American Circumcision
#11
(01-10-2019, 10:09 AM)BC Wrote: It really is remarkable how Feminists and others can (rightfully) protest female genital mutilation in Islamic countries (of course they never blame Islam), but dismiss male circumcision as acceptable because it is practiced by the modern high priests- medical doctors.

The mind is capable of compartmentalizing things that would, without social conditioning, strike one with revulsion.

The purpose of female genital mutilation is to highly reduce, if not entirely remove, the pleasure sensations women receive through direct stimulation thereof (preferably during the marital act).  Or, in other words, prevent women from ever having an orgasm or receiving otherwise normal pleasure through the marital act.

To compare female genital mutilation to circumcision, in my opinion, is outright fraud and deceit.  

Speaking as one of the many hundreds of millions of American men who has been circumcised, I can assure you that it has had no affect on my ability to receive pleasure during, and/or complete, the marital act.
[-] The following 3 users Like Bonaventure's post:
  • austenbosten, JacafamalaRedux, jovan66102
Reply
#12
Well said, Bonaventure! Well said!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#13
My pool buddy at the YMCA ia a retired labor and delivery nurse for many years. She said that it was never a big deal for the babies. They put a little something on there to numb the area and it was a hygiene issue. 

If God could've demanded it of the Jews, how bad could it possibly be?  Hopefully not too bad, we had our boy circumcised.
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
[-] The following 1 user Likes JacafamalaRedux's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#14
(01-10-2019, 01:27 AM)Bombero Wrote: I had the misfortune of witnessing a circumcision when I was a wee lad. I cried because I was so traumatized. I am thankful that my mother chose to NOT have me cut, even though my father is. I feel strongly about the issue but I am not comfortable talking about it for obvious reasons.

God bless your wonderful mother!  I wish my mother had chosen the same as yours.
Reply
#15
(01-10-2019, 11:12 AM)Bonaventure Wrote: The purpose of female genital mutilation is to highly reduce, if not entirely remove, the pleasure sensations women receive through direct stimulation thereof (preferably during the marital act).  Or, in other words, prevent women from ever having an orgasm or receiving otherwise normal pleasure through the marital act.

To compare female genital mutilation to circumcision, in my opinion, is outright fraud and deceit.  

Speaking as one of the many hundreds of millions of American men who has been circumcised, I can assure you that it has had no affect on my ability to receive pleasure during, and/or complete, the marital act.

It is neither fraud nor deceit to compare circumcision to female genital mutilation.  While it has become medicalized in the US, it began in this country as a means to restrain male sexuality and to reduce the amount of "sultry" pleasure a male can feel.  Specifically the way Talmudic Jews and and Americans practice it, it is designed to reduce the amount of sexual pleasure a man can experience to no more than is necessary to facilitate procreation.  Not always the result, but it was the intent.

Many women who had their genitals mutilated say that they still experience sexual pleasure.  While it is true that some of the more radical forms of FGM were designed to eliminate a woman's ability to experience sexual pleasure (the form that American propaganda would have us believe is the only form), the majority of women who have had some form of genital mutilation are still able to experience sexual pleasure.

I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but even if you haven't been able to perceive it, circumcision most certainly has had an effect on your ability to receive pleasure.  You're just not aware of it because you've never experienced what you're missing (unless you were circumcised as an adult and can compare the two).  If you were circumcised as a baby, you simply have no competence to say circumcision hasn't affected the amount of pleasure you experience because you have no way of knowing what you would have experienced if left intact; you can't know.  It's already been scientifically established that circumcision always removes the most sensitive parts of the penis; for you, it is only a question of the degree to which you are affected.  Because you are able to ejaculate does not mean your ability to experience pleasure is unaffected.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Melkite's post:
  • Emblemfan
Reply
#16
(01-10-2019, 11:05 PM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: Hopefully not too bad, we had our boy circumcised.

Why did you go and do that?
~Your local humanitarian snowflake™ with the most noble of spirits.
Reply
#17
(01-10-2019, 11:05 PM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: If God could've demanded it of the Jews, how bad could it possibly be?  Hopefully not too bad, we had our boy circumcised.

The form that God commanded only removed the skin that extended beyond the tip of the glans.  While this is still the most sensitive part of the penis, and still would have drastically reduced the amount of sensitivity the boy could experience as an adult, he would have grown up to have a largely intact frenulum, which is the second most sensitive part.

