It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


You don't mutilate your daughters - why do you mutilate your sons ? (Discussion concerning human se

page: 29
<< 26  27  28    30  31 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 08:19 PM
reply to post by Death_Kron

The law here in the UK is, 95% of the time, a complete joke.

Same here.........He who has the most money and can afford the best defense gets off scot free.

Same old same old.

edit on 30-9-2010 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 08:24 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

Your parents, like me probably had a very hard, harsh childhood.

I've had a very hard life that just recently has blossomed into a nice life at 58.

If you grew up with parents that gave you love and physical comforts you are most fortunate.

I was orphaned at 10...................and have never until 58 had a free lunch.

Instead of the hatred and scorn you show for your parents you might try to understand why they gave you everything....................everything they never had.

They tried to lift you upon their shoulders to raise you above them. To further you.

You just don't see it.

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 09:12 PM
reply to post by ofhumandescent

My parents loved me, they did that with buying me stuff though, and other stuff occasionally. I was unaffected because I did not care. It's not that my parents were good or bad. it was that I simply did not care about it. As a kid I was too busy writing down stories in my head, playing video games, doing school work, and soul searching to be bothered with home. So yea, you should probably stop treating kids as property and objects and realize they have feelings too, and those feelings include rejection because they were born adults and did not have time for childhood's bores.

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 09:13 PM
reply to post by rusethorcain

Yes all three sons have stated if they had the choice they would not have been snipped.

All three

My first born is the most outspoken and if you were in a tight situation would want him to cover your back
My second, a very mild mannered high IQ like my husband
My third, soft spoken, very nice person.

All three...............

edit on 30-9-2010 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 09:18 PM
reply to post by 27jd

Wait, until you hold your first born son in your guess is you have never had a baby yet.

Am I right?

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:28 PM
reply to post by pscysm

I have and all three said they wish they could have chosen.

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:32 PM
reply to post by agentofchaos

If you compare each others willies just say I wanted you to make the decision, not me.

He will respect you for that I hope.

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:41 PM
reply to post by mysticalzoe

You in my opinon are awake and aware.

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:43 PM
reply to post by silo13

Silo, you are a brave warrior!!!

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:52 PM
reply to post by BG43214

No my son was not given any pain killers.........for a new born baby this is not common procedure.

Their lungs are too new to introduce any drugs.


posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:56 PM
reply to post by gimme_some_truth

Everything that happens to you form womb (sometime in the third or fourth month) on to grave is recorded in you brain.

Every single smell, taste, touch, sound, sight ........... untill you die.

And what you don't "remember" is still imprinted within your brain memory.

As an infant, if it is painful than it is imprinted as traumatic.

posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 11:03 PM
reply to post by gimme_some_truth

Every single thing that happens to you is imprinted (reseach that term) upon your brain from about 3 months in the womb until death.

Research......................our brains pick up and memorize every single thing that happens to us from cradel to grave.

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 12:04 AM

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
Still, if you think its more hygienic for that tiny residue, after shaking the drips, to end up soaking into your pants, rather than doing its job of preventing bacterial growth, as evolution has equipped us, who am I to gainsay you?

You're right, healthy urine is wonderful stuff. It is an antiseptic, as you say, and, applied externally, speeds tissue regrowth, so it is wonderful for wound repair.


Some groups of Aussie soldiers in Vietnam, fighting guerrillas in the jungle, were often cut off from supplies, and found peeing on wounds was often the best way to clean them. They also suffered from foot rot, from living in damp conditions, feet wet or sweaty, and sometimes being in conditions where they could not safely sleep without these wet boots on. So they'd pee into their boots, and that kept their feet good.

Personally I've repaired legs and feet perfectly with urine after damage that left bone showing, avoiding plastic surgery the doctors had thought necessary.

Exactly! thank you very much for this post!

I was trained as an Arctic Ranger battlefield medic/sniper in Northern Europe, and during field medical training our instructors said the same.

(In our 8 man groups - two guys of the unit had medical training)

Clean healthy pee is your best friend when something really bad happens to a mate in the Arctic wilderness - just pee on their wounds for the initial cleaning of shrapnel/gunshot wounds and burn wounds. Sound crazy perhaps? but true!

Then try to clean the affected area of the body with clean snow or water and possibly also try to stitch the them up as good as we could for possible further transport away from enemy lines.

(sometimes with additional shots of antibiotics)

That's what they told us, and how they trained us anyway!

Regarding the OP!

I agree fully with you, and I am so happy to be intact with my hood still there.

