Polls

K

koooky

Member
Ok Kong...
I will address our recent debate or disagreement on polls here, as to not to hijack someone else's post on an entirely different subject.

First, lets get this straight,
I only disagreed with Graves ONE statement that "Also, most polls suggest that women by far prefer un-cut penises."

Thats it. That was the only statement I had a problem with. The only polls I have seen posted here, yours and Swanks were both worthless.

You replied, "Those polls do exist...but as we have learned from several outspoken members here, they don't count!"

So, which polls are they? I have only seen one posted by you and it is as easily dismissed as Swanks "20%" poll.

Graves reffered to "POLLS" in that one line, I am only interested in what other polls have been used to suggest this.

It is statements like the one above that Swank and myself have problems with on occasion. Since, in my mind, there haven't been any polls posted here of a usable nature. Saying that "most polls suggest that women by far prefer un-cut penises."
makes me immediately call BS and wonder which "polls" are being referred to.

kooky

BTW,

I hope your medical condition is getting better....
 
Polls are worthless, especially if you want to find women's preferences. Nine times out of ten, they will choose whatever the guy they are with has. If you've ever seen a discussion about size, it goes like this.. "my guy is 6", and it's perfect...my guy is 8" and thick and it's perfect... my guy's is short, but it fit's perfectly..."

I think polls on women about circ status are totally meaningless.
 
MDC said:
Polls are worthless, especially if you want to find women's preferences. Nine times out of ten, they will choose whatever the guy they are with has. If you've ever seen a discussion about size, it goes like this.. "my guy is 6", and it's perfect...my guy is 8" and thick and it's perfect... my guy's is short, but it fit's perfectly..."

I think polls on women about circ status are totally meaningless.
Click to expand...

True, there is no way to get an accurate poll withouit bias. People are just going to say what they have experianced instead of doing research and admitting the truth
 
I don't know exactly what the deal is here, but I agree with what has already been said.

There's never going to be an answer for "what women prefer," and it's fairly useless to try and figure it out. Every woman is going to be different based on her experiences, personal tastes, cultural biases, any number of things.

When you get down to it, probably the only thing you could really say is that if she likes you in the first place, she's not going to care much one way or the other.
 
disclaimer: this thread was written while on painkillers, so bear with me. :D

kooky, the world is a big place, and most of it, for the most part, is full of uncut cock. It is only here in the USA that our culture is so wrapped up in genital mutilation, and it is our insular and self-aggrandizing culture that perpetuates the idea that that is the best and only way it should be and that we are the experts on everything. Do you think the US is the only country that does polls or discusses sexual preferences? Wouldn't you agree that there are French, English, Canadian or Japanese periodicals that have also ran polls on female sexual preferences and asked those same questions?

I think what you are asking for is a scientific study performed by "reliable, American medical experts"...but those are the very people perpetuating the myth that circumcision is cleaner and medically safer and more aesthetically pleasing when we know for a fact that 1) a foreskin is a self-cleaning organ and 2) more babies die from circumcision than adult men from penile cancer and 3) beauty is in the eye of the beholder and most women cannot actually even tell the difference between uncut and cut when the penis is erect.

I think you want to be reassured that restoration is the right thing to do and circumcision is a bad thing, but it is hard to present the kind of proof you want right now because it goes against the grain here in the USA. The medical industry is only grudgingly giving it up because it makes them a great GREAT GREAT deal of money. Our society knows the truth but wants to cling to the old myths, because for one thing, Change is hard for us as human beings, and for another thing, because there are a great number of circumcised men who are disturbed by the idea that something bad was done to their cocks.

Since it is easy to call BS on any peice of evidence that is brought forth, either by attacking the credibility of the evidence itself or the credibility of the source, it is pretty much pointless to try to prove anything to you. Me personally, I do not put much weight by studies, but read all the first-personal anecdotal evidence that I can. I personally do not trust any medical professional. I do, however, trust my fellow man and what he says. Doctor Scapel has something to gain, or lose. Joe ScHydromaxoe from Idaho doesn't. He's just talking about something he's actually personally doing and experiencing.

When I was in the hospital, I flipped through the channels, and one of their private TV channels was the one for the women in the delivery ward. It was talking about how great circumcision was and showing different circumcision techniques. It showed a baby boy who had just been circumcised and was going on about how clean a circumcised penis was and the poor baby looked like he had been deep fried from the belly button down. It was horrifying to me, but what could I do? There were no pros and cons on that program, no hint that there were any drawbacks at all, or suggestions that men may want to decide for themselves as adults. It was just a horribly one-sided and deceptive commercial for their circumcision service. I wonder if we can somehow force them to run anti-circumcision educational programming on their baby channel as well? Perhaps the anti-circ organizations could concentrate on making hospitals own up to the truth instead of wasting their time with the government trying to pass that bill...?

The only way to combat that kind of money-driven power is through education and communication. But if you expect proof of the opposite from them, you are going to be waiting a long time, my friend. They are not going to provide the bullet that allows us to shoot their golden goose. That's just the way it is.
 
Well Kong, sorry to hear of your medical troubles, but that post rang a little sour.

First off, I think Kooky is pretty open-minded and even evaluator of the topic. I think if there was a reliable thing he could look at that supported the concept, he'd take it as it was. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they're not open to the idea, it just means he requires a different burden of proof. Nobody knows what the hell women prefer, and like has already been said, they probably prefer whatever they're used to, or whoever they're with at the moment. Like I said before, I think it's pretty safe to assume it's a trivial point at best for most women, so who cares?

On that note, I know you don't like doctors, but just as a general point, since we're discussing all this, it is highly unlikely that there is any kind of organized medical conspriacy regarding circumcision. Speaking as somebody with a few MDs in the family as well as some close friends, it just isn't really possible. There is no oversight, coordination, or organization that could possibly orchestrate said conspiracy, and even if there was there would be a paper trail, whistle blowers, something. There isn't some dark cabal of doctor insiders that conspire to keep circumcision prominent, it's just the conventional wisdom in the US and what many parents continue to want for their kids. You guys always talk about what a huge moneymaking scheme it is, but that's rather silly.

The profit margins on circumcisions are not that big of a chunk of the medical industry and they have much more pressing concerns and revenue streams than foreskins. It's a prime issue to you guys because, well, you're into foreskins, but for the average GP it's not something of great concern. I'm sorry, but if you think there is some kind of intentional campaign within the medical community to keep circumcision rates high for that little fraction of revenue, then it just shows serious naivety about the medical and corporate worlds. Do the doctors get a brochure every month from circumcision headquarters? Is there a secret class in med school where they tell all the students they have to push for circumcision at every chance because the medical industry will collapse without it? Don't think so. Hospitals make money from $65 aspirin tablets and overnight billing - anything that take a doctor's and staff's time is already on the low side of fiscal benefit. They'd be just fine without ever performing circumcisions.

