Request for Kong

Ok Swank. I don't think Kong is trying to use those who have chimed in here as a scientific study. He is only adding the numbers up and keeping score. That's it.
This thread was originally started by me asking Kong for some info. That's it. I did not intend it to start yet another FR/circ debate. Kong keeping score in this thread is no worse than me using a made up number earlier. He is not putting forth his own opinions as facts and he has clearly stated within his post when he was speaking of his opinions. He has also provided plenty of references and links as well. I see nothing wrong with him keeping score in a thread about screwed up circs when the numbers clearly show that the percentages here do not reflect either of percentages you two spoke of. This has been a pretty good thread so far and really the nit-picking is a little much. Why can't we just keep to the topic and try to develope the conversation more in that direction?

kooky

kong is not simply keeping score, he's pushing his biased opinion by using misleading stats he has made from a forum thread.

im sick of beating around the bush in these debates, its pretty simple, some people in this thread are saying botched circs are a huge thing, and others are saying its not as big as you think.

im sure anyone could find dozens reports that give stats up to 5% of circs are botched, and im sure someone else could find another heap of reports that all give stats under 0.5%

but as i said before, saying stats like 41% is just misleading.

OMG Shithead....you guys really have a hard on for Kong huh? In his last post on the matter, he clearly states, "just of the respondents of this thread". If you or anyone else
is interpreting this as Kong trying to use it as a scientific study of some kind then that is on you. You are putting words or attaching ideas to his post that I find just don't exist.
Saying "41% just of the respondents of this thread" is only a fact that Kong has chosen to keep score with. Where does he present this percentage as a scientific study or try to use thie number as a national average? If that is what you are interpreting, then maybe you could use an exact quote where Kong does try to use this % as a scientific study. Yo guys have coninually asked Kong to onyl use acceptable facts or studies and to privide a reference to those. He is providing an "up to date" fact with this % of those who have responded to this thread. Can you deny this?

kook

Chill guys. I wasn't trying to start a ruckus. I wasn't trying to mislead anyone. I was basically just pointing out (in a thread about botched circs) that there were, in fact, several known botched circs just among the respondents. Food for thought? Yes. Scientific proof? Not unless you're stupid.

I stated my opinion earlier in very clear terms. I think the number of actual horrifyingly messed up circs is extremely low. I think the number of not-so-good circs is higher.

I really don't think anyone here takes what I say as gospel truth, so let's quit the nitpicking. It's just annoying, and isn't going to convince anyone one way or the other. Just makes you look like griping ninnies! :D

Good lord . . . I just wanted to clarify! I think that we can all agree that all people have different levels reading comprehension. Somebody might read through the thread and think whoa! 1/3 of circs could be botched?! Nobody is arguing, nobody is using rough language.

I just wasn't sure what the point of tallying up a percentage of guys posting on this thread with bad circs was in the first place, I was just making it clear that it doesn't mean much of anything.

Swank,
That depends on the meaning of "botched". If you mean imperfect, like uneven, then mine is surely botched. A very high percentage of infant circs are "botched" using this definition. A much lower percentage of adult circs would.

If botched only includes those that require additional medical care, like infection, reconstructive surgery, or other minor surgeries due to complications, then the number is much smaller, but not insignificant.

That's a good distinction to draw MDC. My own scar isn't perfectly symetrical, but I wouldn't say anything went wrong with my circumcision.

What I think the statistics generally reflect is circumcisions that had a complication or caused a problem.

One of the dangers I see in all this propaganda that circulates around is that men are obliged to link up almost any problem they have with their penis to a supposedly poorly performed circumcision.

Shaft is hairy? It's the circumcision.

Penis not as big as you'd like? It's the circumcision.

Women aren't responsive enough during sex? It's the circumcision.

You're not responsive enough during sex? It's the circumcision.

Turkey neck a problem? It's the circumcision.

Ejaculating too fast? It's the circumcision.

Got a bend? It's the circumcision.

Not making Penis Enlargement gains? It's the circumcision.

