How is it the greatest thing ever if you don't remember half the experience?

meanwhile, circumcision has the possibility of being the greatest thing ever
like it was for me

I guess this is one of those things where beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I have a circumcised penis and thinking about it just makes me angry.

that's fucking awesome

Yes because I thank my parents everyday for the decision.

It has nothing to do with the aesthetics of the penis, it's more to do with the fact that it was purely a non-required procedure immediately after my birth and I was not given a choice on the matter. If I was 14 and I was given the option I'd probably be singing a different tune over this subject. But to go through something like that at such an early age when parents aren't fully informed (see the video at the bottom of the previous page)? I don't understand such a decision.

I'm 100% happy I had my son circumcised too, I'm sure he'll thank me one day.

Quote from: Ian on May 10, 2016, 12:12:29 PM

I have a circumcised penis and thinking about it just makes me angry.

You'd rather have a nasty looking slug dick? Shit, I'm happy as fuck every morning when I look down at my dick that my parents had me circumcised. I'm 100% happy I had my son circumcised too, I'm sure he'll thank me one day.

something we can agree on

every day when i shower, i'm like, "damn, am i ever glad i don't have foreskin"

Jesus that's (Savage).

So the primary reason is that it's aesthetically pleasing? Hypothetically speaking, If you were unaware of the idea of circumcision and you were given the option at a much older age, do you think you would be bothered by the look of your penis or that your views might differ if you grew up uncircumcised? There is a potential for death or serious accidental injury of the penis (albeit very low but it's still there) and I feel that if the procedure was done at an older age that low percentage would decrease even more. I simply don't see the benefits of doing it at such a young age.

As I said to PSU I would ask you to also watch the video as it explains why the other reasons aren't true. You don't need to do extra cleaning, the whole point of foreskin is to prevent infection and discomfort and men are just as prone to tearing circumcised.

looks great (comparatively speaking), and i don't have to worry about having an extra gross thing to clean

it's also healthier, because foreskin is more prone to infection, discomfort, and tearing (roman's thread)

So the primary reason is that it's aesthetically pleasing?

No. I gave you three reasons--one dealing with aesthetic, and two that deal with health and comfort reasons.

Hypothetically speaking, If you were unaware of the idea of circumcision and you were given the option at a much older age, do you think you would be bothered by the look of your penis or that your views might differ if you grew up uncircumcised?

I probably wouldn't, but only because getting in as an adult is stupid as fuck. You won't forget the pain at that age--you forget it when you're an infant. That's why they're performed at infancy. So you don't remember the pain.

There is a potential for death or serious accidental injury of the penis (albeit very low but it's still there) and I feel that if the procedure was done at an older age that low percentage would decrease even more.

This is the only problem I see with circumcision, which I conceded in the other thread. But it's fixable.

]It's just the truth. If you compare both acts (rape of a drunk girl and the cutting of genitals) side by side on their own, they're both objectively bad. If you take into account potentially future events and consequences, they could both result in something good and bad. As such, Verb's rebutall falls short as he chooses to only consider that one of the two may eventually lead to good things.

Compare the number of people who are pleased/indifferent to their circumcision to the number of people who were pleased/indifferent that they were raped while drunk.

There really isn't a worse comparison out there.

What if the procedure was done under anesthetics? We're obviously not going to drug an infant but wouldn't anesthetics be an reasonable response to any sort of pain that an older individual might experience during the procedure?

I probably wouldn't, but only because getting in as an adult is stupid as fuck. You won't forget the pain at that age--you forget it when you're an infant. That's why they're performed at infancy. So you don't remember the pain.

You might be able to cut or somehow even tear it

So I'm right?

I don't care about the severity of the injury. The fact that it's prone to injury at all makes it worth cutting off.

I've seen you say you think it produces copious amounts of dirt and pus

Also, yes, it's called smegma, and it's absolutely the most disgusting thing I've ever, ever seen.

Maybe you should read up on foreskin?

I'm just curious, but why? Over the years, I've come to know you as a very factual, no nonsense and rational person.

Well, thank you. But let me just clarify--when I say that you're not going to change my mind, I'm only referring to two things: 1.) the notion that circumcision has no benefits, and 2.) the notion that foreskin is "useful." Like, what the fuck. It's basically a piece of itch skin designed to protect our dicks from the pricker bushes that we're not running around in naked anymore. It's an antiquated, superfluous biological relic of the past. Like wisdom teeth.

It's conceivable that you could change my mind over other things, like whether the benefits of circumcision outweigh the detriments. But you don't even recognize the benefits.

I've been circumcised, and I'm telling you that it fucking rules, but you choose ignore it, because it compromises your agenda.

Yet when this particular subject comes up, you are basically saying "fuck the thousands of pages of medical research on the functions of the foreskin and the effects of circumcision, fuck every single official medical organization in the developed world saying it should not be a routine practice and fuck the almost unanymous global consensus among experts that the benefits of circumcision do not come close to outweighing the cons; none of it will ever change my mind". I could understand such a reaction from some uneducated person living god knows where, but from you? I don't get it.

Have I actually denied that circumcision is a painful, complicated, and delicate procedure that could result in a net negative? No, I haven't.

My argument is simple in that all I'm saying is this: Sometimes, it works out okay. Sometimes, it's worth it. You don't recognize this. You don't think it's ever worth it. You think it's unconscionable.

And from what I remember, you more or less agreed to that in the other thread at some point.

Yeah, I did. so like...

i don't know what your problem is