frankly your disgust comes off a bit conceited. Genital mutilation, or the mutilation of genitals, is never ok. as someone who claims to 'oppose' circumcision, how can you look in the mirror and see anything but an ugly face hypocrite? some people are so 'open minded' their brains really do fall out

as per your Brazilian girl, i'm sure she would love for you to tell her it was "elective surgery", bitch-fuck-holeintheass

you also said that you are lazy, which i am inclined to agree with. anyone who can quote laws strictly dictating these disgusting procedures not be administered to anyone under 18 and at the same time intentionally over looks the fact that the woman in question is 16, is a lazy piece of shit and hope you dead

@MilkmanDan

Please watch the video and interview. There is no way a kid can get anywhere near hormonal treatment, let alone grs, before going through a battery of psychiatrists and doctors over a period of many, many years. Do you think a "dumbass" with mixed ideas about their identity could possibly slip through?

As for calling this "genital mutilation", @CaptainPlanet, I am frankly disgusted at your flippant use of the term. You know what would've been genital mutilation? When a young Tim Petras tried to cut off her penis out of frustration of being in the wrong body. As a strong opponent of genital mutilation (including male circumcision performed on minors), I am doubly insulted, as would surely be Kim. Calling grs "genital mutilation" is akin to calling this "facial mutilation": technically true, connotatively false.

@bmacs27

Talking about consent makes it seem the parents were the ones who pushed this on her, instead of vice-versa. I doubt that's what you meant, but I just thought I'd clarify. Like I mentioned above, gender identity isn't solely a question of sexuality, and it is defined long before puberty. Moreover, the hormonal treatment - which is reversible at any time - spanned at least four psychiatrist-followed years. I'm pretty sure if there had been the slightest inkling of a doubt during that period the shrinks would have picked up on it and vetoed the surgical procedure. Also, please notice that her grs was not "pre-pubescent": seriously, how many kids hit puberty at 16? Moreover, while the hormone treatment is reversible, male puberty is not (cf my above comments).

As for data, there surely is (too lazy to look now), showing that those who come to the idea of grs because of confused sexual identity or problems linked to abuse are kindly redirected during the long psychiatric process. I happen to know a psychiatrist who specialises in transsexualism (in CH you are required by law to see one minimum 1 year before being considered for hormonal treatment, 2 years for grs, in addition to being over 18), and she told me that cases of perceived transsexualism due to childhood abuse and/or confused sexual identity (notably repressed homosexuality) are not rare. There are instances of hormone use, namely in Brazil, for simply lucrative purposes ("dick-girl" prostitution), which I am obviously against if pressured upon the person (sadly the case sometimes).

there are way too many people here that are way too cool with genital mutilation

Above all, please remember it's nothing personal, just the future of our country on the line.

It's not Kenyan, it's "Kenyawaiian". Because Obama's papa was Kenyan, and he (the son) was born in Hawaii. Allegedly.

No one has the time or energy to read--much less list--all the failures of the corrupt regime presently in power, so settle for a single buzz word or two that summarizes the opposition.

I cannot care about the fine tuning between definitions of socialism, marxism and communism, they're all dung from different animals.

Suspend thinking of me (or Blanky) as your idealogical frenemies for a moment and try to see us instead as peeps concerned about fidelity to the Constitution and positive results. I don't give a sh1t about what the Obama regime or liberals in general say they want to do, or claim will happen, my concern is what are the REAL results of following liberal policies such as raising taxes on the wealthy (which then trickle down to us in the form of higher prices and less employment), non-stop government spending of money we don't have and onerous, business-killing regulations.

If this socialist claptrap worked, Europe would have less than permanent double-digit unemployment and less than 4 countries on the verge of economic collapse.

I really don't think you want to go to the tale of the tape (facts-n-sh1t) because from Roosevelt onward, federal tyranny has increased exponentially with the size of the welfare state.

If you want me to stop 'accusing' Obama of being a screw-up, tell him to stop jumping off the same cliff of tried-n-failed socialist baloney with styrofoam wings, then blaming Republicans instead of gravity when he plummets.

