Why is circumcision not practiced in Poland?

US women don't like uncut men? Seems that US men don't like their local chicks anymore... :)

boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com

Quite a few losers posting there, but still some very funny remarks on that blog (don't miss the 'Older Posts' at the bottom of the page).

Hmm. Well there are many pretty American girls, far more than people in other parts of the world realize. The posters say the girls are snobby, most girls with good looks are. I think in general American women are easier to talk to and be with then for instance Polish, Polish women always gotta put their 'two cents in' and are more difficult.

That is not the topic of this thread. Don't make it to be closed for cleaning.

I'd better not start going into my preferences, or this thread really will need to be closed for cleaning ...

(I knew this discussion was going to de-generate at some point ; )

With that link I was merely suggesting that the reason why American ladies presumably don't like uncircumcized men might not be a question of what is better - circumcized or uncut - but a question of where a man comes from and how rich he is. On topic. ;)

PS:
I know that you guys don't like us straying too much off topic, but this is a forum after all and people visit here to chat. You can't always stay on topic within a thread because the discussion takes different turns all the time.

Read the forum rules.

wrong. she wasn't jewish. she met a jewish guy and converted, which came at some time after this episode.


This has already been discussed and you should know it's a very poor argument. The human body is not a perfect design, not by a long shot. Suggesting that nature created something, therefore it must be necessary and perfect, is a losing argument. Several examples of this have already been cited on this thread.

nobody said its perfect, but hey its there. so, and it has a purpose.


depending on who gave the example...


? loosing ground???

goal : )


i did ; )

i'm not going to repeat myself.


it doesn't matter who. if a complete idiot posted, "getting bit by a king cobra is bad for your health," it would still be true, because it's a fact.

sehr gut.


in your particular case it does


really?

just like this fact?

Jews and Muslims were the only ones circumcised up until the last 50 to 75 years. When doctors of Jewish backgrounds started filling the ranks in the US, they pushed it on unsuspecting parents and it has become more mainstream.

PS. It is barbaric.

My Indian doctor told me everyone should wear a turban. This is healthier as there is less chance of a head injury, so obviously we should all be wearing turbans for health reasons.

400 posts on the circumcision thread and still growing!

yep. it suuuuuure does get talked about a lot.

Sorry, missed your response-it's been a while
Appendixes can rupture for apparently no cause and often enough to warrant people having them removed. Foreskin doesn't seem to exhibit, with any notable regularity, the tendency to be life-threatening despite safe and clean living. An appendix can do that so I have to reject that comparison, can you convince me to rethink that?

Okay so aside from that, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that if we use the argument that foreskin is naturally occurring then it doesn't mean squat because we could, from various perspectives, take the approach that nature gets it wrong all the time.

Let me know if that's what you're stating and then I am ready to agree with that it is true, we COULD do that but it would be silly to use that line of reasoning in this case.

Just to make sure we don't go down the road of disease or virus, I have to state that those are not consistent, those are mutations due to contact with other organisms and not even statistically in the same galaxy as a healthy baby boy born with all his bits and pieces where they ought to be. I don't know what you could be talking about that is as frequently occurring and unencumbering to pull your logic through but I am curious to find out.

Before I take the final decision, I am practising home circumcision on bananas.

Circumcision-Decision-11269.jpg

What do you think?

This should be a decision for men who turn 18. Either they can mutilate themselves or not, but don't do it on innocent babies.
It hurts just the same wheather you're 18 or just born, except babies can't talk.
Shaved heads and shaved dicks look the same.

I think we should invite the male members of this site to post themselves, as it were, and then we females can have a good butchers (perhaps not the best choice of idiom) and say definitiwnie which we prefer ... this may lead us to a sensible conclusion as to why circumcision is not generally practised in Poland ... (practise being, of course, with an 's') (said the schoolmarm)

^Why should we care what you think on the matter?

Well, I guess that what you (plural, all males) think about what we (plural, all females) think about your dicks is ... something that sometimes does cross your minds? In the same way that we probably wouldn't want to do something to our bodies which made us less attractive to you.

But as I imagine you know, I was just joking.

Everyone should just go and read up on the history of circumcision around the world on Wiki. I know we are supposed to express our own original opinions here, but we do also need to get our facts from somewhere, and that's as good a source as any.

Some interesting titbits. For example, the Greeks didn't like circumcision at all, because they felt that a man was only truly naked when the foreskin was pulled back, and if you cut it off, then he was always on display. A view reflected here quite strongly in this discussion. And the reasons for circumcision or not were always cultural, the medical/cleanliness arguments always having only been to give validity to often religiously-based practices. There is stacks of myth about all of this - that circumcision was a rite of passage in some societies, or a punishment in others, or something done because apparently a snipped dick is less good at producing sperm that will thrive in all women, so good to have a hubby with one ... i.t.d.

I just thought it might be fun to look at everyone's dicks, that's all. Remotely, as is. Thought it could be so presented as to be relevant to the topic ...

Americans are waking up too and beginning to question and reject this mutilation.

In fact, as is their way, they even have their own Super Hero to combat this menace:- Foreskin Man!

this is a meaningless comparison. you're just missing the point. you CANNOT say that because it's there, it must be perfect, it must be perfectly designed. THAT is what I'm saying and an appendix, or wisdom teeth, or any of the countless other examples, show that we are far from perfectly designed. STOP grouping me in with other posters. Read what I write and take it for face value.


so now you should already have your answer for this.

fascinating how people can get philosophic about sth so small and tiny....and possibly of minor importance

Yes I've read that and I understand what you're getting at but so what? Yes, I get it, naturally, we get deforimities and some can be deadly but so what? This bit of skin we're reflecting on doesn't have any history of killing the owner nor causing him great discomfort in any great numbers I've ever heard of.


That isn't what I wanted to communicate, perhaps you're grouping me in with other posters on this thread? I'm not saying because it's there it must be perfectly designed but if there is a flaw in the design could you please point me to (no pun intended) what it is and how often and to what degree it occurs to warrant removal?

We could take the approach that "nature" gets it wrong all the time but then we have to define what "nature" is and what "gets it wrong" means, like how "wrong" is wrong enough to cut it off?

You feel what I'm sayin?

It is a fashion statement not a health issue and I wonder how did it happened to be so in the USA.

I would say its a religious issue masquerading as a fashion statement/health issue, a Middle Eastern religion trying to force its will upon us.

What? Christianity? That sh!t was forced on us 15 hundred years ago buddy.
As for fashion statement????? Seriously,in my time Ive worn some stuff Im glad wasnt caught on camera but, having my man bits dangling out in public was never a fashion craze I heard of...........

well, the simple answer is, not wrong enough in this case ... or, as some would have it (me among them), perfect and not in any way wrong, so totally no physiological or aesthetic grounds for its removal.

Fuzzywickets, stop this nonsensical defence that the foreskin is 'not automatically perfect just because Nature designed it' and that that therefore somehow justifies cutting it off ... please ... circumcision is not based on medical or hygiene grounds. It is to do with deep-rooted cultural/religious 'notions'. And Poland is on the 'what? No way!!' side of the argument ... (omg i am so impressed with my constant referral to the original question ... no wonder I am so good at exams ; )

I believe it has to do with religion more than anything else.

So what nothing. That's it.


That's a question for someone else. I never said that everyone should be circumcised, just that some people prefer it one way or the other. Moving on.


Sure, valid question.


I couldn't give a rat's a$$ where it came from. I also couldn't care less what "side" Poland is on. All countries differ one way or another. Some have natural dicks, some don't. I really don't see what you people are attacking me about.