Attitude toward parents?

S

snobrd503

0
I'm working on foreskin restoration now, since I was cut at birth. I've been using taping, which I didn't really like. Now I'm using an o-ring, and I have noticed that my glans seems smoother. I'm fairly new to this, so i haven't really looked into other methods.

How do any of you who were also cut at birth feel about your parents having you to be circumcised or authorizing the doctor to circumcise? I haven't really thought about this much.
 
Last edited:
Here's my story about my FR and my parents...

My wife is very supportive of my FR, for the obvious reasons, and has been very anti-circ since she watched a video on the net of a circ being performed on a baby. It was the standard circ, done without painkillers, with the baby strapped down. It made her cry, actually. She wanted me to watch it and I just couldn't do it. I am too squeamish. Seeing her in tears and declaring, "It's horrible! It's horrible!" pretty much did it for me.

I was circed at birth and have no memory of it. I never saw my father's penis so I did not know if he was cut or not. I mentioned to my wife that I wondered if my dad was cut and why my mom had me cut, but it is nothing I felt comfortable asking my mother. Well, my wife is shameless, and she brought it up to my mother a little later, when I wasn't around.

She said that my mother was shocked about my FR and said that uncut men were disgusting and nasty and that, of course, my dad was cut and she would never have sex with an uncut man. My wife tried to explain to her about what FR is all about, but she didn't care. My mother told my wife to make me stop doing FR before I gave her cervical cancer or something... :D

Well, that answered all my questions, pretty much...

I don't hold anything against my mother or father, tho. 33 yrs ago, when I was born, it was a pretty standard thing, and people are only now learning the truth about circumcision. Circumcision is an institutionalized practice, and there is still alot of ignorance and predjudice against uncut men here in the US, so I see no need to hold it against your parents and be angry at them. More than likely, they just didn't know the truth.
 
I don't really feel angry at them either. If that's just what people thought back then...well now we know better. I'm also trying to improve my relationship with my dad. We've never really been that close and bringing something up like, "Hey, why did you have my foreskin taken off without me being able to have some say in it, ect." just doesn't feel right.

I think a lot of the people who are pro-circumcision are arguing for it kind of as a mental defense. They got cut, or had their kids cut, and since they don't know that foreskin restoration is out there, they can't accept the idea that they made a permanent mistake. They come up with false rationalizations to mentally shield them from the idea that they hurt themselves or others.

This might sound kind of strange, but I almost feel that from being cut, I have this burden or duty to not just restore myself, but to help bring this whole madness of infant circumcision to an end.
 
I can't talk to my dad about it because he died a few years ago. He was a very quiet and private man, so I don't think I would say anything to him about it even if he was alive. Like you said, there's really no reason to be angry at your parents about it.

About the mental defense thing, you are dead right. You should have seen the opposition to my ideas here on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] when I first began to preach this. People just got crazy about it! It is finally being accepted here, but only because my constant yapping about it desensitized them to the issue, I think.

It is a really huge issue. This practice is horrifying when you really think about it. We are slicing off the most sensitive and important part of the penis, and why?!?! It's no wonder people get up in arms about it when you bring it up, because it is nothing more than mutilation...sexual mutilation aimed at men...and the only reason it is done, in reality, is to diminish our sexuality...keep us working like good little drones, keep us fighting like good little soldiers...think I'm going overboard? Think about it. Really, really think about it...

Which nations circumcize their children the most? The US, Israel, and Muslim nations. Which nations are the most violent, war-mongering and aggressive? The US, Israel and Muslim nations. Think I'm crazy? Well, you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine.
 
AncientChina said:
Circumsiztions have no proof of making people more prone to being "violent", and "war mongering", this makes absolutely no sense and is way out of context. .
Click to expand...

lol

I dont think that is what he meant AC....
 
kong1971 said:
About the mental defense thing, you are dead right. You should have seen the opposition to my ideas here on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] when I first began to preach this. People just got crazy about it! It is finally being accepted here, but only because my constant yapping about it desensitized them to the issue, I think.
Click to expand...

It got pretty heated on both sides though. You had FR enthusiasts calling others idiots for not doing FR the same as you had other people saying FR was crazy and pointless.
 
For me it is completely the other way round with social views. I live in the UK and girls think it is weird to have a part of the penis cut off, they want to know when and why etc. I actually dont feel like I can go back to having a sex life at all until I am restored, as I just don't feel right without my skin any more.
 
AncientChina said:
Then what did he mean, how did I read that wrong?

The implication of Muslim's doesn't even make sense at all, on a majority Muslims are NOT circumsized.
Click to expand...

I think Kong meant by supressing our sexual pleasure (and turning our mentality away from it)by hacking our skin off would make us as he said "better little worker drones, and better little soldiers" in the quote: most violent, war-mongering, aggressive countries in the world :clank:

I dont think he meant that getting circumsized turns you into a nutcase (thats what I understood of what you said) :D
 
Actually, AC, you took my implications exactly right, but don't speak unless you know the issues. Muslims don't circumcise? OMFG! Dude, do some research. Circumcision in the Muslim world is considered MANDATORY! Perhaps, if you were wrong about something as big as Muslim's not circumcising, you should consider the possibility that you are wrong about other things...for instance, circumcision leading to more aggressive behavior in men because of physically altered sexuality.

Here is a link to a web page of Muslim circumcision. It is not anti-circ, by the way. It is only about Muslim tradition, written by Muslims, tho some of it is unintentionally hair-raising for Restorer's who have come out of the dark. Horrible! Horrible! And they talk about how wonderful and revered the tradition is...yuck! "Fingering the boy until he is erect and then cutting off the foreskin?" That made me want to vomit. It's no wonder this world is so fucked up.

http://www.circlist.com/rites/moslem.html

PS-- You can throw Korea right up there on the list, too. Forgot about them. They are at 90% circ now. They should start a war with someone pretty soon! :D
 
Muslims also circ their girls in many countries, which renders the girl sexually without feeling.
 
I do not try to put forth the idea that I know everything there is to know about circumcision-- like you, AC, by so hysterically disputing every theory I put forth. I am only offering up my questions and opinions about the issue.

How can you say for a fact that circumcision DOESN'T lead to more aggressive behavior? As you said, there have been no scientific studies of its effect on male behavior? I don't know about you, but I don't like the idea of a medical procedure being done to me against my will that has not been thoroughly researched. There have been studies done on babies that have shown a MARKED difference in the behavior of baby boys who were left intact compared to those who were cut. Some of the differences in cut infants were higher heart rate, poorer quality of sleep, lower tolerance for pain, increased sensitivity to loud noises and quick movements. In other words, these babies exhibited signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. Who knows what the implication of that would mean long-term?

