Adequacy front page
 
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
 Should we circumcize our boy?

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Nov 02, 2001
 Comments:
In this week's column, Adam Rightmann helps a couple decide if circumcision is right for their boy, and if a young wife should swap.
sex

More stories about Sex
Lolita's World: The disturbing tendencies of the modern man.
Solving Teen Pregnancy
Homosexuality - Is it the next evolutionary step for mankind ?
Open Letter to a Stripper
The Sinister Secret of our Schools
Don't look at me.
My husband wants to do my ass!
'English Style Lovers', with jsm
I'm a teenager, and I want it bad!
I have not had relations for months!
My neighbors are foreigners, and they don't fly a flag
Active recruiting
My wife hungers for dark meat, and my nephew is a Commie!
Uncle OSM's Guide to Covert Dating: Episode I
My husband wants me shorn!
Uncle OSM's Guide to Covert Dating: Episode II
My inlaws are not fertile!
Taboo: The Downfall of America
The Time is Right for Manual Sex
Help save a baby, and snowballs
The supposedly civilized Europeans. (A WARNING TO ALL AMERICANS)
It's all about the numbers
Caffeinated mints, and getting into the body you desire.
Why can't I get a second date?
The Heterosexual Geek's Guide to Feigning Homosexuality
I want a mistress!
Mommyism in the Workplace
Lesbian Parenting and the Myth of Gay Children
My roommate is gay! My roommate is a drunk.

More stories by
Adam Rightmann

My husband wants to do my ass!
Rock Star: Headbanging Nights
Saluting American Heroes on Flight 93
We are all children of Adam and Eve
I'm a teenager, and I want it bad!
I have not had relations for months!
My neighbors are foreigners, and they don't fly a flag
Have a Right Halloween!
My wife hungers for dark meat, and my nephew is a Commie!
My husband wants me shorn!
My inlaws are not fertile!
Help save a baby, and snowballs
What shall we give up for Lent?
Reclaiming St. Patrick's Day
Let us pray for the priests and victims of sexual abuse
Why can't I get a second date?
I want a mistress!
My roommate is gay! My roommate is a drunk.
Hey Idiot,

Ozzy Osbourne is not a Satanist, he's a Baptist.

Ozzy4Ever


Dear Mr. Ever,

Satanist, Baptist, in the long run, what's the difference, they're both Hellbound.


Dear Adam,

We're expecting a blessed event soon, and if it's a boy we don't know if we should get him circumcized or not. We've looked on the internet, but the information is contradictory, and some of the webpages are very obscene (we miss the days when we thought uncut Twinks referred to Hostess snack food). What do you suggest?

Anteater or turtleneck


Dear Ant,

Do be careful of what you find on the internet. Some of my devoted readers sent me links and pictures about other meanings of bukkake than a Japanese Noodle dish which I found very disturbing (it seems to be some of whorish Onanistic perversion). Instead, let me give you four reasons for circumcision:

1) Jesus was. For many Christians (particulary of the heretical revival-tent snake handling sort) this is sufficient.

2) Aesthetically a circumsized penis looks better. Mrs. Rightmann herself has said so.

3) Greater sexual satisfaction will result.

By exposing the glans to constant friction and stimulation, the penis is slightly desensitized, leading to greater control in ejaculation. Thus you will be able to give your wife greater sexual satisfaction, and even a vaginal orgasm (which really helps in conception). Trust me, it's a lot easier to convince the missus to do her wifely duty when she knows she's going to get a bang-up orgasm at the end.

4) By removing this source of intense pleasure with a short burst of pain, willpower is developed in the male.

By and by, life is about pain and suffering, and how well one copes with this pain and suffering is often a good indicator on how well one does in life. There is one well known ethnic group that circumsizes males, this ethnic group is invariably near the top of any charts measuring wealth, happiness, satisfaction and achievement. This group is the Jews.

An even more interesting measurement is England's economic growth compared with the rate of circumcision. In the late 19th century, the British Empire reached it's peak as Englishman were willing to live lifes of great sacrifice for England and the Queen. This was also the peak time for English circumcision. Nowadays, few English men are circumcized, and their economy is barely growing; it's even being outpaced by the Irish.

