as clean as possible"
lol, American women don't care enough to install toilet showers, but you see them whining about uncut penises being "dirty" and men having to hack off a piece of their penis xD Jeez, do you realize how ridiculous this is? You were unlucky with the one uncut penis you had, that's all.
mzorzor 1 week ago
@firegirl221, you silly girl, it's not about penises! Males and females have a PREPUCE or FORESKIN. If the male foreskin is intrinsically "dirty", why would you think that the female foreskin is not equally so? As a woman and nurse, I can say without any doubt that female genital hygiene is harder, and women are more prone to UTIs and genital infections than males.
dandydosbest 1 week ago
I've had experience with one and it was absolutely disgusting. it smelled like rotting fruit, even though it appeared to be clean.
As for vaginas being disgusting, yes i know they are. But what surgical procedure is there to make vaginas more hygienic? None! They will always be gross. Women can only do so much to keep them as clean as possible.
firegirl221 1 week ago
@firegirl221
Stop dating hobos.
"But what surgical procedure is there to make vaginas more hygienic"
Removing clitoral hood and labias, look it up, that's where smegma accumulates in women.
"Women can only do so much to keep them as clean as possible"
Something your hobo boyfriend didn't do.
mzorzor 1 week ago
@firegirl221
One experience with one uncut penis? You can hardly make any claim on such a tiny basis.
mzorzor 1 week ago
@firegirl221 Well if you really believe that circumcision makes for a cleaner less odorous penis, you should have your clitoral hood removed and have your labia minor trimmed down which will prevent smegma, blood, feminine hygiene products, urine, bacteria, fungi, and semen from collecting under and around the clitoral hood and inbetween the labia minora and majora.
A sample of one uncircumcised penis means nothing and has no validity in supporting your biased, sexist claims
neechee5150 1 week ago
@firegirl221 asks what surgical procedure is there to make vaginas more hygienic? How about you consider a LABIAPLASTY?
dandydosbest 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dandydosbest HOW ABOUT YOU GOY SCHMUCKS STOP BITCHING OVER A FLAP OF SKN!!!
TheGoySlayer 1 week ago
uncircumcised premises are GROSS! They smell and are just freaking nasty!
firegirl221 1 week ago
@firegirl221
Honey, I wouldn't complain about smell if I had a pussy ^^
mzorzor 1 week ago
@firegirl221, sounds like you have good taste. But worse than an uncircumcised penis is an uncircumcised vagina. If the labia are nicely trimmed down, there is normally no gross smell around the vagina, and there isn't the bitter taste of smegma. Also, bacteria don't thrive around the circumcised vagina, so guys are much less likely to get STDs or oral Herpes from it. The hottest girls with the sweetest vaginas are from Indonesia, which has loads of circ'd women - a real paradise!
pierrotpax 1 week ago
@firegirl221 It is obscenely ironic and hypocitical for a woman to make such claims. Here are a few facts/questions for you. How many OTC products for masculine odor are on the market vs how many feminine odor products? From the time of birth through adulthood, which gender gets more UTI's? Which gender gets more yeast and other fungal infections? What is the homologus structure/tissue to the male prepuce/foreskin? Which gender produces and collects more smegma?
neechee5150 1 week ago
@firegirl221 Not unless you are a urologist, fluffer, or professional felationist in a predominatly uncircumcised nation, I question how many uncircmcised pensises you have first hand and eye to eye experience with. Care to give us a legit honest number? Remember this has to be your own personal hands on or face to face experience with an adult uncircumcised penis. We are waiting for your answer. Are you ready to woman up and give us an honest answer?
neechee5150 1 week ago
(con't)
And while studies in Africa found that circumcision reduced the risk of a man's becoming infected by an H.I.V.-positive female partner, it is not clear that a circumcised man with H.I.V. would be less likely to infect a woman.
slauertura77 1 week ago
It's unlikely circumcision is a useful strategy against HIV in developed nations. 3 African RCTs found a protective effect for female to male HIV transmission. The WHO recommends circumcision "for countries with high rates of heterosexual HIV infection and low male circumcision rates". U.S. men are already mostly circumcised, and the HIV epidemic is concentrated in MSM (and drug abusers). But European men are mostly uncircumcised, and as for USA, MSM is the vulnerable group.
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@slauertura77, since you like checking things, here's another interesting reference: USAID investigated HIV against circumcision in eighteen African countries in 2009. From the 3 African RCT results, they expected to find that HIV infection would predominate in the uncircumcised men. But that wasn't the study finding! In TEN of the 18 African countries investigated, it found that HIV was commoner in the CIRCUMCISED men.
See USAID report 2009 "Levels and spread of HIV" (p.109).
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@slauertura77
"it is not clear that a circumcised man with H.I.V. would be less likely to infect a woman."
At some point of a trial, they found females with circumcised patners were 50% MORE likely to have been infected. Guess what? The trial was stopped early for "lack of benefit"... = before the result could get statistically significant, so they can still claim nothing is proven. Interestingly, noone cared to investigate further ( vs THREE trials about women>men transmission)
mzorzor 1 week ago
@dandydosbest : I found a NY times article that cites 80%.
