And of course, he needed you to divine what he meant. I got it. What part of it was supposed to make me think it was only talking about in infancy or it happening just once? Is that what the presumed standard number of child molestation incidents and the obviously standard age?
For the record, my sister told me that I had started taking physical beatings at 18 months. I can’t remember that at all and it affects me more knowing what happened and why that occurred than I am about why my mother had me circumcised, Is that opinion somehow invalid because my abuse continued past the obvious limits that the poster you speak for originally set?
If it only happened before you can remember, and you had an entire society insisting it was a normal thing that needed to be done to all boys, you’d likely have a different outlook on it (unless you were part of a protesting and unfairly ridiculed minority like Blalron).
If he’s being ridiculed, it’s his own damned fault. (Hint: it’s not because he’s against circumcisioin)
If you read the original thread, it wasn’t hypothetical – Blalron was 100% serious. He said some extremely disturbing things. The guy needs therapy.
And once again, we can’t have a discussion on FGM, because men’s issues are more important. It’s ALWAYS been that way on this message board, it seems. I don’t believe in routine circumcision – unless there’s a medical reason, there’s really no need for it. But I am sick and tired of the misogyny present here, that “nobody cares when it happens to MEN!!!”
And you know what, it WOULD be different. Social context matters. If every five month old boy was fondled by a trained man because the parents and the relatives and the neighbors all thought it would be good for the boy, and it was done for the benefit of the boy, it’s extremely unlikely it would be harmful.
I am (happily) not an expert in child abuse. But I bet that child molestation is harmful in large part because the child is being abused for the physical benefit of some powerful person, and because it’s creepy for an adult to take sexual pleasure from a child. Not because it’s intrinsically harmful for someone to touch a child’s sexual parts.
Ah, I see, if we take your particular hypothetical rather than reality and one that posits two things no one can remember you are quite convinced they’d subconsciously hate your thing worse. Clever as there really isn’t any way to doubt it because the rules say you can’t remember which brings me back to my point.
I don’t think that “molesting or abusing a child commonly happens primarily to infants who can’t remember it” is the common assumption that is made when you think child molestation. I don’t frankly believes it works that way. With circumcision they don’t keep coming back throughout your childhood for a “touch up” clip but if they did I’d be willing to change my mind.
Do you have a cite for this because the argument only considers a relatively rare exact correlation ? If not, you are talking your experience and thoughts vs someone who has had both things happen and your answer that limits it to a specific set of particular facts and then spout it out as obviously and I don’t feel your position is that obvious nor fact based,
Were you in the situation and you’re relating your particular experience like I have been doing in which case your anecdote is just like mine and while your opinion would gain some credibility but then we’d only be talking anecdotally that doesn’t equal data.
Do you have any cites that your opinion should trump the experience of those you’re speaking with? How reckless are you willing to be to tell peole their views are wrong and that circumcision is worse than being abused? I’m not the one who dismissed your opinion by saying you’re obviously wrong. If I am, pony up some proof.
Ah, I see, if we take your particular hypothetical rather than reality and one that posits two things no one can remember you are quite convinced they’d subconsciously hate your thing worse. Clever as there really isn’t any way to doubt it because the rules say you can’t remember which brings me back to my point.
I don’t think that “molesting or abusing a child commonly happens primarily to infants who can’t remember it” is the common assumption that is made when you think child molestation. I don’t frankly believes it works that way. With circumcision they don’t keep coming back throughout your childhood for a “touch up” clip but if they did I’d be willing to change my mind. That would probably be worse.
Do you have a cite for this because the argument only considers a relatively rare exact correlation ? If not, you are talking your experience and thoughts vs someone who has had both things happen and your answer that limits it to a specific set of particular facts and then spout it out as obviously and I don’t feel your position is that obvious nor fact based,
Were you in the situation and you’re relating your particular experience like I have been doing in which case your anecdote is just like mine and while your opinion would gain some credibility we’d only be talking anecdotally that doesn’t equal data.
Do you have any cites that your opinion should trump the experience of those you’re speaking with? How reckless are you willing to be to tell people their views are wrong and that circumcision is worse than being abused? I’m not the one who dismissed your opinion by saying you’re obviously wrong. If I am, pony up some proof.
Ah, I see, if we take your particular hypothetical rather than reality and one that posits two things no one can remember you are quite convinced they’d subconsciously hate your thing worse. Clever as there really isn’t any way to doubt it because the rules say you can’t remember which brings me back to my point.
I don’t think that “molesting or abusing a child commonly happens primarily to infants who can’t remember it” is the common assumption that is made when you think child molestation. I don’t frankly believes it works that way. With circumcision they don’t keep coming back throughout your childhood for a “touch up” clip but if they did I’d be willing to change my mind. That would probably be worse.