I'm not saying that if your child is uncircumcized he will grow up to be a lazy, drug addicted malcontent, but do you want to take that risk?


Dear Adam,

My husband asked if I would like to try swapping. Should I?

Unsure wife


Dear Unsure,

I think swapping is a marvelous idea. American's are too materialistic, only wanting what's new and shiny. It's far better for your pocketbook and the environment to enquire with your neighbors about excess items. You may not want that Weber charchoal grill, your neighbor may not want his snowthrower. You both swap, and you are happier for it.


3 or 4 - 0 (none / 0) (#19)
by sardu on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 09:41:55 AM PST
Sir,

You promised us three reasons in favor of circumcision, and gave us four. However, you did not balance this with any disadvantages of circumcision, or benefits to keeping the little man intact. I have been circumcised for all of my conscious life, and therefore cannot come up with any of these counter-factors on my own. Will you please enlighten us? Also, what is your opinion of female circumcision?


 
Once again.. (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by Mint Waltman on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 11:28:22 AM PST
Aesthetically a circumsized penis looks better. Mrs. Rightmann herself has said so.

the propensity of you Catholics to engage in acts of wanton sexual abandon rears it ugly, pustulant head. Tell me, how many penises has Mrs. Rightmann personally examined in order to arrive at this conclusion? Rest assured, any future Mrs. Waltman will have no basis of comparison when we get to know each other in the Biblical sense.


To make ends meet, Mrs. Rightmann (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by Adam Rightmann on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 11:39:36 AM PST
would occasionally watch a friend's baby, so said friend could then go back to work and avoid the joy of child rearing. Two of these babies were boys, with uncircumcized penii. In the course of changing diapers, Mrs. Rightmann saw more than enough uncircumcized penii to make up her mind (similary, I have changed enough girl baby diapers to regard a bare vagina as more work than fun, I suspect those women and men who prefer that bare look to have unresolved pedophilic issues).


A. Rightmann

You change diapers? (none / 0) (#38)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 12:03:36 AM PST
What kind of man are you?


He is.. (none / 0) (#47)
by Husaria on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 05:23:34 PM PST
Adam Rightmann, the religious source for Adequacy..by the way..Mr. Rightmann, are you not a priest? I had read in an earlier story that you were a priest and I would get the link, but I cannot find it on Adequacy, can you clear this up
Sig sigger

I can see (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by Mint Waltman on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 04:07:58 PM PST
Mr. Rightmann, are you not a priest? I had read in an earlier story that you were a priest

...where you might get the idea that Mr. Rightmann is a priest, what with all the discussion of young boy's penises and little girl's bald nether regions running through his posts and columns, but alas, he is not.


 
Not a priest, rather a lay minister (none / 0) (#60)
by Adam Rightmann on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 07:46:54 AM PST
Many non-Catholics would have a hard time accepting advice on sex, relations and morals from a priest, figuring a priest would knwo nothing about love and commitment. So, you have me.

I am married, with two children, I've been on the internet since 1993, and I think it's about time it got cleaned up.


A. Rightmann

Cirsumcision is an odd US only phenomenon (none / 0) (#76)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Nov 7th, 2001 at 01:44:45 PM PST
Or at least amongst Christians. In Australia, the UK, and every other country, circumcision is generally viewed as an oddity. Its fine if your some wants to change the look and the level of nerve endings in his own penis in the future, but if my parents ever dare did that to me as a child, I'd kill them as soon as I worked out that had. Its your sons body, not yours. I have a pierced labret. It is, literally, a multilation. But it looks better in my and many other people's opnion. The difference is I chose it myself, because it my body


On the other hand (none / 0) (#84)
by jakew on Thu Dec 6th, 2001 at 06:46:40 AM PST
And to get your labret you walked into a piercers and had it done, right?

I think that failing to circumcise a boy in his infancy actually denies him a choice. Because it is so difficult to get circumcised as an adult. I gather it's a lot easier in the US, but here in the UK it is nearly impossible. I speak from experience.

