Isn't it about time the Mens' Rights Movement stopped being treated like a joke?

[Kasierith]

So why are we tolerant on them being forced into an unnecessary surgery?

Why not let them grow up till they're old enough to consent and let them decide for themselves?

The risk of side effects at later ages increases, actually. As does the pain from the event, due to neural innervation increasing in that area. The surgery recovery time is also insubstantial for a baby, but debilitating like any other surgery for someone older. There are health benefits shown to come from it (as i showed above) and an absolutely minute chance of side effects.... I mean, people three thousand years ago were doing it. Pushing it off is nothing but the parents wanting to shirk responsibility despite the benefits.

[Wells]

Do you think you'd feel different if the head of your penis was numbed because of a botched circumcision?Do you think people who've suffered botched circumcisions support their use on infants?

An appeal to emotion.

And this is all secondary to the fact that it's still an optional procedure performed on a kid who can't affirm or decline consent.

So is religion, let's get to banning church attendance for children too.

They still have rights, though.

The only time the parent loses the right to control their child's body as they see fit is when they would be causing undue harm to their child. The rate of complications from circumcision are so low its would be absurd to ban it based on this.

[Northern Goblin]

So is religion, let's get to banning church attendance for children too.

You're better than this type of poor argumentation Wells. Turning up to church as a child isn't exactly something you're unable to reverse once you reach adulthood.

[Thrive]

Because, in the end, it was and still remains a shitload worse for women. Maybe I'd take it a little bit more seriously if i'd ever personally experienced negative male discrimination before, but as it stands I have not.

Almost every custody case ever. In fact that's what the MRA is mainly after. Helping father in custody cases

[Wells]

So why are we tolerant on them being forced into an unnecessary surgery?

Because we're not ok with the government banning cultural practices that have no serious danger attached.

---------- Post added 2012-11-24 at 04:41 AM ----------

You're better than this type of poor argumentation Wells. Turning up to church as a child isn't exactly something you're unable to reverse once you reach adulthood.

Neither is getting cut. Arguably its easier.

[Northern Goblin]

Because we're not ok with the government banning cultural practices that have no serious danger attached.

Dunno about you, but if I was told I had to undergo a completely unnecessary surgical proceedure with a 1.5% chance of complications I'd tell you where you can stick your surgical needle.

Neither is getting cut. Arguably its easier.

I missed that page, I assume it's available on all health insurance plans?

[iggie]

Almost every custody case ever. In fact that's what the MRA is mainly after. Helping father in custody cases

I've come to terms that if I ever get divorced I will be fucked out of seeing my kids/nearly all of my money.

[Deleted]

The risk of side effects at later ages increases, actually. As does the pain from the event, due to neural innervation increasing in that area. The surgery recovery time is also insubstantial for a baby, but debilitating like any other surgery for someone older. There are health benefits shown to come from it (as i showed above) and an absolutely minute chance of side effects.... I mean, people three thousand years ago were doing it. Pushing it off is nothing but the parents wanting to shirk responsibility despite the benefits.

"Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine
circumcision for all male newborns"

Taken from your own link.

[Wells]

Dunno about you, but if I was told I had to undergo a completely unnecessary surgical proceedure with a 1.5% chance of complications I'd tell you where you can stick your surgical needle.

And that's great. You're an adult and can make that decision for yourself. Children can't so adult get to make it. And many of them decide to do so.

I missed that page, I assume it's available on all health insurance plans?

No clue, but that's neither here nor there.

[Kasierith]

"Although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine
circumcision for all male newborns"

Taken from your own link.

Which link? Because most of them expressed exactly the opposite.

[Deleted]

And that's great. You're an adult and can make that decision for yourself. Children can't so adult get to make it. And many of them decide to do so.

No clue, but that's neither here nor there.

Children have the human right not to be mutilated even tho their parents want them to be so.

[Laize]

An appeal to emotion. Do you think people who've suffered botched circumcisions support their use on infants?

The only time the parent loses the right to control their child's body as they see fit is when they would be causing undue harm to their child. The rate of complications from circumcision are so low its would be absurd to ban it based on this.[/QUOTE]

Then perhaps the parents' right to control their child's body should only be limited to what's medically necessary. It's ridiculous that a parent could pierce, tattoo or otherwise mutilate their kid as long as the damage doesn't affect their ability to function in society. The restrictions should be stricter than that.

[Wells]

Children have the human right not to be mutilated even tho their parents want them to be so.

Calling it mutilation is stupidly hyperbolic.

Then perhaps the parents' right to control their child's body should only be limited to what's medically necessary. It's ridiculous that a parent could pierce, tattoo or otherwise mutilate their kid as long as the damage doesn't affect their ability to function in society. The restrictions should be stricter than that.

Why? Because you don't agree with those practices? how small government of you.

[Deleted]

Which link? Because most of them expressed exactly the opposite.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or....full.pdf+html

If you link them at least read them


EDIT: "Parents ultimately should decide whether circumcision is in the
best interests of their male child. They will need to weigh medical
information in the context of their own religious, ethical, and cultural beliefs and practices."

This alone tells me that there is no medical reason to do so, only unnecessary reasons from a 3'rd party that are not the ones getting the circumcision

[Grizzly Willy]

Quick question: who here is against circumcision and for abortion rights?

[cutterx2202]

Well, I'll take it more seriously if there's less biased videos out there. All the stats in the world won't help if there's such an extreme insulting bias from the creator.

Sorry Pendulous is a moderator/admin and you are not allowed to ignore him or her.

Damn.

You're not doing much for the conversation or the perception of yourself when you can't even meet at a common ground to START a conversation on a subject. From your own words, you are saying you are unable to consider facts for what they are simply because you don't like someone or something.

I don't see this bias you're writing about. He linked to a video where the author is giving his reasoning for why he thinks men are "...Choosing Not To Get Married." That's his opinion to have and he even showed some figures. If you think it's Bull-dung, then be an adult and show where his reasoning is flawed.

[Laize]

So, Wells... If parents have the right to control their child's body as long as the procedure doesn't affect their ability to function in society, do you think parents should be allowed to dictate if their pregnant 15 year old daughter should have an abortion?

Your assertion is that parents have more of a right to a child's body than the child as long as the procedure doesn't affect their ability to function in society. Surely you must feel that parents should be allowed to force their daughter to have an abortion.

[Wells]

So, Wells... If parents have the right to control their child's body as long as the procedure doesn't affect their ability to function in society, do you think parents should be allowed to dictate if their pregnant 15 year old daughter should have an abortion?

Yes. I know you're just trying to make me sound like some kind of extremist but I am intensely amused that someone who is so against big government wants government force cracking down on a harmless cultural practice. Like how these things so often break down with "small government" types though that only extends to wanting government on your side.

[Kasierith]

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or....full.pdf+html

If you link them at least read them

"Than link the page and line because "Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement. Pediatrics 2012;130:585–586""

Also, the complete post that you selectively cut out.

"the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns. It is important that clinicians routinely inform parents of the health benefits and risks of male newborn circumcision in an unbiased and accurate manner."


So that's what the medical reasons against circumcision amount to. Subjective reading and ignoring the qualifier in the post that discredits what you just said. Since you didn't read through it..... they do not believe it so important that it is absolutely mandatory for every child. But they do believe that it is important enough to allow access in terms of information, legality, and finances to all people. Read before you post.

[Vizardlorde]

For gods sake I cant pee in a bush if its close to a park even if its 3 am and theres no kids around, if I do Ill become a sex offender, but if a woman does it, itll be an emergency.