It’s funny that this is hardly a new cultural conflict. It likely led to the Maccabean rebellion when circumcision was banned. Not that big of a deal to me, of course. So what another culture thinks you are weird...that’s normal actually:)https://www.ancient.eu/article/827/the-maccabean-revolt/ …
-
-
Replying to @smith_valence @CelliniRich and
My argument isn't that we should care what others think of our culture. It is that we should try to step outside our own cultural norms to look at practices more objectively. Defamiliarise ourselves with them and see if they still seem ethical.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CelliniRich and
The consequentialist argument seems like a wash to me. Small benefits, small risks. I think it’s perfectly ethical for a parent to decide for small children in this situation. Parents have to make all kinds of decisions like this.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @smith_valence @CelliniRich and
No, they don't. That's the point. In no other situation are they allowed to make medically unnecessary and irreversible modifications to their children's bodies. Parents have been arrested for tattooing their children even for religious reasons.http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/08/30/jesus-loves-tattoo-on-12-year-old-girl-leads-to-arrests.html …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @CelliniRich and
Right, but you ignore the positives completely (definitely a bias) The WHO is advocating circumcision to reduce STDs in many places where they are rampant and life threatening. If I think that risk mitigation is worth the small risk of circumcision, I should be able to make it.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @smith_valence @HPluckrose and
Are you suggesting that you should do surgery, severing nerves involved in sexual function, on a child, in order to slightly reduce a future risk of sexual activity as an adult? When the said adult *could* have so chosen themselves, if choice weren't removed as a child?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FrostyBalrog @HPluckrose and
The WHO certaintly is, same with the CDC. The nerves in the skin aren't very important for sexual function at all, that's a ridiculously false claim. I think the Europeans are literally backwards here. HPV causes all kinds of cancer, HIV is deadly, ect.http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/ …
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @smith_valence @FrostyBalrog and
Here's the CDCs recommendation. I think Europeans in general are acting irrationally just because circumcision is unusual to them, and Europeans just assume they are morally advanced...because they are Europeans and circumcision is "religious."https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478224/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @smith_valence @FrostyBalrog and
Old thread, but the American narcissism, absolutely incredible. "The Euros are acting irrationally here. They're only against it because it's weird and they're anti-religion. America knows best though. More sensitivity=less ability to control orgasm, that's how sexuality works."
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Nijrisupmat @FrostyBalrog and
Of course, my calling out Euro narcissism is only evidence of American narcissism, because only Americans are narcissists. Nah, Twitter shows that's a lie. Most of the world is a bunch of narcissists, unfortunately. Perhaps we were better off without social media.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
"Narcissism" is applicable when you're one of the only developed countries that still practices circumcision, and you act genuinely baffled when anyone else sees anything wrong with it. Or be an "atheist" promoting what has always been mostly a religious ritual.
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.