I decided I wanted to get cut when I was a teenager. I don't know exactly when, but I guess I was about 13. I was absolutely sure. I talked to my parents, but they only found it amusing. I had to wait until I was 16 before I was legally responsible for my own medical care. Then I went to see my doctor. I was terrified, and it took several months to pluck up the courage. I went into his office with trembling knees. I explained the situation. He looked at my organ, and said that there was nothing wrong, and no surgeon in the land would circumcise me without a medical reason. I still remember those words, 8 years later.

Eventually, I was lucky enough to find a community of like-minded souls on the web (Circlist). Through them, I found a surgeon, took an overdraft to pay him, and spent three weeks healing and alarming me by waking up with blood over my sheets. It wasn't much fun. But finally, I had what I wanted. And now I love my dick.

But if I could have had it done as a baby, I'd have been saved all that. What's more, I'd have a less visible scar, and probably a more snug fit. True, maybe when I looked at my dick I probably wouldn't smile to myself. Perhaps I'd wish I still had my skin - I don't know. But I envy those US boys. I really envy them.

If you're interested, email me at chilliesmadNOSPAM@hotmailNOSPAM.com


 
Um... (none / 0) (#77)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 9th, 2001 at 06:24:20 AM PST
... Adam is a Catholic. Given the references to his wife, how could he possibly be a priest? :p

[to be fair i am excluding reverends et al that get married, then convert to catholicism and become priests... who are married... don't ask.]


 
So Mrs. Rightman prefers your dick (5.00 / 1) (#59)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 09:26:18 PM PST
to that of a baby in diapers. You must be so proud.
<p>
You should know better. Mrs. Rightmann was only giving you a lame excuse when in fact she has seen many adult penises, circumised and uncircumsised. You caught her mid-Freudian slip, and that's the lame excuse she gave you.


 
The bare look (none / 0) (#82)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 23rd, 2001 at 05:34:24 PM PST
Trimming the short and curlies helps to prevent the pain of removing the gauze from my abraded member. A rubber, with a periodic retred as the night goes on, works as well.


 
Agreed (none / 0) (#21)
by Right Hand Man on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 11:28:35 AM PST
I will overlook your reference to 'heretical revival-tent snake handling' Christians for the moment. I realize that most folks are blinded by fear ("Oh, my faith isn't strong enough, those snakes will kill me!")

You advocate the right stance on circumcision, although you seem to be merely suggesting that it be done.

"And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." --Genesis 17:14

"And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed." -- Genesis 17:12

I see no room for error in these words. Unless this Ant would like to see his child cast into eternal damnation the only choice is to cut the boy before his eigth day has expired.


-------------------------
"Keep your bible open and your powder dry."

You gotta read THE WHOLE BOOK! (none / 0) (#61)
by specom on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 10:05:15 AM PST
Sorry but those passages about circumcision in Genesis are for Jews only. As another poster pointed out, in Acts Paul negates the act of circumcision for GENTILES (NOT EVERYBODY as he implied). There was a question among the early church whether or not Gentiles should become Jews before they could become Christians. Kind of like having to become a Cub Scout first to become a Boy Scout. It was decided that there would be no differentiation between members of the body of Christ on the basis of race or nationality due to the new covenant of the cross and the believer's acceptance of Christ's sacrifice thru baptism instead of circmcision.


Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.

You gotta READ the whole book! (none / 0) (#62)
by Right Hand Man on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 01:57:24 PM PST
It was Peter who did that, and he was simply relating the results of the debate about uncircumsized Gentiles between a few apostles. He wasn't speaking the word of God.

You should also note that even if they were speaking the word of God, being uncircumsized would apply only to heathens who convert, not children born into a Christian family.


-------------------------
"Keep your bible open and your powder dry."

WTF? (none / 0) (#64)
by tkatchev on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 08:06:36 PM PST
Not children born to a Christian family.