Do you have a cite for this because the argument only considers a relatively rare exact correlation ? If not, you are talking your experience and thoughts vs someone who has had both things happen and your answer limits it to a specific set of particular facts and then spout it out as “obviously” and I don’t feel your position is that obvious nor fact based,
Were you in the situation and you’re relating your particular experience like I have been doing in which case your anecdote is just like mine and while your opinion would gain some credibility but we’d only be talking anecdotally and that doesn’t equal data.
Do you have any cites that your opinion should trump the experience of those you’re speaking with? How reckless are you willing to be to tell people their views are wrong and that circumcision is worse than being abused? I’m not the one who dismissed your opinion by saying you’re obviously wrong. If I am, pony up some proof.
Ah, I see, if we take your particular hypothetical rather than reality and one that posits two things no one can remember you are quite convinced they’d subconsciously hate your thing worse. Clever as there really isn’t any way to doubt it because the rules say you can’t remember which brings me back to my point.
I don’t think that “molesting or abusing a child commonly happens primarily to infants who can’t remember it” is the common assumption that is made when you think child molestation. I don’t frankly believes it works that way. With circumcision they don’t keep coming back throughout your childhood for a “touch up” clip but if they did I’d be willing to change my mind. That would probably be worse.
Do you have a cite for this because the argument only considers a relatively rare exact correlation ? If not, you are talking your experience and thoughts vs someone who has had both things happen and your answer limits it to a specific set of particular facts and then spout it out as “obviously” and I don’t feel your position is that obvious nor fact based,
Were you in the situation and you’re relating your particular experience like I have been doing in which case your anecdote is just like mine and while your opinion would gain some credibility but we’d only be talking anecdotally and that doesn’t equal data?
Do you have any cites that your opinion should trump the experience of those you’re speaking with? How reckless are you willing to be to tell people their views are wrong and that circumcision is worse than being abused? I’m not the one who dismissed your opinion by saying you’re obviously wrong. If I am, pony up some proof.
Sorry about the dupes. Blind people shouldn’t post when they first woke up. I thought I was editing but I was obviously not. I should have learned when I accidentally hit submit rather than review post. Sorry again. I’ve overused my quota of pixels on this argument. I’ll let others talk.
Cites? You’re joking…right? If not then, uh…no, no cites on that one, sorry. :dubious:
My father was an anthropologist. I’ve heard of this kind of theory before. But for Blalron’s much less radical statement to incite outrage, and this one (which, to call it controversial and tendentious would be a massive understatement) to just be allowed to pass by unchallenged? That’s an incredible double standard that makes it hard to take the outrage seriously.
Yes, Ramira, that’s right: I did all that research, as reflected in my past posts that I linked, to “make people dance”. :rolleyes: (It bears noting that IME your posts, by contrast, consist of quickly tossed-off quips, no data of any kind that I’ve seen—not to mention a blatant lack of concern for presenting your “ideas” using standard spelling, grammar, and usage.)
The original comparison was clearly hypothetical. Hypothesizing an instance of molestation and being 100% serious about preferring the hypothetical molestation to circumcision are not mutually exclusive.
In the “social context” of the American South in 1850, slavery was perfectly legal and socially sanctioned. In fact, slaveholders made reference to the Bible to defend the institution. The scriptures not only failed to condemn slavery, but they actually appeared to sanction it, and instructed slaves to be obedient to their masters!
In this conversation, I feel the same level of frustration that an Abolitionist must have felt talking to a South Carolina cotton plantation owner in the 1850s.
It’s this kind of obliviousness to variation in degrees of harm (comparing the possession of a circumcised penis, which billions of men in many cultures throughout history have not minded in the least, to enduring lifelong chattel slavery and racist oppression on a Southern cotton plantation? Really?) that gets you so widely mocked.
Congratulations on your achievement in making the intrinsically reasonable and understandable position of opposing medically unnecessary surgeries performed on nonconsenting infants seem like a crank obsession. No pun intended.
Blalron, you really aren’t helping your cause. And there are millions of people who make peace with much more serious disabilities than yours, like having lost a limb to an IED, or having Parkinsons, or… without constantly obsessing over the precise details of the missing bits. I think your obsession with the detailed anatomy of the foreskin is unhealthy, and not very persuasive.
Thanks, I think? But I don’t see what’s in any way “generous” about reading Blalron’s reference as “hypothetical”, given that what he said was
ISTM very clear that Blalron’s saying he was not actually molested as an infant (as far as he knows, at least), but he was actually circumcised.
That is, he asserts that he would prefer having undergone the hypothetical incident of molestation to having undergone the actual circumcision.
There are lots of reasons to criticize this comparison, but I don’t see how it can be denied that it’s hypothetical, given that only one of the two things he’s comparing actually happened to him.
This is why it’s of a piece (so to speak) with FGM. How would the same callous accusation not apply to a FGM victim who became an activist? (I am assuming Blalron’s circumcision was toward the worse end of the spectrum in terms of curvature, adhesions, desensitization, etc.)