Some 80 percent of American men are circumcised, one of the highest rates in the developed world. Yet even advocates of circumcision acknowledge that an aggressive circumcision drive in the United States would be unlikely to have a drastic impact on H.I.V. rates here, since the procedure does not seem to protect those at greatest risk, men who have sex with men.
slauertura77 1 week ago
@dandydosbest : No, geography is not confusing. Where are you getting your 80% claim from. Because 1) The only place I have see that # is from Wikipedia's circ page.( if that is your source, it is not creditable) 2) 19 states don't even keep records of circumcision rates, in newborns discharged from hospitals. Soooooo, you might want to rethink the 80% thing.
slauertura77 1 week ago
@slauertura77, here is the very source that your CDC relies upon to estimate that 79% of U.S. men are circumcised:
Xu, F, L Markowitz, M Sternberg, and S Aral (2006). Prevalence of circumcision in men in the United States: data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 1999–2002.
If you think you have a more reliable source, let me know.
As a European, I find that staggering! In Europe infant circumcision is uncommon. It belongs to the Victorian era.
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@mzorzor : Are the studies flawed because you say so? Prove they are flawed. Oh I see, the studies are flawed, because they don't agree with your point of view and no matter how many factual pieces of info that are out there, you still won't believe it. Cool, I'm done with this discussion.
slauertura77 1 week ago
@slauertura77
To begin with, these studies assumed ALL new HIV infections were acquired through heterosexual contact (even when men reported no sexual partners...), which is more than unlikely. As I said, they have been "stopped early for benefit", which is proven to exagerate the effect of a treatment. They didn't take into account the fact that cut men couldn't have sex for 1-2 months after circumcision (it would have been easy, why didn't they do it?).
mzorzor 1 week ago
@mzorzor excellent point. All three of the infamous RCT's that were performed in Sub-Saharan Africa which are the source of of the claims of a 60% reduction in HIV transmission from an HIV+ female to an HIV- male lacked some key controls. 1st they did not control for the practice of "dry sex". 2. They did not control for the use of sex workers. 3. The male subjects who were circumcised were not able to have as many sexual encounters during the trials as they had to abstain inorder to heal.
neechee5150 1 week ago
@mzorzor The three RCTs also did not control for anal sex whether it be MM or MF. They did not control for the number of sexual partners. They did nothing to assure that condom use was equal between both groups.
Here is the part that I find morally reprehensible-in order for these studies to have any meaning, subjects had to be encouraged whether overtly or covertly to not use condoms 100% of the time.
These studies purposely spread HIV & have NOT been replicated in any modern country
neechee5150 1 week ago
@dandydosbest : I beg to differ. Avert.org (Avert is an international HIV/AIDS charity organization) has world wide stats on all STD's, from the same time frame (2000's) that you cite and Europe has much higher rates of STDs than the U.S. Does across the board.
slauertura77 1 week ago
@slauertura77, I like avert.org, but it doesn't substantaite what you claim!
Perhaps geography confuses you: "North America" comprizes both USA and Canada. Did you separate the two? NB. Canada is about 33% circ'd, the USA is about 80%.circ'd.
Give me ANY STD percentage (or rate) from Avert that shows the USA fares better than Europe or the UK! Your own CDC says:
"STDs in the U.S. and abortion rates are substantially higher than those of other western industrialized nations".
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@dandydosbest : Why was your comment taken down? Did you forget what screen name you signed into and you wanted to use a different one? Or was all of your info just B.S. And the administrator was smart enough to know that. What is the APA, because I cannot find what you cited to me, from the APA at all.
slauertura77 1 week ago
@slauertura77, no, I removed my comment while I searched the reference for my quotation. Here it is (remove brackets): ww(.)apa(.)org/divisions/div42/primepsych/std01(.)htm
The CDC makes the SAME comment, i.e. that the USA has a much higher level of STDs than European countries.
The original source for the APA's statement is (online):
"Family Planning Perspectives Volume 32, Number 1, January/February 2000
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Among Adolescents in Developed Countries"
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@psandbergnz : I never said circ prevents getting STDs. I said it reduces the chances. There is a huge difference between prevention and reduction.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
dandydosbest 1 week ago
@slauertura77
"There is a huge difference between prevention and reduction."
They found not BENEFIT from circumcision, which can be either prevention or reduction.
mzorzor 1 week ago
@mzorzor : BTW you do understand "surveys" are not clinical studies, right? I could go to a KKK meeting and take a survey to see how many people there hate Afro-Americans. Then make the assumption that all white people hate black people base on that survey. Which would not be true. Survey info is biased, because surveys are based on opinion, so that survey info is garbage.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77, circumcision does NOT protect from STDs!
Researchers Nigel Dickson et al. published their investigation of STDs/ Circumcision in J. of Pediatrics, March 2008 (see online!)
They found NO circumcision benefit for either bacterial or viral STDs! The study concludes:
"Our findings agree with other similar recent medical studies from developed countries... it appears unlikely that circumcision protects against common STDs".
