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.

"Surely we live in a perfect world where nobody's well brought up DS would ever dream of having sex without a condom no matter how heated the moment might be?)"

Well, if he does have sex without a condom he has much more serious and immediate worries than penile cancer.

Martorana

Hi everyone, I am sallyingforth's partner and I have just been reading through some of the rubbish on this thread.

I strongly resent the repeated assertion that uncircumcised men have dirty smelly penises. Fortunately my parents respected me too much to cut off my foreskin. I do not give it any more or less attention than the rest of my body when washing and I have never noticed any problem with it neither has anyone else ever complained.

Those statistics about levels of disease in Europe and America prove conclusively that circumcision has no preventive effect.

If someone says they cut boys because their religion requires it that would at least be honest. Any other excuse is just deceitful.

No son of mine will ever have any bits cut off unless it is medically required. If anyone tries I promise I will use the same knife to carry out a similarly unnecessary operation somewhere on them.

That is all I have to say on the subject.

Fibs, PigletJohn?
Are you 10?

I assure you the idea of a foreskin filling up with urine is yours and yours alone.

I am sure there will be no need to protect your son with a knife 'Sallyingforth's partner'. Do you imagine people are going about trying to circumcise other people's children?

'..personal attacks also tend to betray the weakness of an argument.'

Indeed they do, Icimoi.

Same goes for repeated fictionalised accounts of other people's posts.

I am glad you think the need for negotiating condom use and problems associated with condom use IF it occurs at all are so hilarious, Martorana.

Similarly, penile cancer is an absolute hoot.
How funny it must be to have a disease where the best option for treatment is penile amputation.

'Oh no! A personal attack! Waaaa! How will we survive?'

Would you like to clarify your attitude to personal attacks there, UncleT?

Icimoi thinks they detract from an argument.

Actually, the UK population is over 60 million. 500 cases represents less than one thousandth of one percent. It's actually around the same figure as the number of people in the UK who die annually from taking paracetamol.

And having a circumcision doesn't remove the chance altogether, it just gives roughly 50 times less chance of contracting it. So that's 1 in 6 million chance rather than 1 in 1.2 million chance (in the UK at least). It also means that 10 of those 500 are likely to be circumcised.

Studies show you need around 900 circumcisions to prevent one case of penile cancer. That means to prevent those 500 cases you'd need 450,000 circumcisions per year. That represents more than one circumcision per baby boy per year born in the UK. And those would be worth having less than one in a million times.

Extraordinary how it is only mathanxiety who thinks her interpretation of other people's posts is correct but nevertheless repeatedly uses those interpretations to try to deflect inconvenient points.

For example, the foreskin/balloon thing. Yes, as far as I remember it may well have been PigletJohn who introduced that specific concept (no doubt s/he'll tell me if I'm wrong). However, that was in direct response to math's frequently-repeated but unevidenced assertion that uncircumcised men smell of sweat, urine and smegma. And that could really only happen if there was no outlet, so that said secretions festered all day. Hence the deduction that it would only happen if the foreskin was closed so that urine etc is trapped, hence the idea of the foreskin filling up with urine. So that concept clearly originated with math alone.

And, yet again, math is ignoring so many inconvenient points. Like the fact that penile cancer rates in Europe compare entirely favourably with rates in countries like the US where circumcision rates are much higher. Like all the serious known health risks associated with circumcision, not least death. But no, let's ignore all that and try to take the moral high ground about penile cancer, shall we?

And in fact, PedroYoni, statistics demonstrate that most of those 500 cases of penile cancer would result from causes that have nothing whatsoever to do with circumcision.

Also that, to carry out all those circumcisions, you would be killing at least two baby boys a year.

So just to be clear, Icimoi, it was in fact PigletJohn who made that bizarre statement and has repeatedly accused me of making it throughout this thread?

Are you sure of that?

Or is it a case of 'as far as I remember it may well have been PigletJohn who introduced that specific concept'?

On a scale of 1 to 10, how sure are you that it was in fact PigletJohn who first said that?

Reading further through your post, it seems you are implying there are extenuating circumstances for someone who deliberately misrepresents another post, not once but several times.
Actually 'misrepresents' isn't an accurate term here.
Just to clarify, are you implying there are extenuating circumstances for a post that contains a fictionalised account of someone else's post?
hang it, let's just call it a lie.

Would you care to comment on the repeating several times throughout the thread of the accusations by PigletJohn by PigletJohn that I said that foreskins fill up with urine?

Would you care to relate PigletJohn's baboon house style of discussion to your earlier observation on weak arguments?

Brokenhearted55a, sadly it is not the case that it is acceptable here on this thread to be Jewish and hold an opinion on circumcision or publish it, nor is it acceptable for Jewish parents to have a son circumcised by a Rabbi. If you have just joined the thread you will have missed the posts, now deleted, that made that clear.

Not too many voices were raised in protest at the posts that expressed that antipathy towards Judaism, if my memory serves me right (and it usually serves me very well). You may draw your own conclusions from that. I certainly drew mine.

Tell that to the man facing amputation of his penis in order to save his life, Pedro.

The UK population is about 60 million, and many of that 60 million don't have a penis, so you might to redo your maths if you are basing your assertions on the assumption that there are 60 million British penises.

I see math is stooping to further personal abuse "baboon"

And also lying again and pretending that it was I who introduced the weird idea that a foreskin is a container that retains urine

I refer you to
mathanxiety Mon 05-May-14 06:12:10
I think my assumptions are very reasonable. If the rest of your body, including parts that do not produce smegma, retain stale urine, and sweat

I did attempt, on a number of occasions, to get her to substantiate her strange idea, but she was unwilling to attempt to do so.

"fictionalised representations of other people's posts " says math untruthfully.

I refer you to
mathanxiety Mon 05-May-14 06:12:10

no fiction required

unlike math's untruthful posts.

Math, I refer you to your post of 5th May at 06.12. It confirms precisely what I said: that it was you who introduced the concept of the uncircumcised penis as a body part that retains urine. The most you can accuse PigletJohn of is describing that concept using slightly different wording that means the same thing. Would you care to have the grace to accept that, in describing you as saying that the foreskin retains urine, he was absolutely correct?

Still avoiding the inconvenient facts, I note.

Math

Piglet said to you in response to your repeated assertions about men's penises and their cleanliness.

I gather you [are] under the mistaken impression that the foreskin is a sealed container that fills up with urine. If you have ever come across one like that, I have to tell you that it was faulty.

It was quite obvious they were making a joke. I was going to say taking the piss but it felt too close to the matter in hand

Breast cancer is indeed common, and there are known risk factors. Ashkenazi Jewish women are particularly vulnerable, and many do opt for mastectomy as a prophylactic. Angelina Jolie recently had the operation because of her own personal risk factors.

HPV is a known risk factor for penile cancer and is itself a disease one would wish to avoid by whatever means one could. It can also cause cervical cancer in women who are infected so that is another good reason to avoid it and avoid spreading it. Circumcision can reduce the risk of contracting HPV.

An obvious joke?

Hilarious not just the first time, but every time it was retold. It's a well known fact that nothing improves a joke more than repeating it several times.

How funny it is to make up something patently ridiculous, attribute it to someone else, and thus imply that that person is ignorant and/or stupid.

And how stupid of me to think it wasn't a joke.

I must be so stupid.

Would you like to share with us all your definitions of 'untruthfully', 'untruthful', 'fiction', and 'fib', PigletJohn?

The definitions would need to be found in a dictionary and not in a parallel universe, or a baboon house..