Latest Breaking News

Crunchy Frog

(28,208 posts)

140. Maybe Americans fuck more recklessly and more frequently without condoms.

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 02:20 AM

Jun 2012

Maybe American men need the extra stimulation due to lost nerve endings and keratinized penises. Maybe condoms reduce an already compromised sensitivity too much, making American men less likely to use them.

Funny that a surgery originally intended to mute male sexuality may have had the opposite effect.

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/419?task=view

Sexually Transmitted Diseases

Limited data is available for STI rates in Europe. However, data from the Netherlands found that rates of reported incidence are considerably higher in the United States.[6,7] Further, comparisons of prevalence (the proportion of a given population which is infected) find that the Chlamydia prevalence among young adults in the United States is twice that among young adults in the Netherlands.[8,9] *

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

234 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Circumcision is grievous bodily harm, German judges rule [View all] JackRiddler Jun 2012 OP

This ruling came out on Monday Mosby Jun 2012 #1

It is being covered in the English-language press now. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #3

BBC News published this on Tuesday - its not LBN dipsydoodle Jun 2012 #77

I'm guessing the judges were were Aryan and Christian? aquart Jun 2012 #55

their foreskins? yurbud Jun 2012 #70

LOL Boxcar Willie Jun 2012 #78

An even nastier thought occurred to me Warpy Jul 2012 #229

Uh oh! RevStPatrick Jun 2012 #2

It's not a binding decision, unfortunately. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #4

Post removed Post removed Jun 2012 #22

I'm calling my own parents idiots for having fallen for the propaganda of 1965. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #25

+1000 +++ n/t RKP5637 Jun 2012 #28

So are all Jews and Muslims idiots? Mosby Jun 2012 #39

Certainly not. What a loaded question! JackRiddler Jun 2012 #41

All Jewish males are required to be circumcised Mosby Jun 2012 #49

No, they're not. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #50

The thing about "widespread belief" is that another word for it is RELIGION. aquart Jun 2012 #53

Would you like to excommunicate my friends who didn't circumcise? JackRiddler Jun 2012 #59

So are the champions... awoke_in_2003 Jun 2012 #91

Is this coming from the itty bitty clitty committee? Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #93

OK, almost all. Mosby Jun 2012 #58

Okay fine. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #61

Did you know that the founder of modern Zionism, Theodor Herzl didn't circumcise his son? Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #94

You are absolutely incorrect. COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #64

except those who decide not to be reorg Jun 2012 #52

Check out this meaningless distinction. go west young man Jun 2012 #63

I heard about that, tragic Mosby Jun 2012 #66

Interesting recent article from Haaretz. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #92

Just because a religion says it's good doesn't make it so 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #157

The bullshit is thick here HankyDub Jun 2012 #76

So you're OK Boxcar Willie Jun 2012 #79

Shame on you for this diversion into propaganda. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #83

50% of your penile skin is/was foreskin? boppers Jun 2012 #100

TMI, but it's at least that much on my sons. And their equipment is pretty standard. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #106

No, it's anatomy. Not just mine. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #115

It's because it's two separate layers with a fold over. Sirveri Jun 2012 #116

Here is an interesting comparison with female circumcision. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #99

+1! for your pre-emptive defense. snot Jun 2012 #74

Saw this yesterday on DU. Not LBN leveymg Jun 2012 #5

Would be nice to be able to feel all those extra nerve endings. RitchieRich Jun 2012 #6

Little different, female circumcision is akin to having the head of penis cut off, not Lionessa Jun 2012 #8

you are also describing only the most extreme RitchieRich Jun 2012 #24

There is a difference between a piece of skin, and removing a "chunk" of a man. Lionessa Jun 2012 #37

FGM covers a whole spectrum of procedures waddirum Jun 2012 #65

I've never heard any outrage about the second type of female surgery, Lionessa Jun 2012 #67

this is the crux of the whole issue waddirum Jun 2012 #73

It's illegal to do it to a minor in this country. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #104

Except for the types that do involve cutting off just a whisp of skin. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #103

There's no need for false dichotomies. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #13

That's too bad. I'm atheist, always have been and had my son done for med reasons, Lionessa Jun 2012 #7

