Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
reb said:so, he told the mother he did it, and now he's telling the courts he did?
people... this is america. please leave your barbaric ancient third-world customs at the door.
Last I heard it happens to THOUSANDS of baby boys every year right here in the USA. Where is your outrage about that?reb said:so, he told the mother he did it, and now he's telling the courts he did?
people... this is america. please leave your barbaric ancient third-world customs at the door.
It is worse than male circumcision. The girls are mutuliated and then SEWN shut! They can't even pee without difficulty. I read a story back a while ago. I'll see if I can find the story link. It was the story of a model now in the states, and as I remember, she stated it sometimes took her 30 minutes to urinate. It was done to her when she was seven years old.reb said:who said i wasn't outraged about that? however it could be argued, that female circumcision is worse. for men there might be some loss of feeling... but for women it's more debilitating, from what i understand. but the bottom line is they are both painful to babies and people let their kids decide for themselves, when they are adults, if they want to mutilate themselves.
Great point! Neither of my sons is circumsized, though many many young boys are - especially in America. It's not nearly as prevelant in Europe and my husband is European. Who knows what decision I would have made otherwise.Linda7NJ said:Last I heard it happens to THOUSANDS of baby boys every year right here in the USA. Where is your outrage about that?
If parents can legally mutilate their sons, why can't they touch their daughters? Equal rights and all that jazz................
I could be wrong here, but I think most women would say that the clitoris is pretty darned essential in the sexual pleasure arena.scandi said:What a stupid tradition these people have, and I feel sorry for any little girl who has it done to her. Thank goodness they still have their G-spots, and they won't know what they missed so will still feel pleasure. I think that is it's only function, right?
Scandi
Research has supported that uncut males are more sensitive than cut ones.scandi said:I thought male circumcision was done for reasons of cleanliness, and I never thought it made one less sensitive.
Um, probably b/c it is done with anestesia(sp) and sterile tools and not kitchen sissors b/c of some old barbaric ritual.Linda7NJ said:Last I heard it happens to THOUSANDS of baby boys every year right here in the USA. Where is your outrage about that?
If parents can legally mutilate their sons, why can't they touch their daughters? Equal rights and all that jazz................
Religious reasons that stated cleanliness as its source or reason.scandi said:I think this gal did a good job writing about the clitoris:
http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/sexuality/a/clitoraltruthin_3.htm
I was so mad when my first son was born. I had no idea they were going to do this and it was a close job! So when I had my second son, I requested for him a partial circumcision, which worked out well, clipping it only half way up.
Thanks Southcitymom, as I had no idea clipping dulled the mans senses. So they have been circumsizing men for centuries. If not for cleanliness, and it lessens sexual pleasure, was it done for religious reasons?
[cvolor=cyan]Scandi[/color]
Jews circumcise boys at 8 days old as a sign of the covenant between G-d and Israel. Based on what G-d told Abraham in Gen 17:12. It is also a sign of entry into Judasim. It is also the day he gets his Hebrew name. Nothing to do with cleanliness. Topical anaesthetic cream can be used.scandi said:was it done for religious reasons?