that those performing these circumcisions may be paid minimum wage
and.........(wait for it).............
TIPS ?????
Thanks, Ladies and Germs! You are all beautiful people
Anyone here tonight form New Jersey?
You don't havta go home, but you can't stay here.... etc.
(Ffff dum DUM!)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Once again, the solution to parts of the body that get dirty, and they all do, is hygiene, not amputation. Why not teach hygiene and condom use? Reducing the number of partners and selecting partners more cautiously would also help.

To completely eliminate the incidence of aids, though, why not perform clitorectomies and complete castrations, thereby eliminating all sexual contact and transmission of std's? If amputation is the route you choose, why not go all out and simply remove the offfending sexual organs? Don't be so timid about it!

I, for one, however, will keep all my body parts and keep them clean.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Great.... more propaganda for male genital mutilation.

If this guy wants to have it done to himself, fine.. his choice. But doing this to infants is barbaric and disgusting mutilation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An actual and symbolic Gesture, all circum-scribed by circum-scision as an aid to fighting AIDS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I can easily see why circumcision reduces the chances of getting AIDS - get rid of mucus membranes, and you're left with the tougher, dead skin that covers the rest of your bodies. But encouraging circumcision is kind of like encouraging random amputation to avoid cancer in the severed parts. While most of us didn't choose to be circumcised, were snipped as babies, and don't have a way to directly compare sexual experiences, the fact is that lots of guys who got snipped as adults say they lost sensitivity. I have no reason to doubt their testimony, and it's easy to imagine why cutting sensitive skin off one's penis would result in a diminished sexual experience.

Use condoms, don't have casual sex or f*ck buddies, be true to your spouse. I'd recommend any or all of the above before I recommend slicing up your family jewels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are convincing arguments for circumcision: ease of good hygiene, reduced disease susceptibility. There are arguments that do not convince me but convince others: tradition and religion.

There are convincing arguments against circumcision: permission cannot be granted by an infant. Possible links to mid-life impotence (untested theory, based on slightly higher incidence rate.)

But on the face of it, there is no compelling reason to differentiate it from getting your kid vaccinated against their will, or letting your kid get chickenpox while young (because, apparently, it's worse when you're older and more likely to lead to shingles).

There is absolutely no parallel between circumcision and the practice called "female circumcision". The analog would be to remove the glans from the penis, not a fold of skin.

One hygiene-related issue in which circumcision is particularly useful is that, during puberty (and the time in which most men in AIDS-stricken countries become sexually active) it isn't uncommon for the foreskin to grow slightly slower than the penis, which can for a period of time make it quite difficult to retract and practice proper hygiene. My own growth spurt happened quickly, and I can personally attest to the difficulty.

Also, you say they should practice abstinence and use condoms instead of condoning circumcision. Have you ever had sex without using a condom? You realize, right, that it feels really good. If it were between circumcision and abstinence, i would choose the circumcision. If it were between circumcision and using a condom for the rest of my life, or even the next few years, I would choose circumcision. Apparently it's painless, with no clear evidence of side effects. Hell I went through worse (acutane) to clear up my complexion.

*POINT*
I've been a while getting to the point, for which I apologize.

There is one and only one reason for the kind of visceral reaction to circumcision that we see even here, in this forum. Blunt, naked, tribalist "normal". People are bigoted. They want their kids to be "normal," they want to be "normal," and the fact that there is disagreement over this procedure is a call to an arbitrary, stupid battle over who fits into the pack better. There is a real debate between serious, intelligent, open-minded people over the right and wrong of circumcision, but the STRONG PROPONENTS one way or the other are almost invariably the same as the schoolyard tuff-guys, enforcing rules against faggotry, academic stand-outs, being different, regardless how limited the territory of their status-quo.

For instance, I am loathe to pay any attention to the calls for "condemn male genital mutilation! zomg!"

And I am equally loathe to pay mind to "GOD says you a filthy infidel. Repent and cut off your foreskin." or "you're uncut! you want to worsen the epidemic!"

In fact, I would avoid anyone pushing buzzwords, divisive language, or promoting open confrontation. Science isn't a democracy - we need cooperation to develop meaningful tests of veracity, in order to come to correct consensus.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

that this guy doesn't become a food critic!

plur

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]