As far as defending Israel-- I think you are being overly sympathetic to them. Israel seems to me to be very good at putting forth the "poor, poor Israel" image. I am not unsympathetic towards their country, but I follow the news as well and they are just as aggressive and violent, at times, as their Muslim counterparts.

I am by no means an expert is sociology. Perhaps I am even putting the cart ahead of the horse. Perhaps circumcision is not the cause of an aggressive society but an effect. Aggressive people mutilating themselves and their children instead of mutilation causing agresssion. Whatever the case, by saying that there is no visible correlation, you are pretty much blowing your whole argument, because there is obviously a corelation. After all, when was the last time you saw Sweden attack its neighbor? Police in England don't even carry guns, for Pete's sake!

You also say the link I offered was anti-circ, when the opposite is true. circlist is the most PRO-circumcision site on the net. They are the enemy, call us restorers crackpots and nuts when all we want to do is to educate people about sexual mutilation (yeah, that makes us crazy!) The only reason I selected the article from them was because it seemed informative and relatively unbiased (for THEM). The very fact that you found the articles offensive and thought them anti-circ shows that, in the back of your head, you know the practice is wrong and that we restorers are right. I hope that you will come out of denial soon-- I'll personally welcome you into the light.

Come on, AC. It's bright and warm and pretty out here! Let me give you a hand!
 
FR has been discussed, at least on some level, for years. I remember reading about it 5 years ago with the first Penis Enlargement manual I purchased online. What were the purported benefits back when I initially heard of it? More sensation during sex. Now this is believable to me. However, every few weeks you or someone else will state some new benefit to FR. First you were saying that it would make your nuts drop, then it would end peyroine's disease, then it would increase libido...Now these are a little far fetched to me. THEN, you really upped the ante saying that circumcision reduces penis size by 2 inches. Now this, circumcision is the cause of all the war in the world today.

I don't think you are a bad guy, but I see this as propaganda, a way to mobilize idiots, so to speak. We saw the same thing with the ROP and FR is becoming no different in my opinion. Whereas the ROP started out as an erection aid it ended up being the magical "cure" for any problem in the world. It would make you grow a few inches in your dick, make you taller, triple your test., make your nuts drop to the floor, clear your skin, better sleep, ect... The list goes on and on. I am sorry to say this to you but I see FR heading in the same direction. I think you should stick to the mechanics of how to regrow foreskin and not make melodramatic statements like you did in this post and many others.

-Skepdick
 
FR has been discussed, at least on some level, for years. I remember reading about it 5 years ago with the first Penis Enlargement manual I purchased online. What were the purported benefits back when I initially heard of it? More sensation during sex. Now this is believable to me. However, every few weeks you or someone else will state some new benefit to FR.

That's because we are discovering the benefits as we go. I have not DONE this, I am DOING it, like we all are DOING IT. What's so crazy about one restorer saying, "Hey, my nuts are hanging lower." Then another saying, "Mine, too." And then all of us discovering that FR will make your nuts hang lower. That's what a forum is for, after all. Does it make your nuts hang lower? Several of us has found that it has so far.

First you were saying that it would make your nuts drop, then it would end peyroine's disease, then it would increase libido...Now these are a little far fetched to me. THEN, you really upped the ante saying that circumcision reduces penis size by 2 inches. Now this, circumcision is the cause of all the war in the world today.

I never said it would end peyroine's disease. I do believe that it can help straighten your cock if a tight circ caused it to curve. Look at my progress pics. I am by no means done, but I have obviously increased my size and straightened out some of my curve.

Libido is partly a mental thing. If FR increases sexual pleasure, don't you think your libido would increase? I know mine has, as has the libido of everyone who has tried it. If it feels better, you're going to want it more, right?

As far as FR helping increase the size of the penis...dude, how many people have to say they've experienced it before you believe it? :D I've read medical reports that say that circumcision MAY reduce the penis by as much as 20% in length. I think this only applies to men who had gotten very tight circs. It all sounds very plausible to me that scar tissue and lack of skin can cause some of the penile shaft to be trapped. I don't understand why so many guys get so aggravated at that statement. If you really want to learn more about it, there are hundreds of forums, online diaries and mailing groups you can visit and read about these claims-- none of them commercial like the pro-circ sites. Of course, if you are predisposed to the idea that circumcision is only benevolent and causes no harm whatsoever, then your mind is already closed, and I am wasting my time trying to convince you. You're already decided. Me, I like to keep an open mind.

I don't think you are a bad guy, but I see this as propaganda, a way to mobilize idiots, so to speak. We saw the same thing with the ROP and FR is becoming no different in my opinion. Whereas the ROP started out as an erection aid it ended up being the magical "cure" for any problem in the world. It would make you grow a few inches in your dick, make you taller, triple your test., make your nuts drop to the floor, clear your skin, better sleep, ect... The list goes on and on. I am sorry to say this to you but I see FR heading in the same direction. I think you should stick to the mechanics of how to regrow foreskin and not make melodramatic statements like you did in this post and many others.

If I thought you guys were idiots, I wouldn't bother trying to convince you. I do think some of you have a severe case of denial and get overly emotional about the issue, which indicates suppressed feelings. I am pretty mellow about it all until I get personally attacked.

There is propoganda involved with circumcision, but it is the side of the circumcisers who use it. "Cut off your penis," they say, "And you won't have premature ejaculation...you won't look different...you won't smell bad...you won't give your wife cervical cancer..." Lord, can't you see through this to the truth...? All I'm saying is, THINK FOR YOURSELF. LEARN THE TRUTH BEHIND THE SMOKESCREEN.

FR is nothing like the ROP. If anything, FR delivers what the ROP only promised. Does it cost anything? NOPenis Enlargement!!! Is it a quick fix? NOPenis Enlargement!!! Am I gaining anything for the time and energy I invest in trying to spread this message? NOPenis Enlargement!!!! Do I delete the posts of anyone who try to call me into question? NOPenis Enlargement!!!

Call my motives into question if you like. I gain nothing from teaching you guys about foreskin restoration and its benefits besides personal satisfaction.
 
But you can't have it two ways. In many statements it is made as if being circed makes a man have far less testoserone, a smaller penis, less intense orgasms and erection, and yet you want us to believe that being circed also makes a male more violent....but wait wouldn't having limited "sexual ability and hormonal levels" lead to a male to be less aggressive?