Now, where exactly did you find this is in the Bible? Please cite passages. Basically, the whole Acts speaks of circumcision in a negative tone, saying very clearly that circumcision and Christianity are completely unrelated.

Now you come here, and make wild claims without any support; moreover, your claims contradict everything that was said by Peter and Paul in Acts.

Evidence, please. Otherwise, I'll just assume that you're speaking out of your ass.


--
Peace and much love...




Ha! (none / 0) (#65)
by Mendax Veritas on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 08:27:57 PM PST
Now, where exactly did you find this is in the Bible? Please cite passages.


Funny, over here, just two days ago, I asked you for specific references for your Biblical claims; you refused to give them, saying that you didn't want things "taken out of context". Now you're demanding references. Why doesn't the same logic apply?

I note in passing the immensely disrespectful use of a link to an Islamic information resource, associated with the words "speaking out of your ass" -- a typically pathetic gesture for someone unable to accept that Islam is vastly superior to Christianity by any sensible measure.


You don't understand. (none / 0) (#66)
by tkatchev on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 09:49:21 PM PST
The whole Acts is interlaced with commentary on circumcision and Judaism. How am I going to quote one whole book of the New Testament here? Don't you think this is a bit unrealitic? Besides, I have a hard time believing that you don't have a Bible at home, so why not just take it out and read the Acts?

O.B. Islam. So, you admit it. Are you a Muslim? If not, are you going to convert, since Islam is "vastly superiour"?


--
Peace and much love...




References (none / 0) (#67)
by Mendax Veritas on Mon Nov 5th, 2001 at 10:34:13 PM PST
The whole Acts is interlaced with commentary on circumcision and Judaism. How am I going to quote one whole book of the New Testament here?
I asked for references, not quotes. You do understand the difference? A few representative ones would do.
Besides, I have a hard time believing that you don't have a Bible at home, so why not just take it out and read the Acts?
Why is that so hard to believe? True, I do have a Bible (NASB95 translation), but it isn't something I read for pleasure. If someone points me to an interesting verse, I'll read it and the surrounding text, but "read Acts" is asking a bit much.
Are you a Muslim? If not, are you going to convert, since Islam is "vastly superior"?
Superior to Christianity. For your question to make any sense, I would have to be a Christian, which I am not.


Reference. (none / 0) (#68)
by tkatchev on Tue Nov 6th, 2001 at 02:09:02 AM PST
Read the Acts. It explains a lot, and I'm not going to post 100 little snippets here, especially when atheist liberalists are begging for a chance to argue with me by way of retarded, out-of-context quips.


--
Peace and much love...




 
Really important reason (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by alprazolam on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 11:48:24 AM PST
It's good for the economy. Imagine what all those guys would do if people stopped having children circumcised. It could result in thousands of lost jobs.


 
Circumcison Bible question! (5.00 / 1) (#24)
by elenchos on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 12:31:24 PM PST
Hey, you know during the night right after God tells Moses to go back into Egypt (Exodus 4:22ff), and God suddenly decides to try to kill Moses for no reason (4:24) and then Zipporah (how come no one names their daughter Zipporah?) cuts off their son's foreskin with a sharp stone and rubs it on Moses, getting him nice an bloody. And then it's all fine and God doesn't kill Moses after all. Whew, that was close.

So my question is... What is UP with that? God seemed pretty happy with Moses up to then, charging him to lead the chosen people and all that, yet come nightfall he suddenly God is all out of sorts. Why? Well, we sort of guess that it was because of the circumcision thing. Lesson: GOD WILL KILL YOU IF YOU DON'T CIRCUMCISE YR SON! Fine. But why did Moses need to get his son's bloody foreskin rubbed all over him? Well, forget why. God must just like Moses better that way.

The question is, what happened to this tradition? Or is it still done this way and I just haven't seen it?

Thanks.

Oh, also. What do you do ultimately with the foreskin when you are done with it? I know at one point they built a pile of them, but that was enemy foreskins, IIRC...


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


What to do with leftover foreskins (4.66 / 3) (#27)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 02:17:25 PM PST
You stitch them into a wallet. Not only is it stylish, but you can rub it and it'll turn into a briefcase.


