Penile Lengthening Column

Great Debates
81

Kimstu,
>How about when a condom is used? If we’re just talking about differences perceptible in unprotected sex, they’re going to be pretty irrelevant to many people’s actual sex lives. <
It is said by some intact men, that a condom does detract from the sensations of sex. Unfortunately, like many other sexual areas, there has been no study of this matter that I know of.
There exists two types of condoms. The regular kind and another type that is made specifically for intact men. With a regular condom the intact man peels his foreskin back and then rolls the condom on. Then he lets his foreskin go back forward again. Now, the condom is inside the foreskin preventing the mucosa from contacting the corona of the glans directly. This is the source of the problem, I believe.
With the condom that is designed specifically for intact men, this problem may be solved under most circumstances because the condom is just put over the whole penis without peeling back the foreskin.
There is a procedure using two condoms which I am developing which will definitely solve this problem, though.

>Oh, and I’d also like to add my voice to Felicity’s (I think it was) in contradicting your assertion about women’s views on “vaginal orgasms” and “clitoral orgasms”. <

Well, you're also contradicting a lot of other women and so-called sex experts too. One thing that these experts do know is the vagina. And, that's all they know because they know nothing about the penis, I can assure you.

>then why did elaborate erotic traditions of such sexual techniques evolve in ancient cultures where no men were circumcised?<

I have recently started to study issues such as this. Apparently, many of the major civilizations of the past were homosexually driven. The Roman Empire and the Third Reich are good examples of this. Pedophilia was common also. When one begins to ask about sexual traditions of such civilizations, one must consider the context within which one is asking this. If someone has a strong tendency to seek sexual gratification through means other than heterosexual sex, I'm not sure how they will actually desire to engage in heterosexual sex when they actually do (and they must no matter what or they're civilization will die). We really do need technical experts in areas beyond the erotic nature of the penis to understand such issues, I'm afraid.
82

I didn’t necessarily say I accept those credentials, Satan, merely that he answered the question.

Jack, I went through the citations on the CRIP site more carefully. I’m going to ignore the Rhinehart study because I have zero faith in recovered memory studies - that’s been covered extensively in other threads. But I looked at most of the other references listed about the traumatic effects of neonatal circumcision. Although I haven’t got the time, energy, data or inclination to conduct a statistical metaanalysis of the studies cited here, my overall impression is that the main effect does not seem to be the circumcision itself. It seems instead to be a main effect of whether anaesthesia was used or not. And I will not necessarily contest that. I do believe infants can feel pain, and that local anaesthesia should be used to minimize the impact of the surgery.

But when you look at anaesthetized circumcisions vs uncircumcized infants, I do not see any statistically reliable main effects.

So I’m not sure about the justification for your statement that circumcized children will hate their parents. Sounds to me like they won’t remember the operation.

Just to throw out a case study, I have an acquaintance who was recently circumcized - some sort of medical necessity. He was hospitalized for a week and in recovery for almost three weeks. It was excruciatingly painful for him - even with general anaesthetic - for several days afterwards. He now finds sex with his wife more pleasurable than previously. He is also planning to have his infant son circumcized because the risk that his sone will develop the same condition he has is quite high and he does not want to subject his son to adult circumcision.

Felice

83

Um…familiar with the Karma Sutra? That goes into a quite a bit of detail about activities between a man and a woman. In a culture that did not practice circumcision at all.

I think you’re dodging the question. The Third Reich is hardly a viable example of an ancient culture.

Felice

84

jb_farley
>you mentioned this a number of times, Jack. Are you sure? I remember some threads in GD a while back concerning cosmetic surgery for children with down’s syndrome.<
The law varies from state to state, of course. Cosmetic surgery to correct an objective deformity is legal, of course. However, if one were to walk into the hospital with one’s baby and ask to have the first digit on the little finger of one’s baby’s left hand amputated, you just watch how fast one gets interviewed by the police and one gets his baby taken away. The parent would probably end up under psychiatric observation, too.
Of course, circumcision violates the Constitutional rights of the baby also. It also violates international treaties. And, strangely enough, circumcision violates the Nuremberg Code.

85

I haven’t been this entertained in a long time! This thread is hysterical! I keep coming back to see what will be posted next. WOLFMAN, I didn’t want your post in particular to pass without someone saying HA!

Can I borrow your crystal ball? I’d like to find out how Tellwitcha is going to do in the fifth tomorrow, so I’ll know how to bet.

BWAHAHAHA! :: wiping eyes :: Me too! Who knew I was a penile expert all this time? And a bigger expert than you, apparently, because I’ve been at it, off and on (ha!), for a lot longer than two years. Man, I’m putting that on my resume.