I don't say it enough: I wish the left could prove me wrong with examples of success instead of promises that never arrive.





>> ^volumptuous:

What's your point GSF?
Should we learn from people like Cafferty (a know-nothing millionaire pundit with absolutely zero focus on monetary policy or economics) and Ron Paul (a devout racist and sexist dominionist who hates our democracy and would like nothing more than to transfer our dwindling wealth all the way upward) and Blankfist (who's a film maker who identifies strictly to Ayn Randian/Paulian methods of extreme wealth inequality) and Quantum (who can't even get his soshulism/marxism right?) ?
OR
Should we listen to pretty much every single economist on the planet who tells us exactly the opposite of these people?
That's really up to you. But personally, arguing with the likes of these people is the same as arguing against a witch doctor in Africa who performs ritual genital mutilations for religious purposes. There's absolutely no way that person will ever think "oh, ya know you're right. maybe women should keep their clitorises and all this religious stuff is nonsense".
No, it's never going to happen, ever. But it doesn't matter. These videos get at most 2-5 upvotes, and Blanky has to keep promoting his own videos because the rest of the planet doesn't buy into this type of garbage.
So, open your mouth and eat my vomit

What's your point GSF?

Should we learn from people like Cafferty (a know-nothing millionaire pundit with absolutely zero focus on monetary policy or economics) and Ron Paul (a devout racist and sexist dominionist who hates our democracy and would like nothing more than to transfer our dwindling wealth all the way upward) and Blankfist (who's a film maker who identifies strictly to Ayn Randian/Paulian methods of extreme wealth inequality) and Quantum (who can't even get his soshulism/marxism right?) ?

OR

Should we listen to pretty much every single economist on the planet who tells us exactly the opposite of these people?

That's really up to you. But personally, arguing with the likes of these people is the same as arguing against a witch doctor in Africa who performs ritual genital mutilations for religious purposes. There's absolutely no way that person will ever think "oh, ya know you're right. maybe women should keep their clitorises and all this religious stuff is nonsense".

No, it's never going to happen, ever. But it doesn't matter. These videos get *at most* 2-5 upvotes, and Blanky has to keep promoting his own videos because the rest of the planet doesn't buy into this type of garbage.

So, open your mouth and eat my vomit

>> ^Ornthoron:

Even without considering the pros or cons of having a foreskin, I am simply unable to understand how anyone can condone removing a piece of an infant boy's body before he can consent.
quality


I had mine removed when I was about 6 for medical reasons. Never missed it. However, if it were removed for anything other than valid medical reasons that would be wrong. I can't stand parents who have their young child's ears pierced either. Mutilation is mutilation.

>> ^Ornthoron:

Your hair grows back. Your foreskin doesn't.
>> ^VoodooV:
Your hair was designed to keep you warm too. Hope you anti-mutilation people aren't cutting yours to stay consistent in your views.
What's that? you cut your kid's hair without their consent?!?!! you animal!!!



Oh, you're splitting ball hairs to fit your agenda and you know it!

Your hair grows back. Your foreskin doesn't.
>> ^VoodooV:

Your hair was designed to keep you warm too. Hope you anti-mutilation people aren't cutting yours to stay consistent in your views.
What's that? you cut your kid's hair without their consent?!?!! you animal!!!

Your hair was designed to keep you warm too. Hope you anti-mutilation people aren't cutting yours to stay consistent in your views.

What's that? you cut your kid's hair without their consent?!?!! you animal!!!

>> ^VoodooV:
Where's the outrage over mutilation due to body piercings? tattoos?

I think tattoos for infants should be banned, as well. That's a good comparison. Pierced ears is a bit of a stretch, though -- less of a modification and it heals on its own.

>> ^Ornthoron:

Even without considering the pros or cons of having a foreskin, I am simply unable to understand how anyone can condone removing a piece of an infant boy's body before he can consent.
quality


Exactly. I don't really give a shit about sensitivity or "dryness". Clearly males have been perfectly happy to be circumcised for generations untold. What I car about it the genital mutilation of infants.

you're never going to convince enough people it's bad to justify a ban.

you can scream mutilation all you want but even if you're right, it's still too much of a victimless crime. Sure there are exceptions, but the general rule is that either people don't even miss the foreskin, or they don't even know what circumcision is until much later in life so they don't even know they were missing anything so it's an "out of sight, out of mind" situation.

