Circumcision

I may not be the best person to write about this, simply because I’m Jewish and I know how important it is to our people that men be circumcised. I’ve had sex with men who were and weren’t circumcised. I never heard any of them tell me it was less pleasurable because they didn’t have a foreskin. All the males functioned quite normally.

The only man I slept with who wasn’t circumcised ended up getting a yeast infection precisely because he wasn’t circumcised. Yeast grows in warm, dark spots. Women get yeast infections rather easily. The circumcised men that I’ve slept with have NEVER gotten a yeast infection. It was physically impossible.

Yeast infections are common in women. Every woman has a balance in her vagina. Sometimes, due to diet, stress, or other variables, the yeast will build up. Normally, we just use an over the counter cream for a few days to reset the balance. Men who have a foreskin are very susceptible to yeast and they don’t get to use a simple cream to get rid of it. They actually have to take internal medicine for it.

What really annoys me is that MRA’s compare taking off a flap of extra skin to Female Genital Mutilation whereby the clitoris, inner and outer labia are cut and the opening of the vagina sewn up so that only a small hole remains for urine. It’s so fucking annoying they’re that ignorant of human anatomy that they think it’s the same. It’s NOT the same thing.

There’s a lot of research on the subject. Scientists say the rampant HIV in Africa is correlated by lack of the practice. The CDC agrees that the practice prevents many health risks and the costs associated with those risks is 10 times higher than normal. There is a study that claims appx. 117 male babies die from circumcision each year. When critiqued, it doesn’t stand up to academic scrutiny. The CDC says the complication rate from circumcision is 0.2% and is easily remedied.circumcision-amputates

Now I don’t mind the campaign to get rid of it. I think parents are always going to have the ultimate decision. I do know one man who did get circumcised when he was in his 20’s. I admit it’s quite odd when men say they’ve somehow missed out on good sex because they lack a foreskin.

There are benefits to getting circumcised. The APA agrees with me but the CPA doesn’t. The website circinfo.net has gathered all the updated scientific literature on the subject and states that getting circumcised is a ‘surgical vaccine’ that protects against quite serious diseases. They claim women have benefits from having intercourse with a circed partner preventing:

  • cervical cancer
  • genital herpes
  • bacterial vaginosis (formerly termed “gardnerella”)
  • possibly Chlamydia (that can cause pelvic inflammatory disease
  • infertility
  • ectopic pregnancy
  • other infections

Quite honestly I think it’s just an issue that MRA’s can attach themselves to in order to claim they are oppressed. If I was to have a male child I would circumcise him, not only because I’m Jewish but because of my actual experience with watching a guy get an infection and suffering because of it.

What are your thoughts?

I know this post is being brigaded today (6/14/14) by MRA’s and a fuckwit antisemite called ‘Thoushaltbemocked on AMR. If you don’t like what I said go complain about it on your thread. You won’t be allowed to muck up my comment section with your bullshit. Trying to explain my religion to me also gets a good laugh, especially when you post links to Chabad.  Now go back to the depths where you came from. Also, if AMR people are here too, Hi!  Looks like you’re part of the brigade and won’t be entertained. Go find other feminists to hound.

You know what’s funny? When I wrote the above paragraph I thought the only place that linked this article was MR. Then I find out some anti-Semitic fuckwit over at AMR posted it too.  Haven’t had enough yet eh? Come on cowards at AMR, explain how antisemites behave. There’s at least 8 of you who think you can pull your Jew hatred out on me. You don’t like Jewish laws? Shall I call Moshe rabbeinu for you?

Oh I know skeptics! Religion-BAD! Right? Go spread your hatred elsewhere.

Advertisements

21 thoughts on “Circumcision

  1. It is a really big debate – and you give good reasons for your point of view. The religious view is especially hard for me to counter in any way because I just don’t have the first clue about Judaism.

    But, personally, I can’t even get my tomcat “fixed.” I know it’s not the same thing – but, still… it’s not like the cat gets to voice his opinion. So, I just leave him as he was born.

