~ archived since 2018 ~

Swazi king pushing mass circumcision

kloo2yoo

July 16, 2011

11 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-07-swazi-king-endorses-mass-circumcision.html

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Swazi king pushing mass circumcision
Author	kloo2yoo
Upvotes	11
Comments	60
Date	July 16, 2011 7:32 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/irgwh/swazi_king_pushing_mass_circumcision/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/swazi-king-pushing-mass-circumcision.1037209 https://theredarchive.com/post/1037209

Comments

[–]kanuk876[🍰] 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Superaverageman 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ujewbot 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link

[–]OThomson 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]OThomson 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]OThomson 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]craigdubyah -6 points-5 points-4 points 15 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

If you are thinking of quitting your regular job and becoming an epidemiologist, please don't.

Where to start...

You shouldn't be comparing absolute prevalence, you should be comparing relative prevalence. The US has about 0.3% prevalence and France has about 0.4%, which is only an absolute difference of 0.1%. But relatively, a randomly selected French person has a 33% higher chance of having HIV than an American. If the logic behind this isn't clear, consider a case in which one population has 0.1% prevalence and one has zero prevalence. The absolute difference is small, but the relative difference is infinite.

There are a huge number of things that could potentially confound this relationship. France and the US are vastly different countries with different demographics, immigration patterns, rates of intravenous drug use, access to medical care, and prevalence of circumcision. All of those things could be, and probably are, playing a role.

Looking at France and the US and coming to a sweeping conclusion as you have done is flat out wrong.

DISCLAIMER: I am a medical researcher

[–]OThomson 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]OThomson 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]OThomson2 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah-2 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]OThomson3 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah-2 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Would you say the same of Female Circumcision?

They are not the same procedure. Honestly I don't know enough about female circumcision to have a strong opinion, but my understanding is that far more of the anatomy is removed. A clitoroidectomy is analogous to removing the glans of a penis, or so I was taught.

how do you feel about Circumcision performed in America by Jewish religious officials?

When it comes to surgeries, the best surgeon are the ones that operate the most. Mohels typically perform more circumcisions than physicians do, and if I remember correctly, their complication rates are generally lower than those of physicians.

During a ritual circumcision, the mohel is supposed to draw blood. Rarely, mohels draw the blood using their mouth. This practice is irresponsible and can cause infection in the child.

why do you feel the preference belongs to the Parents and not the Child?

The procedure is more difficult when done later in life.

[–]Superaverageman1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The procedure is more difficult when done later in life.

It's extremely rare that circumcision will be required later. Non-therapeutic circumcision is not performed in Finland, so the circumcision rates here give a good example of how often the surgery is required. Only 1 in 16,666 men end up being circumcised for medical reasons. Circumcising a child to spare them the surgery later on when there is only a 0.006% chance that they will need it later on is illogical, and irresponsible.

Also, if you think the procedure is more difficult when done later in life, it's even more difficult to reverse this operation later in life. More than 200,000 men are currently trying to restore their foreskins, which involves months or years of applying tension to the remaining skin in order to stimulate new growth, and even that won't restore everything that is removed by circumcision.

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Superaverageman1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The rate of complications from neonatal or adult circumcision, while listed as small in many medical reviews, is still substantially higher than the likelihood that they will even need the surgery in the first place.

True. There are other benefits, such as reduced incidence of UTI and reduced STI transmission. When you take all of these into account, the risk-benefit difference pretty much disappears. Hence the recommendation of medical societies that circumcision is not generally indicated, but it is an elective procedure.

My point was that the risks of circumcision are least when the procedure is performed on a newborn.

http://www.tlctugger.com/

That may be the least reliable source I've ever seen. You can't take data from a Geocities page advertising penis pumps that uses unsourced data to claim the popularity of their product.

[–]memymineown 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]memymineown 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]memymineown 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]misterdoctorproff 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]memymineown 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]ujewbot 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah -5 points-4 points-3 points 15 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

Shouldn't basic human rights be applied to everyone?

Isn't freedom to practice a religion a basic human right?

So basically your argument is that I shouldn't have the ability to remove your ability to cut off your daughter's arms? What kind of sense does that make?

Apples and oranges. Circumcision has risks and benefits, thus the recommendation from medical groups that it is not medically indicated in the general population, but an elective procedure. Removing arms is purely destructive; there is no benefit.

You are resorting to shaming language

Nope, just pointing out that there are many other issues that impact people much more than parental choice to circumcise. Like, the access to education, clean water, a safe home environment, medical care, birth control, legal representation, etc.

If you decide that those issues are less important than the ability of a parent to consent their newborn child to a safe medical procedure, then you are going about it the wrong way. Focus on educating parents instead of legislating the problem away.

[–]memymineown 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

For instance, let's say a key part of my religion was to burn down mosques and synagogues?