90% of doctors performing these types of surgeries are staff docs anyway, they don't individually make money from the surgery. And circumcision rates are dropping nationally, so I doubt they're really pushing it at most hospitals. From what I've been told they could care less what the parents decide, the option is just there if they want it. Plenty of doctors are good and informed people, they're not all money coveting jackasses that don't have any empathy for their patients, which is basically what the "circumcision conspiracy theory" suggests they are.
 
OK..Kong. Why not just say, "I don't have any other polls than the one I had posted before". Thats all I am getting at. Graves told Neo that, "most polls suggest that women by far prefer un-cut penises". You then chimed in with, "Those polls do exist...but as we have learned from several outspoken members here, they don't count!". You b oth used the word "POLLS"..plural. I was only interested in what other polls he and you are referring to. Thats it. If you or graves don't have these "Polls"(plural) then I call BS and you guys should not being telling people that, "most polls suggest that women by far prefer un-cut penises".

Once again, to my knowledge there have only been two polls posted here and both were useless due to the test subjects. If there are polls other than the ones that have been discussed already, then lets see them. I have a feeling their aren't because someone would be on here talking about how this new "poll" shows what women really like.

Kong, I am not asking you to "prove" anything to me. My feelings about circ have not changed and are likely not to in the near future. I am still planning NOT to have it done if I ever have a son. I believe it should be left up to the individual. We are actually on the same side Kong. It just really bothers me when someone throws around certain "poll" data without backing it up. I think most people view a "poll" as somewhat of a study or fact-finding mission. It is in that regard that I comb through such "polls" to find out every detail from them that I can to verify their credibility.



MrD & MDC;
I agree with both of you. A woman is more than likely to vote for whatever her man currently is, and vote against what her last "idiot" boyfriend was.
Any kind of Poll indicating a woman's preference has to be taken with a huge grain of salt to begin with. Ask anyone who has been married! ;)


Swank;
"Nobody knows what the hell women prefer, and like has already been said, they probably prefer whatever they're used to, or whoever they're with at the moment."
If you ever get married, you'll find out just how true this is! And not even talking about sex here..with everything....paint color, carpet color, dishes EVERYTHING! ;)

kooky..
 
BTW Kong...the reason I seem so obsessed with polls is because polling is part of my job. The polls I conduct are much more scientific than any poll anyone could ever on a woman's sexual preference.

kooky
 
Lord, I really don't have the energy to do this tonight...!

swank, please don't get personal. Yes, I don't like doctors. My post, however, was not "sour", just talking. I think it is good that you finally own up to your bias, which is that you come from a family of doctors and circulate in a social atmosphere of medical professionals. I think our readers should know that. However, I do not view circumcision as a "medical conspiracy". I only view the medical industry for what it is...a business. Plain and simple. If you go to a tire shop, the salesman there is not going to tell you your tires are good for another year. He's going to sell you new tires to meet his quota. Same thing with hospitals. They offer circumcision as a service. They are not going to present the truth, but try to make the procedure seem necessary to a patient... thus, the circumcision program running on the childbirth channel. It is only unethical in that both sides of the issue were not presented. It was deceptive because it trades on our basic trust of the medical industry to sell a useless and sometimes damaging product that has no true health value. Don't try to portray me as a "conspiracy theorist" when I am merely aware of the scam. Doctors are not angels of mercy or saintly healers, just highly trained business men in a specialized industry.

kooky, I am not trying to skirt the issue or be deceptive. I simply do not have the energy to tackle what would be hours of internet research trying to find these polls to appease you. I have a life. Believe what you want.

I am going to put my foot down on this right now. I am a moderator here. I have been given permission to ban any trouble makers in the FR forum at my discretion. I have had this permission for a good while but have never implemented it because I believe in FREE SPenis EnlargementECH. However, there are a couple debate tactics that will no longer be permitted here.

#1 -- NO Penis EnlargementRSONAL ATTACKS... a member calling anyone posting here "crazy", "loonie", "cultish" or anything of that manner will be warned via PM by me. If the personal attacks continue, the offending member will be temporarily banned, first for 1 day, then 1 week, then 1 month, and if the behavior continues, finally permanently. The restorers who participate in this sub-forum have certain beliefs, and have the RIGHT to discuss their beliefs without harassment.

#2 -- CALLING BULLSHIT... this is no longer allowed. It is a bullying tactic whose sole purpose is to force a civil discussion into an argument and confuse our readers. If you believe that someone has made an incorrect statement, it is up to you to provide countering evidence, which you may do in a civil and respectful manner. The very name of this debate tactic ("calling bullshit") is a personal attack on a member's credibility, by suggesting they are being deceptive, and will not be tolerated. If you do not believe there is any difference, for example, in female pleasure during intercourse between cut and uncut men, then it is your responsibility to prove it. You cannot try to bully someone who said "women like uncut better" into doing so. We all have the right to express our opinions.

We WILL stay civil here from now on!

Otherwise...

:blasting:
 
Ok Kong....

So now anyone who makes a statement doesn't have to PROVE that statement, only the person who disagrees with it has the burden of proof? That sounds kind of backwards. I was only asking for these Polls in question...more than one. Thats it.

I did not iniatially disagree with ANYONE's opinion, only ask to see these "polls" you and Graves brought into question. If you or Graves know of these polls, it should not be hours of internet research to find them. All I asked is to see these other "polls". Why can't someone just provide them instead of getting all hostile?

I provided all the proof I had at the time, that the two polls presented here were useless and I have detailed throroughly why Swank's was just as useless as your poll.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that is correct, kooky. If you believe that gravesubject was stating a falsehood, it is your burden to prove it. It is not your option to arbitrarily call him a "bullshitter" and demand that he provide proof to you that his opinion is correct. That is a personal attack. I personally do not think gravesubject is a "bullshitter". He is an intelligent and well-spoken member of this forum and should not be subject to harassing or flaming comments like that.

For future reference, please see below:

ACCEPTABLE COMMENT:

"I have only seen a couple polls here on this forum and neither was very convincing to me. I would like to see more of these polls."

UNACCEPTABLE COMMENT:

"That is bullshit. Prove your opinion immediately!"

If you feel so passionately about graves' gravely mistaken opinion, then you have the burden to prove that he is so horribly mistaken or so blatantly lying. Grave, like the rest of us, have lives and interests outside of appeasing you or swank or any of the other members who feel compelled to censor the restoration forum.

If you can provide proof that only one poll exists that depicts female preference for uncut cock, I would be eager to see it.

The purpose of this sub-forum is for restoring men or men interested in restoring or basic skin expansion to discuss their methods, progress and feelings about circumcision. Those looking for confrontation and argument should go elsewhere. Why don't you go to the hanger forum and berate them for hanging 60 lb weights from their penis and ask them to prove that longer cocks are more preferable...?

Thank you.
 
OK Kong. Which one does my original statement fall under?

In fact, lets look at the entire original thread that started all of this.

My original statement was;
"Also...as aside and this can be taken up elsewhere---

Gravesubject, where did you get this from?
"Also, most polls suggest that women by far prefer un-cut penises"

I have never seen this and am not aware of any usable polls that show any preference."