    I have always preferred sex with uncircumcised men. This is a major reason I avoided American men for years, because most men anywhere near my age were “fixed.” And, then soon afterward, I began avoiding them because so many of them are liars, violent and usually both of these things in my experience. (I’ve had a tiny bit better experience with men from other countries, like Germany and Mexico, where they’re not quite so self-entitled toward women.) I think sex with uncircumcised men is less painful because there is extra skin there.

    If I had the misfortune of having a male child, I would not allow circumcision, but I wouldn’t go anywhere near an allopathic doctor, either – so the subject would probably never even come up. Circumcision, to me, seems like another aspect of patriarchal medicine, which I am generally-speaking opposed to – unless there is a very good reason, of course.

  2. Pingback: A Special Thank You To My Readers | Mancheeze

  3. “The circumcised men that I’ve slept with have NEVER gotten a yeast infection. It was physically impossible.”

    Your implication here is NOT true. I’ve never had intercourse, got cut shortly after birth, and I’ve gotten a male yeast infection.

    Also, there do exist Jewish people against circumcision http://jewsagainstcircumcision.org/

    “What really annoys me is that MRA’s compare taking off a flap of extra skin to Female Genital Mutilation whereby the clitoris, inner and outer labia are cut and the opening of the vagina sewn up so that only a small hole remains for urine. It’s so fucking annoying they’re that ignorant of human anatomy that they think it’s the same. It’s NOT the same thing.”

    No one believes them exactly the same thing in the way you’ve implied here. One would have to believe that the vagina and the penis are exactly the same thing to believe this. MHRAs think that female genital mutilation comes as ethically equivalent to male genital mutilation.

    “I admit it’s quite odd when men say they’ve somehow missed out on good sex because they lack a foreskin.”

    You’re not a man. You don’t have a penis. You don’t know what it’s like from the inside to know the sensations when masturbation or having intercourse with a penis. We aren’t talking about an ethical sort of thing here with respect to pleasurable sex, but a bodily sensation. You aren’t a man, and consequently you have NO clue here at all.

    • There has been a big debate in the medical community for years about which is better heath-wise, natural or snipped? – personally, I think the allopaths like to make money anyway they can, including cutting around on babies (and pregnant women, too) for no good reason.

      I think that if a man practices reasonably good personal hygiene, natural should actually provide more protections from infections of any kind. The skin there is actually sort of a barrier and a cushion. The trouble in the U.S. and countries where non-circumcised boys and men are not as common is usually that they may not have been educated as well about hygiene (doctors in these countries don’t understand it, either, because it’s not longer the norm) – I’m just spouting a theory I read somewhere a long time ago that seemed plausible at the time. In countries where most men are not circumcised (unless for religious or legitimate medical reasons), where they know more about how to take care of themselves hygenically, remaining uncircumcised actually renders them less likely to get or transmit an infection – that was the theory.

      Anyway, I’m sorry for anyone who has had any kind of medical procedure, especially surgery, forced upon them. It’s just not right and if the perps didn’t wear white coats and have state-issued licenses, they’d be locked up for violent sex crimes against children. Fortunately, at least, in the U.S., things seem to be turning around a little bit. More women are having children at home, educating themselves and getting out of the clutches of the medicine men.

    • Well you just added weight to my argument. It’s much more likely a man will get the yeast infection and other assorted diseased if he’s not circed. That’s called a fact. I know how MRA’s are about these pesky things called facts.

      Also, when you’re a grown man without a foreskin marching around with a red spray-painted crotch talking about all the pleasure you’ve missed it seems very odd. How the hell do you KNOW you missed out on anything? Doesn’t take a penis to figure this out. And yes, MRA’s compare it to FGM so simply telling me you don’t is just indicative of you, not the general position that the majority of MRA’s hold.

      I also never said Jews weren’t against it. I said I was Jewish and that it’s the symbol of our covenant. It’s funny because you used my quotes in your reply but nowhere was it found that I said anything of the sort about Judaism

      • “Well you just added weight to my argument. It’s much more likely a man will get the yeast infection and other assorted diseased if he’s not circed. That’s called a fact. I know how MRA’s are about these pesky things called facts.”