Do you have any other means of argument? This is the same thing as cutting off childrens arms or murder. I already addressed the issue here:

Apples and oranges. Circumcision has risks and benefits, thus the recommendation from medical groups that it is not medically indicated in the general population, but an elective procedure. Removing arms is purely destructive; there is no benefit.

There "benefits" in no way justify the procedure. That is part of what we are arguing. You are begging the question

I never said the benefits justify the procedure, and neither do any medical associations. If the benefits justified the procedure, it would be medically recommended. And it isn't. It is an elective procedure. That means the risks and benefits are so small that there is no recommendation either way. If the risks clearly outweighed the benefits, there would be a recommendation against it. But there isn't. This is why it's not the same as ripping off arms, or burning synagogues, or murder.

Nope, you are trying to shame me. When I called you on it you decided to retreat. But it is still out there and you can't take it back. Shame when shaming attacks don't automatically win your arguments for you huh?

Shaming huh? Like this?

mutilation of children

And I didn't retreat from shit. I pointed out worthwhile causes that actually impact people. Most circumcised men are happy with their lack of foreskin, just like most uncircumcised men are happy with their full foreskin. It doesn't matter.

Murder is a large problem in my country. Should we make it legal but educate people about how wrong it is to murder people?

See above. Apples != oranges, even if them being the same helps your argument.

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Just because you can't defend against the way I am arguing doesn't mean I should stop.

Already defended. Apples != oranges. Re-read earlier comments.

You are claiming that the "benefits" justify the procedure not being banned. And the consequences clearly outweigh the benefits.

The consequences do not clearly outweigh the benefits. They don't. This is the stance of every medical society I know of, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Urological Association.

The benefits don't clearly outweigh the consequences either.

I am saying that it is a procedure with risks and benefits, neither of which clearly outweigh the other. It is therefore unlike murder or ripping off arms, which are unequivocally bad.

'Mutilation of children' is not shaming language.

I'm over it

You seem to have a problem understanding what an analogy is. Would you like me to give you a link?

I got an analogy for you.

Parents are able to consent their children for vaccination, why can't they do it for circumcision?

When you understand why that is not a fair analogy, you will understand why yours is not fair.

[–]memymineown2 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown2 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown2 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah0 points 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I personally believe that removing erogenous tissue reduces sensation which happens to be the exact same way we treat every single other part of the body.

As I said before, that's like your opinion, man.

I agree that intuitively, it seems like circumcision should decrease pleasure. But lots of things in medicine aren't intuitive. That's why people do studies, and studies have tended to find no sexual differences between cut and uncut men. The anti-circ people focus only on the studies that agree with their ideology, but that is irresponsible and ignorant.

But you are purposely steering the direction away from why you think it is acceptable to perform cosmetic surgery on babies? Should I be able to give my daughter a nose job?

If you wanted to give your daughter a nose job, the surgeon could call an ethical consult to discuss the reasons for the procedure. If they find that you have the child's best interests in mind, they will allow you to do it.

I just honestly don't see the harm in infant circumcision. It's a quick and simple procedure, and in an infant you don't even need stitches. Note: I have helped perform circumcisions.

And just as you don't think it's a parents right to consent for the procedure, I don't think it's your right to control everything a parent can or can't do to their child. Parents make all the decisions for their children, the only exceptions to this being in cases of clear negligence.

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]memymineown1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First of all, no there isn't a good chance you have met me if I were a Nobel Prize winner in Physiology or Medicine(hint: I have actually met many of them). Also, I am not, I said that to prove a point.

I don't believe that you are what you claim and I know exactly what I am. Therefore I am relatively sure I have more experience in the medical field than you do.

I see where you are going with this and why. It is because you can't condone cosmetic surgery on babies and you know it. So you are changing the subject to something entirely random.

The fact that I have stated this several times yet you still continue to plow blindly ahead proves it.

So I don't think I will spend any more time on this. Just know one thing, when you try to debate me again it will probably end up like this. And we both know who won and who lost this.

[–]craigdubyah1 point 15 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First of all, no there isn't a good chance you have met me if I were a Nobel Prize winner in Physiology or Medicine(hint: I have actually met many of them).

Me too.

Therefore I am relatively sure I have more experience in the medical field than you do.

So what's the most sensitive sign of PE? And when do you order a d-dimer, a spiral CT, or a V/Q scan? This is a very basic medical question.

It is because you can't condone cosmetic surgery on babies and you know it. So you are changing the subject to something entirely random.

It's just that talking on this subject is like talking to a desk chair. I explained the medical ethics panel and the best interests of the child. No medical ethics panel would agree with a rhinoplasty like you have said, but panels have repeatedly found that circumcision is a reasonable procedure to consent a child to.

It's because circumcision is not a big deal. It's an extremely simple procedure that's been performed safely for thousands of years. It carries religious value. People that are cut are happy with the result, people that are uncut are happy with their foreskin. It doesn't matter. Get over it.

And we both know who won and who lost this.

Sure you do.