Cicumcision removes countless sensory nerves.
psandbergnz 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
Maybe I misused the word "survey", but nothing to do with opinion, I meant you measure the percentage of men with some STD or STI in real world. In many African countries cut men have as much or more HIV than uncut ones.
I'm really really interested in those trials that were NOT conducted in third world. Reference please?
So you made your son undergo a surgery right at birth in case he'd become a "f-cking moron" who doesn't practice safe sex? :-(
mzorzor 1 week ago
@mzorzor : 1) You're an "F" ing Moron if you think being cut means not having to practice safe sex. 2) The scientific stat I found on a medical site, that is backed up by clinical trials mentions nothing about African countries and third world nations. 3) Until you show me where I can find the info you speak of, what you say is conjecture and means nothing.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
@mzorzor : That is straight off webmd.net. I believe practicing safe sex is a mans best bet. But if my boy decides not to practice safe sex, it's nice to know I gave him a better chance of not getting an STD.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
"if my boy decides not to practice safe sex, it's nice to know I gave him a better chance of not getting an STD."
You also gave him an excuse not to practice safe sex... Again, surveys in first world indicate little to no correlation between STDs and circumcision ( which is why it's abandonned in Canada/Australia/NZ imo), so most likely you only gave him an excuse, not an actual protection
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@mzorzor : Regarding newborn circumcision, most physicians today agree with the practice of informing parents of the risks and benefits of the procedure in an unbiased manner. Recently, however, several large studies revealed a 60% decrease in HIV transmission in circumcised males compared to uncircumcised males. This may ultimately influence some changes in recommendations in the near future.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
In Europe physicians don't even "inform" parents of anything, because it's obviously a cultural practice and nothing more.
Regarding HIV, those studies were flawed and conducted in countries that lack running water. Let's talk about USA and developped world in general, if cut men had half the HIV rate of uncut ones, don't you think we would hear about that, and not about trials conducted in Africa?
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
"several large studies revealed a 60% decrease in HIV transmission in circumcised males compared to uncircumcised males."
Apparently that's news to you, but those 3 large (and largely flawed) studies were all conducted in Africa, and were all "stopped early for benefit", a practice which has been proven to far exaggerate the effect of a treatment. ("Stopping Randomized Trials Early for Benefit and Estimation of Treatment Effects")
mzorzor 1 week ago
Im pretty sure guys know more about their dicks than some virgin teenage girls. I think circumcision is definitely the way to go.
thatguy4885 2 weeks ago
@thatguy4885 "the way to go"
DUH!
schmui 2 weeks ago
@ mzorzor : don't take it out on me bro, I'm just the messenger. You could probably have you anteater fixed, but I bet that would hurt like an SOB. Me, I don't have that problem. J had it done when I was a new born and don't remember a thing. No pain no, no nothing.
( saying you have circ envy is my opinion, so was everything after that. I have no facts to back that up.) That is an example of facts vs fiction. Hope you learned something. Please cite facts in the future.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
Apparently, USA is tie with Switzerland ; all other western/northern European countries have lower HIV rates. Nice job protecting your kids via circumcision. Is that enough of a "fact" for you biggot?
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@mzorzor : I'm not gonna go back and do all the re search again, just for you. Everything I said is backed up by scientific studies and facts. Show me where to find what you're are saying about Europe. Because citing what you heard from a friend does not count. Your opinion and the little Canadian girls opinion hold no merit. Facts are the only thing that hold water. I'm sorry you have a complex about having a funny lookin penis.
slauertura77 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
Oh, so it's up to ME to go back and do all the search again? Try "HIV prevalence by country", as an example. My dick doesn't look "funny", that's how most dicks look where I live. Accusing me of "circumcision envy" is pathetically childish.
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@slauertura77
Flooding again, but I want to point out something. Non-religious circumcision is widespread in USA, and only in USA, is it because 1) Americans do it as a cultural tradition, and rationalize it through medical BS ( I remind you that circumcision has been said to cure epilepsy, tuberculosis and masturbation, among other things ), or 2) the rest of the world doesn't care about STDs and the "bunch of problems" caused by foreskin. Pick the likelier.
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
you girls are judging what a newborns penis looks better with you have problems
dubs1212 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
dubs1212 2 weeks ago
you girls are right let's stop taking medical advice from cavemen
calabiyou 2 weeks ago
@tipoomaster Circumcision is about controlling male sexuality. It's a lesser form of castration. People have known for years that it reduces ability to have sex and masturbate. That's why they still circumcise males. It simply has to stop
dafty97 3 weeks ago
@dafty97 what? how does it reduce that at all. sounds like a conspiracy theory.
lxTheDukexl 2 weeks ago
Girls girls girls let me tell you something :) when I was born, and my brother was born my father wanted both of us circumcised (We aren't muslims any of us) and the fact why he wanted it was because when he was young he suffered from a foreskin that was to tight and had pain each and every day with it, and my mother didn't agree to do it... At the age of 16 my brother and I had the exact same problem. Now who was the one looking stupid? It's actually healthy for your penis to be circumcised.
