Discussion in 'Man Enough' started by GaLaTeA, Dec 18, 2013.
difference is pretty vs. ugly is what I'm getting at
opinion. that's what i'm getting at
My opinion is that circumcised is prettier than non.
For those who don't know the actual purpose...
Male circumcision reduces the risk that a man will acquire HIV from an infected female partner, and also lowers the risk of other STDs , penile cancer, and infant urinary tract infection.
For female partners, male circumcision reduces the risk of cervical cancer, genital ulceration, bacterial vaginosis, trichomoniasis, and HPV. Although male circumcision has risks including pain, bleeding, and infection, more serious complications are rare.
So obviously circumcision >>> not - if you're talking about health and risk for infections or whatever.
those health risks only affect certain people, not everyone so therefore it doesn't hold any weight and i've never in my life had or heard my doctor tell me anything of that nature.
also, pretty sure Eve loved Adam's uncircumsized dong
Bruh that's off the CDC website and it doesn't say nothing about "certain people".
Shit is statistics, b. And as dirty as it is out here I'd rather have every single advantage possible.
"However, an AAP task force formed in 2007 examined scientific studies conducted between 1995 through 2010 to evaluate if a revision was needed. The new, stronger language is a result of emerging evidence that found links between circumcision and decreased risk of urinary tract infections, some kinds of cancer, HPV, HIV, and other sexually transmitted diseases."
The AAP's stance and research on it good enough?
Not reading that bullshit hommie. I got a trunk and bitches love my shit b
Always been good. Do u though bruh
Ain't said a word about bitches loving / not loving it. Just said the health reasons people do it for aside from religious reasons. You ain't gotta read those scientific facts if you don't want to, b. Blame the scientists and researchers man I'm just the messenger.
those are not scientific facts though.
well, it is, since it was released by the AAP and:
"The new policy statement will be published in the September issue of Pediatrics. It is also endorsed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."
it's information that has been collected and studied, peer-reviewed and agreed upon, then released for public information. it's not saying it's necessary, just telling you the facts of the differences between the two.
That's all I been saying. @Twamp think I'm taking shots at him or something. but I'm just the messenger and giving what I thought was commonly known information in a thread it relates to, tbh.
i'm really not tbh
just stating it's unfortunate how people believe everything they read or hear and then slap a "well the doctor said it so it's a fact" bullshit.
but that's not what happened. he slapped the "it's been studied, reviewed, accepted amongst the scientific community and therefore accepted as fact by everyone in the world unless new information comes to light that may change the facts."
the only people that don't believe it are conspiracy theorists.
edit: of which there should be none. nobody's singling out uncircumcised people like muslims.
everybody's a conspiracy theorist. even doctor's.
Couldn't have said it better @zyclon B gas - Yo how come you didn't jump in the fitness comp. this go round (or did I miss you in the thread?)
You still my dogg @Twamp and I'm sure the women love the D, regardless b.
This is bullshit, what's the symbol for an uncircumcised?
Would y'all still Eiffel tower wit me though?
what fitness comp? when was the entry? never knew about it. wasn't posted in the alley or here.
Separate names with a comma.