[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Charles II at 10 Feb 2004 01:20:36: Re: H77 on Permanent Retraction
As an answer to: Re: Retraction of sons Foreskin written by H 77 at 29 Jan 2004 00:44:25:
>I note (Sara is) even accused of lying or a fictional post. This is quite typical of some folks that have no facts on their side and rely on slandering.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Yes, you see it all the time, the insecure anti-circ crowd with no facts or argument that will stand up to mature discussion. When you can't kill the message, kill the messenger.
I have no idea how common female circumcision is, but it certainly exists. The person that found fault with that part of the original message is appallingly ignorant, as are a few others here.
It is also not unheard of for boys to be born "auto-circumcised" or to have a short foreskin retract on its own in quite early years. Others have preferred to retract theirs themselves at very early ages, while parents could never figure out why.
The foreskin is about the world's most perfect over center device, and CAN become as comfortable either fore or aft, regardless of age. Of course, it appears that most of the anti-circ crowd try to keep their boys in complete ignorance of this, which puts first retractions (and hygiene and a lot of others things) on the trailing edge of the curve. As no shortage of boys foreskin complaints attest, the unused and unexercised foreskin then develops phimosis and other problems, and many end up with a little pointy pencil dick and ultimately require circumcision after all. How ironic.
Is Sara for real? Who cares?