I must respectfully disagree.... Swede Atlanta Jun 2012 #9

When the only man I know to have it done later, recommends doing at birth, Lionessa Jun 2012 #15

You obviously have strong personal views on this... Swede Atlanta Jun 2012 #16

As you or perhaps someone pointed out below in reverse, Lionessa Jun 2012 #18

As to the female circumcison remark, Lionessa Jun 2012 #19

You're the one who introduced "that shit comparison." JackRiddler Jun 2012 #20

I Agree With You JackRiddler pmorlan1 Jun 2012 #154

A comparable surgery in a female infant would be hymenotomy Warpy Jul 2012 #228

Actually, it would be removal of the prepuce, just as with the male. Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #232

I have just the opposite story for you. go west young man Jun 2012 #21

My brother in law not impoverishd and knowing my ex-mother-in-law, there would be Lionessa Jun 2012 #38

It was most likely that fastidiousness that caused the problems. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #109

Agreed. My son is a young preschooler and has no issues with being uncirc'd FedUpWithIt All Jun 2012 #122

Yep. Mine are 3 1/2 (twins). Never had it pulled back, never any issues. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #129

Imagine if a guy like me, who is uncircumcised, go west young man Jun 2012 #32

Experience is not ridiculous either way, it's just different. Lionessa Jun 2012 #40

I'm gonna call bullshit on ya for a couple of reasons. go west young man Jun 2012 #56

Point by point. Lionessa Jun 2012 #62

Now my refutation of you refutation. go west young man Jun 2012 #69

Your description sounds alot like the labia minora. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #108

200 men and you've been with 3 uncirc'd and this makes you an expert? FedUpWithIt All Jun 2012 #123

0-6 vote to Leave It, btw... SidDithers Jun 2012 #124

And i don't suppose you're circ'd FedUpWithIt All Jun 2012 #127

Yes, it used to be a gruesome, grueling rite of passage manhood ritual. aquart Jun 2012 #51

A 'little piece of skin' with more nerve endings than your fingers. AtheistCrusader Jun 2012 #10

A little more info about what the foreskin does. go west young man Jun 2012 #26

Yah, it is from politically aggressive atheism. harun Jun 2012 #27

Parents don't have that choice in Germany, the court found reorg Jun 2012 #30

Decision is non-binding. Try to keep up. harun Jun 2012 #35

Huh? reorg Jun 2012 #44

Post removed Post removed Jun 2012 #80

Should "the family" decide collectively about abortion, as well? closeupready Jun 2012 #96

Babies can't get pregnant, so that analogy doesn't work. Lionessa Jun 2012 #97

But since the surgery is stricly optional for 99% of men, however, closeupready Jun 2012 #101

That was our reasoning as well - TBF Jul 2012 #182

Awesome. I hope this spreads. nt ZombieHorde Jun 2012 #11

And somehow I don't feel grievously bodily-ly injured. Iggo Jun 2012 #12

So you should have had the right to cut off your own when you were an adult. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #14

Amazingly, not every court decision is about you. closeupready Jun 2012 #46

I did not know this was an issue until roody Jun 2012 #17

I was pleasantly surprised reorg Jun 2012 #23

It's debatable if the Oil Age has even progressed from the Stone Age, just say'n. harun Jun 2012 #29

it may depend on where you live n/t reorg Jun 2012 #33

Cherry Picking RitchieRich Jun 2012 #31

Everybody has the right to be circumcised reorg Jun 2012 #34

Except in Texas. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #54

You can beat your children in Texas? n/t reorg Jun 2012 #57

Crap, can't find it and didn't comment or rec. Anyway saw it this morning, Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #68

found it, very depressing indeed reorg Jun 2012 #85

Yeah, funny how that works on this board, isn't it. closeupready Jun 2012 #47

I agree with the court's decision Bohunk68 Jun 2012 #36

Like a bad (or really good?) SNL skit RitchieRich Jun 2012 #43

But this is also a hygiene issue. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #42

The court found that it is not a hygiene issue reorg Jun 2012 #45

No "necessity". boppers Jun 2012 #102

it's neither a necessity nor an improvement reorg Jun 2012 #111

Which all occur at higher rates in the circumcised U.S. than in intact Europe. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #114

