[Closed] 235 posts about renaming a dead dog? Wow, reckon this'll top 1000 then!

it seems that a lot of personal opinion is being misconstrued as racism/antisemitism/mysogyny etc etc these days and people now, rightly or wrongly, feel the incessant need to self-censor what they say in order to avoid upsetting the minority

Romper Stomper

top film

Never mind all that...what's his dog called?

Sambo ?

Darkie?

Sheila

he decided to insult as many groups as possible so he called it Abo Hamza

Maddie

Female circumcision was outlawed years ago, so why not the same ruling for boys???

I suspect that most of the ire directed at Crowe has arisen not because of the religious aspect of this, but because the majority of American males are circumcised. [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision#Non-religious_circumcision ]It is standard procedure for them to lop bits off their boys, irrespective of whether it is medically advisable to do so.[/url] So when Crowe says "That's a bit messed up" 85% of US blokes think "Russell Crowe just said I'm barbaric and stupid!" and they kick off as a result. Jewish and Muslim tradition is just a handy stick to beat him with.

Apparently it is a sign for the big ape sky god(s) that you are one of the 'chosen few' (AFAIK this is Jewish people and muslims - are there any more religions that chop bits off like that for a laff?).

Though s/he must be a right perv to demand to see your bits before you enter paradise. "Sorry, you've been a fantastic bloke but your tackles still intact. You're going downstairs!"

I would imagine trying to make a detailed comment about circumcision on twitter must be quite tricky, and you run the risk of your point being cut short.......what with only 140 characters to use.

I personally think circumcision should only be done for medical reasons, not because its part of your religion or creed.

FWIW its a bit of a non story, although he did issue a grovelling apology the next day IIRC.
It did make me laugh when someone said circumcision was more hygenic, to which Crowe replied, so you'll be sewing up your @rsehole then? Top retort.

TuckerUK - Member

Why on earth has Russell Crowe had to apologise to people that harm their children?

I presume he'd punched them?

Culturally tolerated body mutilation but hey lets tolerate it and imagine what zealous atheists would do to a baby's face with a gay swan.

A gay swan with a muslamic ray gun?

I feel strangely attracted to those smooth willies on pron sites though. 🙂

we don't stone to death homosexuals any more, why do we allow people to ritualisticly deface their children?

It's a bit rude to guys who have had to be circumcised, for whatever reason, to claim that they have been "defaced".

I agree that it is comparable to stoning homosexuals to death though.......you're spot on there mate.

circumcision can reduce the risk of contracting hiv

other than that its a bit pointless really

I feel strangely attracted to those smooth willies on pron sites though.

We have much to discuss!

They just look so shiny!!

I feel strangely attracted to those smooth willies on pron sites though

on reflection dd, is that something that you really wanted to share

kimbers - Member

circumcision can reduce the risk of contracting hiv

other than that its a bit pointless really

🙂

apart from the pun, in contrast to female circumcision it actually has positive effects in terms of sexual pleasure. The exposed glans becomes less sensitive and allows the circumcised guy to last longer

The exposed glans becomes less sensitive and allows the circumcised guy to last longer

Thinking of Anne Widdecombe can have the same effect without the need for such drastic action.

bigyinn - Member

kimbers - Member

circumcision can reduce the risk of contracting hiv

How?

Is it due to potential sexual partners falling over laughing at the sight of a leather helmet?

I would say that circumcision would increase the likelihood of a skinned/chafed helmet therefore increasing the risk of hiv.

As for the increased sexual pleasure thing - why on earth would you want to desensitise your glans? Pelvic floor exercises would be a much better way of increasing staying power without mutilation.

you run the risk of your point being cut short...

s****s

[url= http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21114567 ]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21114567[/url]

its a pretty well established fact the why is not so sure, as i understood it antigen presenting cells only come to the surface of your skin on the undeside of the foreskin and HIV works by attacking immune system cells like apcs

It's a bit rude to guys who have had to be circumcised, for whatever reason, to claim that they have been "defaced".

