Circumcision
- Thread starter Billy Box
- Start date
Ok, in all seriousness, I voted for the first option (circumcised and happy about it). I don't really know if I'm happy about it or not as it's all I have ever known.
I'm not against circumcision. I just believe that the person being circumcised should get to make the decision.
As a woman, it makes no difference to me. I believe that a little extra care is needed in cleaning, if you aren't cut.
If I had a male child, I would not cut him.
If I had a male child, I would not cut him.
You NEVER hear a woman say that she prefers UNCUT, only that she has either no preference or that she prefers it CUT.
Last edited:
E-Mail News Alerts
Get breaking news and daily headlines.
Browse all e-mail newsletters
Related To Story
Video: Man Sues Doctors After Penis Amputated
Man Sues Doctors After Penis Amputated
By Kate Cornell/WLKY
POSTED: 5:32 pm EDT September 24, 2008
UPDATED: 2:59 pm EDT September 25, 2008
LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A Shelby County man and his wife said two doctors amputated the man's penis without his consent, and have filed a lawsuit.
Watch The Story
According to the lawsuit, Philip Seaton, 61, went to have a circumcision last Octoberas part of treatment for a medical condition. Seaton said when he woke up from the procedure, he realized his penis had been amputated.
Seaton has suffered mental anguish, pain, and has lost the enjoyment of life, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit was filed in Shelby County court last week against Dr. John Patterson, who performed the procedure, Dr. Oliver James, who administered anesthesia, and Commonwealth Urology, PSC.
The lawsuit states that Patterson received consent to perform a circumcision and only a circumcision, and that Seaton did not consent to his penis being removed.
Kevin George, the plaintiff's attorney, said Patterson amputated the organ after finding cancer, but he only had consent to remove the foreskin.
"Sometimes you have an emergency and you have to do this, but he could very easily closed him up and said, 'Here are your options. You have cancer,' and the family would have said, 'We want a second opinion. This is a big deal,'" George said.
The lawsuit also claims the plaintiff did not consent to general anesthesia.
WLKY attempted to contact the doctors, but have not been able to reach them.
The Seatons are seeking punitive damages against both doctors and the medical practice. Attorneys for the defendants will now have a chance to respond to the suit.
Get breaking news and daily headlines.
Browse all e-mail newsletters
Related To Story
Video: Man Sues Doctors After Penis Amputated
Man Sues Doctors After Penis Amputated
By Kate Cornell/WLKY
POSTED: 5:32 pm EDT September 24, 2008
UPDATED: 2:59 pm EDT September 25, 2008
LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A Shelby County man and his wife said two doctors amputated the man's penis without his consent, and have filed a lawsuit.
Watch The Story
According to the lawsuit, Philip Seaton, 61, went to have a circumcision last Octoberas part of treatment for a medical condition. Seaton said when he woke up from the procedure, he realized his penis had been amputated.
Seaton has suffered mental anguish, pain, and has lost the enjoyment of life, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit was filed in Shelby County court last week against Dr. John Patterson, who performed the procedure, Dr. Oliver James, who administered anesthesia, and Commonwealth Urology, PSC.
The lawsuit states that Patterson received consent to perform a circumcision and only a circumcision, and that Seaton did not consent to his penis being removed.
Kevin George, the plaintiff's attorney, said Patterson amputated the organ after finding cancer, but he only had consent to remove the foreskin.
"Sometimes you have an emergency and you have to do this, but he could very easily closed him up and said, 'Here are your options. You have cancer,' and the family would have said, 'We want a second opinion. This is a big deal,'" George said.
The lawsuit also claims the plaintiff did not consent to general anesthesia.
WLKY attempted to contact the doctors, but have not been able to reach them.
The Seatons are seeking punitive damages against both doctors and the medical practice. Attorneys for the defendants will now have a chance to respond to the suit.
You are right about the extra cleaning part . Its important to always roll the turtleneck back when cleaning . I've found a few woman reluctant to perform bareback when they see I'm uncut so if I sense there may be an issue I'll subtly let them know I like to scrub the general squeaky clean. I would say there is a definite advantage in being cut but I'm not about to get trimmed now.Petite Filet said:
Cut here. Had our kids cut 27 yrs ago. Would have any new kid cut today. The last thing that a 15 year old boy wants to hear is a lecture about cleanliness and the pitfalls of smegma buildup. None of the hippy dippy Dr's in the OB/GYN floor are going to be around when the lad is a teen so it is none of their business. Difference today vs when we had our kids is that I think it is no longer covered by OHIP.
My s/o will not go down on uncut.
My s/o will not go down on uncut.
As a matter of interest, I`d like to know who is cut and who is not, here.
I believe there is a connection between circumcision and sexual proclivity... it would be interesting to know if "statistics" here confirm it.
I know only one man who was circumcised later in life and had experiences both ways. According to him, he is much hornier since he was cut and finds sex much more intense now.
There are, unfortunately, no comparables the other way round!
p.s. I have posted a Poll: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=207460
Perry
I believe there is a connection between circumcision and sexual proclivity... it would be interesting to know if "statistics" here confirm it.
I know only one man who was circumcised later in life and had experiences both ways. According to him, he is much hornier since he was cut and finds sex much more intense now.
There are, unfortunately, no comparables the other way round!
p.s. I have posted a Poll: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=207460
Perry
getting a circumcision is now considered cosmetic surgery from what i heard from my brother who just had a baby boy. You have to pay extra for it. When he asked my mom why she had me and him cut when we were born she could only say that she said a cut dick looks better. i hate my mom....Charlie Harper is my hero
Caveat lector:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision#Prevalence_of_circumcision
"prevalence in which the level is generally low (< 20%) across Europe"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision#Prevalence_of_circumcision
"prevalence in which the level is generally low (< 20%) across Europe"
Portia Love said:
if being cut reduces the chance of gettng HIV explain why the U.S has the highest HIV rate in the developed world and 4 times higher than europe where men are uncut?
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/HIVStatement.html
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/
A current argument for circumcision is that it prevents sexually transmitted diseases. The U.S. has the highest population of circumcised males in the industrialized world. The U.S. also has one of the highest rates of STDs. A new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that “circumcision does not lead to lower rates of sexually transmitted diseases." In fact: “Circumcised men appeared ‘slightly more likely’ to contract a sexually transmitted disease during their lifetime.” [Perlman] In the survey of 1400 men, “circumcised men reported several cases of the bacterial infection called chlamydia, while the disease did not occur at all among the uncircumcised men. Circumcised men “who had 20 or more sex partners had more than twice the risk of bacterial or viral infections -- most often gonorrhea -- compared to uncircumcised men.”
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/stds.htm