Again, you are trying to twist my words to fit your own world-view, AC. I'm not trying to have it both ways. Here is my THEORY: "Circumcision reduces sexual satisfaction in males. Because that sexual energy is diverted, one of its outlets MAY BE aggression." That's it. That's my whole theory. To test that theory, I looked at the level of aggression and violence perpetrated by different societies. Even though these disparate countries have vastly different politics, economies, population pressures, religious beliefs and customs, the most aggressive nations also seem to be the ones that have a higher circ rate. Is my theory correct? Maybe. Are my facts wrong? Nope. There is a correlation. How does it fit together? Not sure if the chicken came first or the egg. Are they aggressive because they circ, or circ because they're aggressive? I think it's an interesting question.

I never said circumcision makes a man have less test. I do believe that FR makes your nuts hang a little lower...and we all know that sperm production increases when your nuts are kept at a cooler temp. I think the difference is tangible, but very small, but it could explain why some of us who are doing FR feel extra horny.

Still, I don't think any of the stuff I say is particularly earth-shaking. I don't see any need to get angry or hysterical about any of it. Just things that make you think.

Most of this is going around as if it is practical science, and guys believe whole heartily that FR will give them this magical size increase, make their test go up, and such, when in fact all they are doing is simply tugging on their loose circed foreskin....why must we paint a miracle of the mind as a factual one? I am not arguing that FR can give guys huge mental boosts and a sense of something great, but on paper it doesn't transfer into incredible surreal effects. It seems to be more mental.

Mmmmm-kay...(looking at dick...yep, it's bigger... ;) ) Hey guys, is your's bigger. What's that? It is? Cool!

Everyday the claims against circumsized men get larger and larger, first it was just simply that circed men were smaller, but now what is being said now I had to speak my mind. I don't like getting into these debates and such, but something said in that manner is a absurd enough to do so.

Personally, I love a good debate. Anything that might make someone think for themself is aces in my book. If they think about it, they might try it...and once they try it, they're convinced. I think that says it all. Once you jump that first mental hurdle and admit to yourself that circumcision is NOT GOOD, and that you were wronged, then alot of things begin to click. It is hard to describe the feeling of it unless you make that first leap of faith...
 
Kong, you're very wrong about your views on Israel. Look at all the facts, and read some history, too. Watching the current and 'biased' news from CNN or BBC won't get you half the truth you're supposed to know. Do your own throrough and deep reasearch before making stupid remarks.

Although your intentions seem good, you have several 'holes' in your knowledge. Being a 'moderator', people will listen to you more, set an example for the rest by preaching something that you know about.... otherwise, let me tell you, you're starting to sound like an idiot.
 
I've never been politically correct... I also never attack people personally unless they attack me first...such as by calling me an idiot. Have I no right to my opinion? As far as CNN and BBC, I do not watch television because it dulls the mind. You wouldn't think I was biased or stupid if I agreed with you, now would you?
 
SyncMaster said:
Although your intentions seem good, you have several 'holes' in your knowledge. Being a 'moderator', people will listen to you more, set an example for the rest by preaching something that you know about.... otherwise, let me tell you, you're starting to sound like an idiot.
Click to expand...
Very interesting. I have a slightly differing opinion. People do not necessarily
believe the MODS, however they are probably very resistant to post opinions that differ from them as it is customary to get flamed and ganged up on.
 
Flame away! When I am wrong, I admit it. If I don't know about something, I say so or ask. However, I am entitled to my opinions, even if you don't agree with them.
 
AC...I AM a circumcised male! I just figured, if the idea didn't offend me, it wouldn't offend others. I am not talking about another group, but a group I myself belong to...at least, for now...:D

If you disagree with my theory, disprove it. I will admit I'm wrong if you show me.

I am also very aware of the history and the situation of Israel and the middle east. I restated over and over that it was an issue I was curious about and that I may be wrong, but I did want to explore the idea.

The only debate I get is that it shouldn't be talked about at all! What kind of an answer is that. "Shut up." That's all you are saying. Guess what, that's the same kind of debating I heard when I brought up FR in the first place:

"Shut up, asshole! You're not supposed to talk about that!"

I relent. If you don't want to discuss it, I won't.
 
Kong we're all open to the idea of FR here. No one said that we don't want to discuss it. Some of us just don't like the kind of blanket statements you make that it will end any sexual problem a man might have; enlarging the dick, straightening the dick, dropping the nuts, increasing sensation, increasing libido, reducing tension and promoting world peace. There is some evidence that FR might give more sensation and pleasure to a man during sex. Even this cannot be proven and I really don't think the benefits of FR go any further than this. My circumsized dick functions just like that of men in other cultures with their foreskin in tact. And to say that getting cut will decrease your size potential is definately hog wash. If that were the case men in America would be smaller on average than the rest of the world and we are not. In fact, I have read surveys that put us a fraction of an inch up on the world as a whole.
 
How in the name of Allah/Jesus/Buddah would pulling on your foreskin scar make your nuts hang lower? How does that even correlate to anything?

*sigh* By generating new shaft skin using skin expansion techniques, the scrotal tissue that MAY have been pulled up the shaft by a tight circumcision MAY be allowed to return to its natural position. You are being purposefully obtuse and argumentative, AC, hoping to disprove one of my theories by drowning it in a flood of other issues. It doesn't relate to anything political that we are discussing. That's another thread. This nut sack issue is something that several of us doing FR have noted.



Theory based on what? By that same assesment I could assume those who are uncut have too much sexual pleasure and are thus proned to sexual deviance, such as child molestation and rape, because they must have a overdrive of sexual energy.......point is that would be so startlingly unfounded and insulting to a whole range of uncut men.

A theory is really just a question based on observation. A theory is neither right nor wrong, but just that...a question mark waiting for an answer.

One outlet may be aggression? Why would there be some outlet, if sexual energy or limited it would be jsut that, why would someone subconciously look for an outlet, and what would make that aggression?

Puh-lease! :s

There are plenty of circed guys here who are clam as they come and horny as the devil. Circumscision reduces the sexual satisfaction in males, by how much? Is this a study I can read? I feel pretty damn good, no one cut off my penis head, do you have a point by saying because my penis head is not covered in a oily skin that I am not getting 110% sensitive...yeah but I also get that not masturbating for awhile....

And here's the problem right here. Here's the denial. "There's nothing wrong with me!" I realize my ideas threaten you, AC, but really, if you are happy with yourself, then don't worry about it. Yes, I and many others believe that FR has given us a greatly increased sense of sexual satisfaction, but it should not bother you so much. If you don't believe it and aren't willing to try it, please don't try to gag me because you can't bear to hear the message. I believe in the benefits of FR and feel they can help a great many men. All I ask for is the opportunity to share my thoughts.
 
