Amorous Propensities : sex is funny, sex is sad

MGM opponents aren’t pests. The LEAST imposing form of FGM (mere slitting of the clitoral hood) is illegal today. Boys deserve equal protection under the law - no genital cutting.

The frenulum - which is always removed during male circumcision - is indeed the male homologue to the clitoris (which is rarely removed in US practice). The foreskin is itself highly valuable errogenous tissue. No one has the moral right to amputate healthy valuable body parts from a minor - not a parent, not a religious authority, not a doctor. Boys need legal protection.

The Colb article expresses concern that outlawing the genital mutilation of boys would trample upon the religious freedoms of Muslims and Jews. Colb ignores the fact that infant also has the right to religious freedom, including rejection of Abrahamic faith as an adult. By letting his genitals be mutilated, we fail to protect the child’s human rights.

No national medical organisation in the world recommends circumcision. Over three-fourths of the world’s men are intact. They suffer no unusual health, hygiene, or social problems.

-Ron Low

I remember reading somewhere that circumsision seems to confer some protection against AIDS. Some african tribes who practice this have much lower incidences of AIDS compaired to their neighbours. If circumsision confers a proven health benifit this will change the arguement.

Thing is, I’m actually quite against male circumcision, inasmuch as it’s unnecessary surgery performed without the consent of the individual, which strikes me as wrong. It’s just when its critics start declaring it equivalent to clitoridectomy or infibulation that they lose me. Really, they can find an argument against it without trivialising a procedure that maims women.

Also, TLC Tugger, I think you’ll find that the glans of the penis is equivalent to the clitoris.

Mr. Tugger is just trying to sell a junk penis product - nothing more.

I’m glad I’m cut. I figure all the guys that support the bill not to cut weren’t cut themselves, and they are jealous. So, they want all the future boy babies to be like they are, lol!

Just me, I hear ya. I’m proud to be circumcised. I’m not jewish either. Here’s a fact. The majority of women would much rather perform fellatio on a circumcised man rather than an uncircumcised one. Many women flat out will not do this to an uncircumcised man. Many think an uncircumcised penis is unclean, or unattractive.

lone wolf - er, we do? We won’t? News to me.

It’s all cultural, innit? United States - circumcision the norm. Other places, including Britain - not so much. But it’s got to be possible to have a debate about this without declaring male circumcision either OMG SO AWFUL IT’S JUST LIKE CLITORIDECTOMY or OMG SO WONDERFUL NO-ONE WILL SHAG YOU IF YOU DON’T HAVE IT DONE. Neither is accurate.

If circumcision confers a proven health benefit (against HIV) this will change the argument. <<

If surgery could fight AIDS, how does that square with the fact that 80% of the dead male victims of AIDS in the US were circumcised?

I think you’ll find that the glans of the penis is equivalent to the clitoris. <<

The level of concentrated sensation in the frenulum (removed during circ) is the only thing one could possibly compare to the clitors.

-Ron

Isn’t anykind of mutilation of kids genitals wrong? I oppose MGM.

“Many women flat out will not do this to an uncircumcised man. Many think an uncircumcised penis is unclean, or unattractive.”

Ahh , so how does it make such women any different from those African men who consider uncircumcised women unhygienic ?

If anything , the large moist genital area of women’s genitals makes a much larger breeding ground for bacteria and viruses ; so there is some sense in the unhygienic aspect .

Besides , if women expect men should be circumcised because it supposedly lowers STD’s in women , why don’t these women circumcise themselves , that would make them much less prone to AIDS .

Those who refuse to seriously consider that the tradition they know of as “circumcision” may in fact be mutilation are equally as guilty as the individuals in African countries who perpetuate FGM by citing religious and traditional reasons.

News flash: no medical organization in the world condones routine infant circumcision, including the American Academy of Pediatrics. Doctors are never going to stop it, and stop producing pseudo-evidence to support the practice, until it is outlawed. Why? Because it’s a major source of income for doctors and hospitals in the United States.

Anyone with a shred of moral responsibility would think for a few seconds before accepting what those who stand to make a profit say at face value.

I encourage anyone who considers theirself superior to those who perpetuate FGM out of sheer ignorance to do some research about whether circumcision is, in fact, justified as being called MGM. The facts absolutely speak for theirselves.

