JCC OZK's Foreskin Restoration Progress Thread

Don't you see? It can't stop. It can never stop. At first, they controlled the circumcision discussion... but now... now it controls them.

 

Now we can stop.

 

No, now we have to have a discussion about how the penis shoots seeds, and makes new life to poison the earth with a plague of men, as it once was, but the gun shoots death, and purifies the earth of the filth of brutals. Because the gun is good.

 

Stop with the Zordoz

 

Zardoz, Arlol. Zardoz.

 

I wasn't sure how to spell it. My bad.

 

It was written in the post right above you.

 

The only time I have trouble getting in water is when it's ice.

 

you do know that most of europe still has their foreskins and we don't have a epidemic of UTI's? oh and if you havent got tonsils in the first place we cant infect them either, or appendices either or nipples.

 

Surely you know by now Arlon doesn't read any posts by anybody else.

 

the conundrum here is that i seriously doubt he has any idea what zardoz is and i'm pretty sure the only way he even heard of it was by reading those posts.

 

Looks a lot more disgusting this way, huh?

RIP Christopher Hitchens.

 

Not the same thing... stop trying to turn this into a gender thing.

 

I've already presented what I believe is a very convincing argument as to why the effects are approximately equivalent, to which your refutation was "Waaaaaaaaal of text."

And that does cause the question to be asked, why is it not the same thing?

 

http://www.moralogous.com/2012/03/19/im-circumcised-and-im-fine/

I'd link to another post from that blog, but it contains comparison pictures between an erect intact penis and an erect cut penis (very telling as to the damage circumcision causes), entitled "A brief history of the foreskin and circumcision".

Instead, I'll simply reference it. Foxes are like circumcised men. Heard of Aesop's Fables? Two of the stories talk about foxes with similar problems.

http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop1.cgi?sel&TheFoxWhoHadLostHisTail

http://www.umass.edu/aesop/content.php?n=10&i=1

The analogy should be clear. Lillian writes:

She explains the cognitive dissonance of circumcised men (I have felt this cognitive dissonance).

She also explains the cognitive dissonance of parents who have already circumcised:

This isn't about a need for attention. I only keep responding to this thread because people keep directing things at me. I'm hardly the one keeping this thread alive. If other people want to drop the issue I'm happy to let the thread sink. But as long as other people keep posting, I'm going to keep posting because maybe I'll get through to someone.

And since you thought it fair to question my psychology, I think it fair to question the psychology of those who support the continuance of this practice.

 

Do you actually think that is poetry? Or do you realize that the line breaks are to allow each premise and conclusion to be made explicitly clear but you're just being sarcastic?

 

You're obviously experiencing grief over the loss of your foreskin and anger at the suggestion that your genitals are somehow damaged and that you are incapable of experiencing as much sexual pleasure as you could have otherwise. I feel the same grief and can sympathize and that's obviously why I've been so passionate about the topic. That's why you spilled this discussion into the other thread. You're angry that you're unable to refute anything I've said, so you're acting out against me in the other thread. That's why you're attempting to derail the discussion with humor.

I know how this feels. It sucks. To think of what we've lost. The grief can be pretty intense at times. But it's okay to grieve. We lost something valuable. But we'll be okay. And it's okay to admit that we lost something valuable, too.

 

Projection will not get him to agree with you.