All boys are born with the foreskin attached to the head of the penis by a membrane.  It does not separate on its own until later in childhood.  Doctors must use a metal probe to separate this membrane in order to perform a modern circumcision (mohels use their fingernail), since they not only cut the skin off beyond the glans, but all the skin covering the head as well.  Imagine a probe being inserted underneath your fingernail to detach it from the flesh beneath.  This is the first part of the torture your boy experienced.

Then, because the additional skin modern circumcisers are cutting off, circumcision cuts through a major vein and artery.  In order to prevent the boy from bleeding to death from the procedure, the skin must be crushed between two metal plates in order to seal off the veins.  Ever pinch your fingertips or lips in between something hard?  Imagine that for 5-10 minutes.  This is the second part of the torture your boy experienced.

Much more infrequently, some doctors will remove all the frenulum (the sensitive underside that, on circumcised men, extends from the circumcision scar into the notch in the head) after crushing and amputating the foreskin.  If it is removed, this is usually cut off with scissors and then stitched shut.  For those poor boys who even have their frenulum removed, they will only be able to experience the bare minimum of sexual pleasure (the full breadth of which God designed him to be able to experience, mind you).  Their experience of sexual pleasure in their entire marital life will effectively be like reading braille compared to seeing in a full spectrum of color.  Yet, presumably like Bonaventure, they will never know anything more than braille, so they will think they are unharmed.  In fact, they'll even think their ability to read braille is pretty awesome and satisfactory!

Modern circumcision is nothing like Abrahamic circumcision.  Modern circumcision is undeniably an invention of Satan.  It is cruel, torturous and extreme child abuse.  Quite frankly, I can't conceive a way in which your pool buddy is not lying to you.  While I have my own reservations about Abrahamic circumcision, it at least can be said to not have been torture to the child it was performed on.
Reply
#18
(01-11-2019, 11:26 AM)Melkite Wrote: I'm sorry to have to break it to you, but even if you haven't been able to perceive it, circumcision most certainly has had an effect on your ability to receive pleasure.  You're just not aware of it because you've never experienced what you're missing (unless you were circumcised as an adult and can compare the two).  If you were circumcised as a baby, you simply have no competence to say circumcision hasn't affected the amount of pleasure you experience because you have no way of knowing what you would have experienced if left intact; you can't know.  It's already been scientifically established that circumcision always removes the most sensitive parts of the penis; for you, it is only a question of the degree to which you are affected.  Because you are able to ejaculate does not mean your ability to experience pleasure is unaffected.

Well, you win the prize today for the most backward use of logic.  If I'm unable to competently testify as to my own experiences of being circumcised because I was never left intact, how is it that you're able to competently testify as to the alleged loss of sensation if you've never been circumcised?  Makes no sense, and around and around we go. 

As far as scientifically established, I'll trust my own personal experience as opposed to some questionable study.


(01-11-2019, 11:47 AM)Melkite Wrote: Modern circumcision is nothing like Abrahamic circumcision.  Modern circumcision is undeniably an invention of Satan.  It is cruel, torturous and extreme child abuse.  Quite frankly, I can't conceive a way in which your pool buddy is not lying to you.  While I have my own reservations about Abrahamic circumcision, it at least can be said to not have been torture to the child it was performed on.

Circumcision is an invention of Satan?   :huh:

If this forum doesn't start to get some form of moderation, I think my days here are numbered.
Reply
#19
(01-11-2019, 02:22 PM)Bonaventure Wrote: Well, you win the prize today for the most backward use of logic.  If I'm unable to competently testify as to my own experiences of being circumcised because I was never left intact, how is it that you're able to competently testify as to the alleged loss of sensation if you've never been circumcised?  Makes no sense, and around and around we go. 


I'm equally incompetent of knowing what I'm missing and the degree to which I'm missing it.  From entirely unquestionable studies (unlike the questionable studies used to support circumcision in this country), we can know what parts of the penis are sensitive and which parts are not, and how strong their sensation is in comparison to others.  From the testimony of men who were circumcised as adults and can compare, we can know how significant of a reduction in sensation is caused by the ablation of each particular area that circumcision removes.

Quote:As far as scientifically established, I'll trust my own personal experience as opposed to some questionable study.

[Image: ostrich-head-in-sand.jpg]
Reply
#20
(01-11-2019, 11:46 AM)Emblemfan Wrote:
(01-10-2019, 11:05 PM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: Hopefully not too bad, we had our boy circumcised.

Why did you go and do that?

Why do you ask why?
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)