So where in that statement am I calling anyone a liar or being disrespectful?

And my proof? I have presented it quite a few times.
I have said that the only two polls posted here were worthless and exactly why they were.

Your poll, presented here;
http://www.mattersofsize.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15587

Is useless because of this line;
"Women having sexual experience with both circumcised and anatomically complete partners were recruited through classified advertisements in magazines and an announcement in an anti-circumcision newletter."

I don't think there is any doubt to anyone familair with polling would argue that the test subject here and the data received are skewed due to the nature of the procedure in which the test subjects were recruited.

Swank's Poll, as presented here;
http://www.mattersofsize.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15637

Is useless due to the limiting number of test subjects who have had sex with both cut and intact partners as described here, "In my opinion, this is not nearly enough women to get a proper across the board, reliable result. I will also add that from here it goes on to say that 16.5% had had sex with both.

"In response to the question "With which penis types have you had sexual experience?", 16.5% revealed that they had had sexual contract with both circumcised and uncircumcised men."

Now...16.5% of 145 is 24. So now we have 24 women who have had sex with both."

I think anyone would agree that a poll taken of 24 women on their opinion of their preference toward cut or uncut can only be described as inconclusive at best.

My entire detailing of Swank's poll can be found at the same thread.



I can only prove that only one poll has been posted here. That was one of my original statements to begin with.


No where have I tried to censor you or any other user in this forum or any other. I only asked for clarification on his statement, that was all. In fact, I never even addressed you until you saw fit to defend his statement instead of allowing him to defend or clarify his own statement.
 
Last edited:
1. DLD alone makes the calls on who gets banned, no mods are empowered to do this as they please. I have discussed it with other moderators. DLD has outlined specific 'bannable' behavior and that's the only thing that will result in that particular action. There are no "enforcer" mods with a green light to toss people they don't like.

2. Mod's don't have the power to dictate what kind of opinions and posting are not acceptable, that's already clearly outlined in the rules. Questioning something or expressing a contrary opinion to Kong or anybody else is not a malicious or personal attack unless it's presented in this way(i.e. the post is personally attacking the person, not the content of their posts). This is an attempt to set up for banning anybody that questions the conventional wisdom around here.

Pretty funny that the theme is free speech, and yet rules severely restricting speech are slapped down immediately. Any topic on this forum is up for debate and questioning, just as it was before. Kooky is well within his rights to say "where are these polls you are talking about?" if somebody makes the claim that they're out there. Accountability for the validity of information is on the poster, otherwise, well, there is no accountability. If somebody says something, you are well with in your rights to say "show me, or tell me where to find it."

If I have this correct, it is now against forum rules to question something somebody says unless you provide contrary evidence in your post? So then nobody is responsible for proving anything that they say or claim. Hmm, sounds like a license for some people to just say anything they want without fear of inconvenient facts getting in the way . . . That's not free speech and it's not even an open debate. It's raw censorship that I do believe has been cooked up by one individual and this forum, any forum, is a lesser thing with those kinds of rules in place. It ceases to be a discussion at that point. It's a forum that is used to discuss FR and related issues, not to exclusively advance the opinions of one or two individuals. Disagreements and debate are what make forums tick, not the opinions of the most frequent and involved posters squashing any competing ideas with threats.

Now that that is out of the way, I wouldn't say having doctors in the family is really a bias (who says I like my family, they could be assholes?). Anyway, several are, as well as close friends, I've actaully mentioned this several times before. So, seeing that I know some of these coniving bastards (my sister in particular), I can tell you that I have spoken to them about his circumcision business before. I'm not talking out of my ass here, they just don't really care abou it. They're well aware that it doesn't offer any great medical benefit, but many parents continue to want it done and won't hear otherwise.

So far as doctors all just being businessmen, well, is anybody that is paid for their work necessarily greedy and unethical by default then? No doctors out there care about their work, have concern for their patients, associate with the human condition? They are, for the most part, very normal (whatever that is), and would never bully people into getting useless surgery to fatten the coffers of whatever hospital or medical group they work for. The only doctors who are functionally "businessmen" are private practitioners, and I promise you they aren't performing a great deal of circumcisions every year.

The point I make that circumcision is far from a cash cow and a very minor blip on the medical radar goes entirely unaddressed. I don't believe it is in any way coarse to suggest that Kong and others have called it a conspiracy-like situation because, um, they have. If you like I will take the time to go back and collect a few quotes, otherwise, you ought to just drop the issue.

Finally, another word on the issue of debate "tactics." I know that in my own experience, I don't employ any specific "tactics," all I attempt to do is make my point. Placing an arbitrary and poorly defined label on just terms, phrases, ect. somebody can use as an unfair "tactic" is a bit out of line. What is not allowed is malicious personal attacks devoid of content (ex: "hey, you're an asshole, get lost, fuck you, ect.") and trolling-type behavior. Attempting to define what types of adjectives are unacceptable to use in reference to the nature of individual posts, internet groups, ideas, ect, well, that's damn near Orwellian.

The fact is, calling something crazy isn't a malicious insult. Hey, I think that people who say the human race was started by aliens are crazy because I think it has no merit. I think that saying there is an intentional effort by medical professionals to get parents to circumcise for the meager profits is crazy because I believe it has no merit. Same criteria, same terminology. Any attempt to curtail that type of expression isn't good moderating, it's the restrcition of freedom of speech on a board that prides itself on free expression and it's not right. People are banned from forums for blatantly disrupting them for no reason and causing trouble for the sake of it, not having opinions or posting in a way that a particular mod doesn't like.

The fact that some people around just don't want competing opinions in the forum or their posts ever questioned at all has never been more clear.
 
Last edited:
DLD ultimately stands behind his moderators and I am not going to tolerate this confrontational behavior. The rules are simple and fair. No harassment. No demands. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and should be free to say what they want without undue criticism from either of you. I have already had one veteran forum member quit because of this behavior and I will not have more of the same. If you persist in arguing about this I will consider it harassment and invoke a termporary ban. You have been publicly warned.
 
Kooky said:
Gravesubject, where did you get this from?
"Also, most polls suggest that women by far prefer un-cut penises"

I have never seen this and am not aware of any usable polls that show any preference.
Click to expand...

Kooky,

My response was based on past cursory surveys of surveys and was by no means comprehensive. It was a quick response to Neo Enigma's statement:

Neo Enigma said:
So needless to say that's narrowed my sexual activity to near to none cause girls in the States usually dont like uncut especially if the foreskin cant be pulled back at all.
Click to expand...
(emphasis added)

I was trying to reassure him that not all women hate an uncut penis, although it does appear to be an attitude more prevalent among the ladies of the States. I was unaware of, at the time that I wrote that comment, that most of the for/against preference claims that I had seen were based on one semi-credible study in the BJU and many, less-credible internet surveys.

So, in response to your statement about a dearth of usable polls on the topic of preference: having spent the past hour going over various polls, I agree that most of them, on both sides of the issue, are unscientific and therefore not reliable. That said, I still stand by my opinion: I don't think that the majority of women in the world, or even the U.S., are biased against circumcised penises.