AIDS rates are about the same in both the US and Europe. happyslug Jun 2012 #121

What has any of this to do with the discussion? reorg Jun 2012 #130

I was responding to the comment aboujt AIDS inflection rates happyslug Jun 2012 #156

Hm? boppers Jun 2012 #137

Maybe Americans fuck more recklessly and more frequently without condoms. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #140

It's not a government's job to judge that. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #48

It is up to parents consulting with their doctor and family JDPriestly Jun 2012 #132

It is up to sovereign individuals to decide what body modifications they want. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #139

Children especially babies, are not sovereign individuals. They depend on their JDPriestly Jul 2012 #212

Parents are guardians and caretakers. Not owners. Sirveri Jul 2012 #215

Yes, that's the point! They aren't sovereign individuals. JackRiddler Jul 2012 #216

The hygiene issue was early last century. go west young man Jun 2012 #60

As long as there are no STD's, sure. boppers Jun 2012 #105

So do you think having foreskin puts one at greater risk of an STD? go west young man Jun 2012 #135

how come no one brings up hygiene to defend female circumcision? yurbud Jun 2012 #71

Because .... because ... well, that's different. closeupready Jun 2012 #72

Well, mathematically, it would make sense. boppers Jun 2012 #107

The answer is very evident if you compare the male and female anatomy. JDPriestly Jun 2012 #131

It's not evident to me, and I have female anatomy. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #133

Female circumcision removes the joy of sex 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #158

I have to say, why not wait 'til the kid's old enough to decide for himself, and snot Jun 2012 #75

Because then they might not make the choice that the parents want them to make. Sirveri Jun 2012 #87

Germany is moving in the right direction, circumcision is barbaric, and the foreskin is necessary ilikeitthatway Jun 2012 #81

I agree. If an older male decides to do this fine, but don't do this to a infant... midnight Jun 2012 #84

ABC News: Baby Dies of Herpes in Ritual Circumcision By Orthodox Jews ilikeitthatway Jun 2012 #82

It should be against the law to circumcise any minor child Megahurtz Jun 2012 #86

Good Fearless Jun 2012 #88

Same here!!! I agree 1,000% n/t RKP5637 Jun 2012 #151

I'm not a man, so no skin off my privates. Beacool Jun 2012 #89

As a Chinese mandarin of several centuries ago... JackRiddler Jun 2012 #90

I would say that reason she puts forward is really the reason many women advocate for circumcision. go west young man Jun 2012 #98

You're over analizing the issue. Beacool Jun 2012 #113

It is a discussion board isn't it? go west young man Jun 2012 #118

Oh, please............ Beacool Jun 2012 #112

Men treat women like meat... JackRiddler Jun 2012 #119

If a guy were to suggest that he prefers women with XYZ surgeries to make them prettier 4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #159

I never said that. Beacool Jul 2012 #192

As someone anti-circumcision, I'll be honest and agree sometimes closeupready Jun 2012 #95

That would be going a little too far, wouldn't it? Beacool Jun 2012 #110

Less extreme than having every male's penis mutilated, closeupready Jun 2012 #117

Wow pmorlan1 Jun 2012 #155

It was a joke. Beacool Jul 2012 #193

Never before dating HillWilliam Jun 2012 #146

LOL, well I guess some of us have no standards. closeupready Jun 2012 #149

I beg your pardon! I have standards!! HillWilliam Jul 2012 #167

Many people enjoy other people's cosmetic surgery, especially breast augmentation. nt ZombieHorde Jun 2012 #120

Some day it may be fashionable to add extra foreskin. Son of Gob Jun 2012 #125

That would be funny. nt ZombieHorde Jun 2012 #126

I want mine BACK!!!! Taverner Jul 2012 #210

Well, after all the German courts COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #128

Please don't feed the "persecuted jew" debate. It gets tiring. go west young man Jun 2012 #136

Not tiring to those of us who COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #142

The vast majority of male genital mutilation victims are not Jewish. JackRiddler Jun 2012 #138

True. But it directly affects any COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #143

What is "observant"? JackRiddler Jun 2012 #144

To answer your question simply, "Yes". COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #147

To check again, because this is important: JackRiddler Jun 2012 #148

I stand in awe in the presence of such COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #150

