Jump to content


Photo

Male Circumcision, Female Circumcision


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 brotherraheem

brotherraheem

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 22 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    African

Posted 07 June 2006 - 08:02 PM

Why do the World Health Organization and feminist organisations campaign against female circumcision but not against male circumcision? in the West, involuntary genital modification of females is forbidden, but it is practised all the time on males.

Why the double standard?

By the way, I am not opposed to either, but I think male circumcision should be encouraged because it is healthier. -- But this is not the subject of discussion.

#2 PantherWoman

PantherWoman

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts

  • Are you African: Y

Posted 07 June 2006 - 09:04 PM

QUOTE (brotherraheem @ Jun 7 2006, 09:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why do the World Health Organization and feminist organisations campaign against female circumcision but not against male circumcision? in the West, involuntary genital modification of females is forbidden, but it is practised all the time on males.

Why the double standard?

By the way, I am not opposed to either, but I think male circumcision should be encouraged because it is healthier. -- But this is not the subject of discussion.


I think the double standard is because female circumcision often involves removing more of the genitals (and more 'vital' parts) than male circumcision does. I would not be able to comfortably watch either being performed though because I am too squeamish.

#3 Twang

Twang

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1200 posts

Posted 09 June 2006 - 06:21 PM

Female circumcision is out right mutilation especially when I here some of the horror stories some of my Somali friends went through. With men it’s different after 9 days of being born it’s just a quick snip where babies are not quite accustom to pain or lack of, none of my boys cried when they had theirs snipped.

Peace.

#4 The Freelance Scientist

The Freelance Scientist

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2358 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Gambia
  • Interests:Education, Politics, Current Affairs, Dialogue with the community and others.

    I like going to the gym, playing football and travelling the world. I'm at university at the moment.

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Mandinka

Posted 11 June 2006 - 07:07 PM

QUOTE (Twang @ Jun 9 2006, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Female circumcision is out right mutilation especially when I here some of the horror stories some of my Somali friends went through. With men it’s different after 9 days of being born it’s just a quick snip where babies are not quite accustom to pain or lack of, none of my boys cried when they had theirs snipped.

Peace.



I couldn't have put it better myself. clap.gif
[i]The Freelance Scientist: He Is The Eternal Student.

#5 Mogho Naaba

Mogho Naaba

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3233 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Afrikan by way of the Native Indian homelands

Posted 20 June 2006 - 10:18 PM

QUOTE (Twang @ Jun 9 2006, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Female circumcision is out right mutilation especially when I here some of the horror stories some of my Somali friends went through. With men it’s different after 9 days of being born it’s just a quick snip where babies are not quite accustom to pain or lack of, none of my boys cried when they had theirs snipped.

Peace.


True dat.

#6 Timeline

Timeline

    Loyal Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 608 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    unsure

Posted 21 June 2006 - 09:04 PM

because male circumcision is "in style" Not being circumcised is analogous to an insult in western society these days. When it falls out of style for men to be snipped at the tip...then more males will complain and less will rush their kids off to go through the same questionable procedure.

#7 Tunduzi

Tunduzi

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 482 posts

  • Are you African: Y

Posted 22 June 2006 - 05:11 PM

^ First woman I've EVER heard speak out against male circumcision. ohmy.gif

#8 Timeline

Timeline

    Loyal Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 608 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    unsure

Posted 22 June 2006 - 06:02 PM

QUOTE (SoberSimian @ Jun 22 2006, 05:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
^ First woman I've EVER heard speak out against male circumcision. ohmy.gif


It just seems more like an attempt to "normalize" a child or assimulate him into the existing culture than look out for his actual health. It is a fashion trend.....and not much else. And not all of these procedures go smoothly.


#9 Djehutis Wisdom

Djehutis Wisdom

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1259 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Jamaican

Posted 22 June 2006 - 06:12 PM

QUOTE (Timeline @ Jun 22 2006, 07:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It just seems more like an attempt to "normalize" a child or assimulate him into the existing culture than look out for his actual health. It is a fashion trend.....and not much else. And not all of these procedures go smoothly.


As it goes in a psychology lesson I was studying DR Money and his theory that gender is a societal construction and the person he was studying was a boy who went for a circumcision and came out without a weenie. The procedure didn't go smoothly but it left the boy smooth.
I was born with two ears and one mouth. One guess as to which should be used more.


#10 Timeline

Timeline

    Loyal Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 608 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    unsure

Posted 22 June 2006 - 09:27 PM

QUOTE (Africanphoenix @ Jun 22 2006, 06:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
As it goes in a psychology lesson I was studying DR Money and his theory that gender is a societal construction and the person he was studying was a boy who went for a circumcision and came out without a weenie. The procedure didn't go smoothly but it left the boy smooth.