Since you do surveys (professionally?) I am curious as to what methodological faults you find with the BJU survey (aside from the self-selected population problem, that one is glaring)? Polling is a valid, scientific assessment tool, but is very, very easy to get wrong, both intentionally and through poor design.

Cheers!


BTW, I thought that this was a funny and telling read on this whole topic:

http://archive.salon.com/sex/feature/2000/09/11/circumcision/index.html
 
Last edited:
Kong,

You have GOT to be kidding. You are going to ban people because of the things outlined above?

If so, I am out of here. This will be no better than Thunder's. I do not think DLD feels this way.

Freedom of speech is a precious thing. You should not so easily flaunt it. No specifics, but I have read things from you that were not so nice. Including in this thread, threatening people.

Bigger
 
Hey Grave. Glad you responded. Now you and I can have this discussion as I meant for it to be.
I will try and address your comments individually without straying to far from the original topic;

"So, in response to your statement about a dearth of usable polls on the topic of preference: having spent the past hour going over various polls, I agree that most of them, on both sides of the issue, are unscientific and therefore not reliable."

This was one of my main focus points to begin with. As I had stated, the only polls I have seen here(one for, one against) were both completely unreliable. I was interested if you had any new polls to share and where those polls might have come from. Like I said, I do on occasion poll in my line of work and I become very intertested when one uses such a tool to support or defend a particular issue. I hope you notice I was the first to throuroughly detail the faults of Swank's poll presented here and by no means was I taking sides. I found Swanks's poll to be just as flawed as the poll Kong posted.


"That said, I still stand by my opinion: I don't think that the majority of women in the world, or even the U.S., are biased against circumcised penises."

The problem I have with this Grave, is that I don't feel you were stating this as an opinion. I feel that your reference to polls tried to convey this as a fact. I hope you know that I have no problems with you, or anyone else here expressing their opinions. My opinion on the subject is that I don't think many women give it much thought. I think women relate sex far more emotionally than men do and therefore are able to experience much more pleasure through the intamacy of the act.


"Since you do surveys (professionally?) I am curious as to what methodological faults you find with the BJU survey (aside from the self-selected population problem, that one is glaring)? Polling is a valid, scientific assessment tool, but is very, very easy to get wrong, both intentionally and through poor design."

Aside from the most glaring fault with the BJU survey, I also feel that there were not near enough test subjects to merit any reliable consideration. I don't feel that 139 test subject are a reliable test group for such a large function of the survey ( Do women prefer cut or uncut). I also find fault with this line as well, "the results were analysed for age, number of lifetime partners, preputial status of the most recent partner, preference for vaginal orgasms (as defined below) and their preference for a circumcised or intact penis." While I have no problem with these survey definitions, I feel that nationality should have been considered as well as it is my opinion that American women would have a slightly higher chance of prefering cut as opposed to european women who may have a higher preference for uncut. I also feel that this poll was intentionally skewed to get the desired results. If a person were to poll women how they feel about abortion, but only used women who subscribed to a right to life newsletter, you have to ask what type of result are they looking for to begin with?


"Polling is a valid, scientific assessment tool, but is very, very easy to get wrong, both intentionally and through poor design."

I agree with this statement 100%. As I stated above, I believe the BJU poll to be skewed intentionally to get the desired results. In my line of work, I have the distinct advantage of being able to poll EVERYONE involved or with an opinion to get very straightfoward results. An example;
Lets say I am told to go to "X Brand" electronic plant to find out how the 500 employees feel about their benefeits package. I have access to all 500 employees. Infact, I do not turn in my report until I have interviewed all 500 employees. I also am able to target every sub group conceivable including but not limited to; age, length of service, departments and family or maritial status. Since I am able to target every one of the 500 employees, my surveys can be much more defining than any poll targeting the preference of women's sexual behavior. How many women would have to be interviewed even to get a tiny percentage and still be able to include age, number or amount of sexual experience and nationality? It is this reason why I am so interested in polls of this nature. I don't feel that it is anyway possible to get usable results when the population at large is so huge.

Just my two cents there Graves. Also, I agree with almost everything else you said in your initial post and I hope you were not offended by my original post asking for a reference to your polling info.

kooky
 
Last edited:
Bib;

I agree with your assessment as well. No where do I feel I was out of line and I believe I was within my rights as a subscribing member to voice my initail questions on where Grave had gotten his information.

Kooky..
 
In no way has Kooky, or myself, acted in a bannable fashion. Suggesting that questioning your desire to ban anybody that simply posts in a manner you do not like seems to be another attempt to threaten anybody that posts an unfavborable opinion around here. The rules for banning are clearly stated and I have previously discussed the matter with DLD and other moderators. Nobody has the power to simply decide what types of speech and posting will suddenly become unacceptable, just because that particular person does not like them. Questioning and debate are considered just fine in other forums on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words], and they are just fine here.

The rules for banning have been made clear by DLD - as a mod you do not have the power to impliment your own criteria for banning. This is an attempt to control the content of the forum and to try to intimidate those who would potentially disagree with what the majority opinions, namely those professed by Kong, is around here. I do not believe this new attempt at speech restrction would be used to prosecute anybody with an opinion commensurate with those of the moderator who is attempting the restrction. That's not what these forums are about. They are not a tool for one person to espouse their opinions and ideas, it's a place where anything pertaining to the forum topic can be discussed from any persepective, and the same rules that are used in all the other forums are still applicable here.

Attempting to label any questioning of your "rewriting" of the forum rules as harrasment is just an attempt to squash any protest of the action. Nothing taking place here could possibly warrant banning, and to even attempt to do so would clearly demonstrate a blatant desire for censorship.

Kooky and Graves are adults and settled their issue in a cordial and mature fashion. Graves was not offended, nor was Kooky trying to offend. Intervention or a new "banning mandate" from a moderator was unwarranted and entirely uncesessary.
 
Last edited:
I tend to agree with this as well Swank. This most recent problem occured because Kong tried to defend or clarify a statement he did not make nor could have he have known any intent of that statement. Whether it was made to purposefully deceive or was just made out of hand. I only iniatially asked to which polls Graves was reffering to. That was it. I recall I was equally harsh and detailed as to my assesment of the Poll posted by you.

I also agree that Graves was very mature and level headed in his own reply and did not seem to take any offense that I could tell. And I take none as well concerning his reply. I think Graves and my statements are perfect examples of how things should be debated around here to begin with. He and I did not quote each other out of context nor did we put words in the others' mouth. I hope to continue discussions with Graves and I support his most of his opinions.

Without speaking for him, I seriously doubt DLD would condone the banning of a "Gold Level Support" member such as myself without me being way, way out of line and over board.



kooky
 
Last edited:
koooky said:
Just my two cents there [Priapologist :)]. Also, I agree with almost everything else you said in your initial post and I hope you were not offended by my original post asking for a reference to your polling info.
Click to expand...

