Why go to a food review channel for this?
-
-
Replying to @_Undersized_ @IAmReviewbrah
I'm trying to get anybody with a youth audience to cover this. I want to ignite mass movement against circumcision which is our only hope of a circumcision ban and government funding for stem cell based foreskin regeneration.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @Gregory_Malchuk @IAmReviewbrah
Why? Believe me, I like a foreskin and all. Not religious. But what’s the point of a mass movement banning circumcision?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_Undersized_ @IAmReviewbrah
Because infant circumcision is genital mutilation and violates the universal human right to physical integrity, the same right that is RUTHLESSLY enforced with regards to ANY intervention on a girls genitals.pic.twitter.com/C3DQIRkQqC
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @Gregory_Malchuk @IAmReviewbrah
Technically. Ever wonder why it became a religious practice to circumcise? It’s hot in the Middle East and so circumcision would reduce the chance of urinary tract infection, so more children would survive. The practice just became a tradition so even the morons would do it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There is no actual evidence that circumcision ever provided any real health benefit, at any point in history ever. Even if it did, the harm of unnecessary surgery before a time of modern sterilization and antibiotics would have claimed FAR more lives than it ever saved.
2 replies 1 retweet 10 likes -
THIS. There is literally ZERO anthropological evidence for circumcision EVER starting for "hygiene". Which would have been insane in a stone age world without antibiotics. If anything, it started in prehistory as a proxy for castration rituals or human sacrifice.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
-
Replying to @Surrey_Atheist @Gregory_Malchuk and
Conversations like this are fun and educational, I’m enjoying this. So I have a few questions: 1. Do you disagree with circumcision in general or only as a religious practice? 2. Where’s the evidence for your theory about removing pleasure? My theory is backed up by 2 med papers.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @_Undersized_ @Surrey_Atheist and
1. Circumcision of infants is wrong regardless of motivation 2. It removes the most sensitive part, determined by esthesiometer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847 Surveys report lost sensitivity https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23374102 And dysfunction https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21672947 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17155977
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
https://www.academia.edu/6395137/Adding_Insult_to_Injury_Acquisition_of_Erectile_Dysfunction_from_Circumcision … https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11956453 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492404 Not to mention that's the reason it started in America (to prevent masturbation), and similar reasoning exists for circumcision in judaism going back 2000 years.pic.twitter.com/Fe0nyvaVvp
-
-
Replying to @KhazWolf @Surrey_Atheist and
We have real reasons to circumcise some babies now. I disagree with the religious reasons, I think it’s pointless and insane, just despite the negatives that I recognise are there, I still think that circumcision should be allowed for medical reasons.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_Undersized_ @Surrey_Atheist and
There are no valid medical reasons. I'm sorry to be the messenger but if you were told there are, you were lied to. Everything circumcision cures, something else cures it better...
0 replies 2 retweets 5 likes
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.