Circumcision: A Social Status in the UK ?

[Amazonia]

Curiously in the UK, circumcision is now a matter of social class. While the "ordinary" folks rarely circumcise, circumcision is prevalent in the upper class as well as in the Royal family.

You are absolutely wrong, Icimoi.

It was PigletJohn who posted that fictionalised account of my posts about hygiene way upthread for reasons of his own.

I obviously don't know about the pain suffered by infant boys on being circumcised, math. The point is that, unlike you, I have never suggested that it is a less painful procedure for a baby than for an older child or man.

If that was in the DM then I reserve the right to completely disbelieve it and demand you do an exhaustive survey on all 350 million men in Europe and 150 million men in the US and their hand washing habits.

Lacking any obvious relationship to the issue of penile hygiene, may we assume that set of quotes has no point except to bash Americans?

Math, have you or have you not said that uncircumcised men are more likely to smell of sweat, urine and smegma?

The necessary implication of that is that you must think that the foreskin retains sweat, urine and smegma. Which is illogical unless you think that it actually closes and that men do not retract their foreskin when they urinate.

The quote wasn't from the Daily Mail, and was posted simply as a counterpoint to your repeated unattributed quotes about the hygiene of British men.

I notice you continue to ignore the point that it makes much more sense to teach boys to wash than to mutilate them routinely.

Icimoi, if you read my post I think you would have found no claim about the pain of the procedure.

Here is what I said:
'Infant circumcision is infinitely preferable to circumcision later in life, when it becomes a far more complex operation that can require a six week recovery period. Not to mention the suffering that happens before the operation while a boy or man goes through all the pain and infections and attempts at treatment that can precede the decision to operate.'

Granted, I did use the word 'pain' .

You know what Math I've lived in the UK for 55 years. I think I'll reply on my own eyes and nose as to whether we are unwashed and smelly or not.

You can read the DM article and track down the survey, if you like. I believe it was also reported in The Independent and may also have been referenced on the BBC site.

Why don't you go back and check what I have and have not said yourself, Icimoi?

So far your track record of distinguishing what you think I said from what I actually said is pretty poor.

The plural of anecdote is not data, Caitlin.

Oh math aren't you clever! I'm so impressed!!Yes you're right!!! I just live here. What would I know.

I don't live in Yorkshire but will be reporting your gratuitous and offensive comment about Yorkshire

So far your track record of distinguishing what you think I said from what I actually said is pretty poor.

On the contrary, math, examination of this thread shows a bit of a repeated pattern of you making that accusation incorrectly against those who disagree with you.

It also shows a very clear pattern of you ignoring points which you cannot or will not answer. Notably the question about the basis on which you contend that there is a correlation between being uncircumcised and smelling of urine, sweat and smegma.

Out of interest, math, how much direct experience do you have of the penises of uncircumcised men?

Unlike many posters here I am able to distinguish between personal anecdote and proven fact so there will be no answer to that question of yours from me.

There are plenty of other posters on the thread who do not seem to care about confusing anecdote and fact. How about asking PigletJohn, who made a few assertions about the personal hygiene of men upthread how much direct experience he has of the penises of uncircumcised men? I am sure you will find others willing to chip in too, with their anecdotes.

Since you have a really poor track record of distinguishing what you think I said from what I actually said I think we can take your statement that I have a very clear pattern of 'making that accusation incorrectly against those who disagree with you' with a nice big shovelful of salt.

No, math, I don't have that "really poor track record" that you claim. However, PigletJohn has pointed out correctly, and more than once, that you keep attributing to him things that you yourself have said - and we can all see the evidence.

The reason I asked for your personal experience is your assertion that uncircumcised men smell because of that famed accumulation of urine, sweat and smegma. As someone who lives with three uncircumcised men, I've never encountered that. Admittedly, I only have direct experience of the penis of one of those men, but the fact is that at the end of the day, before he has had a chance to wash, neither he nor his penis smell. So I wondered whether you had experience of uncircumcised men and whether your experience is any different.

Is there any chance of you answering that question about why it is better to mutilate a male baby than to teach him about hygiene?

There is no mutilation involved so your question is a non starter.

And as shown, 'you can lead a horse to water' and you can even provide soap, but you can't make about 50% of them wash.

Why would anyone wash if not to remove said urine, sweat and smegma? Why bother with retracting the foreskin and making sure the glans was clean if there was nothing to worry about there in the first place?

Apparently about 50% of British men are not bothered so why are you teaching your DSs to wash?

Math will do anything to avoid explaining his/her views on the use of condoms.

So why is it better to subject a male baby to having a painful operation rather than teaching him to wash?

All this distraction about washing is a ridiculous side-show, when we have someone seriously trying to claim that the permanent, tangible, visible alteration of someone's body by the removal of part of it when not medically justified is to be directly deemed the same as giving someone an injection. The idea that no consent should be required is pathetic and risible, and really tells us all that we need to know about the way that poster quite clearly considers men to be second class.

"that poster quite clearly considers men to be second class."

Ah. I was with you til this point. Can't be doing with MRA talk.

Sorry, but it's a specific observation here - not some kind of wider agenda.

Hello again. I just unhid this thread to see how it was going :)
It seems that math has turned it into a reverse AIBU.
The longer he/she keeps digging, the more he/she exposes the lack of reasoned argument in favour of mutilating little boys.

The simple recorded fact that there is less penile disease in Europe (with a very low incidence of circumcision) than in the US (with a very high incidence of circumcision) demolishes any claim that cutting foreskins is medically justified.

So carry on math. Tell the world.

Matorama I'd agree usually on men's rights issues but Math's case is founded on men being too stupid and or lazy to wash properly.

sallyingforth I unhid it too.

If you're from Yorkshire I'd hide it again. You've been libelled