No, not at all. This is the kind of healthy debate that I enjoy and encourage. What I initially wrote about polls was written in good faith, but was admittedly scientifically weak once I delved into the source material this morning. I'm all for keeping everything above reproach.

Cheers!
Priapologist
 
Once again I agree, Grave(Whats with the name change??? ;)

I also have no doubt that your original intent was in good faith to Neo. If I had
felt that you were being intentional deceitful, I would have not be so respectful towards you and your statements. I look forward to continuing discussions with you and wish you well.

BTW, awesome starting size. How's things going with that? What methods are you currently using to reach your goal or are you backing of Penis Enlargement for awhile to pursue your FR goals?

your friendly neighborhood kookyman

Also, to all concerned, I did not mean to imply that I think my "Gold Level Support" status makes me above the law, I only meant that I have a proven track record for support of this board and I don't think I have ever gotten out of hand as per DLD's rules for it's members.
 
Last edited:
koooky said:
Once again I agree, Grave(Whats with the name change??? ;)

I also have no doubt that your original intent was in good faith to Neo. If I had
felt that you were being intentional deceitful, I would have not be so respectful towards you and your statements. I look forward to continuing discussions with you and wish you well.

BTW, awesome starting size. How's things going with that? What methods are you currently using to reach your goal or are you backing of Penis Enlargement for awhile to pursue your FR goals?

your friendly neighborhood kookyman

Also, to all concerned, I did not mean to imply that I think my "Gold Level Support" status makes me above the law, I only meant that I have a proven track record for support of this board and I don't think I have ever gotten out of hand as per DLD's rules for it's members.
Click to expand...



Due to a possible breach in my anonymity this morning at school (some guy snuck up and was peering over my shoulder while my screen name was up), I thought that it was best if my old nick died a sudden death.

Yes, I am usually very careful to either validate what I post or to qualify it by denoting it as opinion, conjecture, et cetera. I was in a hurry and trusted that the information was valid. Of course, polling really is nothing but opinions, so how valid is it anyway :s?

I too look forward to good, open dialog.

And, thank you for the compliment. Nature was kind to me. But, I still want more rofl I have yet to see any erect gains, but I've gotten increased flaccid size, mostly from FR. I've got lots of extra skin rippling up behind my corona now, adding to girth, while my flaccid length has increased by ~0.5 inches. I've been doing FR for 7.5 weeks and Penis Enlargement for about 3 weeks, most seriously durning the past week due to the Newbie challange. I'm trying to balance both, though, so I don't loose the coverage that I have.

Cheers!
 
There is nothing wrong at all with asking for clarification or more data, kooky. However, there is a difference in saying, "Could you cite some of that information" and "I just gotta call bullshit on that one!" I'm not saying that was your exact words, but "BS" was stated somewhere, and my only intent is to head off the name-calling and nit-picking that so often flares up here in the FR forum. I just want to keep everything civil and concise. To be honest, I would love to see more polls myself, pro or con, but unfortunately they are pretty scarce as yet. Please keep in mind that we are all entitled to our opinions, and nobody has to "prove" anything if they don't feel like it. This is a free forum where everyone has the right to say what they think, so long as it isn't overly insulting.
 
That's great Kong. But that is exactly what I did.

My very first statement that started all of this was,
"I have never seen this and am not aware of any usable polls that show any preference."

I did not use the term BS until you got involved. If you remove all the banter between me and you, and only insert the recent dialog between me and O2B, you will find a nice, open-minded discussion between to individuals. It was you that decided to defend or clarify a statement made by someone else. Why not give O2B the chance to speak for himself? Why not wait to see what HE has to say on the matter since my comment was directly addressed to him? He cleared things up rather nicely and maturaly by stating, "So, in response to your statement about a dearth of usable polls on the topic of preference: having spent the past hour going over various polls, I agree that most of them, on both sides of the issue, are unscientific and therefore not reliable." No, you couldn't let him say that. God forbid someone else here come to their own conclusion that a poll posted by you as, "ACTUAL STUDY: Do women prefer uncut cock" is indeed useless and just as flawed as the study presented by Swank. I believe you are guilty of esculating this into more than it was ever supposed to get.
You still have yet to answer which one of your ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE guidelines my original comment falls under. No where did I ever question O2B's opinion, only his reference to polls. As a moderator, why not moderate, wait to see if a discussion needs moderation. That being said, I am going to reconstruct the entire original thread minus any banter while only adding the actual conversation between me and O2B.

Kooky
 
kooky, nothing you said exactly did fall under the guidelines, except for one stray BS comment, made to me. You are right. I do apologize for coming off all high-handed, but I was afraid that thread was going to devolve into the exact kind of flame war a recent one did in which a forum member named executioner quit. It had the signs of going that way. It was already starting to get hijacked...

Executioner was a long time member here. He participated in alot of conversations and kept the FR forum active and lively. He was one of the more passionate restorers, which seems to be the type most often harassed for their feelings about foreskin restoration. He was accused of saying many things that he did not say, and though I tried to defend him, he ended up getting too insulted and frustrated to continue posting on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words].

There seems to be an attitude among some that it is okay to be skeptical of FR and its benefits but not okay to be passionate about it. The FR forum has many active posters whose beliefs fall into both sides of the spectrum, and somehow we have to find a way to make peace between the skeptics and the believers cause this constant battle is sooooo tiresome.

I'd hate to see more believers quit out of frustration.
 
Apoligy accepted. I think by now you know my style. I am one of your converts Kong. A year ago I would have had a son of mine cut without a second thought. If you have reached anyone, you have reached me and I have learned stuff from you I would have honestly never would have gone in search of myself. I think I am usually pretty fair in here and I normally call it down the middle. Why even bother you ask? Because I believe some of the techniques practiced by you and others into FR can help anyone on a Penis Enlargement program. I believe skin stretch is the very first obstacle when one starts. Obviously you guys in here know a lot more about that than your average Penis Enlargement'er. Even Bib talked about how important skin stretch is in the beginning of hanging. I will support and defend anyone's opinions here and other places on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words]. But I will not stand quiet when I believe someone is misrepresenting FACTS either intentionally or completely unintentionally as was the case here. Besides my banter with you, I believe I gave O2B ample opportunity to speak for himself and I have much more respect for him now and I am greatly looking forward to more communications with him in the future. As for you Kong, I know you are very passionate about this forum and about FR and anti-circ in general. That's great. I am the exact same way about several things myself. Please don't let that passion get into the way of being a good moderator. Let two adults here have the discussions as long as they keep it respectful between themselves. I think you cold be a great moderator hereif you would learn to put your passion aside for a few moments. Believe me, I don't think I could ever be a mod because I understand the extreme amount of patience one must have. I also think that you are one of the quickest on the draw here to help someone with anything at all. Keep up the good work on that as well.