LOL! poor fella

#11 The Freelance Scientist

The Freelance Scientist

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2358 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Gambia
  • Interests:Education, Politics, Current Affairs, Dialogue with the community and others.

    I like going to the gym, playing football and travelling the world. I'm at university at the moment.

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Mandinka

Posted 13 December 2006 - 11:33 PM

http://news.bbc.co.u...lth/6176209.stm




Circumcision can cut the rate of HIV infection in heterosexual men by 50%, results from two African trials show.
The findings are so striking, the US National Institutes of Health decided it would be unethical to continue and stopped the trials early.

It supports a previous South African study which reported similar results.

Experts said it was a significant breakthrough but could not replace standard methods of preventing infection such as condoms.

These findings are of great interest to public health policy makers who are developing and implementing comprehensive HIV prevention programmes

Dr Elias Zerhouni
US National Institutes of Health

The two trials of around 8,000 men took place in Uganda and Kenya were due to finish in July and September 2007 respectively.

But after an interim review of the data by the NIH Data and Safety Monitoring Board decided to halt the trials as it was unethical not to offer circumcision in the men who were acting as controls.

Bleeding less likely

The trial in Kenya found a 53% reduction in new HIV infections in heterosexual men who were circumcised while the Ugandan study reported a drop of 48%.


Results last year from a study in 3,280 heterosexual men in South Africa, which was also stopped early, showed a 60% drop in the incidence of new infections in men who had been circumcised.

There are several reasons why circumcision may protect against HIV infection.

Specific cells in the foreskin may be potential targets for HIV infection and also the skin under the foreskin becomes less sensitive and is less likely to bleed reducing risk of infection following circumcision.

When Aids first began to emerge in Africa, researchers noted that men who were circumcised seemed to be less at risk of infection but it was unclear whether this was due to differences in sexual behaviour.
[i]The Freelance Scientist: He Is The Eternal Student.

#12 Tafari Shabazz

Tafari Shabazz

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 997 posts
  • Gender:Male

  • Are you African: Y

Posted 14 December 2006 - 12:18 AM

I'd rather just wear a rubber than get circumcised.

#13 Joseph K

Joseph K

    Advanced Contributor

  • Expired
  • PipPipPip
  • 390 posts

  • Are you African: N
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Irish

Posted 14 December 2006 - 10:25 AM

Good news for Jewish men and other 'roundheads' who like to go 'bareback' and sleep around, certainly, but for anyone else, taking the usual, less drastic precautions, is still much safer. Statistically, if all men were circumcised, since we're not all as responsible as we should be, the spread of HIV would be significantly slowed, but I'd no more require such a draconian measure than I would endorce compulsory vasectomies to stem population growth.
'That punk is either in love with that guy's daughter or he has a newfound respect for life'

#14 SoFrolushes

SoFrolushes

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 378 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    African-Caribbean (Jamaican)

Posted 14 December 2006 - 10:34 AM

i dont believe this one bit
My colour is my Joy
Not my burden!!!!


Think outside of the box....Think in spirit.....


#15 Mezmerized

Mezmerized

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 316 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    RDC

Posted 14 December 2006 - 11:50 AM

Hmmm

Something is just not right with this study....on the other hand, i feel that this will encourage the careless African men who go around beating their shoulders thinking they can escape STDs and HIV because they are circumcised.....i have even heard C African men say things like they are "immune" to "sinful" deseases like HIV.... laugh.gif This article will do more harm in that it will encourage this stupid, ignorant way of thinking thats plagues C African communities.

However, circumcision has been an African tradition since the begining of time....and i feel that this article will now give reason to those Africans who are quick to love Western way to start coming down on circumcision and call it a useless and barbaric practice. In my culture, circumcision has more to do with cleaness as well as rite of passage...its a journey that all our boys must take....for some Diaspora, this is just mumbo jumble....especially since white people have told them that its barbaric and uncessary! laugh.gif

If i had done the study, i would most definitely have started on a different angle, but its the Yurugus scientists so i won't bother either way.

Anyways, I will stll circumcise any of my male child....and still teach them to wear a condom no matter what.....perhaps thats what the stupid study should have made PARAMOUNT....not just ramble on about how it cut the rates of infection by 50%...stupidness!

#16 kephren

kephren

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    JAMAICA

Posted 14 December 2006 - 12:47 PM

They can put this theory alongside the AIDS out of Africa and Green Monkey theories.

