multiple stories of adult men circumcised and happy?

[intactosaurus]

http://www.circ info.net/men_circumcised_as_adults_tell_it_as_it_is.html


Are these stories legit?
I'm just wondering why these guys would have such positive stories when there are so many that aren't. :confused:

[asdfjklmeh1]

http://www.circ info.net/men_circumcised_as_adults_tell_it_as_it_is.html


Are these stories legit?
I'm just wondering why these guys would have such positive stories when there are so many that aren't. :confused:

This website is owned and run by a known circumfetishist known as Dr. Br ain Mo ris (name broken to avoid raising search engine awareness).

I would generally avoid taking anything stated on this website with credibility.

That being said, perhaps there are that many men who feel strongly about circumcision as an adult, either for their own personal reasons (religion, body dysmorphia, a fetish, etc.). They are adults who can make their own decisions.

The problem is their decision being applied to infants through proxy via "parental consent."

There are stories on the other side of the fence, showing that this was the opposite of an improvement. They just so happened to ignore them (Huh, imagine that!).

[intactosaurus]

Ugh I think I'm going to be sick...

That's terrible. :(


Too much misinformation out there...

[photenman]

There is no question that there is misinformation out there by physicians. E.g., there is a physician who is on the American Academy of Pediatrics circumcision policy board who wants to circumcise every African. He was interviewed on NPR, and the interviewer thought circumcision was necessary. (That's ridiculous - most of the men who have ever lived and most men living now are intact.) He failed to correct her, and NPR never retracted the comment. Now if you were an ethicist, which he claims to be, you would correct that grossly untrue statement.

Physicians who circumcise claimed for years that children feel no pain (anyone can see that circumcision is extremely painful to them). The AAP circumcision policy calls the foreskin a "fold of skin" when it is a mucosal membrane, full of nerves, blood vessels, and has different, sensitive parts that function together. The AAP report calls C a "procedure", but in medical books they call it the surgical amputation. It's harder to sell a surgical amputation to a parent than a procedure.

The AAP has never acknowledged that circumcision is harmful when it harms all men (all surgery is harmful, it leaves a scar, does not leave enough covering for a comfortable erection, etc.). So a pinprick harms all girls, but invasive surgery does not harm any boy??

They have never acknowledged that it causes sexual dysfunction, when the surgery amputates the most sensitive part of the penis and changes how it functions, as anyone with an Internet connection can now see, and young people are now seeing. The AAP policy forgets to state that it can kill newborns, as a child just died in New York from herpes related to a religious ritual (oral suction method). So they don't fully inform parents of the risks as the law requires. They also tell legislators that C has a wide array of benefits (the wording in the CA statute) when it does not benefit most men at all, and the benefits (if any) can easily be achieved without losing a body part (e.g., by washing and practicing safe sex).

Look, it's a vertically integrated industry. Physicians and hospitals do not disclose that it's a highly profitable business - all extra money, they never run out of healthy boys to operate on. Then they sell the foreskins to pharmaceutical companies and cosmetics companies to make skin cream. It's monstrous.

Doctors also seem to team up with religious groups who believe C is commanded by god.

It's a huge cover-up. It's just a fraud. A doctor wrote an article saying that it was a fraud maybe 75 years ago. In 1945 a British physician wrote that it killed people and did no more good than washing, and Britain stopped paying for it. Not in the U.S. Here it's all about the money.

[Jeremiah]

Men who say they are happy with their adult circumcisions are either in denial about what they just did to themselves, have yet to have their glans be keratinized, or are mentally unsound.

[admin]

Men who say they are happy with their adult circumcisions are either in denial about what they just did to themselves, have yet to have their glans be keratinized, or are mentally unsound.

I think other cases exist. For example somone who has been mocked his whole life for his anteater, someone who was shamed into never touching himself so he grew up with a tight unretractable foreskin, someone whose foreskin was forcibly retracted as a toddler so he developed scarring or adhesions that led to unretractability, someone who has repeated fenulum tearing that puts him out of sexual action for months at time.

Take one of these cases and deprive him of positive guidance and info about the non-amputative options and he *might* be overjoyed and legitimately happier forever once he's rid of his foreskin.

Not bloody likely, though. I hear from a few cut-as-adult guys every week about taking up restoration.

-Ron Low

[Tug N' Wear]

Let's also bear in mind there is a market for the harvested skin. It is a multi-million dollar industry and they will protect their industry with as many players as they can. Mis-information is one of the primary tools to ensure hospitals meet their harvesting quotas. (mark-ism) The attack on the foreskin will only get more nasty as they see their market share dwindling as more and more parents wake up and see the light. America continues it's slow decline in circ rates. Woot!