 
What to do with all those foreskins ? (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by jozelecrisis on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 06:50:43 PM PST
Hi.

Although I suppose many a ritual -can- be performed with them, I think it may peak Your interest to know that foreskin cells are often used for growing patches of skin for skin grafts (i.e. for burn victims and such) because they tend to divide and multiply a lot really easily.

Now, this idea might appaul You - and to be honest.. I'm not all too thrilled with the idea either.

But if I were burnt, I wouldn't be complaining too much either if it may just save my skin/hide.


 
Circumcision (none / 0) (#25)
by tkatchev on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 12:35:02 PM PST
Circumcision is evil and an abomination under God. Read the Acts if you do not believe in me.

Regardless, you will pay for making an innocent child suffer for the sake of your own insecurities and sexual complexes. If not during your time here on Earth, then definitely in the afterlife.

There can be no excuse for circumcision; it is nothing less than a work of Satan, a horrible paganist mutilation rite.


--
Peace and much love...




Let me see if I have this right... (none / 0) (#28)
by Mendax Veritas on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 03:09:33 PM PST
...you're saying that Jews are Satanists and Pagans?

I have no intention of reading all of Acts, so would you kindly reference the specific verses in which circumcision is condemned?


Indeed. (none / 0) (#39)
by tkatchev on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 03:47:38 AM PST
Of course the Jews are paganists! That is really the whole point of Christianity, is it not?

Again, read the Acts if you don't believe me.

P.S. And no, I won't post Bible snippets here, for two reasons: a) there are too many of them b) I don't want them to be taken out of context. The Acts is a fairly straight-forward "terms of service" for Christians, and taking out bits and pieces of it is wrong.


--
Peace and much love...




categories categories (none / 0) (#42)
by philipm on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 01:34:22 PM PST
I'm a jew, a paganist, a christian, a terrorist, and an atheist.

When the democrats come around I'm also on welfare.

Besides, what does god have to do with cutting part of your penis off?
And if we can do it to guys, why can't we do it to females?



--philipm

Exactly. (none / 0) (#44)
by tkatchev on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 02:18:00 PM PST
Q: What does God have to do with cutting off a part of your penis?

A: Absolutely nothing.

(The wacky Judaists think it gives them some sort of magic powers. But then, they think eating fish with scales angers their wacky pagan God.)


--
Peace and much love...




You wanna talk wacky... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by noah Oneye on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 07:01:37 AM PST
How about the mass hallucination wherein Catholics drink wine and eat crackers while believing them to be the flesh and blood of Jesus? Talk about bizarre pagan rituals, I reckon cannibalism is in that category...


"...and in your free time you can make me sandwiches..."

 
Wow, you're a retard (none / 0) (#50)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 10:23:41 AM PST
Jews are allowed to eat fish with scales. Says so in Leviticus.

Go back to pagan russia and leave the Jews alone.


Oh, I'm so sorry... (none / 0) (#51)
by tkatchev on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 11:55:11 AM PST
...not.

Like I care about your pagan Judaist rituals. It's all the same to me, dood.


--
Peace and much love...




But (0.00 / 1) (#58)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 09:25:41 PM PST
I'm not jewish, hahahahahahah!

but I will use this yiddish expression: You are a shmuck.


 
even God (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by johnny ambiguous on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 05:40:35 PM PST
Besides, what does god have to do with cutting part of your penis off? And if we can do it to guys, why can't we do it to females?

I am not an expert on religious matters, but I know this. Even God can not cut part of a female's penis off, for females do not have penises.

Yours WD "theologian" K - WKiernan@concentric.net


Getting into my Chevrolet Magic Fire, I drove slowly back to the office. - L. Rosen

 
You're not communicating effectively (none / 0) (#26)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 01:59:48 PM PST
American's are too materialistic
Accoding to this phrase, you are suggesting that the swapping of Americans is too materialistic, when it seems clear that you meant to say that Americans themselves are too materialistic. If you're not going to use proper English, I'd appreciate you finding somebody who can write gooder.


