Circumcision and trans puberty blockers in children

Discussion in 'Opinion POLLS' started by kazenatsu, Nov 17, 2022.

?

Do you think the following should be banned for children?

  1. both should be allowed

  2. circumcision should be allowed, but not puberty blockers

  3. puberty blockers should be allowed, but not circumcision

  4. both should not be allowed

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This poll is to try to determine what relationship exists between people's views of (male) circumcision and trans puberty blockers in children. Two different issues, but issues with similarities.

    Obviously circumcision in children is usually done at birth, whereas puberty blockers in trans children might begin at age 11 or 13.
     
  2. Junkieturtle

    Junkieturtle Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    15,845
    Likes Received:
    7,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Puberty blockers can cause far too many irreversible problems in children too young to consent or understand the ramifications of the choice. Gender changes of any kind should only be allowed once a person reaches age 18(or whatever the age of "adulthood" is in their state if it's different).
     
    JohnHamilton likes this.
  3. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,834
    Likes Received:
    32,499
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It’s interesting to see the number of people that believe one body mutilation is fine without consent (likely because it is “normal” but another type where the child has an opinion but cannot consent isn’t ok.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  4. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But there is no male circumcision any more. Not really a good comparison.
     
    Polydectes likes this.
  5. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FTR, I voted that NEITHER should be allowed.

    Circumcision is an abomination (as are puberty blockers).
     
    Polydectes likes this.
  6. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,105
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Im opposed to male child circumcision, but I dont think it needs to be banned. More folks just need to know what it doesnt do (have any hyegenic benefits at all) and what it can do (sexual and erectile dysfunction). If they did know, almost no one would do it. The risks, while rare, far outweigh the benefits, which by most accounts are none. Female child circumcision is quite a bit worse. Its almost certain to have permanant detrimental effects as thats precisely what its intended to do- decrease sexual pleasure to make women more 'loyal' wives. Thats evil and abusive.

    Hormone treatments should be considered child abuse if the child isn't being treated for a life-threatenning condition.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2022
  7. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's not true at all.

    Perhaps you need to look up the circumcision rates in the U.S., Canada, and Australia.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2022
    Sallyally likes this.
  8. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,105
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  9. bobobrazil

    bobobrazil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2022
    Messages:
    1,672
    Likes Received:
    893
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and the reason these topics are in a political forum?
     
  10. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They're low in Canada and Australia (just as they are in Europe, and most of Asia). It seems the US is the only anachronism, being about 30 years behind.
     
  11. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FreshAir, cd8ed and modernpaladin like this.
  12. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,105
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    ya
     
  13. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, you are wrong.
    Here are the statistics:
    U.S. - more than half of newborn babies are still being circumcised
    Australia - about 20 percent of newborn babies are being circumcised, and the percentage of much older Australians who were circumcised is as high as 80 percent
    Canada - 32 percent of newborn babies are being circumcised
     
    Sallyally likes this.
  14. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you serious? You can't think of a reason why it would be a political issue?

    Um, maybe because sometimes government passes laws to protect children?
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2022
  15. crank

    crank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    54,812
    Likes Received:
    18,482
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course those aged over 70 are more likely to be circumcised. That's because it was once like America. We're decades past that point now.
     
  16. LiveUninhibited

    LiveUninhibited Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Messages:
    9,425
    Likes Received:
    2,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Circumcision is therapeutic. The US is right on this, though probably for the wrong (cultural) reasons.

    Circumcision - Wikipedia

    "There is strong evidence that circumcision reduces the risk of men acquiring HIV infection in areas of the world with high rates of HIV. This evidence is principally derived from three randomized controlled studies conducted in Africa in 2002.[19][69] Evidence among heterosexual men in sub-Saharan Africa shows an absolute decrease in risk of 1.8% which is a relative decrease of between 38% and 66% over two years,[19] and in this population studies rate it cost-effective.[70] Whether it is of benefit in developed countries is undetermined.[15]...

    Circumcision is associated with a reduced prevalence of oncogenic types of HPV infection, meaning that a randomly selected circumcised man is less likely to be found infected with cancer-causing types of HPV than an uncircumcised man.[76][77] It also decreases the likelihood of multiple infections.[12] As of 2012 there was no strong evidence that it reduces the rate of new HPV infection,[13][12][78] but the procedure is associated with increased clearance of the virus by the body,[13][12] which can account for the finding of reduced prevalence.[12]...

    Studies evaluating the effect of circumcision on the rates of other sexually transmitted infections have generally, found it to be protective. A 2006 meta-analysis found that circumcision was associated with lower rates of syphilis, chancroid and possibly genital herpes.[79] A 2010 review found that circumcision reduced the incidence of HSV-2 (herpes simplex virus, type 2) infections by 28%.[80] The researchers found mixed results for protection against trichomonas vaginalis and chlamydia trachomatis, and no evidence of protection against gonorrhea or syphilis.[80] It may also possibly protect against syphilis in MSM.[81]...

    Circumcision has a protective effect against the risks of penile cancer in men, and cervical cancer in the female sexual partners of heterosexual men...

    Circumcision does not affect sexual function, sensation, desire, or pleasure.[99][100][101][102][103][104] ...

    Severe complications are rare.[86] A specific complication rate is difficult to determine due to scant data on complications and inconsistencies in their classification.[3] Complication rates are greater when the procedure is performed by an inexperienced operator, in unsterile conditions, or when the child is at an older age.[21] Significant acute complications happen rarely,[3][21] occurring in about 1 in 500 newborn procedures in the United States.[3] Severe to catastrophic complications, including death, are so rare that they are reported only as individual case reports.[3][109] "
     
  17. Pycckia

    Pycckia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    18,224
    Likes Received:
    6,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Some people can make a distinction between a trivial body modification and a highly damaging drug regimen.
    But not everybody, apparently.
     
  18. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,834
    Likes Received:
    32,499
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I never said there was not a distinction but thank you for the strawmen.

    So you believe some mutilation is ok?
     
  19. Pycckia

    Pycckia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    18,224
    Likes Received:
    6,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, of course. What is your position?
     
  20. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,834
    Likes Received:
    32,499
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don’t think children should be altered unless it is a last resort or dire need. That includes mutilating the foreskin.
     
  21. Pycckia

    Pycckia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    18,224
    Likes Received:
    6,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is never a dire need for puberty blockers.
     
  22. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,834
    Likes Received:
    32,499
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Some people would disagree, including medical professionals.

    What is the dire need for circumcision?
     
  23. Pycckia

    Pycckia Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    18,224
    Likes Received:
    6,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And many medical professionals agree that puberty blockers are bad news, including the medical establishments of Sweden and Britain.
     
  24. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,280
    Likes Received:
    18,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are assuming the infants gender... Lol
     
  25. cd8ed

    cd8ed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    41,834
    Likes Received:
    32,499
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No clue. I disagree with placing children on hormone blockers as a general practice but I am also not a doctor or psychologist.
     

Share This Page