BC Health Pays to Restore Man's Foreskin

Tomas · Post by **Tomas** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:09 pm

An interesting article.

See the photo of the 'Circumstraint' board: used for infants

http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/07/25/Circumcision/

Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:41 pm

So?

Did he get new and improved Foreskin v2.0? MicroInjectable desensitizers for extended Carnal Mode and glow-in-the-dark GPS?

Tomas · Post by **Tomas** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:00 pm

It is obvious you hadn't bothered to click the article :-(

No, not at all of your bullshit humor :-)

A Metis Indian from Canada. Held down at the age of 8 years old and forcibly circumcised ... without any pain meds.

Why? - stop any masturbations that may occur.

A Mr. Kellogg, who invented the corn flakes cereal, stated (in 1888) that whacking-off was not a social good.

It's an interesting article for those who pursue truth via "human rights" .... guess you are not one of them. That's cool, though :-|

BTW - Thousands of Indians were forcibly cut, generally without meds. Mr. Kellogg believed this was the way to go about it.

The above Metis is a doctor by trade. At least he is doing something to stop the barbarity of forced circumcision.

Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:06 pm

If I cut you now, would you insist on meds?

Tomas · Post by **Tomas** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:33 am

My tool is 100% there :-)

At my age? ... it probably wouldn't faze me. That being said, I'm no gung-ho John Wayne ... cut me open with a hacksaw type of individual. The common ache and pains ... onset of the aging process are taking its toll in other subtle ways.

Lost an eye, kidney and two ribs (via some shrapnel from a rocket propelled grenade) in VietNam.
On a morphine drip for a couple/few weeks ... that was tough to wean myself from at a young age.

Never been a popper other than the occasional ibuprofen for a headache.

Judging by the way you asked your question ... seems clear to me you were circumsised.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 6:22 am

I never realized how awful that is. It really is abuse.

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:23 pm

I was never abused and yet I have no foreskin.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:38 pm

Tharan, I am relieved that you do not feel deprived of your foreskin.

Reading the article, I recognized the truth in it. I hope that circumcised men do not get distraught over their circumcisions, but I also hope that new recognitions can be made so that the next generations can benefit from the newly re-aquired wisdom.

Tomas · Post by **Tomas** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 2:09 am

The same holds true for women in Africa, and increasingly in Britain, where the women are forcibly "deflowered".

Seems to me, at least, it is a subtle form of rape. Perhaps situational mind-control for life.

Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:46 am

On the other hand, can I claim that I was abused and still feel victimized by particular cultural practices so that I can make you two happy and maybe get a little money out of it? Is there some disabled list I can get on?

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 5:58 am

read the article. go for the money. I wouldn't lie about it though - but perhaps you could think about what it really means. You can claim that you were abused without feeling victimized. That would be truth, IMO.

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 9:15 am

I'm sure I was abused if you say I was abused.

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:00 am

Yes, dear. *grin*

Kelly Jones · Post by **Kelly Jones** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:00 pm

Tharan's point is a good one. Abuse victims hold onto their emotional injuries as a form of martyrdom.

I am guessing that everyone who says "I am a survivor of abuse" will say they are abnormal, and why they are abnormal, but not that this is an implicit admission of what is normal.

I'd say this is because they're avoiding the realisation that emotional suffering is a personal choice.

.

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 3:44 am

There is also psychological reinforcement taking place. For every victim, there are probably two promoters.

Iolaus · Post by **Iolaus** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 2:56 am

Tharan wrote:I was never abused and yet I have no foreskin.

Tharan you say you were not abused, but do your parents have a video of the operation?

I have a hard time talking about circumcision, because I cry when I remember what I saw.

We look back on prior ages, such as the inquisitions, but we are doing something far crazier today. We hand over our newborns of less than a day and don't watch while out of sight and earshot they are subjected to 15-20 minutes of torture.

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:24 am

Anna? Is that you?

Wouldn't the definition of abused include some form of psychological trauma? I love my penis and have nothing but good memories with it. Who needs a foreskin?

Elizabeth Isabelle · Post by **Elizabeth Isabelle** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:07 am

Infant abuse may not be remembered, at least not on a concious level, by the infant as it grows - but who knows what the full impact is except in obvious, severe cases (shaken baby syndrome for example).

Kelly wrote:

Abuse victims hold onto their emotional injuries as a form of martyrdom...I'd say this is because they're avoiding the realisation that emotional suffering is a personal choice.

Some hold on to the injuries as martyrdom, and some make the personal choice to suffer, but much of the time the abuse itself, especially psychological abuse, robs the person of the ability to get out of pain without help except through suicide. Now there's an alternative to emotional suffering... The psychological abuse takes away from a person's internal coping skills, isolates the person from external sources of coping skills, and sets a person up for more emotional abuse from other sources, compounding the effects of the abuse.

Kelly wrote:

I am guessing that everyone who says "I am a survivor of abuse" will say they are abnormal, and why they are abnormal, but not that this is an implicit admission of what is normal.

but they will almost universally ask "What's so great about 'normal?'"

I came from a very abusive environment. A year ago I was sent to a trauma specialist because of my startle reflex. After only hearing a few of the incidents, she told me "I've been a trauma specialist for over 20 years, and you've been through the worst I've ever heard of." I had personally heard of what I thought was worse from other people, but maybe it was something that they recognized in me that let them know I'd understand (this "specialist" did not).