Okay, okay, continue. Sorry to interrupt.

Jodi, who is seriously amused.

86

Oh boy. Please explain how circumcision does any of those things. With specific references to sections of each document. And don’t say you don’t have the time - you brought up the connections, you explain them.

By the way Jack, I’m really curious… You are basically stating that only a man such as yourself is capable of truly satisfying a woman, because you are intact and know how to “properly” make use of your penis. I suppose that would make you an extremely desirable individual, no? One who should have absolutely no trouble getting a girlfriend and hanging on to her, because if she’s in her right mind she would never want to look for anyone else, correct? Then please, bring her here to the Straight Dope, and let her tell us directly how wonderful you are, and how you surpass any circumsized man she might have ever been with. You can no doubt see that, by now, folks here may not be willing to take your word for it.

87

Oh, c’mon, you can’t set yourself up as a big fat target like that and not expect me not to take a shot at you:

Please provide CITES for the following assertions:

  1. Circumcision violates a baby’s Constitutional rights.

  2. Circumcision violates any international treaty.

  3. Circumcision violates the Nuremburg Code (which for those of you unaware, covers experimentation on humans, not procedures that, defensible or not, are common enough to be considered routine).

I’ll take, oh, a case, or a position paper or an opinion for anyone who is not (a) overtly anti- (or pro-, for that matter) circumcision – ie, a reasonably unbiased source. I manifestly will not take your word for it. And please keep in mind that I want cites regarding circumcision specifically – not mutilation or torture or any other animal of offensive conduct that only includes circumcision because you, personally, think it does.

I’ll wait here.

88

Felice,

>So I’m not sure about the justification for your statement that circumcised children will hate their parents. Sounds to me like they won’t remember the operation. <
Studies show that there are differences in behavior of babies following circumcision. Maybe, if the baby had anesthesia during circumcision, this would cure any behavioral anomalies. I am saying that when the child is older and realizes that he has a degraded penis, that he will be mad then for what his parents did to him.

> Just to throw out a case study, I have an acquaintance who was recently circumcised - some sort of medical necessity. <

Oh, I doubt very much that it was a necessity that he be circumcised.

>He was hospitalized for a week and in recovery for almost three weeks. It was excruciatingly painful for him - even with general anaesthetic - for several days afterwards.<

At least he was smart enough to do this under general anesthesia.

> He now finds sex with his wife more pleasurable than previously. <

This is just temporary. Read my post to Cecil on 10-22-2000 09:07 PM

>He is also planning to have his infant son circumcised because the risk that his son will develop the same condition he has is quite high and he does not want to subject his son to adult circumcision. <

What was his condition? I’ll tell you how it should have been cured. If I don’t know the answer, I can direct him to someone who does.

89

Jodi, I am shocked now that we are getting along so well that you haven’t asked me to help you in this research you’re doing!

Don’t worry about Drain Bead, jodi. She knows the importance of scientific research…

(And on an unrelated note, and yes, this is strange to see me type: Glad you made it back! :))

Yer pal,
Satan

*I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, two weeks, four days, 22 hours, 0 minutes and 57 seconds.
8076 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,009.58.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 4 weeks, 1 hour, 0 minutes.

*THE YANKEES WIN! THAAAAAAH YANKEES WIN!
1996 · 1998 ··· WORLD CHAMPIONS ··· 1999 · 2000
26 Titles! The #1 Dynasty of all-time!
And most importantly… RULERS OF NYC!!

90

Jodi,

>Please provide CITES for the following assertions:
1. Circumcision violates a baby’s Constitutional rights.
2. Circumcision violates any international treaty.
3. Circumcision violates the Nuremburg Code<

We'll just get right to the Nuremberg code because I know that's what you're mainly interested in:

The following has been transcribed from the text of the Nuremberg
Code (from Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military
tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg, October 1946-
April 1949. Washington D.C.: U.S. G.P.O, 1949-1953.)

"Permissible Medical Experiments …

  1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to
give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free
power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud,
deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or
coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and
comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable
him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This
latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative
decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him
the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by
which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards
reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which
may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent
rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the
experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may
not be delegated to another with impunity.

  1. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the
    good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and
    not random and unnecessary in nature.

  2. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal
    experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or
    other problem under study that the anticipated results will
    justify the performance of the experiment.

  3. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary
    physical and mental suffering and injury.

  4. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason
    to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps,
    in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as
    subjects.

