celeb news P!nk kicks out fan who causes a scene about circumcision

[Revolution]

15 minutes ago, PrettyHurts said:

the reach I'm not straight so i can't say from personal experience, but the idea that women don't care about the appearance of a dick is completely nonsensical and actually rather problematic. Of course women care about what people they have sex with look like, just like anyone. 

The appearance of a ***** is not even in the Top 30 of what turns them on or what they prioritize. Literally just watch any porn video for women. They are not gay bottoms

[PrettyHurts]

Just now, Shelter said:

That’s a stupid reason and again when he is old enough, he can make that decision himself. 

adult circumcision is much more difficult and actually painful.....it's not easy like when you're an infant....if it was there wouldnt be a debate.

[Shelter]

3 minutes ago, PrettyHurts said:

adult circumcision is much more difficult and actually painful.....it's not easy like when you're an infant....if it was there wouldnt be a debate.

Still not a reason to do it to your baby, because a woman “might” not like it, no. 
 

 

[PrettyHurts]

Just now, Shelter said:

Still not a reason to do it to your baby, because a woman “might” not like it, no. 
 

 

the baby won't remember  sometimes as a parent you have to make tough decisions you know are for the best 

[Cry]

23 hours ago, stupidjock said:

It's giving Resident Evil wiki 

That was actually the Silent Hill wiki.

[Kern]

3 minutes ago, Cry said:

That was actually the Silent Hill wiki.

omg you're right, let me edit 

[AvadaKedavra]

i wish i were circumsised when i was a baby. I have phimosis and i cant top-penetrate anyone or is painful. Nobody cant touch my dick in a bad way or it hurts 
Im too scared to go for surgery now and the pain. So, im staying like this forever  

Edited September 27, 2023 by AvadaKedavra

[PrettyHurts]

13 minutes ago, AvadaKedavra said:

i wish i were circumsised when i was a baby. I have phimosis and i cant top-penetrate anyone or is painful. Nobody cant touch my dick in a bad way or it hurts 
Im too scared to go for surgery now and the pain. So, im staying like this forever  

x2.

 

but apparently no one wants to hear this because they're advocating to protect babies from a thousands year old practice they won't remember the next day 

[Haschwalth]

a nerve was struck i see

[unclefloprry]

This is a thing that doesn't matter to me, I'm only interested in the thickness and size of the pipis   But there are people whose foreskin does not go down as it should and covers the head even when the ***** is erect. That's anti-aesthetic, is also anti-hygienic because of the smegma inside the skin... 

[SuperCiC1]

1 hour ago, AvadaKedavra said:

i wish i were circumsised when i was a baby. I have phimosis and i cant top-penetrate anyone or is painful. Nobody cant touch my dick in a bad way or it hurts 
Im too scared to go for surgery now and the pain. So, im staying like this forever  

Phimosis sounds terrible but ifyou had been taught to retract your foreskin that never would have happened. I say blame our sex-negative society that created circumcision in the first place. Cut or uncut, foreskin and sexual health are taboo.

[lyk251]

22 minutes ago, SuperCiC1 said:

Phimosis sounds terrible but ifyou had been taught to retract your foreskin that never would have happened. I say blame our sex-negative society that created circumcision in the first place. Cut or uncut, foreskin and sexual health are taboo.

Retract is not always work , i got 3 big brothers without phimosis , my parents and doctors try to do it for at least 8 years , they even cut off a few small piece of my foreskin and still don't work.

[SuperCiC1]

30 minutes ago, lyk251 said:

Retract is not always work , i got 3 big brothers without phimosis , my parents and doctors try to do it for at least 8 years , they even cut off a few small piece of my foreskin and still don't work.

I mean had you been doing it since you were a little kid? It's something that should be done regularly as early as possible both to clean and to stretch the foreskin. But we are instead taught not to touch ourselves there until we are older...

[glitch]

1 hour ago, SuperCiC1 said:

Phimosis sounds terrible but ifyou had been taught to retract your foreskin that never would have happened. I say blame our sex-negative society that created circumcision in the first place. Cut or uncut, foreskin and sexual health are taboo.

Actually normally it's caused by retracting too early which causes scarring. And plus some people just naturally can't retract, I don't think it's always environmental.

 

That being said it can normally be treated without circumcision, even in adults.

[Brunette Ambition]

It’s so telling when certain people get mad in this discussion  

 

Pink should be ashamed. I thought she was for body autonomy. 