Paradoxicful 3 weeks ago
@Paradoxicful If the foreskin is tight - it is a normal condition called phimosis - easily curable by stretching exercises - no biggie. Google it up - you can find lots of helpful links. And yeah, i think that your mother did the right thing by preventing your circumcision - saved you a lot of pain over nothing. Peace.
randomshoelaces 3 weeks ago
@randomshoelaces Let me tell you this much :) Phimosis is not easily cureable, been there tried that, did not work at all. You have to remember it depends from penis to penis how the situation is, and honestly I went through more physical and mental pain WITH foreskin than without so I believe your argument is invalid. Maybe you should try it for yourself before coming up with such strong opinions :) just saying.
Paradoxicful 3 weeks ago
@Paradoxicful Did it already - took some time and effort but it worked out eventually. And yeah, thanks for the input - i thought stretching works for everyone - i guess not. So, would you rather circumcise a baby or would you wait till he grows older and give him the choice? I'd go with giving him the opportunity - mostly it won't hurt him in the future - if it did, a preputioplasty would help him out.
randomshoelaces 3 weeks ago
@Paradoxicful Just curious what country did you live in when you had your phimosis condition treated?
neechee5150 2 weeks ago
@neechee5150 I'm from Denmark, with highly educated doctors and surgeons and medical staff, now I have to admit I only took half a circumcision because it was optional, and I could always return if the result wasn't good.
Paradoxicful 2 weeks ago
@Paradoxicful Then it seems that the medical community in Denmark is better trained and educated in caring for natural male genitialia and as a result they offer alternatives and education instead of cutting and asking questions later.
neechee5150 2 weeks ago
@Paradoxicful
"Now who was the one looking stupid?"
The one who wanted to make you undergo surgery before there was any proven problem. But it's not like everybody had a phimotic father anyway.
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@mzorzor The fact is this can happen to everyone; and the fact is that it's actually healthy for your penis to be without foreskin, you don't need it :) however people saying it reduces the feeling with sex, they aren't always right. I gotta admit I like sex even more without foreskin so yes it depends from person to person. But going for whats best for your penis I have to admit being without foreskin is the way to go.. You also wouldn't get a problem with your foreskin in any case then.
Paradoxicful 2 weeks ago
@Paradoxicful
"I like sex even more without foreskin"
You had phimosis, no wonder you like sex better without foreskin.... But that's not relevant for your average male with retractable foreskin.
"you don't need it"
It's handy to masturbate at the very least. You only need one kindey ( 1% of people are born with only one, many die without even noticing), that doesn't mean it's healthy to remove one. ANY part of your body can go wrong.
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
I'm glad you are against it, as it is a terrible practice. But really, of all the arguments against it, the only one you talk about is appearance? Look at the study I posted, there is demonstrable sexual harm as well.
tipoomaster 3 weeks ago
The foreskin contains more nerve endings than any other part of the penis, that's just fact. In the largest study on circumcision in South Korea, Seoul University found 33% of men who were circumcised reported difficulty attaining sexual gratification, 63% said masturbation less enjoyable, and 11% had "frequent" orgasm difficulties.
(source: Kim and Peng, Seoul University, 2004)
tipoomaster 3 weeks ago
the girls can experiment with circumcised and non circumcised dick, and only after that they should comment on that...LOL
major9211 3 weeks ago
@major9211 Why should we trust you and your claims that circumcision is good? What medical or scientific credentials do you have that are relevant? What legit medical and scientific research and literature have you cited to support your position?
neechee5150 3 weeks ago
circumcision should be done by professionals like surgeons, it will be ok...as in my case...guys circumcision is good....trust me
major9211 3 weeks ago
@major9211
Im going to send you a link to a yahoo answer (COMPLETETLY REINFORECED BY FACTS AND RESEARCH) that should make you reconsider what you think about circumcision.
adolfolicious 3 weeks ago
@major9211
\
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071214135237AA7LWSR
adolfolicious 3 weeks ago
Smart women here... I am an uncircumcised aryan male, circumcision is a JEWISH habit. FUCK the jewish penis mutilators, I am proud of my grandfather who was in the SS and helped rid the world of those monsters.
killjood666 4 weeks ago
I miss my umbilical cord. I want that back. And the placenta too......ITS MINE DAMN IT!!
YiuTeub 4 weeks ago
@YiuTeub comparing an umbilical cord and placenta with a foreskin is ridiculous. Do u not realize that the umbilical cord and placenta will detach from the baby in about 10 days? ur right in the fact that leaving it attached to the infant until it detaches on it's own is healthy for the infant and the baby actually knows when it detaches and mourns its loss. google and you tube search "lotus birth" to lean more. it's very interesting :)
2live42day 4 weeks ago
@2live42day So since I lost the tip of my toe in a cycling accident should mean that I have mental stress now? I do not remember losing mine and to suggest so is stupid. I mourn the loss of my calluses too.
YiuTeub 4 weeks ago
@YiuTeub you brought up the umbilical cord thinking you were so clever to do so lol. i'm sure you think your foot functions fine without the tip of your toe. u want ur son to match u don't u? so the logical thing to do is to amputate part of his toe to match yours. after all that is a main reason that parents circumcise their sons. so baby can match daddy and daddy doesn't have to feel bad about himself and his penis and as for the calluses work hard and u could get them back so...