Kong we're all open to the idea of FR here. No one said that we don't want to discuss it.

Do you know how much crap I have had to endure before it was even accepted here at all...? You'll forgive me if I don't quite believe that yet. :s

Some of us just don't like the kind of blanket statements you make that it will end any sexual problem a man might have; enlarging the dick, straightening the dick, dropping the nuts, increasing sensation, increasing libido, reducing tension and promoting world peace.

So I should just shut up, right? :s

There is some evidence that FR might give more sensation and pleasure to a man during sex.

Try it. Cross tape for 3 weeks. That might will change into a definitely does.

Even this cannot be proven and I really don't think the benefits of FR go any further than this.

Can't be proven? If I say it feels better now. And the next one does. And the next one does. and the next one does... How many men does it take before you say, "Well, okay, I believe it now." You sound like a reluctant convert. I'll believe this...but no further!

My circumsized dick functions just like that of men in other cultures with their foreskin in tact.

Of course it does. So does the dicks of those aboriginals who cut their penises open longways.

And to say that getting cut will decrease your size potential is definately hog wash.

Why? If you try cross taping, and get an erection while taped, you will definitely believe that a lack of skin will make your penis shorter. Believe me! Its skin, not silly putty. It will only stretch so far. Again, you should try some of this before criticizing it.

If that were the case men in America would be smaller on average than the rest of the world and we are not. In fact, I have read surveys that put us a fraction of an inch up on the world as a whole.

Saying Americans have bigger dicks is no different than saying Americans are more violent. ;)
 
How am I supposed to respond to this? It is just personal attack after personal attack. My definition corresponds to the definition you pulled up on the internet. It is only worded different.

Fact: The nations I named earlier are well documented to be the most aggressive in the world.

Fact: The nations I named earlier are well documented to have the highest rates of circumcision.

You cannot dispute those two sets of facts. You can wrap them up in whatever kind of argumentive misdirection you want, but they are indisputable facts.

My theory is that this is related.

Why does this get you all up in arms? All you have to do to disprove my theory is to present a study that shows that one of my two facts is indeed incorrect. Instead, I believe that you will only go on another rant about how wrong I am and that I am predjudiced against cut guys or some poppycock and that I should just shut up. Right?

I use the straw man? No, you do. I was talking about my theory and you and skepdick start going on about ball sacks and hardon strength. THAT, my friend, is a true example of straw man! :D

I stand by my opinion. You haven't convinced me yet.
 
What? How does being circumsized compare to having a penis cut "open longways".

They are both ritualized mutilation of the penis.

That's like me saying "Hey I had McDonald's once a week and I feel fine" and then someone coming along and saying "Well tell that to the guy that was 500 lbs and ate McDonald's each day", completely irrelevent. "Of course it does?". Now you are assuming we are too dumb to know whether or not our penises function normally? What does that mean?

Don't try to twist my words. My intent was to illustrate that both forms of mutilation leave the penis functional. While one seems acceptable to us is our society, the other does not. The "of course" meant simply that, if circumcision did not leave our penises functional, circumcision would not still exist. I'm not trying to talk down to anyone, AC. Instead, I am trying to engage your mind. I want you to think outside the box and maybe see where I am coming from here.

By the way Kong please don't bother replying to my thread sentence by sentence, what I have noticed is this is a tactic I have seen a few times and all it does is manipulate the posters true intent.

Please don't tell me how to answer. I am not trying to manipulate intent, just respond with clarity.
 
AncientChina said:
Hey I am all for any mental push or effect that FR gives, but spreading your carnal knowledge around as if it is fact written in stone is a bit wrong. The fact that no other anti-circ member here has responded to tell me different or back you up makes me wonder if many anti-circ guys here are moderates who realize what FR is worth and don't buy the limitless hype and false facts you present at times.

Skep's comparison of the way you talk about FR being similar to the way the ROP was hyped really was pretty decent. And both devices have no basis of science to stand on when they spout their unbelievable benefits. ;)

FR should be a tool, not a mental crutch to fixate a solution to all of everyone's sexual/penile problems.
Click to expand...
Well I don't know what kind of bullshit you're trying to spout AC. I gained 3 inches to my dick size within my first week doing FR and the ROP dropped my nuts to the floor, increased my height by 4 inches, and caused my left arm which was amputated 5 years ago to miraculously regrow, so who the fuck are you to be knocking either one of them : )
 
Last edited:
AncientChina said:
Jesus Christ. :s

Yes, I think that is entirely overstated, crazy, and sorry bro' but I think it's also propoganda bullshit, just as some of your mother's anti-uncut views. Circumsiztions have no proof of making people more prone to being "violent", and "war mongering", this makes absolutely no sense and is way out of context. I think societal values, and mindsets have a far greater impact....

By the way since when were a majority of Muslim men ever circumsized, because they aren't. Ridiculous.
Click to expand...


I usually agree with what you have to offer, but this isn't what he meant. The beliefs that were strongly present in earlier days were brought over here as well and has been embedded into the people of today. Whatever reason you can up with it doesn't matter. It's practiced here and that is what he was referring to. The beliefs and central or majority religion of the aforementioned countries are similar in that the people tend to be hypersensitive and extremely dogmatic with the accompanying religion (not so much here, but still you can go back further for the Christianity thing to see how sensitive they were about their beliefs). There's no direct coorelation between those countries' beliefs/circumcision ritual and their behavior/tendency to involve themselves with war (America is the only super power to really get where it is without having starting war and taking over countries as it's main reason for rising to prominence. It has teetered that line to an extent, but it's dwarfed in comparison to the past superpowers or empires' way of rising to the top. It has much more to do with the democratic and republic process, free enterprise, natural resoucres and thus economic resources((it's a dirty business ensuring that last one is plentiful))and of course luck) being suggested in Kong's post. He is simply pointing out that these countries that have had people of Christian faith, Judaism, and Islamic faith all practice circumcision and also happen to be at war quite a bit. Although, I wouldn't say that this country is always at war because of the same reasons as the other two, I would say there has to be something to the three practising circumcision. It has something to do with desensitizing and feeling guilt or shame for your "sinful body."

BTW, that bold doesn't indicate like me yelling my point. The post just got a little cluttery and I wanted to have that sentence clear.
 