 
Aren't we forgetting something? (3.00 / 4) (#29)
by wymynyst on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 03:35:35 PM PST
In your misogynistical haste to gabble on semi-mystically about your penis, you've overlooked the one issue that no discussion of circumcision is complete without. I speak, of course, of femyle circumcision, a barbaric rite that is still forced upon young girls in many third and second world nations, including parts of the United States.

Male circumcision is really quite a trivial issue. It's funny how such unimportant decisions are often the hardest to make. I assure, it doesn't matter one way or the other how much skin you remove from your son's penis. It's a useless flap of flesh on a useless but dangerous organ. If you were willing to consider cutting the whole thing off, I'd have some clear advice on that subject. As it is, he'll no doubt spend the rest of his rape-hungry male life using his phallus to beat unfortunate womyn into subservience.

Femyle circumcision, on the other hand, removes one of the most important and spiritually significant parts of a womyn's body. Without it, no womyn is complete, and hyr life will be empty and dissatisfying because of that. Only vagina-hating male thugs could contemplate such a horrific act. It is done for the sole purpose of binding womyn to the will of men.

Femyle circumsion is an instrument of male oppression and rape-culture. Male circumcision is merely an irrelevant tradition born from outmoded and thoroughly debunked phallo-centric stone-age beliefs. Let us have no more discussion of it.


female circumcision (none / 0) (#32)
by sputnik on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 04:45:13 PM PST
re-reading my earlier comments on this subject, I realize that I failed to address female circumcision, which, as wymynyst pointed out, must be dealt with in any discussion on circumcision.

female circumcision is horrible and barbaric. female circumcision inflicts far greater damage upon its victims than does male circumcision. wymynyst is correct when she points out that male circumcision is a trivial issue. but it is a real one nonetheless, and the casual abandon with which naive parents lop the top of their children's penises off must be addressed as well. millions of children, male and female, fall victim to circumcision every year. to ignore the cries of helpless male children because of the greater pain inflicted on female victims would be a great injustice.

the more that i think about it... i would actually like to turn wymynyst's statement around and say that any discussion about circumcision is incomplete without a discussion of male circumcision. female circumcision should be the core and the heart of the discussion because of its far more traumatic effects. male circumcision should not even be an issue (it is allowed by well-meaning but misinformed parents who only need a nudge in the right direction, while female circumcision is perpetrated by tyrants and brutish mysogynists who need far greater correction)


what's wrong with female circumcision? (none / 0) (#41)
by philipm on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 01:31:44 PM PST
I mean, I know it hurts and all, but so does 12 years of cheap education followed by 4 years of really really expensive education and a lifetime debt.

Which hurts more?





--philipm

 
May I say (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by Husaria on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 05:17:42 PM PST
Please spell check your posts before you post, your constant misspellings make your posts unreadable, thank you.
Sig sigger

 
Let the child decide later (none / 0) (#30)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 04:28:16 PM PST
What if your parents decided to cut off both of your little toes because of their religion or culture or whatnot? Sure, they're not much use, but they're yours. I would definitely defer this sort of thing until later on.


 
benefits.... (none / 0) (#31)
by sputnik on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 04:31:05 PM PST
the claim that circumcision offers some benefits in intercourse is dubious at best. (cite) That God requires circumcision of Jews is indisputable. But strict adherance to Levitical Law is not required of Christians (or so says Paul).

I sumbit that God mandated circumcision of the Jews for three reasons:

hygiene - the benefits are obvious for a desert-dwelling people, but are negligible in any society that has the option of bathing regularly.

to set the Jews apart - this is a regular theme in the Old Testament. The Jews were set apart from the heathens that surrounded them by their traditions and laws. Circumcision was an outward sign of this separation. But today, circumcision is quite popular, thus negating circumcision's ability to set one apart. I, for one, prefer to set myself apart from heathens and pagans by my Godly attitude and behavior.

to suppress unseemingly enjoyment of the sexual act - this ties in nicely with my earlier statement on the dubious benefits of circumcision regarding intercourse. To suggest that the penis is more effective in its altered form is to suggest that God didn't do it right the first time. God designed mankind's sexual organs in a specific way, for a specific purpose, and with specific mechanics in mind. Circumcision, and the accompanying lack of satisfaction derived from intercourse, is a sacrifice asked by God of the Jews.