2live42day 4 weeks ago
@2live42day I wish they removed my tonsils and appendix etc etc. I don't need them. I looked up positives and negatives about it before I choose to have it done. And I refrained from talking to bias people such as yourself. Great crusade by the way.
I am done here. Continue the smack talk without me :)
YiuTeub 4 weeks ago
@YiuTeub doctors don't remove those parts for no reason anymore and those parts do have a function so...i'm biased because i don't believe in altering the genitals of healthy baby boys? i don't think so because i have no problem with adults choosing cosmetic surgery for themselves. they can do whatever they want to their own bodies as far as i am concerned but to do it to children is barbaric. speaking for those who can't speak for themselves is great. bye :)
2live42day 4 weeks ago
lol u don't know the benefits of circumcision hahahahahaha ahh... silly silly girls
ovidiu5000 1 month ago
@ovidiu5000 Please, educate youtube good sir, what are the benefits of circumcision?
LugeoOrbis 4 weeks ago
let me put my cock between your tits
SlaveMaster62 1 month ago
How does an uncirced guy know his is more sensitive than a circed guy? How does anyone know? And whats with the preventing discomfort thing. I have never had discomfort with mine. And I wouldnt want anymore sensitivity than I already have. Its low maintenance. Plus, It has a face, a personality. LONG LIVE CIRCUMCISIONS!!!!!
bongofury67 1 month ago
I agree, this is stupid. Circumcision better end some day
TheHobbymaster100 1 month ago
LADYS DO YOU WANT A LONG FORSKIN WUITH STRONG SMELL? EMAIL ME
Wentfradump 1 month ago
@Wentfradump TROLL
2live42day 4 weeks ago
now i see why amercians laugh at canadians
boogalooshrimpable 1 month ago
This is slightly embarrassing but will the circumcised penis do anything to effect me later on?
xXcjmckXx 1 month ago
i wish i was uncircumsized ):
matttylerr5 1 month ago
so what if we lose a LITTLE sensitivity and skin, but we last longer in bed than you do haha, think about it ladys
FuzieKiller 1 month ago
@FuzieKiller -"so what if we lose a LITTLE sensitivity and skin, but we last longer in bed than you do haha"
Sorry, the opposite is usually true. We intact men have more control over ejaculatory response. We don't need to "jackhammer" our way to climax like circ'd men do.
Also, since the intact organ has more skin to "grow into" during puberty, an intact man's erect length is on average a half-inch MORE than a circ'd man's.
Think about THAT, ladies! :)
em745aa 1 month ago
Comment removed
FuzieKiller 1 month ago
lmao this video is a joke right?
ps3fan13oy 1 month ago
its a baby penis.... so dumb.
whitebread123654789 1 month ago
It doesnt make you any less of a man or good at sex, so if a women is choosing there mate based on if they are circumsized or not then thats pretty shallow
ChillsidePro 1 month ago
wow beautiful cleavege x2
ffgftfgrtedtjlpoiifd 1 month ago
Dude, no one cares that you like uncircumcised dicks. Its not different coloured when circumcised? Its a child for god sake. you girls are dumb. of course when its circumsized for the first time it will be 'coloured' for a bit. BTW, why are you looking at babys weiners? Lmfao slutty freaks.
atvmark 1 month ago
I agree! Genital mutilation is very stupid! I am a girl and I LOVE intact men!
Noneedtothankme2012 1 month ago
And our body obviously still has a purpose for it or we would have cases of children born without it such as with other useless body parts. (appendix, wisdom teeth, etc.)
The foreskin is useful for preventing discomfort later in life. If it will naturally separate and retract, then what is the purpose of cutting it off? It literally serves no logical purpose other than cosmetics.
Hawkeye0045 1 month ago 3
@Hawkeye0045
erm I know several boys born without the foreskin. Foreskin is not necessary. In areas where there his high HIV incidence those who are circumcized have much lower incidence of infection. Hmmmm.
RabbiZvi 2 weeks ago
@RabbiZvi
"In areas where there his high HIV incidence those who are circumcized have much lower incidence of infection."
Absolutely not, in many African countries cut men have more HIV than uncut men, it's actually quite random, obviously if circumcision has any incidence it's pretty minor.
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@RabbiZvi Once again you are distorting the claims (which are highly suspect) that are based upon the infamous three sub-saharan random controlled trials. Once again, prior to making your posts/claims about HIV and circumcision, did you actually read the three RCT's that you are basing these claims upon? A simple Yes or No will do.
neechee5150 1 week ago
I am uncircumcised. A few facts?
I had phimosis. After about a month or less of stretching I could retract my foreskin perfectly.
My girlfriend likes it. She says it looks more natural and said she wouldn't have it done to her future son after I explained what circumcision was.
The head of an uncircumcised penis is a lot more sensitive than a circumcised one. Therefore sex supposedly feels better.