Damn, see this is what I WAS SAYING. People get awfully upset over ideas and shit. Think about that for a while. Everyone basically knows nations war over resources and religious ideas. I was just thinking that the countries that have a high percentage of circs performed per year that it has to do with a central belief that was or still is there for the most part. if those countries leaders are this way especially then I think war is likely. Religion has been clashing swords on and off and killing people for a long time in the Middle East. A rightful place to live (land) is denied because of what the people practice. See, ideas is what I think the corelation has to be of the circ practicing nations. For the most part the three main religions have a lot to do with the imperfect body and the people running the show preaching and writing the stuff down fed the mentality of society at the time that men and women should not be a certain way and they should do this and they should behave this way. And that if they weren't they should be ashamed. How long did homosexuals have to feel this way in this country even in this last hundred years? It's even hard to come out now for some people. In large part it does have to do with a mentality that was preached long ago and then entwined into religion to further enforce and solidify the argument. I don't know what the circumcision predates back to, but I'm sure at one point it had something more to do with than hygene and tradition. Why did it become tradition in the first place is what I'd really like to know? Some ridiculous belief I'm sure.
 
Last edited:
All right I can see that maybe someone is going to flame about my post too so: here is my automated response...

Okay, no no no, fuck the circumcision thing for now okay. I’m not really trying to figure out whether or not aggression is a plausible generalization to put on an entire population because they practice circumcisions. That’s not my point.

You see what I’m saying is that the early societal mentality of a certain people in certain countries that happen to be practicing certain religions as a whole might be responsible for not only why their histories are stained with war, but this mentality might be as responsible for why they practice circumcisions also.
 
It is hard to bring forth new ideas and concepts when you are instantly labeled a nut, a moron and some kind of scam artist (comparing FR to the ROP! Hahaha!) Instead of presenting any kind of argument, both AC and skepdick just attacked my credibility.

It's okay. I'v been through this before. I really am not as hardcore about it as some might think. Not enough to get as upset as them, apparently. I just hate to have to mince words because of hyper-sensitivity to this issue. One, I don't think it's a big deal. Two, I think it's beneficial and important, but I realize it's not for everyone. Three, it is such an institutionalized practice that there is alot of entrenched dogma to overcome. Why, I bet some people don't even know that their body was altered; that they were just born that way!

iwant8inches had the most intelligent response to my post. I think he is probably right that it is the beliefs these cultures possess about imperfect sinful bodies that leads to the mutilating practices. I hate to even say this because I know it will make AC pop some vessels (Sorry, buddy. I do like ya!) but I have read that the Jewish circumcision practice began as a way for church leaders to drive a wedge between married couples and thus enforce their control over the household more completely. In other words, don't worry so much about sex, worry about what we want!

I never meant that circumcision makes men go mad with lust for violence. That is just oversimplification to make me sound crazy. The honest truth is, we are constantly manipulated by our governments, our organized religions and the economic powers of our nations. These controls are subtle and not so subtle pressures applied to us as groups to make us produce the results they desire. I believe circumcision is one of these controls. You will never be completely in control of your own life until you educate yourself about the unseen forces that are being used to control you.

Of course, if you believe that circumcision is just the removal of a useless little flap of skin, then what I talk about will not make sense and will seem like mad ravings. If, on the other hand, you realize the truth -- that it is purposeful and horrific sexual mutilation-- then what I say might make more sense.

If all this disturbs you, then keep your head planted firmly in the ground. I will think no less of you.
 
Let them flame, iwant. Just gives me more opportunity to talk about it! Besides, debate is what makes us learn. I was honestly thinking that circumcision led men to be more aggressive, but after reading your posts I realize that it is a far more complex issue, and has more to do with the governing forces than a physiological response. Calling me an idiot and a nutcase didn't make me see it, but your well thought posts did! I still believe it is part of the issue, but not the central point-- circumcision as a religio-political control pressure used on the populace, not a widespread psychological symptom.
 
AncientChina said:
If your whole "theory" was reversed with just the reading of one post, then I have to wonder if how solid your "theory" even was to you.

We are getting way off course here.

1. I don't care about those who wish to do FR.

2. I support any guy that wants to do FR to benefit himself, I talk to 9cyclops on AIM and he has all my praise.

3. On that 9cyclops doesn't shove his beliefs down my throat or insinuate any claims, and seems to be much more practical about it.

4. I realize that circumsicition has religious implications, but circumsicion is related to not one religion and has had itself practiced before Christianity.

5. I truly have no negative feeling towards those that seek the use of FR.

The ONLY reason I replied to this thread, was because I felt Kong's claims which have grown and grown on this forum to almost ridiculous levels were for this once taken as insultive and non-supported. Just as many uncut guys would be insulted if someone felt the need to subject or judge them as a whole, I felt that had been done, and that Kong's claim of circumsicition actually making a male more prone to violence was ridiculous.

Anyone who would come to the form speaking homophobia, racial issues, and the such would be questioned also, and no I am not directly comparing the 2 issues before that is brought up.

I have never once on this website ever spoken negatively about Foreskin Restoration, or anything dealing with the Foreskin...never, so labeling me a hater or someone who is "afraid" is laughable, I truly couldn't care less what anyone else decides to do with their body, that's their right.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I am not anti-FR. Kong, if you remember, about 2 weeks ago I PMed you asking the specifics of how to go about regrowing the foreskin. I do think that there is merit to FR. By this, I mean that I think it is possible to regrow some skin and I believe that this will be a positive thing for guys who prefer a foreskin. Nothing more than than. Personally, I have a tight circumcision and it doesn't affect my sexual functioning, but I do have a nearly impossible time dry jelqing and I want to incorporate this maneuver into my Penis Enlargement routine. I have been doing FR in the manner that kong described religiously for about 2 weeks, ever since our PM correspondence. So far I don't see, feel, or measure a damn thing but I struggled with Penis Enlargement for a long time before making gains so I will not write it off unless it doesn't work after 6 months or so of consistent FR'ing.

