Bio not provided
@kmcharleston Use common sense........common sense tells you clearly that foreskin is not a birth defect and it has multiple functions. In fact, a male being born without a foreskin has a birth defect. Look it up and while you are at it, educate yourself on the natural functions of the male foreskin. If you are advocating for it to be cut off......you should at least be educated on it's functions! I looked over the CDC site and read that article, go look for yourself. The article said that the goal was to circumcise all African babies.....because it would be easier than trying to get men into their clinics and it also mentions that it is "cheaper"!!!
2 years, 7 months ago on Circumcision: Human Rights Make No Anatomical Distinctions – By Maria Bangs
@mariaRB @kmcharleston throughout history? Kellogg is the one who made circumcision mainstream way back when.....and what was it to cure? Masturbation! Then there is a long line of proposed "benefits".....like epilepsy for example.....oh yes, circumcision has always been a "cure" just searching for a disease! HIV you say? Oh yes, it is a magic bullet (as African men call circumcision the invisible condom....)..YET, it is only one option that also requires the consistent use of a condom. If a condom is necessary, what is the point of genital alteration? HIV can be transmitted whether a male is intact or cut. It's more about healthy decisions and education....and lots of condoms. The medical benefits you cite, don't have any relationship to an infant's needs....UTI's are uncommon in male infants and girls are much more prone to them and I don't see any advocating for cutting female infants...usually an antibiotic is prescribed. STD's are a theory benefit, as there is no way to know if that baby will be a male at risk for one of those.....and it is years and years down the road, when education should dictate whether a male might be at risk for an STD and can take proper precautions.....Penile cancer is the most ridiculous since it is rare and affects mostly older men so it hardly relates to an infant's immediate needs. Foreskin is not a birth defect and it has functions designed by nature and it belongs on a male. Why is it that so many people are ignorant about normal, natural, functional male sexual anatomy?
@kmcharleston Circumcision is not an option, when condoms must be used to actually avoid transmission. It doesn't matter if you are cut or not, HIV can still be transmitted, so that makes no sense. I don't care where you live, I have seen the posters and reviewed the FB sites of Africans who are questioning this massive push to cut....and they are not being fully informed. I have no problem with a man choosing to do that to himself if he is actually informed, but I know the CDC has already written articles that outline plans to cut babies because it would be "easier", since they can't run or object. To me, that is a violation of human rights. You really should check you arrogance at the door !!!!!!
What's really "irrational" is cutting perfectly normal natural body parts in order to push a "theory" that the studies have been shown to be flawed!!!!! Now that's irrational!!!
I completely disagree. I have read articles from Africa about men actually calling circumcision an "invisible condom".... so you don't know what you are talking about except that you seem to only want to believe what lies are being told about what is happening in Africa. Look beyond what you are being fed as facts and look into the articles about "real" African men and how un informed they are about the whole thing! I wonder why the Gates foundation didn't invest in more education and condoms and spend money cleaning up their blood supply?? Instead they are pushing a ridiculous mass cutting on men who are not properly informed! I guess you don't want to believe that, but it's true! What you don't understand is how much money is wrapped up in circumcision, here in the U.S. and in Africa.....take the blinders off and follow the money, it doesn't lie.
Just follow the money.....it will always take you to the source.
I'm aware that comparing the U.S. to Africa makes no sense.....except that what happened in the U.S. at the height of the Aids epidemic shows that being circumcised does not protect anyone from HIV! The circumstances might be very different, but the outcome will be the same....or worse, it might very well make the HIV problem worse in Africa. Even the CDC will not credit male circumcision as a "magic bullet" against HIV transmission.....and warns that condom use will be vital. The problem is that the African people have been mislead.....and the condom part (which is vital.....) has not been highlighted. Only the circumcision part has been highlighted which is very unethical and does not really inform the men who are volunteering to have their genitals altered in the name of "HIV prevention"! Take a look at the huge posters to push circumcision that are all over Africa thanks to the U.S.A. and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation....and look for the very fine print on the bottom that mentions condoms (that most likely is not being read!!!) My point is that even the CDC has stated that there are many reasons that Africa has suffered the HIV epidemic....and they have even said that since vaccines are expensive.....this is the best they can do. They have even listed the ways in which HIV transmission could be handled.....(clean water; better sanitation; better nutrition; public education; a clean blood supply; adequate medical care.......all of which is highly expensive....) so promoting male circumcision is the best they can do right now, although they also mention that medication and vaccines are available, but just not to Africa...). This is the travesty of this whole thing and African men will pay the ultimate price because it's simply "cheaper". However, there are people making a ton of money in this huge circumcision push.....yes, follow the money!
IF circumcision were truly a mechanism by which males could avoid HIV transmission......how is it that so many circumcised men have died in the United States? In the 1980's, nearly all of the Aids deaths consisted of circumcised men. No one can explain this, because circumcision is NOT going to help African men avoid HIV transmission! If it didn't help the circumcised men, how on earth could it help to continue circumcising men? IT makes no sense.
It was an amusing read. What so may people don't realize is that so much of the "attachment parenting" things that are done, are just normal things and actually very old at that. None of this is new, just like cloth diapering isn't new., and neither is "EC" elimination communication. It seems like it is presented as more of a FAD, when in actuality is is very old fashioned parenting. In the olden days, many families slept together, sometimes out of necessity to keep warm. Breast feeding was the usual way to nourish babies and young children and there was no such thing as formula as we know it today. It's just that today we seem to label everything, including people.
3 years ago on My Attachment Parenting Interview with Barbara Walters: I am Avant Garde and Mayim Bialik is My Leader