And any man will know that dry friction over the head of the penis is painful even to circu
Hawkeye0045 1 month ago 8
@Hawkeye0045 enjoy your jew cock!
obamasucksdick99 2 weeks ago
@Hawkeye0045
How would you know anything about this? You're not circumcized.
This post is utterly subjective. There is nothing in it.
RabbiZvi 2 weeks ago
@Hawkeye0045
It looked, it looked
Shat a lot of subjective nonsense.
RabbiZvi 2 weeks ago
@zxThisGuyxz wow how can they be arguing with you, ur presenting great info! and then they play the GOD card??? bullshit evolution made a foreskin for unclothed creatures who needed to have protected genitals, circumcision just removes an unnessesary part from our bodies, just like when a baby is born with an extra finger or toe, its removed. and in truth, circ on a baby is not painful, its called anestesia and since babys are not sexually active, the recovery doesnt bother them
thephallus4all 1 month ago
@thephallus4all Tell that to your keratinized glans, because of it's constant rubbing against fabric. We should probably take the baby's tonsils and pancreas right off too, right? It's not like they're going to need them anyway... (¬,¬)
ratonL 1 month ago
fuck, y u 2 are just stupid a circ is healthier it prevents some Painful shit from happening, men seem to understand this so much better, WOMEN should NOT state opinions on this, unless thrre trannies or hermaphros they dont seem to understand how delicate it os down there, and how damaging disease can be prevented by circ
thephallus4all 1 month ago
@thephallus4all -"fuck, y u 2 are just stupid a circ is healthier it prevents some Painful shit from happening, men seem to understand this so much better"
I'm a man and I think you're dumbass fucktard circ-fetishist.
Do you understand THAT?
em745aa 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz when you circumcise a baby you rob an adult man of his foreskin duh. it doesn't grow back. it's gone forever and we took your other comment down because it is spam and we don't like spam and this is our video and we are deleting this comment too because you put the same link in it. we don't go for pro circumcision links.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
Comment removed
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz the other side of the argument? these quacks rob little boys and future men of the best part of their penises. i read this and all the other pro circ info long ago so trust me you are not sending anything new our way and if adult men want circumcision they can get it any time in their lives but once a foreskin is gone it is gone forever. the man who was robbed as a baby can never get that specialized erogenous tissue back.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk "The foreskin contains sensory nerve receptors as are prevalent over the rest of the penis. There is no scientific evidence that the extra complement of these in uncircumcised men leads to greater sexual pleasure. In fact, some uncircumcised men have been known to complain that their penis is too sensitive, leading to pain, and seek circumcision to relieve this." From that circumcision website written by "quacks": Professor Brian J. Morris, PhD
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz that quack is not even respected in his own country and the AMA is against circumcision of babies. if an adult man wants to choose circumcision for himself good for him. we're all for that. that is who the choice belongs to. we shouldn't cut the foreskins from little boys just because no more than we should trim the labias of little girls just because she might want it one day. that is ridiculous, are you for cutting the genitals of little girls too?
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk From the AMA website: "There is strong evidence documenting the health benefits of male circumcision, and it is a low-risk procedure, said Peter W. Carmel, M.D., AMA president. "Today the AMA again made it clear that it will oppose any attempts to intrude into legitimate medical practice and the informed choices of patients." Notice all I'm speaking of is MALE circumcision, I am against female circumcision and that has nothing to do with this video or comments.
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz i was talking about Australia because you brought morris into it and he is Australian.. show me one medical association that recommends male circumcision. it's cosmetic surgery and why are baby boys of less value than baby girls? are you aware that blue cross was paying for female circumcision until 1977 and they found
health benefits for it too. you claim u watched all our vids and we did on on why are girls better than boys and can boys wash so if it's good for one...
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz President Carmel's statement was a response the ballot initiatives in CA which would have made infant circmcision illegal. His comments are not the official circumcision policy statement of the AMA. His comments were to let the people involved in the political process in CA know that the AMA would not support the ballot initiatives or other measures.
The AMA and AAP policy statements are very clear-routine (non theraputic) circumcision is NOT recomended.
neechee5150 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz According to the UN/WHO there are five types/degrees of female circumcision or FGM. FGM Type 1 a is the removal of the remale prepuce or clitoral hood, & it is the exact same process as removal of the male prepuce or circumcision.
FGM type 1 a is justified for all the same reasons as male circumcision-religious beliefs, tradition, hygeine and aesthetics, yet it is illegal. There is no difference between FGM type 1a and infant circumcision except gender and the law.
neechee5150 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz Brian J. Morris, PhD is a very biased very unobjective over zealous circumcision advocate who ignores any evidence, doctor or scientist who does not believe as he does. He also provides no documentaton to back up his claims. There are studies that countradict his positions which he routinely choses to ignore
neechee5150 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk "Current newborn circumcision may be considered a preventative health measure analogous to immunization in that side effects and complications are immediate and usually minor, but benefits accrue for a lifetime" [Schoen, 1993].
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz schoen is a sicko that even writes poems about circumcision and he calls circumcision a rape of the phallus and circumcision is a boy's first sexual experience. how sick is that? we know all these quacks and circumcision is cash for them. if they didn't make money from it they wouldn't do. google his poems, he's one sick f**k
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk On 28 March 2007 the World Health Organization and UNAIDS endorsed circumcision for HIV/AIDS prevention [WHO, 2007].