I hope you are feeling better btw.

kooky
 
One of my converts...haha...that's nice. Just have a little patience with me when that old bug flies up my ass on occasion. It's just a part of who I am. Thanks for the compliments and all that. I was feeling better yesterday and kind of overdid it so now I am paying for it. The pain isn't too bad but the nausea is awful. I can't even look at food without wanting to ralph right now, and I feel like I am on a slowly rolling boat. Whooooooooaaaaaaaaaa........ 3 to six weeks for this thing to heal. Ugh! Yeah, I'm doped up. ;) I'm going back to bed.
 
Damn... I'm sorry to hear that TheExecutioner decided to quit. I don't think that anyone intended to insult him or compel him to leave. I know that my response to him was motivated by his apparent about-face: first questioning Noel's sincerity, then gushing sympathy when Noel cracked. I just seemed overboard, and perhaps insincere, at the time.

I think that the lesson that can be taken from many of the past events is that questioning a person's comment isn't necesarily hostile questioning of that person, although I have seen that. What we need to do is separate the health skepticisim from personal attacks, otherwise this begins looking like the Jerry Springer show instead of the Foreskin Restoration sub-forum.

Peace,
Priapologist
 
This whole name change thing is getting a little crazy.

GS = O2B = Priapologist

Priapologist from now on :) I promise I won't change it again.


Cheers!
 
You're not even replying to the quote, in which I call for a cease to name-calling and personal attacks. You're just criticizing me personally. The only reason for that post you quoted was for everyone-- not just the official skeptics, but also the true believers-- everyone to have a chance to say what they think without undue name-calling and harassment.

Besides, as always, you're just a couple days late. That debate had pretty much burned down. Why throw more gas on the fire now, AC? Just couldn't resist a jab at me, your self-professed "arch nemesis"? :D
 
Priapologist, this forum IS the Jerry Springer Show sometimes. AC just lobbed a chair at me! [Kong leaps up and runs at AC, tackling him as the guards rush forward to intervene]
 
AncientChina said:
No that is an entirely different issue, you decided to take it upon yourself to lick my transexual girlboyfriends ass....I had to protect my manwoman.
Click to expand...

MERCY! That's hot.

I think I'm gonna faint :P
 
Yes, that is quite astute. They always DO shoot the messenger. I should keep that in mind when AC takes a shot at me or swank calls me the "arch grand master of whining and bullshitting" or I am otherwise called a "lunatic", "loony", "cult-leader" or "scam artist". In fact, I have been taking those shots for more than a year now on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words], but guess what AC, swank and company...? There are more and more restorers here every day. So suck on that, babies! See that? Yeah, that's right. Suck on it! Suck on it and then Suck on it some more! Ha ha! The Age of Whole Men is dawning! Genital Mutilation is so OUT. You should just conform and start regrowing your foreskins now so that you will fit in with the rest of us in the future and no one will make fun of your poor skinned little weiners with your glans all hanging out and exposed in such a vulgar manner! It's disgusting, really. Nobody wants to see your glans.
 
You should learn to read as well as restore your foreskin. I didn't say "skinnier". I said "skinned". Although, from what I hear, you do have a pretty skinny penis. Probably from having all that flesh removed from it at childbirth. Just left you with a little dried peanut shell of a head and some corpus. Sad, really. Unlike my huge, gravid fleshy cock and shiny, wet giant mushroom of a head, all covered in hot, smelly male juices and female-attracting pheromones.

Just to clarify, your quasi-religious ideas concerning cock are all fucked up. Although Jesus was a Jew and thus circumcised, God is not. We are, after all, created in the image of God, so why would God have us be born with a foreskin if HE, in all his glory, does not, in fact, possess a foreskin. Not trying to be funny, but I bet God has a Huge Schlong and a big Anteater of a foreskin. You'd probably be jealous. Maybe as jealous of His cock as you are of mine.

Finally, Da Vinci, I know for a fact, loved the uncut cock. Men were not widely circumcised in his times. You need look only to his masterpeice "David" to see that. I bet DaVinci sucked almost as good as you do. He probably went balls deep and gave that foreskin a good tongue-swirly too, something you should probably learn to do, as we are all going to be uncircumcised in the next twenty or thirty years. You really should learn the tongue swirly, AC. Just to keep your men happy, you know.
 
You should leave God, Barney, Jesus and DaVinci out of this. This is a fight between you and me. For God's sake, Barney doesn't even have a penis, unless it is some kind of bizarre retractible dinosaur penis (if so, I've never seen it). Even if he did have a penis, I am sure it would be uncircumcised, because it is illegal in the USA to circumcise animals...including, I am sure, T-Rex's.

You are such a closet homo. First, you bring up the gay stuff by foisting on us your DaVinci fantasy, then you're like, "Eww, don't talk about gay stuff. It makes me all woogy!" Just come out of the closet, dude, nobody cares! You remind me of my cousin. He's like, "Yeah, this gay guy hit on me and I punched him in the face cause I'm like so not gay." I was like, "Where did that come from?" I was just downloading some stuff on my computer when he blurted that out. You closet homos are so funny...

Finally, no one cares how big your dick is. This is the foreskin restoration sub-forum. We will all consider you lacking here until you have a big juicy hood on that cobra.

PS-- Any penis, cut or uncut, stinks after 7 days of not being washed. Your argument is weak and trite.
 
AncientChina said:
Remember it was Leonardo Davinci (a homosexual and fan of the penis) who once was quoted to say "The circumsized penis is something of the upmost beauty, a truly righteous tool of God, and one I enjoy immensely"!
Click to expand...

Dammit! I want confirmation of that quote from three, independent, world-recognized DaVinci scholars! In triplicate!! Notarized in blood by the pope!!!!






Then I'll tell you it's shit anyway rofl


Ahem... you guys are hijacking this thread :P

Cheers!
Pri
 
Well, all I've got to say is, didn't god (Yahweh) instruct the Jews in the time of Abraham to perform circumcision to form a covenent with him as the one true god? So god is a fan. Well it says it in the bible so it must be true! Just kidding, I don't believe in the bible, but I did read that the Hebrew people may have picked up the practice from contact with the Egyptians, who appearently were doing it from way back. You see, when you live in an arid, sandy environment, circumcision can prevent some very painful, harmful conditions that can develop in the foreskin due to infection and lack of water. Probably why it continues to be a more major practice in Africa and the Muslim world as well. The origins are practical and hygene related, not really religious. I know nobody was seriously arguing that, but in the spirit of informative reading . . .

That being said, Kong I love how you characterize the the forums as growing despite all the criticism directed at you. Do you really think anybody is trying to stop guys from being interested in FR? Do you think your credibility is what attracts people to the forum? Do you think it is yourself that interests men in restoring their foreskins? Frankly it smells like a little bit of egomania wafting through the air. "Ah, men continue to FR despite the fact that people have repeatedly pointed out that I make shit up and cry out with rage when people point out the crapiness in much of my posting, behold my FR forum!" Do you think you're running a cult of personality over here or what? Give me a break.

Come on now guy, how many times do I have to explain this? When people critique your posts, they're only referencing YOUR POSTS, not FR or the men who are interested in it at large. You aren't the intellectual guardian and champion of this stuff, you're just the most frequent poster and most vocally angry whenever somebody challenges anything related to FR or anti-circ, including people who practice it or generally support you (cyclops, kooky).

