[OnTheIce]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Also, I'm curious as to why some of the pro-circumcision folks here are so interested in the genitals of little boys?

Really Bart, you're going to sink that low?

[Brenda]

CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:

I have to admit I'm kid of with Bart on this one. In a secular state unless you can show demonstrable evidence of medical benefit parents and doctors have no right to remove any part of a persons sexual organs.

In Canada for example the state refuses to pay for the procedure but parents are allowed to pay for the procedure with their own money to have it done. Doctors are also within their rights to refuse to preform the procedure.

I doubt the state pays for a face lift or a boob job. So apparently, the state sees it as cosmetic surgery.
I wonder if the health care insurers cover it?

Anyhow, it is not illegal, and Canada will not sue a random doctor who performed it at parents request.

[Gunnair]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Be that as it may, a secular government has every right to outlaw such practices from being carried out upon children. Let them do it at 18 if they want.

Also, I'm curious as to why some of the pro-circumcision folks here are so interested in the genitals of little boys?

That was truly classless. Even some of the worst shitheels like Eureka wouldn't sink to that level of putrid bullshit.

What a truly disgusting piece of work you became with that.

[Gunnair]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Also, I'm curious as to why some of the pro-circumcision folks here are so interested in the genitals of little boys?

Really Bart, you're going to sink that low?

I'd gladly rep you for that kind of restraint.

[BartSimpson]

Oh, c'mon. Tell me you folks didn't set yourselves up for that?

[OnTheIce]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Oh, c'mon. Tell me you folks didn't set yourselves up for that?

Considering it's your side of the fence concerned about other boys penises, perhaps you should look within with such a question.

Personally, I don't care what other parents decide to do with their boy's penis.

[Zipperfish]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

The way I see it you're a woman who supports state interference in the genital mutilation of girls, but not of boys, so, as far as I'm concerned, that makes your opnions irrelevant.

Perhaps because circumcision isn't mutilation at all and comparing male to female circumcision is laughable.

It's a word used by those against circumcision to scare people.

Stating it over and over again doesn't change the fact it's gential mutilation by definition. I'm not trying to scare anyone. If you want to do it, fill your boots. I see it as a primitive religious custom on par with sacrficfing sheep to gain fortune form the gods.

I understand that female and male circumcision are quite different. I'm just wondering where Brneda draws the line for her "Nanny State."

[Zipperfish]

Thanos Thanos:

A boy who's been circumsised doesn't experience a lifetime of shrieking levels of agony in their genitals during any sexual activity in the same way that a girl who's been mutilated does. That's the main difference. And the only important one right there.

I kind of can't believe that we're even having this sort of relativistic conversation.

I' can't believe" means you don't like being challenegd on it. I don't see a big difference between male and female circumcision. They're both essentially babarbric primitive customs. One is Jewish, so it continues to get practiced in our culture. The other isn't native to our culture, so we see it as barbaric.

There's other forms of female genital mutilation, besides mere circumcision, that look nastier and doubtless do have long-term negative impacts, but I'm comparing what is essentially the same operation here: circumcision. Removal of the hood covering the glans.

As for screaming agony, I think that's a bit over the top. Some adult females get circumcised, apparently to increase sensitivity. Others get a clit ring. They seem OK with it. Sure they're screaming in the porns, but I don't think it's screaming agony. Or there's the penile piercings--lots of guys get them with, it appears, little in the way of discomfort, long-term.

Maybe I'll get my next son one of those.

"Um, no circumcision, doc, but can you give the kid a Prince Albert. Rather get it done now."

That said, my general feeling is that female circumcision is already illegal so I'd keep it that way, Nanny Statist that I am. Male circumcision--well, we can only hope that our kids will live in more enlightened times.

[Thanos]

I'm fairly certain that there's a massive difference between an adult tattoo-bitch hipster choosing to get her nether regions pierced so she can be loyal to some obnoxious contemporary fad, and some 10-year-old girl in Somali getting held down by three or four adults and then mutilated for life, all with not anaesthetic, by some witch doctor using a sharpened clamshell or lid off of a tin can. Seriously, this should be apparent to all.

I'll stick by what I said previously. The differences should be obvious even to a blind man, and I still can't believe we're all having a conversation with these things placed on the same continuum.

[Zipperfish]

Thanos Thanos:

I'm fairly certain that there's a massive difference between an adult tattoo-bitch hipster choosing to get her nether regions pierced so she can be loyal to some obnoxious contemporary fad, and some 10-year-old girl in Somali getting held down by three or four adults and then mutilated for life, all with not anaesthetic, by some witch doctor using a sharpened clamshell or lid off of a tin can. Seriously, this should be apparent to all.

True, but what about female circumcision involving removal of the clitoral hood by a qualified medical practitioner in a sterile environment. We're talking about the role of the state of Canada in circumcision here, not Somali witch doctors, or pouring acid on the vagina to tighten it or whatever.

So in this case it would be an infant boy or girl being held down and mutilated for life without anesthetic, but with clean tools. One is culturally accetpable, the other isn't.

[OnTheIce]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Stating it over and over again doesn't change the fact it's gential mutilation by definition. I'm not trying to scare anyone. If you want to do it, fill your boots. I see it as a primitive religious custom on par with sacrficfing sheep to gain fortune form the gods.

I understand that female and male circumcision are quite different. I'm just wondering where Brneda draws the line for her "Nanny State."

No, it's not genital mutilation and it's not defined as such. It's only defined that way but anti-circumcision people like yourself. If it was indeed defined as such, it would be a crime in this Country to perform the procedure.

To define mutilation:
1. To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple.
2. To disfigure by damaging irreparably

Male circumcision is none of the above.

[Zipperfish]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

No, it's not genital mutilation and it's not defined as such. It's only defined that way but anti-circumcision people like yourself. If it was indeed defined as such, it would be a crime in this Country to perform the procedure.

To define mutilation:
1. To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple.
2. To disfigure by damaging irreparably

Male circumcision is none of the above.

Well, as the foreskin doesn't grow back, that's pretty much irreparable damage. Thanks for proving my point.

Circumcision is legal for the same reason alcohol is. Snuck in under the grandfather clause.

[OnTheIce]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well, as the foreskin doesn't grow back, that's pretty much irreparable damage. Thanks for proving my point.

Circumcision is legal for the same reason alcohol is. Snuck in under the grandfather clause.

Damage? Besides the fact the penis looks 100x better and is cleaner without that shit hanging off the end, I'd say it's "damage" well done.

And comparing alcohol use to so-called child abuse? Impressive.

So you're claiming the government is turning a blind eye to what you consider child abuse?

[Zipperfish]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Damage? Besides the fact the penis looks 100x better and is cleaner without that shit hanging off the end, I'd say it's "damage" well done.

As far as looks go, neither way does do much for me, to be honest.

$1:

And comparing alcohol use to so-called child abuse? Impressive.

So you're claiming the government is turning a blind eye to what you consider child abuse?

No, I don't recall claimingthat at all.

You see, this is where to get that OTL moniker.

[2Cdo]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

As far as looks go, neither way does do much for me, to be honest.