I see your point, but I don't agree. Just as I don't think it would be rude to genuine amputees to described children that have limbs removed for some sacrifice as 'defaced'.

apart from the pun, in contrast to female circumcision it actually has positive effects in terms of sexual pleasure. The exposed glans becomes less sensitive and allows the circumcised guy to last longer

I can last as long as I need to, so that's that argument down the pan.

I wish you had linked to a vid of an actual circumcision op SBZ, at least it would be funnier.

BOOM! Take that Hale & Pace!

on reflection dd, is that something that you really wanted to share

🙂

Ah well, too late for the edit now 😕

I can last as long as I need to, so that's that argument down the pan.

You do know that anecdote is not the singular of evidence, don't you?

You do know that anecdote is not the singular of evidence, don't you?

Not sure, you hum it and I'll join in when I can.

de[b]face[/b] their [b]child[/b]ren?

I see what you did there.

I can last as long as I need to, so that's that argument down the pan.

You do know that anecdote is not the singular of evidence, don't you?

You're coming on to me aren't you? Steady tiger! Not that I'm not flattered mind you, but I kinda prefer the ladies myself, nothing personal.

It appears that'd more people care about the misnaming of a dog in a fictional movie account of a wartime event than care about the systematic abuse of children...kind of say lots about the terrible falseness of being PC.

its a pretty well established fact the why is not so sure, as i understood it antigen presenting cells only come to the surface of your skin on the undeside of the foreskin and HIV works by attacking immune system cells like apcs

Using an apparent reduction in risk of HIV as a reason for circumsision is at best weak. That study has had many many criticisms not least because the small reduction in HIV is from female-to-male infection not male-to-female tranmission or male-to-male. Another criticism is that were it to be true then places like th US where male circumcision is common should have much lower HIV rates than uk where it is not. The reverse seems to be the case when you look at this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate

Condoms are a much much better way of reducing the risk of HIV infection in ALL group, cricumcision is next to useless.

circumcision can reduce the risk of contracting hiv

There used to be a big black dog that chased us whe we were on road bikes on the back lane near to Stoodley Pike above Todmorden. It had 3 legs and was called Tripod. We used to p!ss ourselves when the owner shouted it back.

It appears that'd more people care about the misnaming of a dog in a fictional movie account of a wartime event than care about the systematic abuse of children

That's a bit unfair, I have very strong feelings concerning children being named ****.

systematic abuse of children

What, male circumcision? A procedure practiced in many cultures/societies around the globe, that has absolutely **** all damaging effects on billions of men who have been circumcised throughout history?

Ha ha! I've read some ignorant shit on here, but this is right up there with the best!

Gotta be a troll, surely?

Who wants to see my knob? It's shiny and lovely. 😀

[img] http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcReg5rHLBoq5I-MgAtfxAvTAj2C0xhXjVHIR9u-gGOJX6I7qoEa [/img]

Who wants to see my knob?

What that thing on top of your shoulders ? ...........I've seen it loads of times.

DD; I jolly well have not had it chrome plated, but now you mention it....

It has been polished quite a bit though.

I made the mistake of image googling "shiny knob" 😯

that has absolutely **** all damaging effects on the billions of men who have been circumcised throughout history?

I tried to read up on this. Evidence to support the above claim seems to amount to circumcised men saying "Let me tell you, there is NOTHING wrong with MY willy hur hur hur!"

Unfortunately it's impossible to contrast and compare in this situation.

Mol, let me tell you....

A procedure practiced in many cultures/societies around the globe,

...for absolutely no good reason whatsoever. Just because a procedure is widely practiced does not make it a good idea, and does not mean it isn't "systematic abuse".

'Systematic abuse'

Oh my giddy aunt... 😆

This thread is one that'll keep on giving, is not it?

Let the abuse commence....

I was merely quoting what other people have said and pointing out a flaw in your argument. I don't personally think that it qualifies as abuse (although you can't really argue with the systematic part), however performing an unnecessary and pointless operation on a child is however wrong in my opinion.

however performing an unnecessary and pointless operation on a child is however wrong in my opinion.

It's ignorance like this that I find amusing yet a bit sad at the same time. 😐

Where's the ignorance there, Fred? It seems like a valid point if not necessarily one I agree with.