        If I had added weight to your argument, then I would have provided some sort of evidence that supports your argument. I said

        “Your implication here is NOT true. I’ve never had intercourse, got cut shortly after birth, and I’ve gotten a male yeast infection.”

        The phrase “got cut” means that I got circumcised. One interpretation of what you wrote implies that it was physically impossible for a circumcised man to get a yeast infection, and I refuted that. Now maybe you didn’t mean that absolute statement, since you did say:

        “The circumcised men that I’ve slept with have NEVER gotten a yeast infection. It was physically impossible.”

        Now, a person gets a yeast infection because of how physical things interact in the world. Vaginal-penile intercourse doesn’t ever cause a yeast infection, but the physical things in the world that accompany intercourse can cause a man to get a yeast infection. Now here’s the catch…

        I’m fairly confident that I got the yeast infection from using petroleum jelly once while masturbating. Yeast can grow in moist places, and a jar of petroleum jelly is moist.

        Can a circumcised man get a yeast infection during vaginal-penile heterosexual intercourse? Well petroleum jelly can get used as lubricant of the vagina (which is not to say that it should). Consequently it follows that if a jar of petroleum jelly can harbor yeast, and if that lubricant with the yeast is used on a vagina before vaginal-penile intercourse, then it comes as possible that the yeast in the lubricant can get transmitted to the man during heterosexual intercourse. So, it does not stand to reason that it is physically impossible for a circumcised man to not have the possibility of getting a yeast infection during heterosexual intercourse. So, almost surely, a circumcised man can get a yeast infection during vaginal-penile intercourse.

        “It’s much more likely a man will get the yeast infection and other assorted diseased if he’s not circed. That’s called a fact.”

        You might have some statistics that indicate the observed frequency of men with yeast infections is higher in circumcised populations than in uncircumcised populations. That much I would understand as factual. However, that does not identify why such a frequency exists. Also, even if that statistic holds, that does not imply that *in the future* such a frequency will continue to exist that way.

        The purpose of such a statistic lies in implying “if an individual gets circumcised, then *in the future* that individual will have more protection against getting a yeast infection or an assorted disease.” But, the conditions involved here which might lead to those diseases are NOT constant, and most definitely are not constant in every single respect. So, you haven’t actually proven your case here with such a statistical reference.

        “How the hell do you KNOW you missed out on anything?”

        There exist a significant number of nerve endings in the foreskin. But, that doesn’t really answer your question as you’ve stated it.

        One can’t hardly know anything in the way you’ve asked the question here with respect to “missing out”. There is rarely to never any absolute certitude with respect to any experience or lack of experience, because the majority of emotions are not precise and clear-cut. So, really, your question here cannot get answered, because you’ve imposed a demand of all too high of certitude on a situation which necessarily has much less certitude, by using the phrase “missing out”.

        That said, we do know with a very high certitude that boys experience pain when circumcised, and they don’t get anesthetics when getting circumcised. The foreskin then often gets sold later on.

        “And yes, MRA’s compare it to FGM so simply telling me you don’t is just indicative of you, not the general position that the majority of MRA’s hold. ”

        I agree that MHRA’s sometimes act irrationally by comparing MGM to FGM. FGM is against the law in the U. S. at the federal level. MGM is not. MGM is much more commonly practiced than FGM. There is not much of a comparison here. Medical “reasons” have not gotten used much to justify FGM, but have often gotten used to justify MGM. There is very little comparison here, and a very high degree of contrast.

        “I also never said Jews weren’t against it. I said I was Jewish and that it’s the symbol of our covenant.”

        Yeah.. (sarcasm) *surely* it’s a symbol of “our” covenant, when you simply were not ever cut. It’s a symbol of “our” covenant, when your body was affected in no way whatsoever by the cutting. *You* got included in such a covenant by male circumcision when your body was not affected by the cut. The boy’s getting cut apparently is a symbol of your covenant also, even though nothing of note really happened to you. I’m sure, all so very, very sure that’s the way that sacrifice works. (end of sarcasm).

        • Ugh. You just did it. You said MGM. It’s not genital mutilation dude. You people don’t even read what you write nor do you comprehend what others write.