There were a lot of years that I could not find my way out of the pain, and beleive me, I wanted out. I found my way, but I'm also unusually intelligent. I am now able to recognize some gifts from my experiences (although there are still things I need to keep working on). I think for myself far more than "normal" people whose parents did a good enough job of raising them that the offspring unconciously took on their parent's bad traits, and never recognized anything wrong with those traits. I understand the ugly side of humanity better than normal people, and I do not fear it; rather I confront it.

Were the gifts worth the cost? Not to me, but perhaps I can make the cost worthwhile by helping enough other people. Is that normal? No - perhaps normal is what David and Kevin were talking about - sitting in front of the TV all day (I do not even have television hooked up). Instead I'm generally doing something that I think will contribute to peace. If being a sloth is normal, what's so great about normal?

Iolaus · Post by **Iolaus** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:42 am

Tharan wrote:Anna? Is that you?

Wouldn't the definition of abused include some form of psychological trauma? I love my penis and have nothing but good memories with it. Who needs a foreskin?

Yes, it's me. The psychological abuse is extreme. The child knows something is terribly wrong while he's in the circumstraint, before the doctor shows up. He is already screaming in fright. He is uncomfortable, and he is in a position no newborn should be in.

A baby mammal expects a mother to protect it. Surely that must be quite hardwired. Lack of mother means death of newborn. Since the baby screams and no one comes or takes mercy, it means he has no mother.

Imagine being slowly and exquisitely tortured while screaming in the most eloquent way for mercy - but the voices - human voices - appear to take no notice.

Blair · Post by **Blair** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 2:56 pm

birdofhermes, you were making the same hysterical charged point 2 years ago when you posted here.

What's changed? Why are you here again?

Iolaus · Post by **Iolaus** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:40 am

prince wrote:birdofhermes, you were making the same hysterical charged point 2 years ago when you posted here.

What's changed? Why are you here again?

Who the hell are you?

It isn't hysterical. I know what I saw. What have you seen?

Is it hysterical to find torture a very negative thing?
Is it hysterical to suppose that torture of a one-day-old is worse than torture of, say, a soldier?
Is it hysterical to let people know what goes on behind closed doors in hospitals - which when I tell them produces great surprise? Knowing that they do not know the real picture, is it hysterical to inform them?

My advice to parents who want to circumcise is - go ahead, but for heaven's sake: watch!

What? You want something done to your baby that you lack the courage to witness?

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:24 am

Anna, I agree with you that the practice is not necessary. There are many cultural practices in this world that modify the body. Some much worse, from a health perspective, than circumsion.

But to rise this particular practice to the level of abuse is stretching the definition a bit, I think. It is unnecessary most probably, but there is not malintent. There is no motive or dervied joy from this practice if this were abuse. There would need to be some enjoyment or motive (i.e. torture). And I don't see it.

For example, one may argue that female clitoral circumsion, which is a completely different operation than male circumsicion, is done more for perceived social control by the males in the locations it is practiced. This component is not present in the tradional practice of male circumsicion.

Matt Gregory · Post by **Matt Gregory** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:30 am

I don't see what makes this worse than little girls getting their ears pierced. Of course you're going to have to strap a baby down if you're taking a scalpel to him so you don't accidentally cut his finger off. Personally, I think Anna is just obsessed with penises.

Tomas · Post by **Tomas** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:41 pm

Hey Anna,

Good to read some sanity on this subject of human rights abuses.

Seems they must all be controlled by the jewish/muslim practice of male social control (be like Mike) whether they realize it or not.

Obviously the repliers have all been 'nipped in the bud' at the above mucous membrane site.

I'd go a step further, though, and completely stop the "practice" of doing this to babies and young girls/boys.

Hey, they turn 18 anything goes!

BTW - Anna and Isabelle are a breath of fresh air on a staid message board.

Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971

Iolaus · Post by **Iolaus** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:52 pm

Matt and even Tharan,

This is absolutely beyond belief. I have seen little girls get their ears pierced! They can hardly feel it.

I am telling you what I saw and you laugh it off. Do you think having your fingernails ripped off in a torture chamber might hurt worse than getting your ears pierced?

I know a vietnam vet who got all his teeth pulled out one by one.

I am just speechless that you would dare to compare this to ear piercing, when you have not witnessed what I have witnessed.

Do you know what medical clamps look like? They are metal and they are ridged, and they can ratchet very tight. the doctor puts one on the end of the foreskin and RIPS it off the head of the penis. Yes, the foreskin is still attached in a newborn. Then he takes a second clamp and ratchets it onto the foreskin and pulls is on the opposite side and he brackets them both like that. then he attaches one of several different sorts of devices and beings cutting. whole thing takes 10-20 minutes. Severe pain, every second, no language, no idea what is going on.

The baby cries until he pukes and stops breathing. they sometimes lose consciousness briefly. We all know that torture can make the victim go unconscious. The baby screams more deeply than you have ever seen or heard a human being scream. He cries and empties his lungs while his whole body shakes and turns red.

I know because I have three children, and I NEVER saw any one of them scream like that - not with colic, NOTHING.

If you really think mothers in the mall would stand by while something like this happens to their babies ears you are crazy.

It is sad that you sit here and masturbate about enlightenment while having the unmitigated gall to laugh when you find out that thousands of small babies are being tortured in the name of some tribal God every day. And ignorance is what prolongs it - and you want to let it go on!

I asked you a question - what have you seen? The answer I already know.

Your damned right I love penises - but what has that got to do with this? torture is torure, no matter what body part.

Of course female circumcision should stop! It is even worse and is akin to castration.

And I didn't bring it up and it rarely comes up but when it does it is surely my duty to let people know about it.

By the way, it needn't be done so painfully. The old Jewish way was bad, but about 100 times less cruel.