None of these reasons are sufficient or relevant enough to, in my mind, justify the needless mutilation of infant children who are not even given the option of declining.


creation is ongoing (none / 0) (#36)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 11:58:45 PM PST
By circumcising their males, Jews participate in G-d's creation.


 
Hebrews weren't the only ones to circumsize (none / 0) (#53)
by John Milton on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 12:38:11 PM PST
Actually, there was nothing special about Hebrew (Note that I didn't say Jew. They are two completely different things.) circumcision. All of the neighboring netions did the exact same thing. The only difference is that the Hebrews claimed that they did it for religious reasons.


-John Milton

perhaps if you lived in a desert (none / 0) (#55)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 02:06:33 PM PST
you'd prefer to cut off your foreskin rather than spend every evening picking out the particles of sand embedded in your dick.


 
myth busters (none / 0) (#34)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 09:07:54 PM PST
Thus you will be able to give your wife greater sexual satisfaction, and even a vaginal orgasm

I've had sex with many women, and have never seen the above. The vaginal orgasm is a MYTH.


I see. (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 2nd, 2001 at 09:41:39 PM PST
You have had sex with many women, but failed to induce vaginal orgasm in any of them. This is completely credible.

Or perhaps no woman has ever thought it necessary to inform you of the event. From what I understand of these things, it is not yet Standard Female Policy to provide Full Disclosure upon Completion of Sexual Activities.

Then again, it could be that you are simply too good for them-- perhaps, after bearing witness to the miracle of your sexual prowess, they are so quiveringly exhausted as to be unable to tell you their own names, let alone the locus of their astonished pleasure.

But I doubt it.


It's worth noting that I live in Sudan (none / 0) (#70)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Nov 6th, 2001 at 08:32:03 AM PST
where female circumcision is widely practiced. On a lighter note, no female has ever strayed from me by seeking intercourse with another man.


 
what kind of myth? (none / 0) (#43)
by philipm on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 01:36:02 PM PST
Is it a liberal, i'm on welfare myth? Or is it a texas, bit by twenty rattlesnakes myth?



--I'm on welfare, so I'm not qualified to comment


--philipm

 
Myth? (none / 0) (#71)
by opalhawk on Tue Nov 6th, 2001 at 04:32:13 PM PST
Myth my swollen hot and pink Clitoris!

I am a woman, and enjoy the unequaled sensation of vaginal orgasm on a fairly regular basis.

I think you are doing somthing wrong my friend, if you ladies are not experiecning complete satisfaction. Let me tell you, The vaginal orgasm, G-spot orgasm as well as any female orgasm in general were all thought to be myths for a long time. They exist, they are wonderful.

I wish you ladies knew what they were missing

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.


vaginal orgasms... (none / 0) (#72)
by nathan on Tue Nov 6th, 2001 at 04:45:25 PM PST
So, does size matter?

No offense, I'm seriously curious...

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

Of Course Size Matters (none / 0) (#74)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Nov 7th, 2001 at 09:18:00 AM PST
Length seems to be immaterial, but width is important.


Excellent. (none / 0) (#75)
by nathan on Wed Nov 7th, 2001 at 12:01:37 PM PST
Good for me.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Size... (none / 0) (#78)
by opalhawk on Fri Nov 9th, 2001 at 09:19:27 AM PST
Size does matter... but only to a point. (ha ha get it? nevermind...)

This is a discusion my female friends and I have had over and over. We all agree that there needs to be enough there to get the job done, but in the end it is technique, not size that is the most important.

What is "enough"? That depends on the lady... I have one friend who would be happy with somthing only about 3in inches length. My personal preferance is somwhere between 5 1/2 and 7 inches in length.