          Males most certainly do get anesthesia. So fail.

          Facts don’t agree with you dude. Just face up to it and stop writing a diary on my comment section.

          Yeast grows in dark warm places. That’s why it’s more common. I specifically said that in my post. DERP. Oh and yes dude, the yeast infection was due to PIV. Another fail.

          • You clearly know nothing about germ theory. Yeast grows in dark warm places IN THE ABSENCE OF LACTOBACILLUS. Now, circumcised penises lack Lactobacillus.

            This is also why douching causes yeast infections.

            And yeah, keep splaining to him about his dude parts that, oh yeah, you don’t have.

      • http://www.a-parents-decision.co.uk/thought-2-page-2.html

        “Unfortunately, although initially this sounds fair enough, it is fatally flawed for several reasons. At what age is your son old enough to decide for himself? Is eight years old enough? Quite a burden for an eight year old I would have thought. How about twelve years old? By twelve years old your son has already gone through most of his formative childhood years. During that time he has had to put up with all the problems of not being circumcised.

        He has almost certainly looked enviously at his lucky circumcised friends and wished his willy was like theirs. Now you ask him if he would like to go into hospital and have bits cut off his penis. Not surprisingly, most twelve year olds are going to decline your kind offer. Even though they would almost certainly have preferred it, if they had been circumcised as a baby. By now it is too late. Your son will be condemned to putting up with his foreskin, probably for the rest of his life.

        Of course, all this assumes that you as a parent, ever get around to having this embarrassing discussion with your son. Many parents, precisely because they are so embarrassed, keep putting off the dreaded day longer and longer. The longer they put it off, the older their son gets, and the more difficult the conversation will be. Eventually, they realise they have just left it too late and it never gets mentioned at all.”

    • Also, what annoys me is when naïve bloggers, way outside of their personal field, conflate legitimate medical authorities, such as the American Medical Association, the Canadian Medical Association,the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, and the Royal Dutch Medical Association, among others, with MRAs.

  4. “You just did it. You said MGM. It’s not genital mutilation dude.”

    No, you just did it, because you tried to dismiss what I’ve said by referring to me personally in a derogatory manner by calling me “dude”, instead of trying to actually address what I’ve written. Your appraisal of me personally simply does not affect the quality of my argument.

    “You people don’t even read what you write nor do you comprehend what others write.”

    You have no way of knowing if we read what we write, nor what we comprehend. If you had an argument here, it comes as likely that you wouldn’t have resorted to another attack against someone’s character instead of actually addressing the argument.

    “Males most certainly do get anesthesia. So fail.”

    No, they don’t. Here’s what a pro genital mutilation site says:

    “Despite the benefits and proven safety of anesthesia, studies in the early 1990s found that many male newborn circumcisions in North America did not involve anesthetics and this was as much as 64–96% in some regions [Toffler et al., 1990; Wellington & Rieder, 1993]. “Given the overwhelming evidence that neonatal circumcision is painful and the evidence of safe and effective anesthesia/analgesia methods, residency training in neonatal circumcision should include instruction of pain relief techniques” [Howard et al., 1998].

    A 1998 survey found that in the USA 84% of pediatric, 80% of family practice and 60% of obstetric programs do indeed teach anesthesia/analgesia techniques [Howard et al., 1998]. Another survey in the USA that year found it was thus surprising that 71% of pediatricians, 56% of family practitioners, and only 25% of obstetricians were found to use analgesia/anesthesia [Stang & Snellman, 1998]. A survey in 2006 found 82% of training programs taught circumcision and of these 97% taught the administration of anesthetic, either locally or topically [Yawman et al., 2006]. The breakdown by specialty and type of anesthetic is given in this article. Use of pain relief always or frequently in residency programs that teach circumcision was, however, only 84% topically [Yawman et al., 2006].”

    Not a single statistic there indicates that 100% of programs use anethesia. Also of note, the site talks about evidence for neonatal circumcision as painful. The recognition of pain for the male infant here though NEVER required any study at all.

    “Oh and yes dude, the yeast infection was due to PIV. Another fail.”