Does circumcision reduce the infection and transmission rates for other STDs.

Have they explained how HIV/AIDS theory still does not fit the same infection/transmission trends associated with gonnorhea & sphyllis.

#17 Joseph K

Joseph K

    Advanced Contributor

  • Expired
  • PipPipPip
  • 390 posts

  • Are you African: N
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Irish

Posted 14 December 2006 - 05:45 PM

Not sure you'll get any answers to those questions here, kephren. Or were they rhetorical?
'That punk is either in love with that guy's daughter or he has a newfound respect for life'

#18 The Freelance Scientist

The Freelance Scientist

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2358 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Gambia
  • Interests:Education, Politics, Current Affairs, Dialogue with the community and others.

    I like going to the gym, playing football and travelling the world. I'm at university at the moment.

  • Are you African: Y
  • Cultural Heritage:
    Mandinka

Posted 15 December 2006 - 12:15 AM

QUOTE (Mezmerized @ Dec 14 2006, 11:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
However, circumcision has been an African tradition since the begining of time....and i feel that this article will now give reason to those Africans who are quick to love Western way to start coming down on circumcision and call it a useless and barbaric practice. In my culture, circumcision has more to do with cleaness as well as rite of passage...its a journey that all our boys must take....for some Diaspora, this is just mumbo jumble....especially since white people have told them that its barbaric and uncessary! laugh.gif

Anyways, I will stll circumcise any of my male child....and still teach them to wear a condom no matter what.....perhaps thats what the stupid study should have made PARAMOUNT....not just ramble on about how it cut the rates of infection by 50%...stupidness!



Co-sign
[i]The Freelance Scientist: He Is The Eternal Student.

#19 coltrane

coltrane

    Family

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1155 posts

Posted 15 December 2006 - 12:58 AM

QUOTE (Mezmerized @ Dec 14 2006, 11:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Hmmm

Something is just not right with this study....on the other hand, i feel that this will encourage the careless African men who go around beating their shoulders thinking they can escape STDs and HIV because they are circumcised.....i have even heard C African men say things like they are "immune" to "sinful" deseases like HIV.... laugh.gif This article will do more harm in that it will encourage this stupid, ignorant way of thinking thats plagues C African communities.

However, circumcision has been an African tradition since the begining of time....and i feel that this article will now give reason to those Africans who are quick to love Western way to start coming down on circumcision and call it a useless and barbaric practice. In my culture, circumcision has more to do with cleaness as well as rite of passage...its a journey that all our boys must take....for some Diaspora, this is just mumbo jumble....especially since white people have told them that its barbaric and uncessary! laugh.gif

If i had done the study, i would most definitely have started on a different angle, but its the Yurugus scientists so i won't bother either way.

Anyways, I will stll circumcise any of my male child....and still teach them to wear a condom no matter what.....perhaps thats what the stupid study should have made PARAMOUNT....not just ramble on about how it cut the rates of infection by 50%...stupidness!



I'd say this is great news for high risk african countries. Of course it doesn't replace the need for safe sex but anything that reduces the risk of infection is excellent.

I've always understood that the hygiene in a time/place where cleanliness was not so convenient or possible aspect was the main reason for circumcision. Like the bit in the bible where it tells you to go outside city wall to take a crap, hardly gods law but good common sense.

Sad that it has to be hijacked by the yahoos then.

I'd just say I don't consider circumcision "child mutilation" in such circumstances, it would seem like a sensible precaution.

Equally I'd say it is pretty obvious in countries where a) hygiene is not a problem and cool.gif sex education is advanced to lop of a piece of human flesh for the sake of it is unwise.

As for the it's redundant arguement a) it's well known that it increases sensitivity cool.gif it's said it's more comfortable for females during sex (the movement of the foreskin makes the old it/out less abrasive) and c) this arguement could be used for removing the apendix - which can be a lot more dangerous - so why not.
If we do not believe in freedom of speech for those we despise we do not believe in it at all. ~ Noam Chomsky

#20 Tunduzi

Tunduzi

    Advanced Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 482 posts

  • Are you African: Y

Posted 15 December 2006 - 09:20 PM

Coltrane. Appendices like foreskins are not superfluos but serve a purpose. Appendices serve in the digestion of babies in the womb and eary children. They help with immunity at that stage. Because the function was unknown until relatively recently it does not follow that it had no function. Sure you can do without it as an adult, like you can live on one kidney or one eye but would you argue that having two eyes is being greedy and we should be happy with one? lol

You really got a bee in your bonnet about this topic and it's funny how other man's tings concern you so much.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users