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz condoms is what prevents HIV AIDS. you're not saying that circumcised men don't have to use condoms are you? babies don't engage in sexual behavior anyway so...
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz The S African Med Com stated that it was unethical and illegal to perform circumcision on infant boys in this instance. In particular, they expressed serious concern that not enough scientifically-based evidence was available to confirm that circumcisions prevented HIV contraction and that the public at large was influenced by incorrect and misrepresented information. The Committee reiterated its view that it did not support circumcision to prevent HIV transmission.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz The 3/28/07 WHO document does not even contain the word endorse, and I am willing to bet that you have never read the document itself. The WHO based their recomendations on circumcision on three very controversial and flawed RCTs. In the process of performing these RCT's the WHO/UN doctors and scientists had to covertly or overtly ask subjects to not use condoms and in the process they spread death and disease in the name of science and treated humans worse than animals.
neechee5150 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz what a hoax do you live in Africa you savage? They fuck like eight bitches a day and don't bathe. That's why they get aids. Europe has a lower rate of HIV than America and they don't slice cocks. Cutting ignorant people like yourself for HIV purposes will be more prone to HIV because you will think you won't have wear a rubber.You are not smart.
rud494 3 weeks ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk In Jan 2010 an objective review by experts at John's Hopkins University and the National Institutes of Health highlighted the long-standing benefits for neonatal circumcision and concluded that "with mounting evidence that male circumcision decreases viral STIs, genital ulcer disease, and penile inflammatory disorders in men, and bacterial vaginosis, T. vaginalis infection, and genital ulcer disease in their female partners"
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz circumcision has always been a cure looking for a disease. it's sad that this is still happening but babies do not engage in sexual behavior and cutting parts of healthy babies of either gender is stupid.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk It's more preventative maintenance and is nothing like female circumcision.
There are plenty of articles by men who've HAD to be circumcised as adults in order to be able to have sex again (hardened foreskin that wont retract is an excruciatingly painful condition) and they all say the same thing, "I wish I would have had it done as a baby."
No women have ever needed or enjoyed the results of circumcision so the comparison is pretty irresponsible.
granolanutpunch 1 month ago
@granolanutpunch infant circumcision is cosmetic surgery. the foreskin is protective and belongs on a penis. we have nothing against men choosing it for themselves if that is what they want.many men are restoring but can't get their real foreskin back and are pissed that they were robbed.
google "labiaplasty" a fashionable cosmetic procedure on the female genitals. it's painful but many women love it. should we do it to baby girls? after all genital surgery is genital surgery
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk Cosmetics is part of it but it's inaccurate to say it's JUST cosmetic surgery when it removes the chance of very painful erections later in life, infections, and reduces the chances of some nasty diseases.
We're not running naked through forests with a 30year life expectancy anymore. Which is why most foreskin problems arise in the 20's or 30's when the surgery is more problematic.
We change and remove a lot of ourselves to adjust to our new environment.
granolanutpunch 1 month ago
@granolanutpunch "[circumcision] removes the chance of very painful erections later in life" Circumcision has been known to cause very painful erections, bent penis, and skin bridges. the AMA, AAP, CPS and RACP have made it very clear that the potential adverse side effects from circumcision are equal to any alleged benifits, and thus they do not recomend routine circumcision.
"[Circumcision] reduces the chancesof some nasty diseases"
What specific diseases are you referring to?
neechee5150 1 month ago
@granolanutpunch
"it removes the chance of very painful erections later in life"
Removing too much skin during a newborn circumcision is a major cause of painful erections (his penis grew more than expected and the skin gets so tense it's painful). And guess what, you can't ADD foreskin to fix this, but you can get cut for a phimosis. If it "reduces the chance of nasty diseases", why are STD/STI rates in USA so bad?
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@granolanutpunch
"it removes the chance of [...] infections"
"We're not running naked through forests with a 30year life expectancy anymore."
You said it, we also have running water ya know xDDD
mzorzor 2 weeks ago
@granolanutpunch There are 5 types/degrees of "female circumcision" or FGM according to the UN/WHO with each type having one or more subtypes. FGM type 1a is exactly the same as male infant circumcision. The prepuce is torn away from the glans penis or glans clitoris & cut off. Those who practice type 1a do so &did so in the US until 1996 for the same reasons for male circumcision- religious beliefs, cultural traditions, alleged health reasons, aesthetics and diminish sexual pleasure.
neechee5150 1 month ago
@neechee5150 -"FGM type 1a is exactly the same as male infant circumcision"
Actually, since the male prepuce is the anatomical equivalent of the clitoral hood _AND_ the inner labia combined, male circ is "exactly the same as" FGM types 1a + 2a (i.e. removal of clitoral hood and labia minora).
Just a minor clarification. (Then again, maybe not so minor.)
em745aa 1 month ago
@granolanutpunch There are thousands of cases of permanent penile damage due to circumcision and cases of circmcision revision and 1000s of men who wish they were given the ablity to choose for themselves Phimosis is rare and is frequently misdiagnosed particularly by doctors who have not been trained to care for the natural penis.