    As I said above “I’ve never had (heterosexual) intercourse” [PIV] so you’re the one who’s actually failed here.

    • YOU called it MGM. I don’t. I’ve made the argument in the piece.

      If you’ve never had PIV then I’ve just educated you on the risk if you’re not circumcised.

      You still haven’t made an argument.

      • That’s a fallacy of definition, though: You’re arguing that it’s not genital mutilation because we don’t call it that.

        How well does that work? When I was 7, a white girl, just a month under 15, slept with me. How is she not a child molester? Because we define her as not one. Oh, never mind me, I’ll be over here wearing ugly sweaters in hundred-degree weather so as to avoid being not-raped because it was totally not rape! Haven’t you seen how rape is defined, gaiz?

        Or, you know, I can rely on actual African feminists who are sick and tired of you using them without their permission to erase other victims of genital mutilation. (And not just men. I have several grandaunts who underwent involuntary sterilization.)

          • “Sterilization is NOT circumcision.”

            But it is genital mutilation. Except to white women. Since, of course, white women are always willing to defend white men. And of course, you really don’t care about genital mutilation, even of women, but just want to erase people like Ryan White and David Reimer.

            “Stop playing Womanists against radical feminists.”

            You offended them yourself.

            Also, I object to you calling yourself a radical feminist because 1) defending a millennia-old tradition is the opposite of radical, and 2) defending a book that blames women for all the evil in the world (and just gets worse in its treatment of women from there, including protocols for how a man can have his wife executed if he so desires) is the opposite of feminist.

            But continue your orientalist whitesplanation. I’m all ears.

  5. Interestingly enough, African feminists, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, oppose circumcision. In fact, they’ve opposed circumcision longer than white feminists have cared about clitoridectomy or infibulation.

    The APA? Really? The American Psychiatric Association? A bit out of their field, no? (And they don’t agree with you either.)

    Seriously, though, the guy behind the “health benefits of circumcision” report from the American Academy of Pediatrics, Douglas Diekema, also promotes clitoral “nicking”, and amputating the limbs of children with learning disabilities.

    Now let’s go over your health claims:

    First, about yeast infections, sorry, this makes no sense. At all. Does douching prevent yeast infections? No? Then circumcision won’t, either, for the same reason.

    •cervical cancer

    We have a vaccine.

    •genital herpes

    Condoms.

    •bacterial vaginosis (formerly termed “gardnerella”)

    Condoms.

    •possibly Chlamydia (that can cause pelvic inflammatory disease

    Condoms.

    •infertility

    How?

    •ectopic pregnancy

    How?

    •other infections

    Curiously, you don’t mention any of them.

    You forgot to mention TB, homosexuality, schizophrenia, manic depression, and a bunch of other things it was claimed to prevent in the early 20th century that it obviously can’t. Morris claims circumcision can prevent meningitis; again, I’d like to see how something done to the penis can affect the meninges.

    That circinfo site is run by Brian Morris, an Australian gentleman (notably NOT an MD) who also meets up with like-minded individuals online to distribute circumcision-themed porn among themselves. (And I can assure you from personal experience that Morris’ claim that American Indians practiced circumcision is nonsense.) If you go through Morris’ site, you can still see a few traces of stuff from Vernon Quaintance, a circumcision campaigner who was caught for possession of child pornography in 2012.

    My experience, studying AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa, was that the pro-circumcision people came in, circumcised the men, and then the men subsequently used that as an excuse not to use condoms or get tested for HIV, as they were already immune. So fail.

  6. Pingback: MRA’s Post My Picture On News Article and Harassment From Unexpected Places | Mancheeze

  7. Cutting boys to prevent disease in women that can be prevented in other ways?
    Not everyone is heterosexual, and circumcision makes some forms of gay sex impossible. But hey, patriarchal religion > body acceptance.

  8. If the person whose body was altered calls it mutilation, nobody else’s opinion matters. And YES this country has a history of experimenting on blacks in the name of fighting STDs.

  9. I know this is an older post but as a guy who was circumcised at 25 I just wanted to write down my two cents. In short I find sex more enjoyable after the procedure and there’s certainly not any less pleasure.

Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s