cutnbulls2ox (imported) wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:42 am
It does make me wonder if infant ciircumcisions contribute to later urges in males to modify male sex organs more often than females who are never circumcised in western cultures ?
I strongly believe that circumcision opens the door to other genital modifications. In most psychological books, we may read this "Circumcision now, castration then". In my case, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, I have started to fantasize about genital modification shortly after I've learned that I had been circumcised, I was 12 y.o. at the time. I had never heard of, read or seen anything about that and I could fantasize about meatotomy, subincision, genital piercing like P.A. and so on. Then, I started to fantasize about castration. At 14-15 y.o. I was tying shoelace or elactic band around my genitals (I didn't even know that method was used to castrate animals). I was piercing my penis with sewing needles and so on. I hated (and I'm still hating) my own genitals so much that led me to 2 castration attempts and later 8 years of chem castration, to avoid any sexual relation. Why? Because I was too embarrassed about my genitals appearance and also to avoid rejection.
My embarrassement comes from the fact that no less than 85% of my penis skin was removed during my circumcision, this prevented the natural penis growth during puberty and the glans was attached close to the scrotum. For those who think that circumcised penis are more aesthetic, thrust me it isn't.
I can no longer stand the lies about circumcision benefits and sometime I get carried away. Ever since the victorian era there have been over 50 diseases that circumcision was supposed to cure or prevent, all were proven to be false. On top of the list, circumcision was proposed to prevent masturbtion because, according to physicians at the time, this was the leading cause of blindness. No wonder that parents were prone to get their sons circumcised.
The latetest lies are to prevent H.I.V. transmission and prostate cancer. Of course it these were true, USA would have the lowest rate of these diseases in the world, which is quite the contrary for both of them. The countries who have the lowest H.I.V. rate in the world have also the lowest circumcision rate.
What about cleanliness ? Since my comming out at 27 y.o., I must have sucked off well over thousand of intact penis. Here, where I live 85% of men are intact and not once I had the opportunity to smell smegma. I guess it is normal to all male to shower everyday, at least before sexual encounters. Notice, it is just as easy to wash the foreskin than to wash our assholes. So where is the problem ?
Infections ? Most infant penis infections come from the lack of education concerning the care of intact boys. Ignorant doctors will tell the parents to retract their boy's foreskin. That is wrong, in infancy, the foreskin is fused to the glans, forced retraction may cause bleeding therefore opening the door to infections and para phimosis. Therefore doctors see an opportunity to circumcise the boy and cash in money. By the Way para phimosis and phimosis can be cure without surgeries.
S.T.D.'s, to prevent them, the only option is to wear condom. Circumcised men are even more at risk, because circumcised men have less sensitive glans, so they don't like to wear condom.
There exist not one valid reason to justify infants circumcision. Sure, circumfetishism exist among adults but does the boy into it ??? Until he can consent to it, circumcision should be considered a rape, a child abuse, a sexual aggression. The psychological trauma will last for ever.