Girth is also a concideration. We have had a lot of discussions regarding what is "too skinny" and "too fat". Girls seem to be happy with a range of 3 inches of total girth (wrap the tape measure clear around the fattest part of your dick....) up to about 6 inches. Anything lower is not going to really provide pleasure (unless you have an incredible technique, which I have seen done...) and anything bigger is going to be painful.

Yes, there is such a thing as too big.

I hope that answers your question... so, how do you stack up? *giggle*

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.


 
Maybe you ain't doing it right... (none / 0) (#83)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 30th, 2001 at 09:13:54 PM PST
No offense.
The clitoris and/or the G-spot must be stimulated if you want the girl to have an orgasm.
The clitoris... well that's pretty obvious but you might want to manually stimulate this part.
The G-spot is inside the vagina, about 2 inches inward on the front side, i would advise a manual exploration :). With the right technique, you can massage this point with the tip of your penis during sex. But this is harder in missionary position since this applies more pressure to the girls backside instead of the front. I like the "spoons" postition, on my side behing her. That way i have more control, and access to both the clitoris and the G-spot.


 
uhh (3.00 / 1) (#45)
by j0nkatz on Sat Nov 3rd, 2001 at 04:14:31 PM PST
boys have a penis.
girls have a vagina.


 
What's the big deal? (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 12:23:34 PM PST
There are people(mainly against circumcision) who get really worked up about it, on the basis that it's horrible mutililation, or something. It's just a fucking flap of skin.

I realize that those looking at the issue from a religious perspective have a reason to take it seriously, but all those secular humanists and atheists who think it's a crime against humanity are nuts.

When's the last time you used your foreskin? "Man, the traffic on the freeway is really bad today. Good thing I've got my foreskin." "Look! A charging rhino! But don't worry, I've got foreskin!"




OK. (4.00 / 4) (#54)
by tkatchev on Sun Nov 4th, 2001 at 01:27:57 PM PST
Splendid reasoning.

Your eyelids -- just a flap of skin.
Your ears -- just two flaps of skin.
Your lips -- just two flaps of skin.
Your nose -- just a piece of cartilage.
Your nails -- just some dead skin cells.
Your toes -- just two useless little bones.
etc., ad nauseam.

The man's foreskin is one of the most important organs on the man's body. It protects your glans. A man without a foreskin is as horribly mutilated as a man without eyelids.


--
Peace and much love...




Oh no! (none / 0) (#80)
by RabidMonkey on Fri Nov 9th, 2001 at 11:28:23 AM PST
I'm horribly mutilated. Oh no - what shall I do <gasp>

Maybe I'll tour with a circus, showing off my disgusting disfigurement.

Oh ... what to do with my life now that I know I'm mutilated! I can't end it ...

Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself. I'm sure you're not exactly a prize either.


 
two bones? (none / 0) (#81)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 11th, 2001 at 10:18:01 AM PST
you only have 2 toes, whats up with that


 
Thanks mom! (none / 0) (#69)
by gt3 on Tue Nov 6th, 2001 at 03:29:41 AM PST
I say if parents have the right to name their children, and literally
own them for the first 18 year of their life, then they have the
right to decide if their son's PeePee looks good. Im circumsized and i'd like to give a shout out to my mom for the quick thinking some 23 years ago.


 
The way that can be spoken is not the constant way (none / 0) (#73)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Nov 7th, 2001 at 08:32:42 AM PST
You religionists ponting at your dusty old books arguing minutiae of the merits of outmoded magical superstitious rituals make me absolutely sick. Thank you all for reminding me of the total idiocy of the Abrahamic religions.


Well, if its religious (none / 0) (#79)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Nov 9th, 2001 at 10:31:47 AM PST
Why not let the baby reach an age where he / she can say....<BR>
Now is the time for me to embrace god. Cut off my dick / clit, so I may be one with the religion.
<BR>
OR, you can grab a bar or soap, a little water and scrub yourself clean. I imagine that soap and water were not to prevalent in the desert 6000+ years BC. Imagine the smegma counts back then!<BR>

Thank God I'm civilized. I don't need surgery to keep clean!


 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.