no difference. its removal of a part of the human genitalia, without any anesthesia. why? mostly for silly cultural/religious practise
Brother, if you don't know the difference between female and male circumcision, then you need to spend less time online and more time with the opposite sex.
i know the difference, it both involves the removal of genitalia, without anesthesia. for cultural/religious reasons, and to reduce sexual pleasure, as sex is "bad".
it should have to be done by a medical professional and have medical benefits or it's child abuse imo there is zero medical benefit to female circumcision.... .
how am I wrong? what's the significant difference between female and male circumcision? do you even know?
Since when do infants get a choice? If they could choose - how many would choose to get stuck over and over with painful vaccine needles?
what gives you the right to cause pain to a child and remove a part of his body, for no medical reason whatsoever? do you also have the right to cut of his ears? his tongue?
No, because it keeps the penis cleaner, helps prevent infections, including STDs. Also, a lot of men end up having to have circumcisions when they are older, and it is MUCH more painful. http://www.webmd.com/men/news/20090325/circumcision-cuts-stds
Reading comprehension problems again? I said I was not for it but that it should be left up to the parents and their doctors. Not all doctors are against circumcision. Some believe it's more sanitary and will prevent infections when the boy is older. I've hear adult uncircumcised males wish they'd be circumcised as infants. Once again - this isn't about you. Let the doctors and parents decide.
I'm not here to school you. But here is some research material for you to educated yourself. But remember, after this, your ignorance is all your fault... http://thecircumcisiondecision.com/male-vs-female-circumcision/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/acti.../Dont-compare-male-circumcision-with-FGM.html http://goaskalice.columbia.edu/distinction-between-male-and-female-circumcision http://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2012/jul/29/the-big-issue-male-circumcision http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2008/11/12/why-male-circumcision-and-fema/
Again, I would ask that you stop making loaded poll options. Try having a plain "yes"/"no" without some loaded answer attached to it. It never hurts to include an "other" option, either, and I'd particularly appreciate it because not one of the options you gave fits my opinion, but had you simply left a "yes" or a "no" option up, even a "yes - other" and "no - other", then I'd have been able to fit in a correct poll answer. As such, I picked the closest option and your poll already doesn't reflect accurately the views of posters, because you've made such loaded options. As far as this goes - I would like to hear why your justification for opposing the Bill of Rights.
Ask a prostitute if she would rather go down on a man who was circumcised or a man who wasn't. ? I believe the question has already been asked. A man who has been circumcised has a cleaner willey. You also might want to look at Africa where hetrosexual transmission of the AID's virus is rampent. Few circumcised men are infected.
I'm not sure asking a prostitute would be relevent or not. Seems to me she has already made some questionable life choices. Besides, if you were to ask a prostitute, why only ask the female ones?
Don't cut short my posts, please. That is just dishonest tactic. Now, you completely ignored the fact that it helps to cut down on STD transmission from men to women. - - - Updated - - - Agree, that's why I didn't even vote with those silly poll options.
That's just a myth, and has been disproven by multiple studies. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/male-circumcision-and-the_b_249728.html http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/28/circumcision-prevents-hiv-infection-medical-myth