  5. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the
    humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

  6. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided
    to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities
    of injury, disability, or death…

  7. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at
    liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or
    mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be
    impossible…

Obviously all of these experiments involving brutalities, tortures,
disabling injury, and death were performed in complete disregard of
international conventions, the laws and customs of war, the general
principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all
civilized nations, and Control Council Law No. 10. Manifestly human
experiments under such conditions are contrary to “the principles of the law
of nations as they result from the usages established among civilized
peoples, from the laws of humanity, and from the dictates
of public conscience.”

Whether any of the defendants in the dock are guilty of these atrocities is,
of course, another question …"
Question: Does RIC/MGM qualify as the Immoral Medical Experimentation
of non-consenting humans? If so, it violates the Nuremberg Code,
which is based on “the general principles of criminal law as derived from
the criminal laws of all civilized nations.”

91

Jack said:

Funny. I just finished a book, The Invisible Enemy: A Natural History of Viruses, by Dorothy H. Crawford, who is the Robert Irvine Chair of Medical Microbiology at Edinburgh.

She noted in the book that circumsized men are less likely to spread HIV because the tip of the circumsized penis thickens and is therefore less likely to tear or otherwise be damaged and thus expose the circulatory system to the virus.

But I guess you probably know more than she does…

92

I’m with Jodi here…I can’t believe this is a “serious” debate . Comedy Centrals Daily Show had a bit about one dude who is spreading the gospel of foreskin stretching…it was freaking hilarious…I can’t for the life of me get this as a serious debate…but I guess I’m seriously outta whack with this issue…to whit

http://www.eskimo.com/~gburlin/restore/uncirc.txt
Foreskin (I hope it’s not considered a porno link…if it is…feel free to edit)
http://www.infocirc.org/rest-e.htm
BTW I would have volunteered to add to Jodi’s anecdotal data base…but (a) Satan beat me to it (the bastard) and (b) my wife would kick my ass :stuck_out_tongue:

93

Wait…YOU were the one who said up front that it violates the Nuremburg Code…yet my reading of what you posted refers to a pre-requisitie of medical experimentation…you have not proven that pre-requisite yet…unless you want to include ALL procedures done to kids that might be controversial…whats next—Measles Vacines are prohibited by the Nuremburg Code?

94

I have nothing to add to this already inflamed debate, except to say that the fanaticism displayed by Mr. Tyler has made me skeptical of the rationality of the anti-circumcision lobby. If I had to make a decision today for a baby, I’d say it’s not worth it because the evidence either way is equivocal. But I’m re-evaluating that because, in my experience, zealotry is usually a substitute for credibility in any movement.

If you thought that you were converting people here to your perspective, Jack, you’re mistaken - not because they’re scared of the truth, but because, as the debate goes on, you seem less interested in debate and more interested in feeling like you’re preaching to the savages.

95

Well, I’m mainly interested in the first. How is circumcision a violation of Constitutional rights?

96

More mind reading, I see.

Since when is circumcision experimental? One would think it had been done enough times that they would have the basics down by now.

I’m also more interested in how you come up with the idea that it’s unconstitutional.

97

I’m at a complete loss to understand the assertion that circumcision violates the constitutional rights of the circumcisee. I don’t remember there being a constitutional right to a foreskin.

Would someone care to explain this one to me?

98

David B,
>She noted in the book that circumcised men are less likely to spread HIV because the tip of the circumcised penis thickens and is therefore less likely to tear or otherwise be damaged and thus expose the circulatory system to the virus. <

You're just paraphrasing what this doctor said. If I were to assume that this is the substance of what she said, I would have to disagree with what she has said. I would be more worried about the mucosa bleeding than the glans. In any event, I would suppose that even though there's no research to back it up, that a circumcised penis is less likely to bleed and is therefore less likely to spread the AIDS virus through that route. However, there is little doubt that the hammering done by a circumcised penis on a woman or gay partner will be more likely to create an open wound and then with the AIDS virus in the ejaculate AIDS will spread.

>But I guess you probably know more than she does…<

It's a sad state of affairs, but I'm certain that there are many lay people in America that know more about the penis than she does.
99

>I’m also more interested in how you come up with the idea that it’s unconstitutional.<
If someone walks up to an intact man/boy and forcibly cuts off his foreskin, then in addition to violating the mayhem/aggravated assault laws of the state, that someone is guilty of violating that man/boy’s rights under the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment protects all Americans from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

100

Nice try, but the Fifth Amendment controls what the government may do to you. For example, it would be unconstitutional for a legislature to pass a law saying that all babies must be circumcised before leaving the hospital (that one would probably also be a violation of religious freedoms).