While we agree that there is no need for female circumcision, those who practice it justify their practices on the basis of religion, aesthetics, hygiene ect
neechee5150 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CanadianGirlsTalk Spam, huh? That's your argument for not listening to the other side of an argument and saying that your opinion is right and is the only opinion to have? And the fact that you won't even look at something that differs from your opinion is a logical fallacy and represents the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
why circumcision happens i'm also circumcised but i don't like :(
cooladi555 1 month ago
Wait, wait a sec....you're telling me that two probably teenage or a little older girls are telling me that circumcision is 'stupid', just because they thought it looked bad? Not taking into account religious, political, family, or sanitary motivations? Seems legit.....
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz what about all the men who are the owners of the penis and want their foreskins back? none of that matters? well it does and the only one who has the moral right to alter one's body is the adult owner of that body so...
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk Look, I'm not saying that I agree with circumcision, or that I'm against it, I would just like to see I better reason to oppose it besides 'it looked bad'. Oh and technically the adult owner of that body at birth is the parent, and I'm not sure there's a lot of men who were circumcised at birth and 20 years later say they want it back.....
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz parents don't own their babies' bodies. If they did FGM would still be legal. girls are protected from so much as a simple pinprick.why does the penis belong to the parents and not the vulva? circumcision is the only cosmetic surgery that can be performed on an infant and that is wrong. more than 200 000 men are restoring their foreskins and we get many messages from men who are not happy this was taken away from them. google it and see for yourself.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk So how about this hypothetical situation: A baby, just born, begins to show signs of heart failure but it is not certain. You are saying that it is up to that baby to decide whether or not to have surgery to fix that? Parents are legally and morally responsible for their children until they turn eighteen. FGM is different than male circumcision too. And yes there is a percentage of men who do restore their foreskins, I will give you that one.
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz heart surgery is not cosmetic surgery but circumcision is. a simple pinprick to a vulva is not as invasive as cutting off the infant foreskin (this grows to 4 x 6 inches on a man) from a baby boy so why are girls protected?. not one medical organization in the world recommends circumcision including Israel's. genital cutting is genital cutting and it wrong to do it on children of either gender. it shouldn't hurt to be born a boy and the foreskin belongs on the penis.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk I wasn't referring directly to the form of surgery but whose decision it would be to have that surgery. With your reasoning, it would be the babies decision because he/she owns his/her body. In reality, it would be the parents decision because they are the legal guardian of that baby. For now, I'll refer back to my 1st and 2nd comment. Before going completely against something, can you present some facts/reasons to be against it besides 'it looks bad'?
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz fyi this is not our only video about circumcision. we have many others. it does look bad on a baby and the baby who was circumcised in the video we refer was circumcised because daddy wanted it. parents cannot refuse to have life saving surgery on their children. if they do the courts step in, the child is apprehended and lifesaving surgery is performed or lifesaving treatment is given so...
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk I watched your other videos and I didn't find a single piece of evidence to oppose circumcision besides 'it looks bad'. And to your probable response of 'go look at this horrible circumcision video and see what happened', that was more than likely an isolated incident. Every surgery/procedure has possible consequences and risk associated with it. Life's tough sometimes so get over it.
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz from the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons
Many adult men are increasingly concerned about whether their parents had the right to give consent for infant male circumcision. They claim that an infants rights should take priority over any parental rights to make such a decision. This procedure should be delayed to a later date when the child can make his own informed decision. Parental preference alone does not justify a non-therapeutic procedure.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz you are so obviously for circumcision.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
Comment removed
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CanadianGirlsTalk You know what? I'm tired of this conversation. All I've done is presented factual evidence to back up my claims and you have just replied with subjective crap you call information. Goodbye, I'm ashamed to have even given your video the small amount of time and thought processes I gave it. May God bless your soul.
zxThisGuyxz 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz you know what? when God made the penis He knew what He was doing and He designed it perfectly. i'm sure He doesn't want babies being hurt because i heard he loves children including baby boys.
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@zxThisGuyxz sanirtary motivations? what else should we cut from little boys? are little girls really that much more trustworthy that they can be trusted to wash? political? new one so now we have the right to hurt boys for political reasons
CanadianGirlsTalk 1 month ago
@CanadianGirlsTalk
Check out HIV infection reduced 60% by circumcision
RabbiZvi 2 weeks ago
@RabbiZvi Have you read the three Random Controlled Trials conducted in sub-saharan Africa upon which this 60% claim is based upon? Have you read any of the countless critiques by doctors and scientists who have found flaws in these RCT's?
It is also a blatant distortion of the suspect claims from these RCT's to claim as you have that circumcision reduced HIV infection by 60%. If you are going to cite these studies and their suspect claims at least do it accurately.
neechee5150 2 weeks ago
@zxThisGuyxz Why preform genital mutilation surgery on health babies?
globalchaos1984 1 month ago
Anteaters Unite!!!
SgtTripper 1 month ago