[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Ralesk at 15 Feb 2003 21:01:36: Re: Response...
As an answer to: Response... written by AJ at 15 Feb 2003 15:40:51:
>>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?
>Anything is within the realm of possibility, Ralesk. Is it likely, however? Probably not.In my reading, this means (you assume) you know probably more about the human body than the rest of us. Watch your words, as this might not be true.
>> 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?
>First of all you need to reign in yet another presumption that a doctor would propose that a circumcised penis is "default". You are just presuming to speak on behalf of people again, Ralesk. Again, was there a survey - "Do you think the circumcised penis is a) default, b) non default c) unknown"? No. There was'nt. So, in this instance, you've drawn a conclusion based on nothing other than fancy.Okay. What do you know about American people? Look, I know a big amount of people who had no idea they had even been modified down there. I know a bigger amount of people who know they had been circumcised as infants but have never seen an intact penis in their life. Now if a lecture book and a lecture don't mention intact penises -- as they don't (or didn't until recently) -- then where do you think these "qualified" people would be any more aware of the intact penis than their unqualified fellows? I just don't see who or what would teach them about it, unless they specifically go and research in this topic themselves --- which is (has to be) a small amount of the doctors.
>>So we have to degrade to "who knows more" games.
>It's not a game. However, Ralesk, if you check the archives (especially Fathermag) you will see many requests from your colleagues (Jim) to newcomers posting there to tell people what makes them qualified or able to give advice.Should I point out that the word "game" was meant metaphorically?
Are you qualified to say skin growth exercises don't work on everyone?>>And here we are, all of us, pretty much sharing our experiences.
>We're not though, are we? Let's see...we know about me. We know about Jake. We know some stuff about Rood (Korydon). But that's it really. Jim, PaulB, 28/F, Ivan, Aussie Girl and even yourself don't share any experiences and history.I recall myself and Aussie Girl having shared experiences, you should open your eyes. AG, though, is a rare contributor to this particular forum, so I don't know why she counts so much in your world.
Paul B. gives precise replies about medication --- hardly deniable facts about different stuffs you can buy in a pharmacy. It has hardly to do anything with stretching experiences.
I could agree about 28/F, though.
And you have forgotten Glider.>>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.
>It's the fact the individual is unqualified and has no accountability which is this issue in that context.But your circfaq make you have that accountability you always talk about and makes you be qualified about whatever you write in there? The fact that we don't make personal sites where we obsess about our own penises doesn't make us less qualified or less accountable.
>> 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.
>I've been to a doctor. Lots of time. Never to have my penis cut off though.you have misread it. To have something cut off of your penis.
>>Not meaning to be nasty, but I doubt you have experience in stretching matter. You have failed it, afterall.
>I have plenty of experience in stretching the foreskin, Ralesk. I did it for several months. It just did'nt work. There's a whole bunch of people that have reported limited to no success too - not only on the internet, but in medical studies as well. I can't quite see why the hang up on the issue of it not be successful for everyone.Let's see. You have never told us what exactly you have done as several months of unsuccessful stretching. I have never encountered any published medical studies which state that at a certain person, skin growth exercises have failed --- to be honest, the person would have died a horrible death as a small child or a foetus if it hadn't worked. And the reason of the hang up is that even if you want to or not, it doesn't take much sense for psychology to see that your way of stating that it might work but won't work for all, SCARES people away from even trying it. A concerned individual is likely to think like this: "hmm, guess it won't work on me, it wouldn't be this bad if it did... yea, ok let's call the doc for an appointment." This is what we want to avoid, and if you keep saying that -- even if it's correct, though quite doubtful -- it will lure people away from even trying it. See, if we care about this, they try it and if they fail then they at least know they have failed and either come back and ask what to do and wtf is going on, or well go to the surgeon. If we, though, keep advertising some failure factor (whose only victims (sorry, synonimes escape me) of the board are AlfredH and you), especially in a wording that practically means there is a HIGH chance of failing it, then it's not helpful at all.
I'm aware your answer will be that I'm not responsible and why am I trying to help if I'm unqualified. Well, see above, western doctors are sadly very likely to be not quite qualified either.
>Okay, so let's take a worse and best case scenario here, Ralesk, which do you think the parents would want for their kids... worse case: The kid is told by unqualified individual to make a ring in shop class and shove it down his foreskin..best case: It is suggested to the kid that he should speak to his parents and doctor first. What's so bad about that? Again you are presuming to tell people that "we know better" and to attempt to cut the parent and/or doctor out of the decision making process.
Worst case scenario has been happening ONLY in your brain since uh october or so? We refrain from suggesting ANY devices. All of us.
And the best case might not be the best case, again because of simple human ignorance -- and doctors are humans too, sadly -- or lack of information (especially throughout the USA). We also quite often suggest the treatments and to pay a safe approach visit to the doctor. Read /recent/ archives.Most books stemming from the era between WW2 and recent years in the USA do NOT depict the prepuce at all or say anything about it. Fact, not an opinion. You could try and go read stuff in an american medical library from the 60s 70s... that's when quite an amount of current GPs were trained.
Well, I can't shut out the misinformation part, but from multiple sources that are not related to FatherMag or this forum, I have heard things like this. Another friend of mine was circumcised at the age of 14 as a treatment for an infection (the guy's behaviour shows total ignorance about the topic, btw, so he is anything but an anti-circ "freak" who would (according to you pro-circumcision people) make up a story just to please me).Ugh... this is about it.