OK! I have never known any other condition than this, but most European women are quite familiar with us 'hooded men' - so I seriously doubt that they would "prefer" a cut penis.

I've never had any complaints during my 44 year long life anyway!

I think it's just a cultural thing - and I don't buy the BS information that a cut penis would be any better or healthier than one with a hood!

Just my two €uro cents!

edit on 1-10-2010 by Chevalerous because: Bad English as usual!

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 12:21 AM
I have seen allot bunk information being pushed around in favor of circumcision in this thread. I normally don't talk about it because it's private matter but I am not circumcised. My father was not and my uncle was not. Nor was my grandfather so on and so forth.

Now for these issues that seem to be the most common ones presented by people in favor of circumcision.

1. Prevents Penile Cancer. Virtually eliminates the risk.

Well there isn't a single case of Penile Cancer in my family I'm 28, My dad is 54, My Uncle 58, and My grandpa is still kicking at 86. My great grandpa lived to be just about 90. None of them suffered from Penile Cancer so at least in my family it would seem this medical claim is bunk.

~ Helps prevent Urinary tract infections.

Considering I have never gotten Urinary tract infection at 28, my dad has never gotten it at 54 I feel pretty safe from it. I can't speak for my Uncle because I don't know if he has. As for my grandpa allot of bad stuff has happened to him over the years from farm equipment accidents, to needing heart surgery in his 70's (only case of heart complications in my family and took him 70 years to develop it so I feel pretty good on that front to.), and even losing an eye to shingles, yet never heard him talk once about urinary tract infection and he grew up in the thirties where something like that could have been life threatening.

~ Lowers risk of contracting STDs.

Not a single case in my family I'm clean, my dad’s clean (and before he married my mom he had allot sexual relations.), As far as my uncle goes I think he is clean and he prefers the same sex. My grandpa was womanizer before my grandma got a hold of him and made him settle down to nice quite 60 some year union and he is clean.

~ More Hygienic

Well we must not smell or be to disgusting considering both my dad and grandpa got the ladies. I don't know how well my uncle does but I don't ask either but in the past I he use to regularly have a male or female companion with him. As for me I'm just unlucky when it comes to that kind of stuff but the few women I have been with my Hygiene was not the issue other my feet smelling horrible but that was hardly the issue they up and left over.

As I see there is no benefit or draw back really in either case my family choose the way they did because they felt circumcision was a way to force another faith's belief on you. They had nothing against the other faith it just wasn't there own and they didn't feel it needed to be done. That and none of the so called medical advice on having it done seemed to have any base or real merit to it (proof of its claims.).

(Also for the record I'm American.)

edit on 1-10-2010 by OWoutcast because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 09:51 AM
reply to post by Gorman91
(Reason for anecdote = veracity)
My belle asked me to stop reading whatever was irritating me, b/c we had a dinner date with her family y/day & I had to be on my best behaviour. Today, I dont, so I'll address this 1st:

Get on topic, or you're getting reported for spam.
Since I found this thread on the front page, it has 72flags & many respondants, I feel sure the mods are keeping an eye on it. Also, since prudery is quite common, I'd not be surprised if several people have already hit "alert". Still, I haven't been censored yet. In fact, in my whole time on ATS, I think I've only been censored once & never been warned. Thus, I feel confident that I understand the T&Cs & how to remain within them, even in a sensitive topic such as this.
Still, the button is there: click it if you want. I'm sure you can use your imagination to anticipate what threats on the internet come across as...
To put it in my native dialect, "either piss or get off the pot."
This phrase is curiously apt, b/c I've also heard it used, in a group setting, when a cut man is taking ages & trying so hard to reach orgasm that he's doing nothing for his partner but hurting them in a manner which is no longer stimulating. If the partner is sub, they usually wouldn't complain, but another dom will. In this context, it means "if you cant get off, give it a rest, b/c you're out of order."
In your case, it means "if you cant answer the question about what is derailing, OT, trolling, or now spam, about politely discussing the use (& latterly the consequences of that use) of the object under discussion, then stop making a bigger fool out of yourself than you have to & prove to us that your argument has crashed & burned by trying to get the mods to shut me up, b/c you have nothing but are too stubborn to admit it."

