Comment

Comment by Dallas (on hiatus) on November 9, 2011 at 8:13am

Yeah, thanks for the link Nerd. I've passed it on. Although it was on a humor site, it's actually quite sad that people are that way -- so filled with fear, guilt, and shame about their bodies.

Comment by Paula T. on November 8, 2011 at 9:07pm

The Nerd, I wonder how many adults were not taking their own advice, but still tried to control something natural and normal.  More hypocrites, but that's not surprise.  Some wild (and sad) stuff there!

Comment by TNT666 on November 8, 2011 at 8:51pm

Comment by TNT666 on November 8, 2011 at 12:43am

Nope, I don't buy it for an instant, the crying child eventually finds comfort in mother's arms. Any psychotic anger/distrust I would think would get directed, if not at other males, then at all humans, not at the individual which actively provides most of the active loving, following after the male who caused the pain in the first place. If you really wanted to test your hypothesis, you'd have find studies which study the prevalence of misogyny among various groups of males, of which intact and cut. I doubt you'd find any correlation, but go ahead.

Comment by Tom Sarbeck on November 8, 2011 at 12:25am

What led you to infer the gender of the person who did the cutting?

"Is it possible, that since for most men our mothers are our first caregivers AFTER WE ARE BROUGHT HOME FROM WHERE THE CUTTING TOOK PLACE, that we associate the pain of cutting with our mothers and misogyny results?

Comment by TNT666 on November 8, 2011 at 12:16am

Since all but a very small percentage of circumcisions were performed by females, I don't see why any misogyny would be justifiable...

I met a guy on a personals this week, my age, from the USA, who'd never, ever, met any intact male, or heard of any locally, I was dumbfounded. I pleaded with him to never to that to any potential son of his. He asked what was different in bed... I gladly volunteered :)

Comment by Tom Sarbeck on November 7, 2011 at 11:59pm

When I started thinking about circumcision and its effects, I came to see that its purpose is:

1. to persuade boys to trust no one, or

2. to make unnecessary pulling the foreskin back before peeing and thereby reducing the chances that boys would discover masturbation.

Though not Jewish, my mom's doctor was and I was born in a Jewish hospital. They cut me and years later my mom told me that when she brought me home I trusted no one. Why was I not surprised?

Is it possible, that since for most men our mothers are our first caregivers, that we associate the pain of cutting with our mothers and misogyny results?

Any other opinions?

 

Comment by Dallas (on hiatus) on November 7, 2011 at 1:00pm

I got this from another site, and a guy who posted it basically said faith trumps the welfare of the child. Some people are such morons.

Comment by Dallas (on hiatus) on November 7, 2011 at 12:51pm

Lost Boys: An Estimate of U.S. Circumcision-Related Infant Deaths

 

Baby boys can and do succumb as a result of having their foreskin removed. Circumcision-related mortality rates are not known with certainty; this study estimates the scale of this problem. This study finds that approximately 117 neonatal circumcision-related deaths (9.01/100,000) occur annually in the United States, about 1.3% of male neonatal deaths from all causes. Because infant circumcision is elective, all of these deaths are avoidable. This study also identifies reasons why accurate data on these deaths are not available, some of the obstacles to preventing these deaths, and some solutions to overcome them.

 

Must pay for the PDF if you want it.

Comment by Jim Mo. on October 27, 2011 at 10:48am

Porn Is Ruining The Sex Lives Of An Entire Generation

Brain science? No distinction between vividly imagined and actual physical experience? Can overexposure make sex boring? Good for population control? Where is the simple answer?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• …
• 36
• Next ›
• Page