Proposed Circumcision Bans Now Banned

Sorry:

Gov. Jerry Brown on Sunday signed a bill that prevents local governments from banning male circumcision, a law that was conceived earlier this year after a ballot measure that would outlaw the practice appeared headed to San Francisco voters.

[…]

Matthew Hess, an activist behind the attempted ban in San Francisco, said Sunday that California had “taken a big step backward. … Circumcision is elective surgery that an adult should be allowed to choose for himself.”

Maybe it would have been more fulfilling to have the state electorate vote down Hess’ silly idea (and what is obviously his personal beef with cut cock), but either way, good! Besides, circumcision rates are already dropping on their own, drastically. Let parents decide for themselves. [image of Sean Cody’s Jeff via]

30 thoughts on “Proposed Circumcision Bans Now Banned”

  1. In the United States during the 1880’s under the influence of Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, founder of the famous American plant cereal appeared antimasturbation campaign and his theory that the circumcised boys masturbate less, and for girls who masturbate recommended the burning of the clitoris with acid. So the boys at birth are circumcised in the United States and that surgery has become routine.

    So…if you still think its normal…

    But today doctors in America make this an excellent grip, and are prone to medical prejudice (also have an unduly large number of caesarean section and hysterectomy in relation to European physicians = read – MONEY

    In europe with state regulated health insurance doctors do it only if truly profound health reasons or religious beliefs exist (the last one on your expense). If you think about it, the child in it has no deep faith, and therefore it is difficult to assess whether it would be circumcised or not. Many state hospitals refused to circumcised before boy turn 18, but private doctors dont mind of course…

  2. Cut cock is the way to go! The last people who cared about foreskins this much were the Nazis. It’s not surprising that the anti-circumcision people put out that anti-semantic comic.

  3. What a waste of time and energy of the US government to deal with this issue. Yes, the kid should decide for himself and nobody else. If a medical issue demands it then it will most likely occur at a time where the kid hits puberty and is able to come to his own conclusion. If he gives in into “peer pressure” (religion, parents, media, etc.) then that’s his own deal.

    Being uncut doesn’t make you clean “down there” by default. Pro-cut people rely way too much on that particular argument. A cut dick needs the same attention to be cleaned as an uncut dick.

  4. This was a ridiculous law that should have never received any attention. Especially when the majority of ppl who are arguing about it are gays b/c I can’t imagine a straight guy making a big deal out of it, or straight women for that matter. If you don’t like foreskin, then don’t sleep with men who have it. Perhaps have the balls to ask the person before you decide to sleep with them if they are circumcised or not.

    Also I know some friends who have gotten a circumcision because of pressure from their boyfriends at the time to have it removed. Those relationships no longer exist and now all my friends regret having ever gone through it. Personally I think adult circumcision is the worst idea ever if it’s for cosmetic purposes, and the benefit of having it done as a baby is that you can’t miss something that you don’t remember ever having.

    1. That’s not a benefit , read what I posted above : circumcision amputates the most sensitive/innervated part of the penis , externalizes the glans and leaves it keratinized ( = calluses under your feet , but worse since it’s supposed to be a mucosa in the first place) . Circumcision was invented by religious people to make sure your sex life is miserable enough so you don’t completely behave like wild animals : jews , Muslims and Christian Copts have said it , Victorian England made it to prevent masturbation…America does it to fill the doctor’s pockets AND prevent excessive sexual pleasure (since it was imported from England ).
      Excised women don’t miss their clitoris either if we go by that reasoning, they never had it .
      Let’s circumcise them all , therefore. And cut children’s earlobes too .
      No?
      There just isn’t any logic to it , it’s useless mutilation on a patient that hasn’t given its consent.

      1. Isn't It Obvious?

        You fail/refuse to take into account any medical grounds, phimosis is a birth defect which can only be cured by circumcision and had I been circumcised as a child I wouldn’t have needed the operation in adulthood (-ish). Trust me it’s not a pleasant condition to live with. I won’t list the symptoms for you but trust me when you have too much foreskin you can’t feel a thing.

        You’re anti-circumcision, we get it, but you’re being very narrow-minded.

        1. Phimosis concerns less than 0,5% of people (among which you can find quite a few phony diagnosis), it can be a justification for circumcision if you want but there are alternatives :skin is elastic, have you ever seen someone with a tunnel piercing in the ears for instance ? Same principle, you can do it with topical medication. You also don’t have to do a full circumcision (if you choose to do so) to treat phimosis.
          If there is a TRUE underlying disease , it can be considered , but clearly that is not what we are talking about when it’s routinely done on most healthy boys born in America, or on religious grounds .

          Read http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/

          1. Isn't It Obvious?

            I don’t know how it works in other countries but I had numerous consultations to see how severe the case was and if there was an alternative, for me there wasn’t.

            Circumcision on children is the parents’ choice, no different from vaccinations or sending them to school. I don’t agree with peer pressure religious or otherwise, but on children it’s the parents’ choice just as having a child vaccinated or sent to school. I’m sure parents who don’t follow strict religions do have a good reason for doing so and that’s ultimately what matters, the motivation more than the act.

            For cosmetic reasons in adult life, again it’s someone’s choice. Dicks are dicks it makes no difference but personally I believe if something isn’t broke it doesn’t need fixing.

  5. A stupid law for circumcision comes from having Gay Republicans! What’s next a law against pierced nipples or metal cock rings due to the dental bills from chipped teeth? These nuts should stick to health food and peta! Maybe it the health food that’s making them crazy?

