Circumcision “researchers” aren’t looking for a cure to a disease. While in any other case, science is meant to outdate itself, make itself obsolete, #circumcision “research” seeks to make a contested, ancient ritual permanent and indispensable. In short, it’s pseudoscience. #i2
-
-
Other questions arise. How would we treat “research” and “trials” to find “medical benefits” in
#FGM? And how would we treat “studies” that actually found them?#i2 http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2017/08/does-female-genital-mutilation-have-health-benefits-the-problem-with-medicalizing-morality/ … -
It looks like some people will not have any of it. Yes, talk about “expectations.”
#i2https://allafrica.com/stories/201106280259.html … -
Joseph, why does society trust ANYTHING researchers say, then? And you do know these studies actually represent the medical statuses of/responses from women, right? Why don’t you understand women exist who SAY they’re not mutilated and ARE NOT? Women are right about THEIR bodies.
-
That’s the problem with “research.” We have gotten to a point where anything can be made “true” or “unquestionable” if we say “research says.”
#i2 -
People seem to forget papers get retracted. You do know this happens right? That’s the story of science’s life; replacement of newer, better information.
#i2
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Research that tests sensitivity on different points on the penis show precisely that the most sensitive part of the penis is in a part of the foreskin called the ridged band, removed during circumcision. Are you going to deny the experience of the men who suffer dysfunction?
#i2Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“The ongoing quest to vindicate circumcision is pseudoscience.” What are you even talking about? If researchers find that the ACTUAL statuses of circumcised people isn’t damage or harm & many don’t feel violated, researchers aren’t making that up. What are you talking about?
-
The actual status is undeniable damage and harm: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21672947 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17155977 http://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/2017/08/msoc2-1708.html … Any researcher concluding that "circumcision is harmless" is not doing their job correctly.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.