Kong, you strike me as being very hypocritical in your claims. Yout claim that AC and I have labeled you as a psychopath just b/c your methods and ideas are unconventional while at the same time you attempt to make us look crazy, unintelligent, solely due to our skepticism of your radical claims about FR. You have said time and time again that we are getting angry and trying to call you out and neither are true. I don't "care" about FR. I don't "care" if you believe everything you say about the benefits. I don't "care" if you convince half the guys on this forum that taping their foreskin around their penis head will make it grow back to normal in a matter of months causing several inches of dick growth, lower hanging balls, erections of steel, and an end to world peace. Obviously I care about this one some level, but if you reread my last sentence and pay attention to the "'s you will understand what I am meaning to say. This shit is not really a big deal to me, but I do want to post my opinions on it because I think it is wrong for you to make such rediculous claims. This IS a big deal and it has nothing to do with anyone's disdain for FR. Blowing things up, out of proportion like you have with FR causes a speculative bubble. People think they have found the Holy Grail of sexual health, they try it, it doesn't live up to their expectations, and things come crashing down. Read the following thread if you don't believe me.

http://www.mattersofsize.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11689&page=1&highlight=ROP+bullshit

Kong you have already laughed in my face for comparing you and FR to Supra and the ROP, but I ask you to take a closer look at things. The ROP became a cult-like obsession for some here, and at a certain point, regardless of what the problem was, whenever someone asked for help in a thread the answer was the same, get a ROP. Eventually, these "benefits" were not even in the sexual realm. It would cause you to grow talled, impove your immune system, clear your skin, produce better sleep... Obviously, the ROP wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Now look at all the ailments FR is supposed to fix. It will straighten your dick, enlarge your dick, increase erections and libido, drop your nuts, produce more intense orgasms, ect... If things ended here I would not be happy but I could live with it. You have extended the benefits of FR way out of the sexual realm, despribing it as a "life changing experience" and the potential hope for world peace. If you fail to recognize (or maybe the word I am searching for here is "admit") the similarities that you and FR share with Supra and the ROP I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

I don't want to imply that you are trying to cheat or steal from the members here like Supra did. I just think you are a guy that has an insecurity about his penis and sexual health. You justify this by saying that you only haveve problems because you were circumsized and do FR with some kind of blind hope that it will make you into the man you should have been. I think that you need all this shit at the end of the rainbow to give you hope to carry on with it. I feel for you man, I really do.
 
kong1971 said:
Let them flame, iwant. Just gives me more opportunity to talk about it! Besides, debate is what makes us learn. I was honestly thinking that circumcision led men to be more aggressive, but after reading your posts I realize that it is a far more complex issue, and has more to do with the governing forces than a physiological response. Calling me an idiot and a nutcase didn't make me see it, but your well thought posts did! I still believe it is part of the issue, but not the central point-- circumcision as a religio-political control pressure used on the populace, not a widespread psychological symptom.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd for the sake of having some sort of structured scientific aproach to the idea you posed on what begets such hostility in certain societies (past and present because whatever the case it will end up turning everyone's head around and around full circle) it is kind of like a violence begets more violence to put it simplistically. If the various reasons making the people think a certain way about sexuality and other human elements then the people will do or practice rituals in a particular way or behave a certain way (of course in general) thus creating ever the more subtle tendencies of behavior all generated from some central psychological dependence. The condition of a male's reproductive organ could very well be an underlying factor for some men to be more aggressive or depressed or what have you. It's not that far fetched to suggest that Kong on an individual basis. On a national level, no way. One thing I will say however is that the nations that have had a fairly rich history of reisignation and revolution and a period of enlightenment over dogmatic concepts all have through the years become less and less dependent on such things as religion. This of course has been replaced by a more complex and yet with some countries a more flexible governing body where ideas are free to flow thus creating a more open minded society. And while this country had strong ties to brilliant men as well as strong ties to certain sects of Christianity and a revolution occurred there are still residual, we'll say Puritan, (for an example) concepts deeply embedded into our minds about the body. That free flowing society is what allows for more innovators and inventors and people of multi talents and those willing to accept and mix rather than clash with other cultures. Of course that takes many decades and many conflicts/struggles for it to happen or even start to happen. I mean whatever the case whether it be a new group of people being lead to another place in the world for whatever reason or someone standing up and saying this is wrong and something needs to change, the world while it's had its share of leaders there seems to be more people than ever willing to just live their life and tolerate as much as they can. I don't know whether that is a good thing or what, but things are going to shift one way or another I think in this country in particular. Back to the point though, ha, with all that said people in the UK and in the US and Canada and many many other countries have that individualism trait embedded in them. They can go this way or that way but at the least they are going to go the way they think is best. By no means do we all or will we ever have complete control over what we think or the way we behave all the time for the most part we are free thinkers. That equals more of us seeing through our lesser qualities as a person and trying to change for the better. The qualities that make us good for the most part have always been there and were represented in spiritual and religious literature early on in history, but I find myself at least less inclined to believe something in such text without having thought about it for a long time. Everyone usually does of course do that (interpret/soul search), but plenty of people do not in this day and many more did not many many years ago. It's simply hard to let go especially when you don't even realize what you've inherited. lol on a more relevant note (sorry Kong I tried to stay on topic as much as I could) I think circumcision was one of those religious(more from church than anythig else or in other words people particularly with a fixed sense of things that wanted control) ceremonies handed down to this society from long ago. Now it seems as though there are different reasons you can give as to why it is done. The reasons may have changed but if it's understanding that is wanted always look back to its roots.
 
AncientChina said:
No, he is not! Did you read any of his posts? Here is what he is saying and what he is stating. He is saying directly that circumsicitions themselves cause males to be more aggressive and violent!
Click to expand...


Lol, yeah it was late and didn't feel like reading the entire thread. It looked so long at first, but then it got interesting to me so I did read it after I posted. My fault AC.
 
AncientChina said:
iwant8, I appreciate your posts, they were well thought out.

About war and religion, does circumsicition have it's roots in there, nowadays it probably is partially a byproduct of this. Do I buy all of Kong's description of how things go? No.

To say that one of the reasons the Palestinians and Israelis are at war is directly because of the males lacking their foreskin is ridiculous and as he stated. To say that they are at war due to religious conflicts and one part of their religion is circumsicition which itself has nothing to do with the problems, I could possibly accept.

By the way, FR has been around for years and years, this is nothing new or inventive and no one on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] has ever been against what another male would like to do with his penis......this is not some new hot invention it's been around for a very long time.
Click to expand...