    1. You are stupid , you have every right to do body modifications on yourself if you decide it /give your consent – as an adult .
      Babies can’t do that, that’s why you shouldn’t cut their dicks,tatoo them , pierce their nipples, give them nose jobs or horn implants when there is nothing wrong with them in the first place.

  6. Isn't It Obvious?

    I don’t understand what some people’s problem is with circumcision. For me, it was medical and since it’s the only option for congenital phimosis I got it on the NHS.

    @Zee yeah the recovery isn’t fun, but it’s only a few weeks.

    1. Some people are just obsessed with foreskin and think everyone else should be as well. They need to get the fuck over it already. It’s just a foreskin, not a magic “I Win” button for life.

  7. How about that ?

    Let the children decide for themselves once they have grown up .

    Not parents, they won’t be the ones using the cock as far as I’m concerned .

    Removing healthy fully functional body parts that can’t grow back is mutilation,on top of being an illegal surgical procedure ( doctors are supposed to cure diseases) .Circumcision cuts the most sensitive part of the penis and exposes the glans to rubbing which leads to keratinization(thickening of the skin, like when you have calluses under your feet ).A circumcised penis is up to 5 times less sensitive than a regular one .

    “Fine-touch Pressure Thresholds in the Adult Penis” article published in the British Journal of Urology International.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x/abstract;jsessionid=A063DBAF611BB959F713C1F7BA391886.d02t02

    Obviously you can’t know that if you’ve been circumcised as a child , but your dick is supposed to be a very sensitive mucuous membrane that lubricates itself without any help from lube or anything else .
    The foreskin has a function analogous to that of the eyelids, imagine what your eyes would feel like if you couldn’t blink or shed a tear…and you get an idea of what circumcision has done to you .

    Circumcision is done in order to reduce sexual pleasure , back in the Middle Ages we had the balls to say it ( read Maimonide for instance) , in Victorian England it was done to prevent masturbation,etc… the medical justifications are made up to fill the doctors’ pockets . Most americans are circumcised but they get higher STD rates than Europeans who are not . It doesn’t help , see . COndoms will protect you , and soap exists , this is the 21th century ,so don’t start on how dirty it is ,etc…

    Rant over .

      1. I hope this is ironic…

        watch the video below

        It deals with the issues of pain ,lies regarding prevention of diseases, human rights , trauma…you can also witness a circumcision this way, see how wonderful it looks and how much the baby seems to enjoy it (no anaesthetics are used of course)

        http://nocirc.org

        There’s this one too , very pedagogical and interesting as it adresses the cultural patterns that have made it the norm in America.

        “Child circumcision : an elephant in the hospital ”

        Do not comment before watching please.

      2. “Whatever, foreskin is unnatural.”

        LOL. That has got to be the most laughable things I’ve heard in a while. If it is so unnatural, then you wouldn’t born with it, CHILD. Grab a dictionary. Look it up. Science itself has proven that the “benefits” of removing the foreskin outweigh the cost. It is unnecessary mutilation.

        Some of you queens are just pathetic. Here we are fighting to be accepted the way we are born and yet some of you people are willing to mutilate a child just to have a good looking penis. That is just SHALLOW and PATHETIC. No wonder it’s hard for our community to earn a vast amount of respect. We can’t even agree to our own fundamental credo.

        1. Just because you use hyperbolic and inflammatory words like “mutilate” doesn’t make your freakish foreskin obsession any less weird. If you want to keep your foreskin or for your kid to keep his foreskin, have at it. Just also have the decency to shut up about it and leave the rest of us alone, cut or uncut. It’s a nonissue, as it should be.

          1. It’s a human right issue , not a sick obsession as you put it . I m sorry your brain isn’t developed enough to understand the right to physical integrity for children . I care about it because it was done to me of course and don’t wish it to happen to anyone else without their consent.
            Give people the right to choose for their own body , that’s all we ask .

            mu·ti·late (mytl-t)
            tr.v. mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing, mu·ti·lates
            1. To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple.
            2. To disfigure by damaging irreparably: mutilate a statue. See Synonyms at batter1.
            3. To make imperfect by excising or altering parts.

            So that’s precisely the definition, not hyperbolic or inflammatory.

            And if you’re one of these people who think it’s “just a little piece of skin” , you are ignorant and I suggest you watch this . It’s the most sensitive/innervated part of the male body .

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1FcN3lT40w&feature=related

    1. Good call, Tommy Wells. I really don’t approve.
      Zack says, “Let parents decide for themselves.”
      I agree. Let them decide for THEMSELVES. Let them decide if they want to cut their own body parts off. Not their children.
      Parents have no right to slice off the most erogenous part of a man’s body, limiting their son’s sex life.
      Foreskin is good. At the very least, it should be my choice if my body parts are chopped off.

      1. “The most erogenous part of a man’s body”? Oh please. As obsessed with sex as men are, if the foreskin were really as almighty and important as you proclaim it to be, do you really think circumcision would still be taking place at all? Men lead perfect sexual lives with or without a foreskin. It doesn’t diminish a boy or man in any significant way, and anyone who thinks it does is either self-hating because they are circumcised and are under the impression that the grass is greener on the other side, or self-aggrandizing because they haven’t been circumcised and think that makes them more “whole” than and superior to lesser, circumcised men. In the end, that’s all this really boils down to: sad men who either hate themselves or delusionally think they are some kind of great dick gods. This whole “innocent children are being mutilated” jag is just crap – anti-circumcision nuts don’t give a fuck about kids. They just have some irrational fear that someone is going to come in the night and take away their precious foreskin, and then they’ll have to commit suicide because they think their dicks won’t work or will fall off or something equally moronic.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 50 MB. You can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Scroll to Top