Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by GoodSarmatian, Jun 28, 2012.
like governments buying tamiflu in ridiculous amounts because BIRD FLU?
That is clearly cultural. In Sweden uncircumcised is the fashion and is widely preferred by Swedish women. Circumcised would just be considered weird.
Also wouldn't it hurt like hell to have direct contact mouth to head of penis? The foreskin protects.
It would clearly be quite weird if you had a circumcised penis when nobody else did. And in the US a few decades ago the exact opposite was true.
And no, most American women know to open their mouths. And the foreskin retracts when the penis is erect so there is no real difference except for the degree of cleanliness.
Does everybody realise that "Anglo-saxon" (meaning a few german tribes) also refers to Britain, Canada, Australia and NZ - these countries do not have an insane "lop off your cock" at birth culture ;p
Well, the head of penis get desensualised due to constant exposition to underwear. Circumcised males should take longer to ejaculate, but I will prefer my fully sensualised sex, as Evolution intended, thank you very much.
Britain had until it was made uncovered by medical insurance and parents didn't want to pay for it. But rest of Anglosphere have AFAIK higher prevalence of Circumcision than rest of the nonmuslim, nonisrael world. Apart from South Korea that adopted this practice from USA after Korean world.
Actually, in Canada and Australia nearly everybody was circumcised until fairly recently. And as Algeroth just pointed out, GB quit doing so for economic reasons despite it being ridiculously cheap when they decided to do so.
I am clearly outnumbered here. The foreskins have won, as they recently did in Germany. It is sad when hyperbole and fearmongering win out over rational thought that results in a judge making such a horrible decision over a simple matter of malpractice.
The EU clearly needs a First Amendment that actually protects the religious rights of its citizens.
I have suspected this. I have tried several times to see what it is like to be circumcised and I walked around with my foreskin pulled back. It was really painful and uncomfortable.
But UK is still the source of many amusing inventions in the sexual field: fervent fight against masturbation (including chastity devices), using lobotomy for curing homosexuality, extending of the meaning of the term "pedophilia", and blowing every sexual issue from masturbation to homosexuality and paedophilia out of proportion rivaling Spanish inquisitors in the insanity.
I don't think I'd ever forgive my parents of they had me circumcised.
You did a sig there
edit: I concur
Right, well all of that has pretty much passed me by and probably my parents too
We had a cultural and sexual revolution in the 1960s which has completely changed attitudes to all of those things you mentioned; unless your suggesting there is something genetic in anglo-saxon countries that makes them pre-disposed to be obsessed with sex? Or a deep-lying cultural reason?
You say this after I even tend to agree with your opposition to the ruling?
Did you even care to think about what really this sweet irony is supposed to be here? Or is it more like a standard maneuverer of sorts?
Well, pedohysteria is pretty new thing. After homosexuals went out of fashion it seems UK and USA were in the dire need of some new sexual enemy to whom paedophiles were appointed. But as there are very little actual paedophiles the ingenious Anglo-Saxon thinkers decided to enrich this word with a new meanings so it would more paedophiles to hunt for. Great!
It is an interesting question. In any case it seems that Anglo-Saxon countries have not yet finished with this issue and still need some sexual "anti-fetish" to be obsessed with .
I think it's just bad influence from their American cousins.
I'm curious now. What legislation or change in social mores extended our definition of paedophilia? So we could satisfy our puritanical urges?
So no real difference if you WASH YOUR DICK.
Hahahahaha, oh god. If I could, I would sig that.
But yeah, wash your weiner and the hygiene problem goes away.
Shouldn't this just be left to the general consensus as the more who don't do it should not worry about those who do? The world knows that Jews and Muslims practice it, so restricting it does only affect them. There are doctors in the US who do not encourage it nor do it. Were is the need to make it a law?
The only ones who are complaining are those who had it done incorrectly. And even those who have not had it done will never know what a toddler experiences. That is called projecting an act as wrong without any proof.
It is not the practice itself that is wrong, if anything it is the inability of doctors to do it right.
but yaou have to touch it to do that. eww.
Separate names with a comma.