Well, I appreciate your posts as well. I like discussion. It makes us a little more humble at times and gives us incentive to be more aware of things we know little about. I just want to let anyone out there though to know that I wasn't suggesting that the war and such conflicts was a byproduct of any one thing, but that yes perhaps the obvious claim that the source of such fighting and rituals is one and the same. It could be that those nations with serious issues spawned from well let's just say conflicting dogmatism to a lesser extent the two sets of beliefs that have clashed so much are along the same line of thinking. I mean for a very silly and perhaps not to "scale" by any means example: If one is inclined to play tennis they would probably buy a tennis raquet, but if someone else liked to play basketball they would buy a basketball. If the tennis player had a father that played tennis also there is probably a good set of reasons behind that person liking tennis. Same for the basketball player if his father played basketball. They each had good and similar reasons to buy the equipment and like their sport. Now, if for some reason the two didn't like the other's preferred sport they might have some condescending words for each other's preferred sport. It might even end up in a fight because someone went too far. Now that is just crazy to compare certain religions and people and their conflicts to those imagined people; however they both have similar reasons behind liking what they like and have different reasons yet similar for why they don't like tennis or basketball. Someone says something and the other socks him. Why? Doesn't matter anymore. It's on. Then they quarrel for a whole year and by then flat out do not like each other. "My dad says I can't be around you anymore." "Well, mine says your mom's a whore." "Ah, that is it. You're getting it now." "Your mom's probably gettin' it now." "Oi you sumummabitch!" See, then the families don't like each other and a grudge forms and there's new reasons behind not liking the Jackson's or the Evans's. And around and around lol. I didn't mean to really have all that be as insensitive to the stuation in The Middle East as it might sound. I got carried away and maybe you want to delete it after people tell me to go away, but my point is while sometimes people have conflicting ideas or opinions they either accept, tolerate, or clash. But either way the differences in opinions or ideas are almost always along a similar way of thinking. The inherited reasons from genetics or the inherited reasons from our fathers are all factors of why we do things a certain way, think a certain way, and why certain things occur today. It's just such a long history to look back on and point to any one reason as to why things are the way they are now. NO one really ever cares how things first started. They either just want it to stop or they don't care about the past anymore, just the outcome that they want to see.
 
kong1971 said:
Let them flame, iwant. Just gives me more opportunity to talk about it! Besides, debate is what makes us learn. I was honestly thinking that circumcision led men to be more aggressive, but after reading your posts I realize that it is a far more complex issue, and has more to do with the governing forces than a physiological response. Calling me an idiot and a nutcase didn't make me see it, but your well thought posts did! I still believe it is part of the issue, but not the central point-- circumcision as a religio-political control pressure used on the populace, not a widespread psychological symptom.
Click to expand...

Well, government and religion do share a common thread and that is to control thought. There has never been wider spread propaganda than with those two systematic things. Even some sects of religion such as Catholicism has a government type body to it. Scary to think about that in a way.
 
Skepdick said:
Well I don't know what kind of bullshit you're trying to spout AC. I gained 3 inches to my dick size within my first week doing FR and the ROP dropped my nuts to the floor, increased my height by 4 inches, and caused my left arm which was amputated 5 years ago to miraculously regrow, so who the fuck are you to be knocking either one of them : )
Click to expand...

Only 3 inches. Only an arm grew back? I have 3 testicles now. Lol, yeah for some the benefits that can be had not guaranteed by me especially because I've only been at it 5 weeks now sound a little too sensational. I will only go as far as this for now; if you have your doubts then maybe try it for a few weeks. It's not like your penis will grow much anything back to make it into a restored dick or anything. I will say it has improved the head's texture. It's smooth now and the extra skin feels a lot better. before, and especially since I Penis Enlargement my head was rough and little pieces looked like they'd been dug out of it. Not anymore.
 
The only thing about this thread that bothers me is how viciously I was rebutted. Give me a break! Some of you guys need to take a chill pill! The original statement that caused all this fury was qualified as being an opinion. I also did not state that circumcision made men violent-- only that the most violent countries were also more prone to circumcise-- and I stated several times that I wondered if there was a correlation and thought there might be. All opinion and conjecture, of course, and clearly labeled as such. What I received was pure bile: called a moron, an idiot, a bigot, a scam artist, accused of being insecure about my penis, deeply deluded, insane, misleading...Just go back through all the posts and reread them. Your reactions were shockingly overheated and hateful. I apologized, qualified, trying to clarify my curiosity, and was even more maliciously flamed. And you say I have a problem...? :D The only problem around here is that some ideas are "okay" and some ideas are not. The folks that bring up the "not okay" ideas had best be prepared for some hardcore hating, whether they intended to cause harm or not, because the motto for some of you guys is "seek and destroy" not "debate and educate". Thanks, Iwant, for helping me to understand the issue I was curious about. You other dudes who think you are the moral and mental absolute here: FUCK YOU! I'D NEVER TREAT YOU GUYS THE SAME WAY YOU TREATED ME HERE!
 
kong1971 said:
The only thing about this thread that bothers me is how viciously I was rebutted. Give me a break! Some of you guys need to take a chill pill! The original statement that caused all this fury was qualified as being an opinion. I also did not state that circumcision made men violent-- only that the most violent countries were also more prone to circumcise-- and I stated several times that I wondered if there was a correlation and thought there might be. All opinion and conjecture, of course, and clearly labeled as such. What I received was pure bile: called a moron, an idiot, a bigot, a scam artist, accused of being insecure about my penis, deeply deluded, insane, misleading...Just go back through all the posts and reread them. Your reactions were shockingly overheated and hateful. I apologized, qualified, trying to clarify my curiosity, and was even more maliciously flamed. And you say I have a problem...? :D The only problem around here is that some ideas are "okay" and some ideas are not. The folks that bring up the "not okay" ideas had best be prepared for some hardcore hating, whether they intended to cause harm or not, because the motto for some of you guys is "seek and destroy" not "debate and educate". Thanks, Iwant, for helping me to understand the issue I was curious about. You other dudes who think you are the moral and mental absolute here: FUCK YOU! I'D NEVER TREAT YOU GUYS THE SAME WAY YOU TREATED ME HERE!
Click to expand...
Kong, both AC and myself have responded to all of your posts in an intelligent, straight forward, and respectful manner. You are the one who is blowing things out of proportion, telling us we're overheated and hateful, no one here has attacked the character of another [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] member except for yourself. I am going to drop it as of this post, so please don't bring me back into it. I think we need to let this crap of a thread die.
 
Here is what I said:

"Which nations circumcize their children the most? The US, Israel, and Muslim nations. Which nations are the most violent, war-mongering and aggressive? The US, Israel and Muslim nations. Think I'm crazy? Well, you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine."

Here is how I was replied to:

"Jesus Christ...I think that is entirely overstated, crazy, and sorry bro' but I think it's also propoganda bullshit...this is such propoganda bullshit...I am not harping on anyone's personal beliefs but when general and absurd statements like that are made, something has to be said...A total female circumsizition is a totally different case...you, yourself, don't understand the situation in the slightest bit...I never made any negative statements about FR in the past, and I have never ever overstepped my boundaries and made my personal opinions of FR known at all...How in the name of Allah/Jesus/Buddah would pulling on your foreskin scar make your nuts hang lower? How does that even correlate to anything?...No...........here is a link for you, www.dictionary.com...anyone with two eyes and 5 brain cells can see right through this transparent rebuttal of yours...You don't have a theory to stand on, you have become outrageoulsy overzealous...First off, you don't have a theory, that is so ridiculous... Kong, you beleve it to be that I don't have a rebuttal but what you say is so mind bogglingly absurd that it's hard to even give it any credentials..Talk about a void and utterly pointless statement.........I felt Kong's claims... have grown and grown on this forum to almost ridiculous levels...I think we need to let this crap of a thread die"

AC, as someone who says "I truly have no negative feeling towards those that seek the use of FR" in one post and then "And both devices have no basis of science to stand on when they spout their unbelievable benefits" in a later one, I feel you need to maybe come clear on where you stand on the issue of circumcision and foreskin restoration.