Yes, I'm aware that there have been cases of doctors botching the procedure and there are life long complications, but that's an individual screwing up, not a problem inherent with the procedure itself.

Where's the outrage over mutilation due to body piercings? tattoos?

This is something that should be left up to the parents to choose. This is also where separation of church and state kick in.

If there was some worldwide epidemic of complications due to circumcision running rampant then that would be a different issue, but that isn't happening so.... In other words...where's the fire?

In a perfect world, I would agree that it probably shouldn't happen, there shouldn't be any stigma one way or the other about it. But we don't live in a perfect world and you can't work backwards on something like that. People have to choose. It's the same with abortion, it's the same with smoking, etc. If it's ok to choose to have an abortion, then it's ok to choose to have a circumcision done to your kid.

>> ^quantumushroom:

"Americans in the top one percent, like Americans in most income brackets, are not there permanently, despite being talked about and written about as if they are an enduring 'class' — especially by those who have overdosed on the magic formula of 'race, class and gender,' which has replaced thought in many intellectual circles."

That “Top One Percent”
Not an enduring class.


Possessions are factored into wealth. So if you own an expensive house and then sell it, you don't get any wealthier, you just have more cash. Many of the wealthiest people in the world do not have a large amount of liquid assets. The mutilation of logic here is staggering.

DUUUUUHHHHH!!!!

I actually can't think of any other time in over two years when I've *unreservedly* agreed with something you've said. Can we have an argument to settle my confused head?

In reply to this comment by Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Hate is hate, no matter who is doing it. The past suffering of women does not justify current women jumping on a hate bandwagon in the name of 'retribution'. The past suffering of minorities does not justify current minorities jumping on a hate bandwagon in the name of 'retribution'. The past suffering of Palestinians (or Jews) does not justify current people jumping on a hate bandwagon in the name of retribution & fairness.

See the pattern here? We have all these groups who point to past injustices, and use it as justification to make THEIR OWN evils sound somehow more acceptable. I reject all such self-excuses as evil. Pure, 100%, unadulterated evil.

It isn't funny to tell a racial joke just because it is about whites. Racism is racism. It isn't funny to joke about mutilating a man. Sexism is sexism. It isn't funny to lump all the Tea Party into one bucket and pretend they are all Timothy McVeigh. Prejudice is prejudice. Anyone who practices it is an evil person, and needs to take a good hard look in the mirror at themselves. These are all different manifestations of the same disease. Hatred. And it isn't funny.

I would not say that one action, or even multiple makes an evil man.

Additionally, I will say that if one group tolerates a growing corruption, a festering if you will, within, then they are the ones propagating "racism" or "sexism" within their group. Not those who "prejudice" against them. And besides, prejudice is a natural instinct, a safety mechanism of sorts. Without it, we would all be dead.

Hatred, however, is counter intuitive...

But, upvote your comment because despite the trivial distinctions in definitions I make, you are on point.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Hate is hate, no matter who is doing it. The past suffering of women does not justify current women jumping on a hate bandwagon in the name of 'retribution'. The past suffering of minorities does not justify current minorities jumping on a hate bandwagon in the name of 'retribution'. The past suffering of Palestinians (or Jews) does not justify current people jumping on a hate bandwagon in the name of retribution & fairness.
See the pattern here? We have all these groups who point to past injustices, and use it as justification to make THEIR OWN evils sound somehow more acceptable. I reject all such self-excuses as evil. Pure, 100%, unadulterated evil.
It isn't funny to tell a racial joke just because it is about whites. Racism is racism. It isn't funny to joke about mutilating a man. Sexism is sexism. It isn't funny to lump all the Tea Party into one bucket and pretend they are all Timothy McVeigh. Prejudice is prejudice. Anyone who practices it is an evil person, and needs to take a good hard look in the mirror at themselves. These are all different manifestations of the same disease. Hatred. And it isn't funny.