If there is a guy around here who knows his stuff I'd say it's this Priapologist fellow. I doubt he considers this his "turf" when it comes to posting, and I also don't see him flying into a rage if anybody contradicts one of his opinions on the matter (you have to face it, AC is right, it's you that people bicker with, not really anyody else). Also, not to kiss ass, but he has a legit grip on biology and human anatomy and understands the actual physiological processes at work here. Scientific literacy is a key skill when trying to digest information on a topic that is heavily anecdotal and largely unstudied, and I think your mediocre grip on science and information is what has lead to a lot of the confusion around here. Learn from the guy.

For instance, it sounds like you think seeing the glans is gross, but in truth it's probably a sexual turn-on for women. Normally, the appearance of the glans would indicate sexual arousal in the male, a female sexual cue, just as an open vagina is more arousing to the male eye than a folded over moose knuckle. Probably why circumcised dicks tend to be viewed as more visually pleasing by women.
 
Swank said:
Well Kong, sorry to hear of your medical troubles, but that post rang a little sour.

First off, I think Kooky is pretty open-minded and even evaluator of the topic. I think if there was a reliable thing he could look at that supported the concept, he'd take it as it was. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they're not open to the idea, it just means he requires a different burden of proof. Nobody knows what the hell women prefer, and like has already been said, they probably prefer whatever they're used to, or whoever they're with at the moment. Like I said before, I think it's pretty safe to assume it's a trivial point at best for most women, so who cares?

On that note, I know you don't like doctors, but just as a general point, since we're discussing all this, it is highly unlikely that there is any kind of organized medical conspriacy regarding circumcision. Speaking as somebody with a few MDs in the family as well as some close friends, it just isn't really possible. There is no oversight, coordination, or organization that could possibly orchestrate said conspiracy, and even if there was there would be a paper trail, whistle blowers, something. There isn't some dark cabal of doctor insiders that conspire to keep circumcision prominent, it's just the conventional wisdom in the US and what many parents continue to want for their kids. You guys always talk about what a huge moneymaking scheme it is, but that's rather silly.

The profit margins on circumcisions are not that big of a chunk of the medical industry and they have much more pressing concerns and revenue streams than foreskins. It's a prime issue to you guys because, well, you're into foreskins, but for the average GP it's not something of great concern. I'm sorry, but if you think there is some kind of intentional campaign within the medical community to keep circumcision rates high for that little fraction of revenue, then it just shows serious naivety about the medical and corporate worlds. Do the doctors get a brochure every month from circumcision headquarters? Is there a secret class in med school where they tell all the students they have to push for circumcision at every chance because the medical industry will collapse without it? Don't think so. Hospitals make money from $65 aspirin tablets and overnight billing - anything that take a doctor's and staff's time is already on the low side of fiscal benefit. They'd be just fine without ever performing circumcisions.

90% of doctors performing these types of surgeries are staff docs anyway, they don't individually make money from the surgery. And circumcision rates are dropping nationally, so I doubt they're really pushing it at most hospitals. From what I've been told they could care less what the parents decide, the option is just there if they want it. Plenty of doctors are good and informed people, they're not all money coveting jackasses that don't have any empathy for their patients, which is basically what the "circumcision conspiracy theory" suggests they are.
Click to expand...

What is going on here? again with this. Do you like reading? I like to read. Do you like making money? I enjoy it myself. Do you think that it's a conspiracy among some group or just more likely...why rock the boat? I like money and chances are so do you so is there a conspiracy going on between us to make money? No, but we do share a common ground there. No conspiracy, just happens to be the way it is.
 
Uhh...AC, you did know that I was joking around with you those last few posts, right? Right? Oh lord... I was talking about Barney's retracticle T-Rex penis and DaVinci giving tongue-swirlies... it was a joke folks...chuckle-chuckle...

I wasn't seriously accusing you of glorysizing, AC. To be honest, I am actually quite in awe of your mammoth maleness. I've never seen it, but still I dream about it, and in my dreams it is mammoth.

Closet homosexual...? AC, you post in color much more than I do. If that isn't a sign of closet homosexual tendencies, I don't know what is. You should post in black like all the rest of us manly men. Color is for sissies. Also, don't make fun of Rupaul. Don't you know he acts that way to get girls. Please...

Once more for the records, it don't matter how big it is if you don't have that foreskin. Foreskin is all that counts when it comes to cock. Just ask any female what is more important, personality, looks, money, size or foreskin and 99% will say foreskin. There are literally thousands of polls which reflect this. No, don't bother challenging that. I don't have to prove anything!
 
Iwant8, read the rest of the post, or posts rather as I've commented on it more than once. Individual doctors don't make much money at all from circumcisions, in fact most make NO money at all just by performing them as they're staff doctors, paid on salary, not by the operation. Circumcision takes 15 minutes as I understand it, it's not like they call in a specialist who contracts with the hospital. They bill it and treat it almost like getting a couple of stitches, and the actual procedure isn't much more complicated. It's not some kind of cash cow for the medical industry despite the popular claims.

The other point is, not all doctors are people soley concerned with making as much cash as humanly possible. Believe it or not, many people are in the medical profession for other reasons than just simply making money, and they are entirely ethical. One of the basic tenents of the whole anti-circ thing is that the medical indsutry is an evil monolithic collective of greedy and uncaring doctors who will do anything for a buck. Not the case, and neither is the idea that anybody tries to keep circumcision around just for monetary reasons.

Lots of parents still want it for their kids in the states because of the cultural thing, plain and simple, and the fact is, there is no solid evidence that circumcision really causes a lot of problems for most men. I know it's hard to believe when all you read this stuff about it on the internet (i.e. circumcision makes you suicidal, violent, prone to rape, homosexuality, impotent, depressed, numbs your penis to deadening levels, ect.) but none of these things are really true. Step back for a minute and look at reality, or better yet speak to some doctors about, don't just read all this crap on the internet and make assumptions.

And, it pretty much has been referred to as no less than a conspiracy type situation, like I said, if it's really that big of an issue I'll go back and dig up some quotes. As I recall they pretty much proclaim that circumcision only still exists to make money for doctors. This suggests doctors believe it is harmful, and promote it anyway in order to profit from it, and somehow have some kind of nation-wide covenent to keep this hushed up. That my young friend, is a conspiracy theory.
 
Swank said:
Well, all I've got to say is, didn't god (Yahweh) instruct the Jews in the time of Abraham to perform circumcision to form a covenent with him as the one true god? So god is a fan. Well it says it in the bible so it must be true! Just kidding, I don't believe in the bible, but I did read that the Hebrew people may have picked up the practice from contact with the Egyptians, who appearently were doing it from way back. You see, when you live in an arid, sandy environment, circumcision can prevent some very painful, harmful conditions that can develop in the foreskin due to infection and lack of water. Probably why it continues to be a more major practice in Africa and the Muslim world as well. The origins are practical and hygene related, not really religious. I know nobody was seriously arguing that, but in the spirit of informative reading . . .

