Site Presented By
Saturday, Nov 7, 2009
Well, I've been around a lot longer than your sex partners. I was at my prime in the 60's, which is ancient history I guess. My sex partners were mainly graduate students at a major university. That was pre-AIDS of course. Many of the women I dated had enough sexual experience to have had both types. They seemed to like me as much as they had liked my uncircumsized brethren. But maybe they were just being nice.
I hate to say this, since it deeply offends the politically correct. However, the reservoir of sexually transmitted disease, including and especially HIV, has always been the gay community. Their incredible promiscuity and deep desire for anal sex is the source of the present epidemic. If the HIV infected practitioners of anal sex could be quarantined we would stop the epidemic in its tracks. All this phoney emphasis on heterosexual transmission is a red herring. Women get HIV from bisexual men, both in Africa and the US. The epidemic of HIV in African-American women comes from the large population of A-A men "on the down low." HIV could have totally stopped 20 years ago if we had used standard public health measures, which the gay community was able to block. Unbelievable, since they were most of the people dieing from it.
I was pleased to see the letter exposing the phoniness of the research on circumcision. Comparing two distinct populations, whose mores and behavior are not similar. Also, unbelievable.
Please post a few links - because a google search disagress with your strong assertion. Even the most Anti of anti-circumcision sites are inconclusive on that score -
this is from the Circumcision Resource Cenetr - regarding adult circumcisions:
Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function, decreased penile sensitivity, no change in sexual activity, and improved satisfaction. Of the men 50% reported benefits and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having been circumcised.
Now maybe these men don't know their own dicks or what constitutes satisfaction, but they probably know this stuff better than you.
Other studies show that circumscised men masturbate more frequently, and engage in oral and anal sex more frequently (hetrosexual). the anti-circumcision folks claim that's due to a lack of sensitivity thus a need for varied sex. i'd say that most women don't want that nasty looking uncircumsized dick in their mouths or ass, but we'd all be guessing there...
Thought so.
Men do not matter as much as women. So much for the vaunted EQUALITY feminists are always braying about.
Radical Mastechtomy does not prevent breast cancer, it is a treatment for very progressed breast cancer.
Simply removing the breast tissue does not prevent breast cancer. If there were the case women with very small breasts and men would not get breast cancer. Likewise radical mastechtomy would be cure for breast cancer, which it is not as even after the procedure woman may have their cancer return.
Also, just be clear, to equate the removal of a small relativly unused bit of skin to the radical removal of a physical feature shows a man unduly obsessed with his own genetalia.
A more accurate analog would be "breast reduction surgury prevents breast cancer", which again is not really an appropriate analogy, as breast cancer, like all cancers haver various avenues of treatment,where as HIV has no known cases of remission.
Um, I think medical and public health researchers are ethically obligated to stop studies if they reach conclusions like this. While at one point it was all fun and games to infect racial minorities with diseases in order to study them, these days I think we've evolved to be a bit more moral in our clinical work. I'm not sure why this offends you . . . would you have liked to be one of the uncircumcised men in the study who was told "Well, we found that circumcision greatly reduces the chance of contracting HIV, but we aren't going to let you get one, so just keep going out there and having risky sex, thanks for participating in our study." Come on!
Cutting off parts of people's penises reduces the chance that said penises will pick up the AIDS virus. As other people have pointed out, let's go that one further, and just cut the troublesome organ off altogether! Breasts are have a tendency to get breast cancer... better have all of them off too, while we're at it.
The 50% solution to AIDS reduction may be circumcision, but the 90+% solution would be condom use. And if you think it's tough to get African truck drivers to use condoms, how easy do you think it's going to be to get them to agree to having the ends of their penises removed?
Different sub-types of HIV have been implicated vis a vis differing transmission vectors, ease of transmission, and in some cases, the progression of disease. Some sub-types more prevalent in Africa appear to be more amenable to transmission via heterosexual intercourse.
http://www.avert.org/hivtypes.htm
http://pathmicro.med.sc.edu/lecture/hiv6.htm
http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_releases/2006/02_06_06.html
As far as being sans foreskin, would my brain actually explode during orgasm were I so fortunate as to have retained mine?
I don't know or care-- and I doubt anyone else does, either-- the extent to which male orgasms may be affected by circumcision (and there's really no way to compare those who are circed as infants with those who are adults, because those who grew up without a foreskin are likely more desensitized anyway after years of exposure). Hell, some women who have had clitoridectomies still can reach orgasm, and I doubt that the climaxes themselves are that different from what fully intact women experience. The difference is most likely in the journey, not the destination, because foreskins not only have additional nerve endings from the rest of the penis, they also are apparently functionally different, meaning that sensations experienced would also be different. Now, men can go on and on about how fabulous their orgasms are, how they couldn't possibly be any better, but there actually is more to sex than the end result, and assuming that there isn't pretty much validates some of the old cliches about men and sexual selfishness. Y'know, women do notice when you guys time yourselves to reach some sort of imagined longevity standard and/or get impatient with the time we may require, neither of which are really all that much fun.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The Maine fight was supposed to be the dress rehearsal for repealing California's Prop. 8 -- but gay marriage lost
Once one obtains Seriousness credentials in the Washington media, they are irrevocable no matter one's conduct.
Salon headlines in your mailbox
