BTW, puzzlegal: the people who have those other disabilities presumably didn’t get them from a pervasive, culturally prescribed elective surgery inflicted on them in infancy and still prevalent (if somewhat less so) in their adulthood. Blalron’s not just bellyaching about his own situation, he is trying to save others. Good for him! I have had several people tell me I convinced them not to circ their sons, something I am extremely proud of.
I think she meant that Kimstu was even-handed and charitable to a fault. Now translate all your posts into Ramira’s native language. Don’t forget to always be idiomatic and fluent!
I wouldn’t dream of even attempting it, unless her native language is French. In which case I would spend enough time to make sure I did a decent job with it. My posts in French might not be perfectly idiomatic and fluent, but I think they would be more grammatical and readable than hers are, and I would certainly not forget there existed such a thing as uppercase letters. :dubious: (That strikes me as a lazy “textspeak” mode rather than a language barrier.)
I feel the need to mention a new beauty product: foreskin facials.
And I bet he doesn’t succeed in “saving” others, because he sounds like a crazy person. I was completely serious when I said I don’t think he is helping his cause. I’ve read lots of calm, persuasive arguments against male circumcision. His posts are not. Certainly not to anyone who knows any of the many happy well-adjusted cut men in the world. Maybe to someone who has never run into a circumcised man. But that person was unlikely to have their son circumcised anyway, unless there was medical need to do so.
Holy cow, that appears to be a real article in a real newspaper. Um… I guess they use placentas in cosmetics, too. But um, …
Uh…I think I’ll pass. Or stick with avocados.
Save others? He wants to outlaw circumcision. Okay, fine. But how to enforce it? Here are some of his “suggestions”:
-Require an exam before a child is admitted to school.
-Allow kids to sue parents who circumcised them – with no statute of limitations. Considering that many people are unable to sue the Catholic church for the molesation scandal due to the statute of limitations, this is especially tone-deaf.
He backed away from that, but DID propose foreskin replacement insurance. :rolleyes:
He doesn’t seem to get that a lot of this shit would most likely traumatize kids far more than circumcision as an infant. Nor, do I suspect, that he cares.
Because none of this shit sounds like it came from the mind of someone with a sense of rationality or common sense.
He seriously needs therapy. I suspect there’s far more behind this than his foreskin.
Can you ever just… not? I mean, ever?
I’ve heard of this kind of thing before—also that it has some amazing properties in terms of repairing burnt skin or something? So it’s a “useless flap of skin” that can do stuff no other piece of tissue or artificial product can do. Interesting. :dubious:
Speaking of lazy! Either you had a specific verb in mind and couldn’t be arsed to actually make the effort to type it, or you’re just basically throwing out a low-energy, gratuitous shot that amounts to “I don’t like you and the things you post, stop it”. Yeah, yeah, I’ve heard it. Stipulated. :rolleyes:
It’s a flap of newborn skin, so it’s still rich in stem cells, like every other part of a newborn. Just like cord blood is an excellent source of human stem cells. You know, that magical umbilical cord that is incredibly traumatic to lose.
And the cosmetic industry does use placentas, I believe. There aren’t really a lot of sources of human hormones and human cells.
I’m pretty sure the feminists would be freaking out if men were using the harvested labia of little girls on their faces.
There are vested financial interests in continuing circumcision. It’s an industry.
Ah bon. Celebrity and super models cosmetics. There is no thing that they will not do…
So that’s a no then. You really can’t help it.
I’m astounded and disgusted that some people have tried—and succeeded!—in building a degree of false equivalence between clitorectomies and circumcision, thus giving FGM some degree of cover. You are some fucked up people.
I think it’s more that men are talking about their penises–as usual. Minimizing FGM is just a side effect to “My Junk Is Important, Pay Attention To It!!”
Lol. So fucking nuts.
And you see this in forums all over the place. A thread or article comes up about FGM and be it 3 responses in or 30 or 300, someone comes in with “but what about little boys’ penises!!!” and then They. Will. Not. Let. Go.
Yes, you and the legion like you have made it very clear that you want a nice safe space where we can all take as given that “oh, sure, male circumcision is fine, or not a big deal, but FGM is heinous”. No. Not going to concede that premise, sorry.
Some cursory research indicates that it is unusually rich in fibroblasts, which are the key to this medical usage. But I’m fine with not wanting to convince too many people they are so splendidly useful, because the whole thing is sick. Blalron may have said some other crazy shit, but noting the financial imperative behind continuing the supply of foreskins for commercial purposes is not one of them.
Point of information: A lot—not a majority, but a lot—of female genital cutting practices do not involve clitoridectomy or any other surgery more severe in its effects than male circumcision. Here are some posts from the closed GD thread on circumcision discussing types and prevalence of FGC.
I am adamantly opposed to promoting any kind of false equivalence between male circumcision and clitoridectomy, labiectomy, infibulation, or any other kind of FGC that has significantly more severe impacts on health or sexual function than male circumcision does.
However, I’m completely fine with acknowledging the non-false equivalence between male circumcision and the various kinds of FGC that are not more dangerous or harmful than male circumcision.
Any society that permits ritual male circumcision procedures on minors is IMHO ethically obligated to likewise permit any forms of ritual FGC procedures on minors whose level of harm is less than or equal to that of male circumcision.
it is not a compliment and of course you do not.