If there is one single topic that makes my blood boil is MGM and those who propound it and all their arguments. Genital mutilation is just that: MUTILATION!!! When did the child/baby DECIDE that they had the CHOICE to have their genitals mutilated for no medical reason? Who has the right to decide to modify a male’s future sexual behavior and sexual response by mutilating them? If an adult wants to make the choice to remove their foreskin - fine - GO FOR IT!!! But to make choices that will affect a male child’s life for the rest of their life is immoral, irresponsible and a disgusting betrayal of parental responsibilities and the child’s very love itself. How can anyone consider this to be a good thing to do? The argument that MGM is NOT equivalent to FGM also shows that many do not actually know the details of all the forms of FGM. The simplest form of FGM is the removal of the clitoral hood NOT of the clitoris and this is STILL considered an abuse of a child’s rights and is illegal – why don’t we confer the same rights on boys? Yes, I am well aware that is no parallel between extreme FGM and MGM, but it’s not about WHAT is done and how bad it is in comparison to each other. It is about the rights of a baby/child to grow up and have their own choices and not have their future sexual life determined by someone else’s cultural, religious or sexual preconceptions.

Wow! There are so many guys out there that are cut, but if they actuly saw a circ being down I’m pretty sure they’d not want that done. Plus if they knew what they were missing out on they be all in.

Oh and the tugger is not a junk penis toy. I really works. I read all the time about men that restore their foreskin and have increase sisations in the head. Because cuting the foreskin off makes the head of the penis dry and discolored, also circ removes the most sensitive part of the penis called the frenulum. The foreskin protects the head of the penis from the elements. Thats why cut men have dry penises, gross.

Oh and circ doesn’t lower your risk of geting STDs, and HIV/AIDs. They try to say it does, but thoes studies are a bunck of bull.

Oh and only guys that knew nothing about the foreskin say their glad to be cut. And when uncut guys get cut most regret it, but a restored penis is never as good a natural one but it can increase please by a mile.

Good luck.

Anyone who thinks that any genital mutilation regardless of gender is silly is in some deep denial. The trauma created from cutting off any part of the genitals is real. That’s why helpless infants cry during the procedure. It hurts! I got scars on my cock because my parents wanted me to follow lock step the same way they were taught. Circumcision is a hold over from religious & even older pagan rituals & should be banned as barbaric. It’s akin to the practice of animal & human sacrifice & cannibalism! It was begun in the west in the late 1800’s as a masturbation prevention. Sadly the most erogenous tissues are removed. No wonder why men are so f-ing angry & why war is so prevalent as a solution to conflict.

i was circumsiced when I was 25 my wife said that it was the best that i could have done as i look somuch tidier now

ok, this is a reply to “too shy to post even a fake name” first of all i totally agree that male genital mutilation is wrong especially on minors who don’t have a choice, but you out of your damn mind if you think that its the same as female genital mutilation cause its not. it isnt nearly as bad as fmg not even close. why don’t you try having someone completely violate your womanhood and then get back to me, oh my bad you’re probably a man huh, well just know that males have plenty of rights and in most countries treat women like shit when we should be worshipped so don’t come with your ” boys should have the same rights as girls” because they just flat out shouldn’t

Whoever wrote this article is an absolute moron. Female circumcision is the removal of FEMALE FORESKIN (which is illegal). Female foreskin is laibea major and minor/clitoral hood. Cutting off a clitoris is like cutting off a penis, which is already illegal. The FGM bill eliminated ANY FORCED Alteration of female anatomy. Men simply want the same. These morons are everywhere.

it does not matter if its anything like female genital mutilation or not, the fact is that its mutilation and its not right for anyone to make that choice other than the person who will have to live with it, and its only right that he gets that chance because this is america and why the heck cant have controll over our own pecker.

PS: though its not the same as FM Genital mutilation, its damn close to it, and it certainly isnt a wonder why almsot every country in the world is not at all big on it like the U.S. is.

I am a non mutilated 54 year old male, who is thankful any choice was left up to myself, mutilation of another is only the owner’s choice not a third party/ this moronic view that felattio equals justification for cutting a brand new body (male or female ) is criminal, no less, the locker room acceptence is a very shallow view on how to get by in life, and will stay with little men for ever.