Obviously that's just a goof-off, but my point is along those lines. When all these symptoms are always loosely associated with all these supposed bad jobs out there, men are inclined to always think they've had a rotten circumcision when they buy into the propaganda.

I'd be willing to wager that all thsoe problems are just as pervasive in Europe and other largely uncircumcised parts of the world as they are in mostly circumcised regions. I don't even think there's sufficient evidence besides hearsay to show the oft-discussed "tight circumcision" can be linked to any specific problems. With this perception, like so many others, the nature of internet information is a distorting lens.

Most data shows a small percentage of circs cause problems - the number of men on the internet complaining of difficulties appears to indicate the percentage is higher. But we have to ask, if they're on internet sites discussing it and worrying about it in the first place, are they really representative of the overall male population? Point of fact no, as probably only a small percentage of men get online and research, discuss, and decide to complain online about their particular circumcision.

I think we all understand that circumcision is not the cause of all male sexually related problems. No one is trying to dupe anyone else into thinking that. However, there are cases in which circumcision is the cause...but if we aren't educated about it, the men who are suffering may not realize what their problem really is and be able to fix it, if possible. I didn't realize some of my problems were circumcision related until I stumbled into it by accident. Skin expansion has increased my satisfaction with my penis and sex in general by making intercourse more pleasurable and more comfortable for both me and my partner. I have a larger, extremely loose cut and more sensitive peter. What is the problem with wanting to share that with other men?

The forum nanny is just worried that the kids will get there hopes up.

Kong, I wasn't really addressing you or your posting. I'm speaking in general terms about a general trend. If you want to apply it to yourself you're more than welcome to, but that's your decision.

Raffiki, everybody else on the forum is pretty much being constructive and adult now, and all you do is shell out insults when somebody posts something you don't like. All it does is feed negativity into the forum and it's useless. If somebody posted like you do but from another perspective you all would be screaming "troll" and PMing the moderators.

If you've got an opinion or idea express it like an adult.

Just expressing my opinion. Raffiki was just expressing his opinion, too! Nothing personal!

No offense Kong, but if somebody expressed their opinion to you in that fashion we'd probably hear about it loudly and profanely.

In the interest of this continuing to be a good forum people of any persuasion of opinion ought to keep it civil and constructive.

I don't think there's anything wrong with some good natured teasing. I get teased quite often on the forum and just chuckle. There is a difference between a gentle ribbing and accusing someone of being an anti-semitic, delusional scam artist. In fact, an apt joke can sometimes make someone realize a point more than trying to hammer them with dry facts.

Frankly I don't think that many of the threads show you as being quite so diplomatic, but people can check that out for themselves, I won't bother digging up old stuff.

You're right. I'm not always sweet. I am who I am.

Yes well, you ARE a moderator and an adult, so maybe it would be cool not to send out winking posts of agreement when people make random and useless flame-type posts. You don't have to be sweet, but you could take some responsibility.

In my opinion, just one botched circumcision is too many.
There is still no good reason for doing it. Not one.

KOT...

qd

Swank, you really need to grow a sense of humor. Lordy...!

Swank said:

Yes well, you ARE a moderator and an adult, so maybe it would be cool not to send out winking posts of agreement when people make random and useless flame-type posts. You don't have to be sweet, but you could take some responsibility.

Click to expand...

Come on man. That wasn't a flame. That was a joking way of saying what you generally seem to do. Every time a claim is made you have to challenge it in some. Be it a benefit of FR or a negative consequence of circ. Therefore, it seems to me that you view yourself as some authoritative figure.

You also comment on reading comprehension, and feel the need to "clarify" everything. So you either think that most people here are stupid, or are very young. Judging from the emotional trauma that you suffered at a young age, I would guess it is the later.

Henseforth, "nanny" and "kids".

I know you don't agree, and that you feel justified, and will never stop, and so on and so forth. But you have to see that it has been very annoying and frustrating for the actual restorers for whom this was created for. I think you can deal with an occasional joke. This is not a court of law, and people aren't going to be "diplomatic". This is a forum, and I type messages here in pretty much the same fashion that I would speak to you.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks raffiki.

KOT...

qd