Circumcision is practiced since ancient times. Today this religious tradition is carried by Jews and Muslims. Also it is performing on new born babies especially in the US hospitals due to health advantages.
Anti-circumcision advocates think that it is a sex crime, and performing such a brutal operation on babies is against the human rights and there are lots of irreversible disadvantages.
Moreover it is claimed that that's a $400 million dollar industry.
To me, it is a total butchery!
I warn you! If you have the guts watch this episode. Because I fainted before the first 15 minutes. Broadcasted on April 25, 2005.
Further reading on the topic: The Case Against Circumcision
Related to: To Circumcise, or Not to Circumcise
Also watch: Moolaadé - Protection (2004)
File Name ..........: Bullshit.S3E1.Circumcision.avi
Total Size (MB) ....: 233,23 MB
Video Length .......: 00:29:16
http://www.filesonic.com/file/833343831
http://www.filesonic.com/file/833343751
http://rapidshare.com/files/256050585/Bullshit.S3E1.Circumcision.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/256058324/Bullshit.S3E1.Circumcision.part2.rar
21 comments:
When I watched this episode it made me feel very uneasy, the jewish excuse is just pathetic, it's just another form of branding, and since god isn't down with marks upon the body, we just chop it away. It's religiously enforced Body Integrity Identity Disorder. The stupid idea that their god got it wrong and wants them to make little adjustments is just fucking hypocritical, if I wasn't a member of VHEMT I would never do it to a child of mine.
I too feel that circumcision violates the fundamental medical principal Primum non nocere (first, do no harm) that all practitioners are taught.
However, in males I wouldn't quite call it "total butchery". There even seems to be some evidence that it can reduce the risk of AIDS transmission for those in the small portions of the world without access to condoms.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8473838/
For most of the world, however, the practice subjects the patient to needless pain & risk and in the majority of cases certainly should NOT be performed on babies. Female "circumcision" *is* total butchery as it removes more than just some skin and doesn't appear to give any medical benefits.
Forewarning: don't watch if you're iffy around blood, baby foreskins being chopped off, female genital mutilation, or footage of an old man pulling down his pants and showing his penis that grew it's foreskin back.
On a lighter note, it does an excellent job showing that circumcision is just plain WRONG.
I became a Muslim when I was 18 and got circumcised
I'm VERY happy I got it done :)
I'm an Atheist now by the way:
http://charleswardle.com
Eh, here's the deal woman find it sexy and you last longer being cut. Do you son a favor and doit. I get laid more b/c I'm cut.
Don't believe me ask women.
Congratulations!! This blog is addictive. Thank you for all this movies and books.
Is there any chance you have "Blasphemy"? I've only found it in Youtube.
Bye!
Hey, if women find it sexy then get circumsized when you want to. Not when you're a baby.
And I'm not really sure the idea of being cut makes you last longer. lol.
Interesting to hear from the two guys who apparently had the procedure done later in life.
I've suspected that some dulling of sensation might be the cause of "lasting longer". Anyone care to comment on that thought?
Getting your son circumcised because they might make some women happier is a ridiculous reason for three reasons:
1. All you need to do is pull the skin back for the same result
2. He should have the choice of cutting it later on in life if he wants
3. He may end up being gay anyway
As for health reasons, the evidence is lacking as the episode shows. And another thing: simple wearing a condom is so much more effective than relying on your foreskin to help prevent AIDS.
Good points Psybermonkey. Let me add #4. The Hell with modifying your anatomy just to please someone else.
The article I referenced above came out *after* the P&T episode, so it may bolster some previously thin, (or lacking) evidence. If there are legitimate benefits, they shouldn't be ignored.
Regardless, I think your #2 point could be an apt end to any debate about the issue. (but I'm sure it won't) ;)
agreed :)
"Eh, here's the deal woman find it sexy and you last longer being cut. Do you son a favor and doit. I get laid more b/c I'm cut.
Don't believe me ask women."
I submit to you that if you brag in front of a woman that you're cut then it actually lessens your chance to get laid since this is a clear sign of neediness.
Second of all I can't imagine a woman suddenly freaking out on you and leaving after you pull down your pants and she sees that you are uncircumcised. Ridiculous.
So I can't quite put my finger on how exactly being cut results in more sex. In fact I would say someone who is insecure enough to worry about how women react to an intact foreskin and chooses to be cut on the basis of such worries doesn't get laid at all. ;)
Seriously? Have you never watched porn? Cut looks better. Women know it. Gay men know it. Yes the person who mentioned the dulling effect is correct. That's why you can last a bit longer.
Just think about it as ear pericing or ornamentation. A humans have altered there bodies though history, it's not a big deal.
Get circumsised, get an ugly blotch of scar-tissue on your desensitized penis. If that's the only way to make you "last longer", then have fun!
It's just more brutality in the name of superstition. Health benefits, what fecking health benefits? Babies have no say in the matter, they just feel the pain & have to grow up with a malformed dick. No wonder jews need psychologists.
Why not let the baby grow up and decide if he wants to alter his body?? The foreskin is not a deadly disease that must be wiped out. My husband and I left our son intact and at the age of seven, he has has exactly zero problems. If he wants to be circumcised, I will drive him to the doctor and make him comfortable while he recovers. I will support his choice to do it. It's not my body and not my choice.
See how that works?
Jon:
I don't think there is a loss of sensation. I can't personally think of any negatives at all for having had it done. Wouldn't want to be more than a casual nudist though :)
There is a big difference between removing the foreskin and removing an organ like the clitoris.
I think if you want to make a case against removal of the clitoris and unsafe medical practice then including properly done male circumcision weakens your case.
I know there are a number of other kinds of female circumcision but I don't know enough to comment. One thing for sure is that some have terrible consequences and hopefully there will be a reduction of such practices.
You are wrong.
There is certainly a loss of sensation after male circumcision too:
"That circumcision reduces sexual pleasure, and that it is fully experienced by the traumatized infant, is now well established."
http://www.forward.com/articles/2704/
Yes Charles, I agree that there's a large difference between male & female circumcision. I also agree that it's not reasonable to compare the two as you've illustrated.
Which is why I didn't. :)
However I *am* arguing in favor of letting the individual make the decision for them-self (in either case).
Dear anonymous, as a female-bodied person, I can assure you, women prefer unmutilated penises. You've obviously been brainwashed by Western dogmatism and the lies that men tell themselves to make up for the fact that they've lost a vital part of their anatomy.
This blog is amazing, by the way, thanks for existing.
Penn Jillette and Teller are true Gods.
Post a Comment