That being said, Kong I love how you characterize the the forums as growing despite all the criticism directed at you. Do you really think anybody is trying to stop guys from being interested in FR? Do you think your credibility is what attracts people to the forum? Do you think it is yourself that interests men in restoring their foreskins? Frankly it smells like a little bit of egomania wafting through the air. "Ah, men continue to FR despite the fact that people have repeatedly pointed out that I make shit up and cry out with rage when people point out the crapiness in much of my posting, behold my FR forum!" Do you think you're running a cult of personality over here or what? Give me a break.

Come on now guy, how many times do I have to explain this? When people critique your posts, they're only referencing YOUR POSTS, not FR or the men who are interested in it at large. You aren't the intellectual guardian and champion of this stuff, you're just the most frequent poster and most vocally angry whenever somebody challenges anything related to FR or anti-circ, including people who practice it or generally support you (cyclops, kooky).

If there is a guy around here who knows his stuff I'd say it's this Priapologist fellow. I doubt he considers this his "turf" when it comes to posting, and I also don't see him flying into a rage if anybody contradicts one of his opinions on the matter (you have to face it, AC is right, it's you that people bicker with, not really anyody else). Also, not to kiss ass, but he has a legit grip on biology and human anatomy and understands the actual physiological processes at work here. Scientific literacy is a key skill when trying to digest information on a topic that is heavily anecdotal and largely unstudied, and I think your mediocre grip on science and information is what has lead to a lot of the confusion around here. Learn from the guy.

For instance, it sounds like you think seeing the glans is gross, but in truth it's probably a sexual turn-on for women. Normally, the appearance of the glans would indicate sexual arousal in the male, a female sexual cue, just as an open vagina is more arousing to the male eye than a folded over moose knuckle. Probably why circumcised dicks tend to be viewed as more visually pleasing by women.
Click to expand...

God, you're such a boor. Those last few posts between AC and myself were in good humor. We do that sometimes. Be silly. I do not think seeing the glans is gross. I happen to like my glans. Its big and shriny and mushroomy. If your sense of humor was half the size of your enormous cock you might have picked up on the humor...
 
Hey, I'll take boring over "don't post or I'll beg DLD to ban you" any day. Frankly, I can't tell when you're serious or not, I don't think it falls under the malicous attacks category if I do say that you're a pretty volatile, moody guy. That is to say, one day we might have the cheerful "I don't care what anybody says" Kong, the next day is the black rage "don't post something I don't like or the banning shall commmence, why are you trying to destroy FR and ruin men's lives, I am a crusader and this is my forum for crusading" Kong. Ya know?
 
Swank said:
Iwant8, read the rest of the post, or posts rather as I've commented on it more than once. Individual doctors don't make much money at all from circumcisions, in fact most make NO money at all just by performing them as they're staff doctors, paid on salary, not by the operation. Circumcision takes 15 minutes as I understand it, it's not like they call in a specialist who contracts with the hospital. They bill it and treat it almost like getting a couple of stitches, and the actual procedure isn't much more complicated. It's not some kind of cash cow for the medical industry despite the popular claims.

The other point is, not all doctors are people soley concerned with making as much cash as humanly possible. Believe it or not, many people are in the medical profession for other reasons than just simply making money, and they are entirely ethical. One of the basic tenents of the whole anti-circ thing is that the medical indsutry is an evil monolithic collective of greedy and uncaring doctors who will do anything for a buck. Not the case, and neither is the idea that anybody tries to keep circumcision around just for monetary reasons.

Lots of parents still want it for their kids in the states because of the cultural thing, plain and simple, and the fact is, there is no solid evidence that circumcision really causes a lot of problems for most men. I know it's hard to believe when all you read this stuff about it on the internet (i.e. circumcision makes you suicidal, violent, prone to rape, homosexuality, impotent, depressed, numbs your penis to deadening levels, ect.) but none of these things are really true. Step back for a minute and look at reality, or better yet speak to some doctors about, don't just read all this crap on the internet and make assumptions.

And, it pretty much has been referred to as no less than a conspiracy type situation, like I said, if it's really that big of an issue I'll go back and dig up some quotes. As I recall they pretty much proclaim that circumcision only still exists to make money for doctors. This suggests doctors believe it is harmful, and promote it anyway in order to profit from it, and somehow have some kind of nation-wide covenent to keep this hushed up. That my young friend, is a conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

A SERIOUS POST BY KONG:

I never said it was big money, comparatively. 5 billion or so annually is alot to me, but I know it is a drop in the bucket when you compare it to other procedures. I think of it as something more in the line of an "add-on" sale. Kind of like fries with your burger, or in my line of business, tossing a strategy guide in for sale with the latest video game. Yes, you are quite right in that it is a quick, simple and low-risk procedure...in other words, snip-snip here's the bill. It's basically a perfect little add-on sale because of its low risk, low cost nature and the fact that, well, the customer may not realize he is dissatisfied for 30 years (and if he does become dissatisfied, there is no legal recourse available due to the statute of limitations). I do not, repeat, do not think it is a conspiracy -- in that I believe somewhere there is a cabal of evil circumcisers plotting their latest schemes -- rather that it is an institutionalized practice that has its own momentum after so many, many years and it needs to be brought to a stop.

The biggest ethical crime I think we can accuse the medical industry of regarding circumcision is their apparent lack of initiative in educating the public. As I said, there were no pros and cons in their circumcision videos on the in-house maternity channel. I would bet 100 dollars there is not even a brochure explaining that circumcision has no medical benefits and has been proven to reduce male sensation during sex anywhere in the hospital I stayed at. This withholding of information all by itself is a horrible thing to my mind. Wouldn't you agree? By law, we require used car salesmen to disclose all information on a vehicle they sale, but doctors are not required by law to disclose all information on an operation they perform on our genitals? Something smells fishy, and I don't think it's my restored foreskin, gentlemen.

Of course, admitting that something bad was done to your genitals opens your mind to a line of reasoning that is not comfortable for some men to contemplate, so I will leave it at that. Think it over as far as you can handle it tonight. I won't push any further right now.
 
I am a moody guy, I admit. Still, there are a few members in this forum who seem to have a personal dislike for me and a knee-jerk reaction to take offense at something I say without even taking a moment to think. I really don't hate you, swank. You have, at times, completely frustrated and infuriated me. At other times, you have forced me to examine my beliefs very closely. I might grouch and threaten, but I would never actually ban you because you are like my yang. I think we could get along a little better if you would quit playing the devil's advocate so much and admit more often that some of the things I say are true (and you know some of them are). I do bullshit at times and I am by no means an expert. You are probably a lot smarter than me and make me look foolish all too often. However, don't think for a second I try to be the foreskin expert here. I think of myself as more of the FR cheerleader here. Rah-rah! Goooooooo, foreskin! I passionately believe what I say, but I am always learning as well, and my beliefs aren't set it stone. They change and evolve as I grow and experience and learn more and more every day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top