this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2024
12 points (100.0% liked)

pissposting

1343 readers
3 users here now

Piss tier memes, lower than shitposts. Brain damaging stuff.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] voltaric@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

For those who don't know, the US systematically mutilates the genitals of baby boys and young boys.Sciences points to the foreskin being a protective and erogenous dual layered membrane.

It is not 'one side' pushing this. This is how the American people take their aggression out on males.

[–] iheartneopets@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You had me until the last sentence. There are a lot of deeply misguided—and plain fucking stupid—reasons that circumcision has become seen as the 'norm' in the US, but I don't think it's how the American people takes its aggression out on men?? That's a pretty unhinged thing to think. I understand the anger and frustration at genital mutilation of babies (bc that's what it is, in my opinion), but let's come back to earth a bit.

EDIT: since this comment is getting attention, I just wanted to add that it really does seem like people are waking up to how fucked circumcision is. We just had a baby, and as part of our stack of information brochures given to us by the hospital (in Oklahoma, a deeply red state), there was a whole page dedicated to circumcision pros and cons. You could tell it heavily favored not circumcising, and preserving bodily autonomy was it's own full bullet point on the cons side, as well as busting myths that people perpetuate trying to justify it still.

Also, in our infant care courses, they showed some really awful pictures of freshly-circumcised baby penises. We had already decided not to circumcise for obvious moral reasons, but that made us feel even more secure in our decision. I feel like more parents need to see that stuff to make them realize what's actually going to be done to their baby with the procedure.

All that to say, I think there's hope for decreasing the occurrences of this deeply awful cultural practice!

[–] brlemworld@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Insurance companies should do what they do and make it be a cosmetic surgery and not cover it. It should cost thousands in cash.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At a minimum. Also, the law should make it illegal.

[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Unless it's out of medical necessity

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Correct. And preventative doesn’t count as “necessary” unless it’s preventing seriously elevated risk of death in the near term.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Leveraging the broken health care system to attack the revanchist cultural system?

I mean, maybe. But when child birth already runs into the $20k-$50k range, I doubt anyone is going to notice the $150 they charge for foreskin removal until the bill arrives.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

That's what they're saying. The typical cost is $20k-$50k, with all but ~$3k covered by insurance.

If insurance doesn't cover it it's now $1200 out of pocket.

Making it illegal would be better, but that requires convincing people. Even if you approve of circumcision, you're still not going to be surprised when your insurance company drops what you consider to be something important.

[–] rollerbang@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Even better would be to simply banun, unless there are proven medical reasons.

[–] MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

While I whole heartedly disagree with the practice of circumsizing babies. (babies can't consent therfore an unnecessary procedure is just flat out unethical) It's not really true to say science shows that the foreskin is erogenous or even that circumcision affects sexual pleasure.

There is a bit of conflicting data out there so there is still some debate over the fact but right now the data leans heavily toward there being little to no adverse affects on sexual pleasure. And in fact some anecdotal evidence actually seems to show that the opposite may be true; that circumsized penises may actually be more sensitive to sexual stimuli.

Again though, I can't stress enough how much I believe circumsicion is wrong.

Source

Edit: hey guys. Coming back to this and uh, have learned some things. I'd like to retract this statement pretty please. Please forgive me.

As the owner of a foreskin, fuck science. Yes, it is erogenous.