[Miss Show Business]

Since people want to downvote me instead of doing their homework.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/

Spoiler

In summary, male circumcision does not appear to adversely affect penile sexual function or sensitivity when compared with uncircumcised men. Although the literature contains a wide range of evidence for and against circumcision, the better quality studies affirm the recommendations of reputable experts who have evaluated the benefits and risks of circumcision as a desirable intervention early in life.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5296634/

Spoiler

Arguments by opponents start with the premise that MC has no benefits, only harms, or that the benefits only apply later in life when the male can make the decision to get circumcised[150-152]. In reality, not only are the benefits considerable, they start in early childhood and extend over the lifetime[1,2,5,8]. As described above, MC later in life poses significant barriers to adolescent boys and men that usually mean it will not happen except for a medical reason[54]. Another claim is that MC diminishes sexual function, sensitivity and pleasure[150,152,153]. But the detailed systematic reviews[133,136,137] and meta-analysis[134] referred to above strongly suggest otherwise. If anything sexual pleasure improves after MC, as found in a RCT[154]. Those findings are supported by data on location of sensory receptors[137]. Legal and human rights and other arguments used by MC opponents in criticizing the policy statements of the AAP and CDC have been shown to be flawed[155-159].

...

A systematic literature review of histological correlates of sexual sensation showed that the sensory receptors responsible (genital corpuscles) reside in the glans, not the foreskin, meaning loss of the foreskin by MC should not diminish sexual pleasure[137]. In fact, by exposing the glans, MC should increase sexual pleasure.

...

Penile cancer affects approximately 1 in 1000 uncircumcised men over the lifetime, thus making it uncommon, but not rare[2,114,115]. Infant MC reduces penile cancer later in life by 95%-99%[116-118]. Prevalence was 22-fold higher in uncircumcised men in a United States study[116].

These are systematic reviews, the highest quality of scientific evidence available. It is VERY clear what the research says, and unfortunately, your personal feelings on the matter don't contradict decades of research and scientific evidence. So go ahead and keep down voting. You're still wrong.

Edited September 27, 2023 by Miss Show Business

[Futile Odds]

1 hour ago, PrettyHurts said:

x2.

 

but apparently no one wants to hear this because they're advocating to protect babies from a thousands year old practice they won't remember the next day 

This is so backwards. You're saying it's done to prevent these uncommon health conditions, while at the same time letting an unconsenting baby risk even worse (but rare) complications after a completely unnecessary procedure. If you practice basic hygiene, there's nothing gross or unsanitary about foreskin. And if complications do arise, people can choose to have the procedure done anyway. Of course it will hurt, but there's a choice in the matter. Meanwhile, victims of circumcision are just supposed to deal with it. 

 

Also, lots of traditions have been abandoned over the years because they did more harm than good. Even if a "successful" circumcision doesn't hinder the experience of a person, it still doesn't give anyone the right to chop off a perfectly healthy body part without their consent, simply because it has been practiced throughout history. 

 

Also, speaking of "advocating" and picking narratives, have you read testimonies from circumcised people who do wish they had a choice? Some are even in this very thread, which you conveniently ignored. 

 

OT: Honestly, it's not debatable. Routine infact circumcision serves no place in modern society and needs more awareness. Is a P!nk concert the right place for that? Definitely not (especially because it wouldn't surprise me if the "fan" has antisemitic or misogynistic motives). But it's concerning that people feel more comfortable mocking and silencing this issue in the name of "tradition", rather than actually listening to those who are negatively affected. 

 

That said, it's gross that some of you choose to vent by using loaded words like "mutilation", knowing full well this will upset or anger people. Same goes for the other side. 

[lyk251]

46 minutes ago, SuperCiC1 said:

I mean had you been doing it since you were a little kid? It's something that should be done regularly as early as possible both to clean and to stretch the foreskin. But we are instead taught not to touch ourselves there until we are older...

Yes ,my parents and doctor do it to me since a little kid , i finally got circumsised in the summer of 8th grade .

Edited September 27, 2023 by lyk251

[PrettyHurts]

2 minutes ago, Futile Odds said:

This is so backwards. You're saying it's done to prevent these uncommon health conditions, while at the same time letting an unconsenting baby risk even worse (but rare) complications after a completely unnecessary procedure. If you practice basic hygiene, there's nothing gross or unsanitary about foreskin. And if complications do arise, people can choose to have the procedure done anyway. Of course it will hurt, but there's a choice in the matter. Meanwhile, victims of circumcision are just supposed to deal with it. 

 

Also, lots of traditions have been abandoned over the years because they did more harm than good. Even if a "successful" circumcision doesn't hinder the experience of a person, it still doesn't give anyone the right to chop off a perfectly healthy body part without their consent, simply because it has been practiced throughout history. 

 

Also, speaking of "advocating" and picking narratives, have you read testimonies from circumcised people who do wish they had a choice? Some are even in this very thread, which you conveniently ignored. 

 

OT: Honestly, it's not debatable. Routine infact circumcision serves no place in modern society and needs more awareness. Is a P!nk concert the right place for that? Definitely not (especially because it wouldn't surprise me if the "fan" has antisemitic or misogynistic motives). But it's concerning that people feel more comfortable mocking and silencing this issue in the name of "tradition", rather than actually listening to those who are negatively affected. 

