[ ARC forum 2 ]

General stuff, all read it all

Written by Ralesk at 14 Feb 2003 19:28:18:

As an answer to: Re: Well, you're right about one thing written by AJ at 14 Feb 2003 14:40:50:

>>You are not a doctor.
>As I said in the above post, Jim. You and I are not doctors. Nobody here is.
>>Along with that statement, you should also say that you don't know diddly about anything relating to the human body.
>I don't want to picky with what you say, Jim, but please don't speculate about how much I know about the human body. For future reference - I know a few things about it.
>>That doesn't mean that others who are not doctors are as ignorant as you are AJ.
>One would have to assume, Jim, that anyone practising as doctor would have recieved extensive training.

   To these I answer: AJ, can it be possible, that those of us who you denounce as quacks, armchair doctors, paranoid conspiracy theory makers and so on, do also know "quite a bit" if not more about the human body?  Can it be that those of us for whom any sort of skin growth exercises did work, have perhaps more experience with them than someone for whom they didn't and who gave up?  Can it be, that those of us who posess a whole -- and working -- foreskin, know better where most probably the pleasureful zones are, than those with 1) unretractable foreskin 2) circumcised penis?

   Not to be picky here...

   And about doctors, well yes, you can pass all subjects with a C and get a diploma at the end.  Most don't give a shit about extreme stuff like genitals, just more common problems like flu and such.  Most (in the far west anyway) were taught (re: extensive training) from books and on lectures that do not mention the prepuce at all, so why would you expect a circumcised person who has probably never given a thought to his penis because he feels okay and somewhere deep in his mind circumcised penises are the default, to read up on a subject he barely knows exist?  Not to mention female doctors who in their off-work life haven't seen an intact penis (that's not uncommon), nor do they posess one, what would lead them to read up on it?  Not to mention, most American literature would just say "it is usually removed in infancy or early childhood".  That does not give a clue for anyone, on how to treat a foreskin; their only sane idea -- evil they be or NOT -- will be, it shouldn't be there, for most it's not there, they don't have problems with that, so let's refer the guy to a surgeon and have this solved.
   This is simple logic from my point of view, I hope someone can tell me to fuck off in a way that I accept it.  Ie. with another train of LOGICAL deduction.

>However, it's always better to get an objective, qualified and professional input as opposed to an armchair doctor like yourself.

   Yes, if that were so easy.  And btw, Jim hardly qualifies for the armchair doctor title, since he has never stated he were a doctor.
   I agree with that qualified input is needed.  However, I don't really thing anyone on the world knows exactly what the hell is going on in the prepuce and the penis.  I don't think that per definitionem anyone would be qualified.  So we have to degrade to "who knows more" games.  And here we are, all of us, pretty much sharing our experiences.  As stated above, those with a foreskin know probably better what it is like.  Those with restored coverage know probably better what difference that makes.  Those who have done skin growth exercises to a bigger depth, let it be restoration or "stretching" know probably better how that works and what makes one succeed at it.  It makes no sense to call someone an armchair quack with dark and evil intentions (as above under Justin), especially when it regards a topic they are more experienced in.  To be honest, it is like you are experienced in going to a doctor, queue like a good Englishman, and have something cut off your penis.  Not meaning to be nasty, but I doubt you have experience in stretching matter.  You have failed it, afterall.

>Then there's also the issues of accountability and responsibility - both of which appear to be other worldly concepts to you.

   You also have little problems regarding responsibility, to be honest.  You immediately refer people to doctors, without warning them that they should have open eyes meanwhile.  It's not and NOT about that doctors would be evil, but the fact that doctors (as in GP and urologists) do not receive education about this matter in the world.  That's the sad and simple fact.  Some of them have read up on it, some of them have their own experience with their own body (the lucky sods), but this is by far not the majority for the United States.  I can't be less than cautious in this part of it, and so is the rest of us.  And that people don't write in every post that the person should cautiously go to the gp/urologist/etc. doesn't mean they have forgotten about it.  It might happen that someone else has already written about that to the same concerned poster.


   Sorry for the rambling, I needed to collect a bunch of diverse shit I wanted to say.

--
RNK


Answers: