Hetero-Home ... Nature or Nurture?

[Inevitable]

The fact that I am correcting your misconceptions about the origins of circumcision is not proof that I disagree with you.

You haven't corrected shit. As usual you are just raising hell.

I wasn't wrong and you have failed to prove it.

Also, I am not the one being petulant here. I can prove that by the fact that you are the one that resorted to insults in the CDZ, while all I did was mock your opinion.

I didn't, I still haven't.

You mock facts and call them opinions there is no need to insult you.

You didn't blame a bunch of nuts on a hill for all circumcision? Was that someone else?

No, I blamed a bunch of perverts on a hill, accurately.

 

[Inevitable]

Yeah, that is why, it has nothing to do with the fact that it actually damages the female who receives one.

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Damage? Is this another delusion? Can you point out where this resource, or ay other, says anything about damage from circumcision that is in any way comparable to what females who have a cliterectomy experience?

Circumcision: Learn the Pros and Cons of This Common Surgery

Approx 117 boys die every year from it. That isn't a delusion. I posted a recourse, you are welcome to look at it.

Chopping bits of a penis off damages it and it's just for cosmetic reasons. It's backward.

Your petulant attempts to get me to "think outside the box" never work because you are terrible at talking to people. Frankly you are stuck on the box and incapable of thinking without it.

 

[Inevitable]

Yeah, that is why, it has nothing to do with the fact that it actually damages the female who receives one.

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Two points here:

#1.) We get your point...you like uncut penis.

#2.) Your preference for this being genetic is not supported by the case posted. It is a horrific case for sure, but does not support people being born "gay."

I never said people were born gay.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Obviously, religion played a role in introducing circumcision into the medical community.

John Harvey Kellogg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ironically, the desensitization of the American male is the main reason for this country's obsession with sexual aesthetics and pornography, since secondary stimulation is usually necessary to get the job done.

Speak for yourself. I've never had a problem "getting the job done" and I was circumcised as an adult so I've experienced sex both ways. Sounds like you should see a counselor.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Sure, but quackery like clitoridectomy are no longer sanctioned by the medical community. And why? Because they are not in the ******* bible!

Yeah, that is why, it has nothing to do with the fact that it actually damages the female who receives one.

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Bullshit. I wasn't damaged and neither is my son. There are medical and health benefits for getting circumcised.

 

[Inevitable]

Yeah, that is why, it has nothing to do with the fact that it actually damages the female who receives one.

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Bullshit. I wasn't damaged and neither is my son. There are medical and health benefits for getting circumcised.

you have scarring, your genitalia isn't intact. Seems to be damage to me. I don't seem to be unhealthy for having an intact penis. So I don't buy the "health benefits" garbage.

Btw what does it mean to "Taz" something?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You haven't corrected shit. As usual you are just raising hell.

I wasn't wrong and you have failed to prove it.

I didn't, I still haven't.

You mock facts and call them opinions there is no need to insult you.

You didn't blame a bunch of nuts on a hill for all circumcision? Was that someone else?

No, I blamed a bunch of perverts on a hill, accurately.

Perverts, nuts, not that big a difference. I couldn't remember the exact wording so I went with nuts, at least you admit you said it. Funny how you decided to ignore the fact that history says that circumcision wasn't about religion though, why is that?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Damage? Is this another delusion? Can you point out where this resource, or ay other, says anything about damage from circumcision that is in any way comparable to what females who have a cliterectomy experience?

Circumcision: Learn the Pros and Cons of This Common Surgery

Approx 117 boys die every year from it. That isn't a delusion. I posted a recourse, you are welcome to look at it.

Chopping bits of a penis off damages it and it's just for cosmetic reasons. It's backward.

Your petulant attempts to get me to "think outside the box" never work because you are terrible at talking to people. Frankly you are stuck on the box and incapable of thinking without it.

117, wow.

How many girls die from genital mutilation every year? Considering all the factors, my guess is it is a lot higher than 117.

Not to mention that you didn't actually address the question. If the only danger you see is 117 deaths from a surgical procedure that occurs hundreds, if not thousands, of times every day you really haven't got anything. How many of the millions of men that didn't die were harmed? How many of the few thoousand girls that didn't die during their procedures were harmed?

Hint: The answer to the last question is 100% of the girls who underwent the procedure.

That said, since this thread isn't about circumcision, feel free to post how you outsmarted me because I will no longer address the issue.

 

[Politico]

Yeah, that is why, it has nothing to do with the fact that it actually damages the female who receives one.

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Bullshit. I wasn't damaged and neither is my son. There are medical and health benefits for getting circumcised.

This whole thread is getting deranged.

 

[Inevitable]

Damage? Is this another delusion? Can you point out where this resource, or ay other, says anything about damage from circumcision that is in any way comparable to what females who have a cliterectomy experience?

Circumcision: Learn the Pros and Cons of This Common Surgery

Approx 117 boys die every year from it. That isn't a delusion. I posted a recourse, you are welcome to look at it.

Chopping bits of a penis off damages it and it's just for cosmetic reasons. It's backward.

Your petulant attempts to get me to "think outside the box" never work because you are terrible at talking to people. Frankly you are stuck on the box and incapable of thinking without it.

117, wow.

Yeah, they deserve to die.

How many girls die from genital mutilation every year? Considering all the factors, my guess is it is a lot higher than 117.

If we stopped mutilating babies genitals no babies would ever die from it. I am absolutely against the barbaric practice on both genders.

Not to mention that you didn't actually address the question. If the only danger you see is 117 deaths from a surgical procedure that occurs hundreds, if not thousands, of times every day you really haven't got anything.

Yeah but you throw in the fact that it's a completely frivolous cosmetic surgery performed out of as you pointed out extremely outdated religious practices, it starts to seem like a big deal.

Why would anybody think that perverted doctors chopping up babies genitalia for cosmetic reasons is in any way okay if even one child dies from it?

How many of the millions of men that didn't die were harmed?

All men that received this cosmetic surgery as infants were harmed. One death as a result of cosmetic surgery that was not elected by the recipient is one too many. uncircumcised men live normal lives, there is no excuse for this barbaric practice.

How many of the few thoousand girls that didn't die during their procedures were harmed?

I'm sorry but you are arguing against yourself here I need for not allowing perverted doctors to chop up babies genitals I don't care if their male or female it's a barbaric practice no matter what.

Hint: The answer to the last question is 100% of the girls who underwent the procedure.

HINT: I'm against chopping up babies genital for no reason.

That said, since this thread isn't about circumcision, feel free to post how you outsmarted me because I will no longer address the issue.

that's right run away.

 

[Inevitable]

You didn't blame a bunch of nuts on a hill for all circumcision? Was that someone else?

No, I blamed a bunch of perverts on a hill, accurately.

Perverts, nuts, not that big a difference. I couldn't remember the exact wording so I went with nuts, at least you admit you said it. Funny how you decided to ignore the fact that history says that circumcision wasn't about religion though, why is that?

it was about religion, that is why only people in the religions based on Abraham do it.

I don't know what your deal is when you trying to argue here but you completely faild. I guess that's why you scampered off in your last post.

 

[Politico]

The reason I would do it has shit to do with religion. So much for the everyone thing.

 

[midcan5]

I remember reading John Money's 'Sexual Signatures on Being a Man or a Woman' and wondering if that was really possible. Nurture wins over nature. It turns out wrong and nature eventually won. The book is still available on Amazon. Whenever I hear anyone argue homosexuality is a choice I always ask that they switch hit, so far no one has reported back. I wonder why.

"On March 14, 1980 -- when "Brenda" was 15 years old -- Ron and Janet Reimer finally told their child the truth: "She" had been a normal boy until a terrible act of medical malpractice had destroyed his penis. "Brenda" was relieved. He wasn't crazy, after all; his growing sexual interest in girls suddenly made sense; everything made sense. "Brenda" insisted on immediately reassuming a male identity, and he did so with remarkable ease, despite having neither a penis nor testicles. He chose the name David, because he felt that his life so far had been a David-and-Goliath struggle. "Brenda" is now David Reimer, happily married and the adoptive father of three children. He is proficient at automobile mechanics and enjoys watching televised sports."

'David Reimer committed suicide in May, 2004. He was 38 years old.'

NASSPE: Research > David Reimer: the boy who was raised as a girl

http://www.usmessageboard.com/health-and-lifestyle/50615-know-what-really-causes-homosexuality.html

PS we Catholics were circumcised too.

 

[Inevitable]

I remember reading John Money's 'Sexual Signatures on Being a Man or a Woman' and wondering if that was really possible. Nurture wins over nature. It turns out wrong and nature eventually won. The book is still available on Amazon. Whenever I hear anyone argue homosexuality is a choice I always ask that they switch hit, so far no one has reported back. I wonder why.

"On March 14, 1980 -- when "Brenda" was 15 years old -- Ron and Janet Reimer finally told their child the truth: "She" had been a normal boy until a terrible act of medical malpractice had destroyed his penis. "Brenda" was relieved. He wasn't crazy, after all; his growing sexual interest in girls suddenly made sense; everything made sense. "Brenda" insisted on immediately reassuming a male identity, and he did so with remarkable ease, despite having neither a penis nor testicles. He chose the name David, because he felt that his life so far had been a David-and-Goliath struggle. "Brenda" is now David Reimer, happily married and the adoptive father of three children. He is proficient at automobile mechanics and enjoys watching televised sports."

'David Reimer committed suicide in May, 2004. He was 38 years old.'

NASSPE: Research > David Reimer: the boy who was raised as a girl

http://www.usmessageboard.com/health-and-lifestyle/50615-know-what-really-causes-homosexuality.html

PS we Catholics were circumcised too.

not this catholic.

 

[Agit8r]

Yeah, that is why, it has nothing to do with the fact that it actually damages the female who receives one.

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Damage? Is this another delusion? Can you point out where this resource, or ay other, says anything about damage from circumcision that is in any way comparable to what females who have a cliterectomy experience?

Circumcision: Learn the Pros and Cons of This Common Surgery

It is completely comparable. Both surgeries remove the most sensitive body parts of the respective sexes. Both leave only that which is essential for procreation.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, I blamed a bunch of perverts on a hill, accurately.

Perverts, nuts, not that big a difference. I couldn't remember the exact wording so I went with nuts, at least you admit you said it. Funny how you decided to ignore the fact that history says that circumcision wasn't about religion though, why is that?

it was about religion, that is why only people in the religions based on Abraham do it.

Anthropological evidence disproves that statement.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I remember reading John Money's 'Sexual Signatures on Being a Man or a Woman' and wondering if that was really possible. Nurture wins over nature. It turns out wrong and nature eventually won. The book is still available on Amazon. Whenever I hear anyone argue homosexuality is a choice I always ask that they switch hit, so far no one has reported back. I wonder why.

"On March 14, 1980 -- when "Brenda" was 15 years old -- Ron and Janet Reimer finally told their child the truth: "She" had been a normal boy until a terrible act of medical malpractice had destroyed his penis. "Brenda" was relieved. He wasn't crazy, after all; his growing sexual interest in girls suddenly made sense; everything made sense. "Brenda" insisted on immediately reassuming a male identity, and he did so with remarkable ease, despite having neither a penis nor testicles. He chose the name David, because he felt that his life so far had been a David-and-Goliath struggle. "Brenda" is now David Reimer, happily married and the adoptive father of three children. He is proficient at automobile mechanics and enjoys watching televised sports."

'David Reimer committed suicide in May, 2004. He was 38 years old.'

NASSPE: Research > David Reimer: the boy who was raised as a girl

http://www.usmessageboard.com/health-and-lifestyle/50615-know-what-really-causes-homosexuality.html

PS we Catholics were circumcised too.

Do you understand the difference between gender and sexual preference?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Damage? Is this another delusion? Can you point out where this resource, or ay other, says anything about damage from circumcision that is in any way comparable to what females who have a cliterectomy experience?

Circumcision: Learn the Pros and Cons of This Common Surgery

It is completely comparable. Both surgeries remove the most sensitive body parts of the respective sexes. Both leave only that which is essential for procreation.

The clitoris is a bundle of nerves that is a lot larger than you think it is, and is pretty much essential to females enjoying sex. The foreskin only has the normal nerves and men can still enjoy sex without it.

But feel free to continue spouting nonsense.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

How can we demand that people live out their lives lying to themselves and to others about their sexuality?

Why would we even want to do that?

Among consenting adults, we shouldn't It's nobody elses business. On the other hand, this whole "it's our hardwired nature" thing leave people with sexually related mental diseases, such as a pedophile, or rapist, to attempt some type of exclusion from taboo.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Nobody seems to care that it damages the boys that receive circumcision.

Damage? Is this another delusion? Can you point out where this resource, or ay other, says anything about damage from circumcision that is in any way comparable to what females who have a cliterectomy experience?

Circumcision: Learn the Pros and Cons of This Common Surgery

It is completely comparable. Both surgeries remove the most sensitive body parts of the respective sexes. Both leave only that which is essential for procreation.

I was circumcised in my early twenties for a medical reason. Sex felt no different afterwards than it did before.