 

That said, it's gross that some of you choose to vent by using loaded words like "mutilation", knowing full well this will upset or anger people. Same goes for the other side. 

but three people in this thread already talked about being affected by phimosis  circumcision remains harmless for most 

[Gaia]

When will cut people realize no one cares about their POV. It will stay the standard in the US because no one has an issue with it

[hétérosexuelle]

4 hours ago, makeme said:

If your ***** is cut awesome. If it's uncut great. 

 

No need to shame men over a decision they had no control over. 

 

Yeah it's just a preference no prejudice still love all ***** 

  Reveal hidden contents

Literally sucked on an uncut one not even 3-4 hours ago. 

 

***** you cannot help but stay bragging huh pfft

[ZIVERT]

22 minutes ago, Miss Show Business said:

Since people want to downvote me instead of doing their homework.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/

  Reveal hidden contents

In summary, male circumcision does not appear to adversely affect penile sexual function or sensitivity when compared with uncircumcised men. Although the literature contains a wide range of evidence for and against circumcision, the better quality studies affirm the recommendations of reputable experts who have evaluated the benefits and risks of circumcision as a desirable intervention early in life.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5296634/

  Reveal hidden contents

Arguments by opponents start with the premise that MC has no benefits, only harms, or that the benefits only apply later in life when the male can make the decision to get circumcised[150-152]. In reality, not only are the benefits considerable, they start in early childhood and extend over the lifetime[1,2,5,8]. As described above, MC later in life poses significant barriers to adolescent boys and men that usually mean it will not happen except for a medical reason[54]. Another claim is that MC diminishes sexual function, sensitivity and pleasure[150,152,153]. But the detailed systematic reviews[133,136,137] and meta-analysis[134] referred to above strongly suggest otherwise. If anything sexual pleasure improves after MC, as found in a RCT[154]. Those findings are supported by data on location of sensory receptors[137]. Legal and human rights and other arguments used by MC opponents in criticizing the policy statements of the AAP and CDC have been shown to be flawed[155-159].

...

A systematic literature review of histological correlates of sexual sensation showed that the sensory receptors responsible (genital corpuscles) reside in the glans, not the foreskin, meaning loss of the foreskin by MC should not diminish sexual pleasure[137]. In fact, by exposing the glans, MC should increase sexual pleasure.

...

Penile cancer affects approximately 1 in 1000 uncircumcised men over the lifetime, thus making it uncommon, but not rare[2,114,115]. Infant MC reduces penile cancer later in life by 95%-99%[116-118]. Prevalence was 22-fold higher in uncircumcised men in a United States study[116].

These are systematic reviews, the highest quality of scientific evidence available. It is VERY clear what the research says, and the unfortunately, your personal feelings on the matter don't contradict decades of research and scientific evidence. So go ahead and keep down voting. You're still wrong.

It feels like most of the people who have made “circumcision is mutilation” the cause they grandstand over have somewhere along the line seen social media posts calling uncut d*cks ugly, internalized it, and made it their villain origin story. Projecting your insecurities onto circumcised people/people who don’t have an issue with circumcision and acting like you’re the morally righteous one is a kii.

[Futile Odds]

10 minutes ago, PrettyHurts said:

but three people in this thread already talked about being affected by phimosis  circumcision remains harmless for most 

And that's really unfortunate for them, but still doesn't negate my point.

 

@Miss Show Business Since you disliked my post, here's something else you probably don't want to read:

 

Quote

Neonatal circumcision is a contentious issue in Canada. The procedure often raises ethical and legal considerations, in part because it has lifelong consequences and is performed on a child who cannot give consent. Infants need a substitute decision maker – usually their parents – to act in their best interests. Yet the authority of substitute decision makers is not absolute. In most jurisdictions, authority is limited only to interventions deemed to be medically necessary. In cases in which medical necessity is not established or a proposed treatment is based on personal preference, interventions should be deferred until the individual concerned is able to make their own choices. With newborn circumcision, medical necessity has not been clearly established.

https://cps.ca/documents/position/circumcision

 

Yes, slight benefits of circumcision exist depending on environment, but they aren’t as major as you're trying to make it seem. Meanwhile, countries that should be doing worse given that a large majority of their population is uncircumcised, are doing perfectly fine. There's no real need to permanently alter the human body for something like this. Instead, what we should be doing is provide better sexual health education and medical access.

[ALBAVEASP]

On 9/26/2023 at 3:08 PM, Miss Show Business said:

I’m SO sick and tired of scientifically illiterate mobs of people watching a YouTube video, reading a Facebook post, or watching a TikTok, filled with misinformation and just running with it without any critical thinking skills whatsoever. You may was well say you're anti vaccine, too. You don't get to disagree with science when it shows you evidence you don't like.

You’re basically describing yourself right here lmao

[Miss Show Business]

3 minutes ago, ALBAVEASP said:

You’re basically describing yourself right here lmao

Imagine typing this out when I included actual research above

 

I've not seen systematic reviews, RCTs, or meta analyses that show MC has a negative impact. Not once.

 

I will however find mobs of people who make posts and videos about it on social media... Like someone said above, there's a grandstanding narrative on social media and it's not based on evidence.

 

Try again!