Judaism is passed maternally. Sirveri Jun 2012 #152

No one is saying that an uncircumcised male child born COLGATE4 Jun 2012 #153

So what you're saying is that it's not actually necessary to be forced upon the child. Sirveri Jun 2012 #160

"After all, they can get it done as an adult." COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #163

I believe that it is the possessor of the genitals decision. Sirveri Jul 2012 #190

The law does not agree with your premise. COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #198

It's either for medical need or it's not. If it's not then it's cosmetic. Sirveri Jul 2012 #214

That's your opinion. And you know what COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #222

They have this new thing nowadays called "anesthetic". Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #195

One of my best friends had to be COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #197

Links on the Russian adult immigrants and on neonatal pain. Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #218

The 'Russian Immigrant link' makes my COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #221

All I can say is that your "knowledge" of neonatal pain is about 30 years out of date. Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #231

There's are laws in the west telling people what they can and cannot do religiously riderinthestorm Jun 2012 #162

Laws in the U.S. restricting religious practices COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #164

What "public interest" is served by banning FGM? It's largely a private concern. riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #169

One person's "harmless" is anothers' "drastic". COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #170

Thanks for a thoughtful convo. A lovely Sunday morning treat riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #184

Thanks to you, too. It's somewhat COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #200

Right back atcha! riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #203

My point is that, at least for those for whom it is COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #220

Its protected at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't change riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #224

Seeing as how First Amendment juridprudence has COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #234

I completely agree with your personal decision COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #226

Some forms of FGC are that severe, certainly. Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #219

Quick, change the subject! Try to make it personal! JackRiddler Jun 2012 #161

You argue but do not persuade COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #166

Same argument is being made in favor of FGM and stoning. JackRiddler Jul 2012 #171

On what do you base your assertion that COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #181

On the physical fact that it IS grievous bodily harm. JackRiddler Jul 2012 #185

This message was self-deleted by its author COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #186

Or, in other words, COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #187

If I were to put my First Amendment rights into practice reorg Jul 2012 #188

I have no idea COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #189

sorry if I didn't make myself clear enough reorg Jul 2012 #191

I'm guessing that this is part of the explanation Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #196

Your 'discipline example' is COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #199

Again, not all religious practices are guaranteed under the 1st Amendment. nt riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #201

No, but those that aren't so protected are COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #202

I mentioned a few upthead: must have face exposed for a drivers license photo, polygamy, riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #204

As I mentioned in my first reponse to you COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #205

Female genital mutilation became illegal in the US in 1997 riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #213

Because 18th Century legislators believed that COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #223

I'm going to theorize that the acceptance of infant circumcision will also erode. riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #225

No. If by some stretch of the imagination it COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #227

So then logically you must believe that girls undergoing FGM in secret is okay? riderinthestorm Jul 2012 #230

I think the analogy is fairly clear reorg Jul 2012 #233

Rights trump religion any day 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #172

Again, how do you define "observant"? JackRiddler Jun 2012 #145

Jews aren't exempt from the law because of their religion 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #168

Correct. This is the Leviticus argument. JackRiddler Jul 2012 #173

I think there was something in there about women being submissive 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #175

Wow! The depth of your understanding of COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #177

Which part did you find contentious? 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #179

How do you know if you have been circumcized? snooper2 Jun 2012 #134

It seems that this new plague may be infesting the UK as well. Crunchy Frog Jun 2012 #141

Plague? You mean the Enlightenment? JackRiddler Jul 2012 #174

I should have added this: Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #194

Yes, I see! Friends! JackRiddler Jul 2012 #206

A plague of not removing body parts 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #176

It's a barbaric practice Mosaic Jul 2012 #165

I agree. I am convinced all religions were started by people mentally ill. Taverner Jul 2012 #209

Interesting view from Jewish side.... MindMover Jul 2012 #178

What a ridiculous notion 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #180

Exactly! COLGATE4 Jul 2012 #183

Misses the point - people can always see a Mohel outside the hospital Taverner Jul 2012 #208

Kind of a lame cartoon IMO. Crunchy Frog Jul 2012 #217

Although I agree, somehow I'm nervous that it was Germany to declare this first.... Taverner Jul 2012 #207

I don't think you should be. JackRiddler Jul 2012 #211