Well rather than being condesending like that, why don't you give me a good medical (or other) reason why it isn't pointless and unnecessary and also why it can't wait until the child has grown into an adult and is capable of making the decision themself?

why it can't wait until the child has grown into an adult

😮

It's ignorance like this that I find amusing yet a bit sad at the same time

That's not ignorance, it's an opinion.

There's no doubting it's unnecessary, medically, so the opinion is a valid one IMO.

Well rather than being condesending like that, why don't you give me a good medical (or other) reason why it isn't pointless and unnecessary and also why it can't wait until the child has grown into an adult and is capable of making the decision themself?

Have a think about parts of the World where male circumcision grew to be popular, and part of the culture. Take the Middle East for example, where Judaism and Islam were born. Hot, dry, dusty places often without significant or even available water supplies. People would have travelled about the region a lot, trading, herding livestock, escaping persecution etc. So, regular washing and hygiene wooduv bin difficult. Circumcision helps keep things nice and clean down there. For maximum benefit, best to do it while the child is very young; drastically reduces the risk of infection and subsequent future complications.

So, not at all 'pointless and unnecessary'. If it were, it would most likely have not bin practiced globally and have more or less died out.

Female circumcision is another matter entirely, and I agree that it is a form of abuse. It is noticeably far, far less widesread and not particularly popular certainly not amongst more progressive religious communities.

But don't go dissing my thang cos it's better lookin' than yours... 8)

There's no doubting it's unnecessary, medically, so the opinion is a valid one IMO.

There's 'no doubt', is there? Oh right, so you speak for the entire global medical community, do you?

Have a think about parts of the World where male circumcision grew to be popular, and part of the culture. Take the Middle East for example, where Judaism and Islam were born. Hot, dry, dusty places often without significant or even available water supplies. People would have travelled about the region a lot, trading, herding livestock, escaping persecution etc. So, regular washing and hygiene wooduv bin difficult. Circumcision helps keep things nice and clean down there. For maximum benefit, best to do it while the child is very young; drastically reduces the risk of infection and subsequent future complications.

Sure, but to quote the sainted Martin Fry, that was then and this is now. So what's the justification in 2011, in the UK/US/Europe, where the cleanliness argument no longer applies?

Why do people get their ears/other body parts pierced (Poddy I'm looking at YOU!)? Why wear tattoos? Why have a particular hairstyle, wear particular clothes, make-up, perfume, fake tan, 'skin lightening' cream, etc etc etc?

As for the 'let someone decide for themselves when they are an adult', well, fair enough. I don't disagree with that, tbh.

But I'm not bothered, and neither are any of the other 'systematically abused' blokes I know. 😀

Circumcision helps keep things nice and clean down there.

Umm... you don't need to cut your cheeks off to clean your teeth, do you?

I'm not convinced by the cleaning argument. Does anyone actually need to wash their foreskin?

Take the Middle East for example, where Judaism and Islam were born. Hot, dry, dusty places often without significant or even available water supplies. People would have travelled about the region a lot, trading, herding livestock, escaping persecution etc. So, regular washing and hygiene wooduv bin difficult.

2000 years ago perhaps, but why is still done today when most of that no longer applies?

Does anyone actually need to wash their foreskin?

Yeah you do; with bleach and a wire brush!

You filthy dirty unclean beast...

I have actually heard other (uncircumcised) blokes complaining about infections and stuff. Never heard anyone circumcised getting owt nasty. Dunno if this is evidence that circumcision is healthier at all, just saying what I've heard.

But then apparently I've bin 'systematically abused', so maybe I'm all mentally screwed up or something and can't think straight...

apart from the pun, in contrast to female circumcision it actually has positive effects in terms of sexual pleasure. The exposed glans becomes less sensitive and allows the circumcised guy to last longer

Mrs deadly's just enquiring as to the veracity of this. She mentioned something about a cost-benefit analysis. 😐

Using an apparent reduction in risk of HIV as a reason for circumsision is at best weak

By that argument, you could reduce the risk of HIV to almost nil by removing the penis completely.

"however performing an unnecessary and pointless operation on a child is however wrong in my opinion."