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 11:52 AM
You seem like wise caring loving women. I have skimmed over this thread from time to time and posted once before about the atrocity of older boys in south Asia getting cut behind the chicken coup. Aside from the my way is best arguments and experiences from one persons view point to the next this has been an entertaining and informative thread, well done mods. Frank and for the most part mature interactions with many pc correct and ats acceptable terms for all parts off the reproductive organs

Now the debates can be endless as it has branched out in many ways...yet still on topic lol, depending on multiple factors, pride ego, tradition, myths, experience, sensitivity(or lack there of) . Many variables, but is it really worth debating, in my opinion no. Cut or not cut.

Really all us males have been cut.....only at different lengths.

But its still a fun topic to debate for some, me included. OK i just exposed my lack off maturity.

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 12:36 PM
reply to post by Bunken Drum

Sure i can prove it. You've bend psychoanalyzing me and talking about off topic dribble as opposed to the topic at hand: circumcision. So yea, piss off or get on topic. I don't give a damn about your girlfriend or life with her or sexual lust. This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. In fact, it's the definition of derailing. It is really quite simple. For the past half dozen pages you have posted like your half drunk or high and have ADD. So either get back on topic, or piss off. because pretty much, you've failed to answer the most simple questions going back pages now. You just go off topic and drool about things that have no relationship to the matter of hand.

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 01:42 PM
reply to post by Gorman91
Eventually, I'll go back & stinish what I farted (b/c I'm sincere so its not enough to refute you: I intend to use the literary equivalent of cluster munitions, b/c underlying this debate is the issue of harming children; this isn't a threat, its a metaphorical "Incoming!", so retreat, or get in your bunker & U2U for fire support, b/c you are outflanked, outgunned & outclassed), but I'll tackle this next:

And in terms of lying, read the last post. I did not notice your banner change.
I did reread your last post & I found innuendo & failure to grasp the point. I think the problem is a scaled down version of what I commonly face IRL, in that I may be presenting too many ideas to hold in your mind at the same time before drawing a logical conclusion (google: IQ 30 point difference functional communication - reason: further veracity). It matters not whether you noticed my avatar change, the point was that the pic was the best evidence I could post on ATS, that I had to-hand, that what I've been saying is the truth (you can also see the corner of the rug I mentioned earlier, to the left of her thigh) & I posted it before you could reply. I did it in anticipation of you accusing me of lying, which you did. Therefore it proves that, regardless of your claims to uniqueness, I really do know you well enough that I can predict your behaviour accurately &, @the risk of overloading your brain again, it therefore destroys your position that your experience is so noteworthy that we ought to give it credence, since, if you are right & a human, the chances are that there are plenty more like you, thus your position holds merit. It does not. You are human, just like the rest of us &, just like the rest of us, a good deal of your psyche is devoted to self-deception.
Now, respecting Kailassa's reminder, I'll not dig deeper, but you ought to know there's always someone brighter than you or I.

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 03:08 PM
reply to post by Bunken Drum

Yea I'm pretty sure you're still off topic and still dribbling. IQ has nothing to do with it.

You're not on topic.

posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 05:59 AM
reply to post by Gorman91
(I'm going to stick with the military metaphor, b/c broad-spectrum polysyllabic english seems beyond you & I'm trying to find a way to communicate nonetheless. [This itself is also a funky metaphor:
Your reading comprehension & command of language is clearly inferior to mine. So what? I'll bet there's plenty of things you can do better than I. We're each born with gifts & weaknesses. If we hone our gifts, we can be above average in that area. Why then should we deprive a child of a sensory organ that has allowed me (& many others) to hone what began as average into a distinct advantage (b/c, with practice, we can use it to communicate in "the silent tongue" extremely well), even though it wasn't a particular gift?])
So then, a quick surgical strike to assassinate/capture key enemy personel:

Sure i can prove it. You've bend psychoanalyzing me and talking about off topic dribble... etc. [note I haven't used that Freudian slip]
You need to google "proof". An opinion does not prove anything. Proof requires some evidence & a conclusion backed by an irrefutable argument (usually also backed by evidence).
In this instance, you would need to quote me (I suggest you pick what you consider my most egregious foul) & state plainly what is wrong with it. Personally, I dont care if you quote the T&Cs as evidence to support your argument, b/c we all ought to know them already, but, to be within a strict definition of "proof", you ought to.
Naturally, I will refute you. Based on the evidence so far, you will fail to rebut & instead continue to repeat & rely upon a disputed argument. This is not just the definition of "illogical", but also, to those whose grasp of debate is simply instinctual (& I'm not patronising: everyone starts somewhere & some choose to devote their energy elsewhere, so whatever works...), its boring & shoots your position in the foot (love that recapitulation, eh?

new topics

top topics

<< 26  27  28    30  31 >>

log in