Maybe I am overzealous, but you are obviously conflicted about it.

AC, you keep going on and on about it even after I posted this, clearly admitting I was wrong:

"I was honestly thinking that circumcision led men to be more aggressive, but after reading your posts I realize that it is a far more complex issue, and has more to do with the governing forces than a physiological response. Calling me an idiot and a nutcase didn't make me see it, but your well thought posts did!"

Do you want blood or something, dude? You have anger management issues!
 
I knew you'd say that I edited and took everything out of context. That's sad...and so very not true. It is what it is, and you said what you said. You have this fault where you can never back down from an argument, and never are wrong, AC. Plus you positively lose your cool when confronted by this whole circumcision thing. You've done it time and time again. If you don't want to do it and feel it is all just in our heads, then why get steamed? I feel sorry for you. You're ire almost makes me rethink my original theory!
 
I would rather read Kong's positive, inspirational post's than some of this other bullshit. I'm a believer.
 
AC, I love you, man!

I don't feel bad about my body, my beliefs or my comments here. I believe I spoke and responded with clarity. I am not trying to deceive anyone. I am not a scam artist or a fool. Perhaps, you wish I were.

When I speak of the benefits of foreskin restoration, I almost always qualify them with "for some men" or "if you were tightly circed" or "may help". I always try to remember to do that because of members like you, although sometimes I forget.

You are being very inflammatory when you label me as a nutcase or a scam artist.

Because there is so much reluctance and even outright prejudice against FR, I always try to qualify what benefits I say a person may experience-- unless I am talking to a fellow FR enthusiast, who knows and has experienced the truth!

As far as your claims that everyone is coming down on cut guys nowadays...grow up! How many times do you think an uncut guy has had to endure comments like "smells bad" and "looks ugly" and "gives women cancer"? Your whining about us FR enthusiasts making you cut guys feel bad makes me laugh. Sounds a little like "white man burden" whining to me. Why begrudge a few guys their pride in trying to return to their natural state...unless it threatens you somehow.

You dispute the benefits, though they are well documented by many men-- hundreds if not thousands here and all over the net-- or blow them out of proportion so that they seem to be outrageous and silly. The benefits of FR are hard to explain, because they are subtle, yet at the same time, amazing. You anti-fr guys attack us for being excited when we experience a benefit-- yet at the same time, post in 107 pt red type when you make a .15" gain in girth. Discrimination! I cry. Prejudice! I cry. Stop trying to grind us out. Stop trying to shut us up. Leave us alone and stop trying to make us sound like crackpots. You want to talk about your dick and its size...let us talk about our dicks and its natural functioning...and stay out of our debates about our feelings concerning circumcision...because ONE) You don't understand TWO) You don't even WANT to understand and THREE) You ARE truly prejudiced against us because you do not believe what we are saying.

Buddy, just because you don't believe doesn't mean its not true.

If you think your belief makes something real or not real, then you have serious mental issues.
 
I don't think anyone who follows this thread closely is going to be confused with where we stand on the issues, AC. I rest my case and trust everyone to decide on their own interpretation. Just who is the propagandist here? Decide for yourself!
 
What a treat to not be wrapped up in the FR debate! One thought: the claim that judeo/christian/muslim countries are more violent due to circumcision (Kong, I understand this is just your opinion not based on fact or research, and you're not trying to tell anybody otherwise) has a few quagmires. For starters, the countries mentioned have violent histories that predate circumcision. Geopolitical aggression at the moment is actually low compared to past centuries, and yet circumcision didn't exist widely outside of jewish culture before the victorian era, I believe. To cite a fairly cliched example, the most aggressive military forces of the 20th century (Germany and Japan, to an extent Russia) were not circumcised anyways.

The Brits, the founders of global aggression and imperialism, who shipped out and conquered a a good chunk of the world with guns and battleships - not circumcised. French, Dutch, Belgian, really any of the colonialists, not circumcised. America, the civil-war, one of the bloodiest conflicts in all of history - not many people circumcised yet. And what if a nation's leadership is circumcised, but the population is uncut? Or the other way around. Will there be an uprising? Will the people demand peace/war?

Also, some of the most violent and dangerous places on earth right now (such as Sudan, The Ivory Coast) are not likely to have high circumcision levels. A nation's level of aggression and global activity is dependent upon it's history, position, and leadership. By the way, Israel is aggressive because they had to be in order to survive, and they are still attacked daily. They fight back, and of course aren't innocent bystanders, but suggesting that their politics are shaped by not having foreskins is so dodgy I won't even get into it. If you find that to be unfair, track down an Israelite and say "Hey guy, so don't you think all the problems over there are really just you all being circumcised? I mean really, isn't that more logical?" I don't believe the reaction will be favorible, so, you know, at your own risk.

And finally, this whole idea is dependent on the clause that uncircumcised men are somehow dramatically less sexually satisfied, and this somehow builds up in some societal energy bank that eventually turns a nation towards violence and conquest. Hence, FR is the key to world peace! At long last! I hope the Nobel people check out Penis Enlargement forums every once in a while . . . Well, I just think it sounds a little bit like something my old smoking buddies from university would say to get a laugh. Speaking of university, I'll stick with what my instructors taught me there; that the mechanics of global politics, the international system, and most importantly history, are immensely complicated and many very intelligent people spend entire lifetimes attempting to understand them. Or it could be the foreskins.

Now don't get all huffy on me Kong, I'm just having a bit of fun
 
No, swank. :) I admitted in an earlier post that my opinion about that was junk. Actually, all I said was that the most aggressive nation right this moment were also the nations that were more likely to circ. AC turned that into me saying that circed men were more violent. At first, I was like, Yeah, okay, right, that's what I think, and then I thought about it and decided, No, that's not true...mainly from reading iwants good posts about it. Still, I do believe there is a correlation. Maybe a weak, incidental one, but still there nonetheless. Probably more to do with oppressive/aggressive religio-political ideas than any physical cause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top