It's ignorance like this that I find amusing yet a bit sad at the same time.

How would you feel about a small child whose parents had given him, say, a tattoo or pierced ears?

EDIT: sorry, simultaneous posts, you sort of mentioned this in passing. Difference is, choice as an adult, or choice made for you by parent.

it actually has positive effects in terms of sexual pleasure

Umm.. not entirely convinced. I read much anecdotal evidence from women saying that circumcised men were typically more sensitive and gentle lovers, what with having a more delicate and sensitive bell end (possibly).

Elfin have you ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever...ever...said the words 'mmm yeah I take your point'?

By that argument, you could reduce the risk of HIV to almost nil by removing the penis completely.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. I'n not advocating it a means of reducing the risk of HIV, quite the reverse.

How would you feel about a small child whose parents had given him, say, a tattoo or pierced ears?

Tattoos are illegal in this country for anyone under 18 so that's not a valid argument and pierced ears will heal up if it is decided later that they are not wanted so that comparison isn't valid either. That being said I am generally opposed to that too.

How would you feel about a small child whose parents had given him, say, a tattoo or pierced ears?

Dunno if tattooing is actually legal under a certain age in the UK, and there are absolutely no health benefits, perceived or otherwise, and in fact probbly certain health risks. But many people have them done and are fine. Ear-piercing; it's a very quick and relatively painless procedure, and doesn't seem to cause serious harm, physical or mental, to even young children, so I don't think it's that bad. Praps wait until the child is at least old enough to understand what it's all about though. I've got friends with daughters, who've had them as young as three wanting pierced ears, most have made them wait until they're a bit older, but it seems the kids really want them, and are prepared to suffer a bit of temporary discomfort to look nice.

Elfin have you ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever...ever...said the words 'mmm yeah I take your point'?

Well, I actually did pretty much that, here:

As for the 'let someone decide for themselves when they are an adult', well, fair enough. I don't disagree with that, tbh.

Try reading. You might learn something. 😉

This will always be a matter of foreskinless people defending the action because they have to.

Ear-piercing; it's a very quick and relatively painless procedure, and doesn't seem to cause serious harm, physical or mental, to even young children, so I don't think it's that bad

Conceptually though - invasively decorating your kid for your pleasure? They're not dolls...

Elfin have you ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever...ever...said the words 'mmm yeah I take your point'?

He does if you make good enough points 🙂

A procedure practiced in many cultures/societies around the globe

I never realized that a procedure being wide spread was a form of validation.

Heehee! You lot are arguing about willies now

I might get mine out and start waving it in a minute, Dez.

Well, it does look particularly [i]nice[/i]....

Let's dispense with a few myths, shall we.

In the Western world in the 21st century, there are two and only two reasons to circumcise.

The first is medical. There are complaints which necessitate a foreskinectomy. (A mate of mine had it done, so is in a fairly unusual position of being able to comment on before and after).

The second is ritual. We've always done it / everyone else does it / his dad did it and he should match / our religion dictates it etc.

Everything else is cobblers. Sorry. It doesn't make you any better or worse in bed, it isn't any more or less hygienic, it doesn't stop you catching galloping nob-rot, it doesn't prevent masturbation (sorry, America), and it doesn't make you walk on water or shoot sparks out of your arse. All these other 'reasons' are just excuses to justify putting a child through non-therapeutic surgery.

Whether or not it's right to modify a newborn infant's genitals is an interesting discussion, but let's not hide behind nonsense, hey?

There's 'no doubt', is there? Oh right, so you speak for the entire global medical community, do you?

Maybe, as you said, in hot dry countries there were benefits, maybe there still are. I didn't know that.
Maybe if there were good reasons, humans in those areas would have evolved differently...?
But is it necessary in the rest of the world, medically? No. It's a tradition, no more, no less.
I have no problem with it personally, live and let live, but the opinion is still sound IMO.

Why do people get their ears/other body parts pierced (Poddy I'm looking at YOU!)? Why wear tattoos?

Big difference. That's personal choice at an age when I can make that decision. If I was tattooed when I was a baby, that would be different.