Become an expert in
pussy licking!
She'll Beg You For More!

Find local men
to exchange blowjobs

Male Multiple Orgasm
Discover your full Abilities!

Stay Hard as Steel!!!

FEMALE CIRCUMCISION

This is an Adult Discussion Forum of Show It Off Site
If you wish to participate you should register on that site and write there

Started by #57759 at 30,Jul,10 22:24
WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS AND ANY PICS AVAILABLE



Similar topics: 1.circumcision?   2.So why is it that straight guys...   3.circumcision   4.Considering Circumcision   5.Circumcision in the UK press  

New Comment

Comments:
By #22155 at 01,Aug,10 01:31
So, here are my final thoughts (for real) on this one (after taking some time to calm down and gather my thoughts):

Those that are advocating for male circumcision but against female circumcision are belying a serious case of ethnocentrism. If this were an apples-to-apples comparison-- that is, if both procedures were done in sterile conditions and if neither operation were ever botched-- there can be little doubt that male circumcision, which removes the entire foreskin, decreases sensitivity much more than female circumcision, which is intended to only remove the clitoral hood. Similarly, in developing countries where both sexes are routinely circumcised-- and not in sterile conditions-- male circumcisions are as likely to be botched as female circumcisions and boys have died (routinely) because of this.

You can not have your cake and eat it too on this issue, in my opinion. Yes, female circumcision is abhorrent. Would we support it if it were carried out in the US under similar conditions to male circumcision? Were any of you on this thread that are talking about how much more damaging female circumcision is than male circumcision giddy with support for the APA when they recommended a genital "nick" for newborn girls a few months ago?

My guess is no, even though that genital nick certainly constitutes less damage than the routine male circumcision procedure in this country. So why the double-standard? Why isn't there room to hate both procedures?

My guess is cultural attitudes, and that is very sad. People have defended male circumcision in this country for years, sometimes for reasons as simple as "because the bible tells us so." But usually because "it's more hygenic", or (originally) because it was supposed to prevent masturbation, suppress sexual urges in boys, and keep them "pure." But when another society does it to girls for expressly the same purposes, all of the sudden we all think that it's barbaric?

Come on, guys-- wise up. There is a wealth of anthropological evidence out there indicating that these procedures--for both sexes-- go back to the beginnings of human history, and have played integral roles in the development of societies across the globe. I believe that we've outgrown the (perceived) need to practice either male or female circumcision. Maybe that's why I'm so dumbfounded by people that have not.

But at the end of the day, it really is ethnocentric, isn't it? We're appalled by something because it isn't something that we would ever contemplate doing, but then when the tables are turned around, and somebody points out that we *do* do it, and all of the sudden there's some profound, fundamental difference between the two? No, we continue to support male circumcision because we've done it for generations, and it has historical and religious roots that we're familiar with. If we had been doing the same thing to females for centuries, none of you on here would be complaining!

So that's food for thought. I'm dumbfounded. Truly dumbfounded that in the 21st century, people will hold onto stupid practices like these that have clearly outlived their purposes, and refuse to read the writing on the wall: that they are-- indeed-- outdated, and in fact quite damaging. It's hypocritical, and-- again-- jackassery in the first degree.

That's it. I'm not going to entertain this discussion any further (unless luvmyclit wants to accept my challenge to produce her (non-existent) credentials...)
By #5532 at 01,Aug,10 13:49
I do not owe you, nor anyone else "proof" of what I have worked hard for in my life. Your diatribe, while sounding most interesting is a bit of a stretch. You seem to like the term "ethnocentric" and use it freely, regardless that it does not apply to this discussion. Ethnocentric has more to do with cultural issues. This particular topic is not constrained by cultural / social parameters.

I disagree that it is hypocritical to support one and not the other. Female circumcision is generally done at the behest of males looking for some sort of inner-pleasure. Male circumcision (with the exception of Jewish law) is typically done for medical reasons. Therein one may find the differentiation of the two procedures.

IU - Bloomington undergrad, IU - Bloomington MA, Northwestern MA, Internship @ Pitt, Internship @ Vanderbilt.
That is all you get, as one of the key elements of this site (for me) is to remain anonymous).
Thank you
By #22155 at 03,Aug,10 04:28


I suggest you go look the term up.


No, male circumcision is typically done ritualistically in Jewish society, *and* in numerous Muslim and Christian societies which Jewish Law has informed. It is done routinely in the United States to infant males before a medical condition ever exists. It is done for ritualistic reasons-- just like female circumcision-- under the guise of medical pretenses-- again, just like female circumcision. Again, get your facts straight. And I suggest you go out and research the wealth of anthropological studies on this.


Well, that's nice, but anybody can claim to have fictitious certifications on an internet forum.




By #5532 at 31,Jul,10 04:54
Can you say mutilation? It is nothing like male circumcision, it destroys the nerve endings and removes all sensation.
By #22155 at 31,Jul,10 06:24
actually, male circumcision removes more nerve endings than female circumcision. Not saying that I'm for female circumcision, but c'mon....let's be fair, and get our facts straight here. I *believe* that there are more nerve endings in the male foreskin (20,000), than in the entire vagina (8,000). So, yes: it is nothing like male circumcision. By your own standards, it is much less damaging...
By #6568 at 31,Jul,10 14:26
This may be true but unfortunately, You also need to get your "facts straight". Female circ. also usually involves the cutting away of the clitoris with express purpose of removing the girl/womans ability to obtain orgasm!!! Leaving 'nerve endings' aside this is synonymous with someone having cut the head of your penis off!!


I absolutely HATE the idea of anyone being able, or having the desire, to sexually mutilate a young child for absolutely NO good reason.


Female circ. is prevalent throughout the African continent. It varies from place/tribe to place/tribe in its exact form and methods but the usual practice is for the childs labia and clitoris to be cut away using a piece of sharp glass. In some tribes only the labia are removed, in others the process is so extreme, inhuman and horrible that I am not going to give it!


I think all forms of circ. without a direct medical need are an attack on the personality of a child, and also the adult that she/he will become and it seems to be carried out as a symbol of control and authority in the societies that practice it.


Here in the UK there is a growing menace of young girls from African decent being taken back to Africa for 'holiday' and then them being subjected to the horror of being mutilated against their desire. Therre are even those who think they should be allowed to do it here!!.....


........I hope that the new gov. will tighten the law still further and come down heavily on families who 'allow' this to happen the young girls taken on 'holiday'.....
By #22155 at 31,Jul,10 16:22
Listen, I am by no means in favor of female circumcision. My only point is that you have to be equal opportunity about this: if you hate genital mutilation on girls, you hate to hate it on boys, too. I feel that you do, so my beef is not with you.


The fact that luvmyclit clearly thinks that it is abhorrent to mutilate girls, but totally ok to do it to boys, makes her a hypocrite and a jackass.


By #5532 at 31,Jul,10 15:03
You better go back and retake your physiology and anatomy classes. In most female circumcision they remove part of the clit, that would be like slicing off a part of the head of the penis. You do realize that the nerve bundles and endings in the clit and the penis are identical. In the womb we were all females, some get a change in chromosomes and the clit grows into a penis. The nervous system is already there in the clit and does not change as it morphs into a penis. The male foreskin has very little to do, if at all, with the nervous system of the sexual organ. That is mostly old wives tales and uneducated drivel.
By #22155 at 31,Jul,10 16:11
Alright, I was slightly inebriated when I wrote that last night, *however*.....no, the male foreskin *does* contain 20,000 nerve endings-- that is a fact. It is intricately linked to the overall nervous system of the entire penis. It heightens sensitivity immensely-- any expert will admit to that.

For you to preface your statement by saying that "female circumcision is nothing like male circumcision"-- insinuating that it is a LOT worse-- is pure jackassery on your part.

That's all I'm going to say on the subject.
By #22155 at 31,Jul,10 16:18
Oh, and I still don't understand your point (?). Mostly because it is not factual:

There is a wiki answer on this very subject ("what has most never endings penis or vagina?"), but I can not link to it in this forum, because that's against the rules, I guess....anyway, the answer states that there are 20,000 nerve endings in the male foreskin, 8,000 in the clit. Just like I said.

Yeah, having part of the head of my penis cut off would not be pleasant, but there aren't nearly as many nerve endings there as in my foreskin. So, from a sensitivity standpoint, which is what this conversation was all about, male circumcision appears to remove more.
By #5532 at 31,Jul,10 19:05
That is nice that wiki is your source. At the University level classes (Master and above), we do not allow this as a source because it is not reliable. I think I have spent enough time in the classroom (on both sides of the lectern) to have a pretty good idea as to what we are discussing. Further, I certainly do not appreciate you turning this into a name calling / personal assault against me. The entire idea of this forum is to share information, and to debate. Name calling is not debating. I would be more than happy to cite dozens of text books, studies, findings, etc from many sources, that is providing that you are looking for the end result of a debate. That being proof through logic and fact, not shouting someone down with verbal attacks and name calling.
By #22155 at 01,Aug,10 00:31
Well aren't you high and mighty!

As far as my source goes, it is verified in dozens of studies; wiki answers tends to link to those types of things, if you care to check it out.

As for your sources, please do list them. I would be fascinated to know about the definitive sources that managed to fly under the radar of a peripherary google search. I am *sure* that they are so totally reliable that they don't even NEED to be high-profile!

As for the name-calling, I call them as I see them. And as I see it, somebody that defends male circumcision and rails against female circumcision is a hypocrite and a jackass. Tell me where I'm wrong?
By #22155 at 01,Aug,10 00:33
And yes, I have taken high-school level biology classes and was aware of all of the basic anatomy lessons that you've given me on this thread beforehand. Thanks for the patronizing tone, though.
By #22155 at 01,Aug,10 00:35
And one more thing: am I really to believe that somebody with a significant amount of education actually believes that there are the same amount of never endings in both the male and female anatomy? You're belying your ignorance here.

I don't believe that you have any expertise on this subject. If you want to scan a pdf of a masters or PhD or some other certificate that tells me otherwise, again-- I'd love to see that, since I seriously doubt its existence...













Adult Discussion Forum