I stumbled across this recently while going down a different rabbit hole and it stunned me. I missed this previously. It leaves me wondering why I am circumcised. I am a bit bitter still and always about having the tip of my penis chopped off in the name of tradition, Now I see this and wonder what justification my parents could have had in reality? Was it all just peer pressure? They were southern baptists, supposedly believing in NT over OT in any conflict. This is deep in the NT:
Galatians 5:2-6
2 Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law. 4 You who want to be justified by the law have cut yourselves off from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love.
I am an Atheist, Ex-Christian, Ex-Southern Baptist Apostate in my 40s. I talked to my mother about it, when I had a son. She said she just didn’t want me to stand out and circumcising was just what everyone else was doing. It drove home the point that my mother has never really thought for herself on any of that and much of it had impact on me. I’m thankful that my kids won’t have to go through all of that.
I’m venting because it dug up an old wound for me. As always, I’d love to hear some feedback.
Probably Kelloggs
Yeah. Some time ago I stumbled across a thread by an adult who got circumcised and was shocked that he could no longer easily masturbate without lube. So, that old dude being super weird with his views on sexuality and his larger influence on American culture might have played into OP having lost his foreskin indeed.
Also just checked the Wikipedia page on John Harvey Kellogg and on the German one there’s an entire chapter on his views on sex and masturbation and his weird obsession with enemas that seems to be missing from the English one. Odd.
I wonder if my affinity for Special K is due to being circumcised.
Unless you’re doctoring that Special K, I think your taste buds are broken.
Special K + spoon of sugar + whole milk.
I haven’t masturbated in years.
I don’t think that’s a Christian thing. I live in Germany, a mostly Christian country, my parents are Christians, yet the only circumcised people I know are Jews and one guy that needed to get a circumcision for medical reasons.
I have heard its common in the US tho, to prevent masturbation or something like that.
In the US is a largely puritan Christian thing that still pervades society.
It’s not particularly effective at that second thing, lol
It was about masturbation and faith when Kellogg lobbied for it, but I’d wager now it’s just more a tradition and aesthetics thing. I have heard my nurse friend who works at the VA espouse circumcision since when you get old it gets harder to keep your foreskin clean (she works with a lot of older ex-military patients). I still wish my parents hadn’t circumsized me though.
Idk how it prevents masturbation. Definitely didn’t work for me, unless I’d be masturbating 5-7 times a day without it. If that’s the case then I’m happy it was done. 1-2 times is plenty enough.
Because if you’re an American, it’s because your dad wanted your dick to look like his and/or your parents read some bs about uncircumcised dicks being dirty (if you bathe, this is not an issue). Historically, the reason why Americans even consider circumcision is because William Keith Kellogg was a puritan and invented Corn Flakes as a way to prevent masturbation. He also promoted circumcision because if you slice skin off of a baby boy’s dick, the pain will be so great that they won’t ever want to masturbate.
yeah I don’t think it’s the masturbation curb you assume.
ahem, speaking from first hand experience…
Kellogg assumed.
indeed, didn’t study, didn’t test, he assumed.
It’s why some do it to females. I’ve never needed lube because of the extra skin and on the other side you lose sensitivity as well. I believe they can undo the damage now a days.
I can assure you that is not the case. I’m not saying this wasn’t the intent, just that it doesn’t stop people.
We know. Kellogg was an idiot, but that is the reason circumcision caught on in the US.
Fun podcast about him
What the fuck is Paul even talking about there?
First he says that circumcised men are not covered by Christ’s sacrifice, which goes against the single most central point of Christian belief.
Then he says circumcision doesn’t matter, only Christ does, just a few sentences later.
deleted by creator
Seems like an early church numbers game to me. Paul realizes, I think, that if they’re going to convert a substantial number of non Jews, they’re going to need to drop the “now cut your penis” requirement for entry.
The thesis that Paul is trying to convey is that salvation doesn’t come from performing a ceremony, like circumcision. It comes from faith in Christ. He’s writing to a church who were mostly Jewish converts who were still insisting on new Christians being circumcised.
There seems to be multiple similar cases in bible, so it could be some weird linguistic thing.
Romans 14:1-3
Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2 One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them.
It’s not because of religion, but moreso in spite of it.
You can thank 1870s science for it, which over several decades built up a case for its supposed health benefits and increasingly began practicing it on infants of the upper class, which in turn created a social context by which it was seen as desirable in the US as the lack of circumcision was associated with less well off classes.
If you are interested in the quite lengthy but interesting backstory, this paper has a ton of details.
American doctors would recommend it back then. Everyone was doing it. As you know, most Christians, religious or otherwise, don’t really know/follow everything in the Bible.
Ther was also the hygiene arguement, and issues down the track with it not stretching enough.
Nearly completely solved now though
Stupidity is the conservative way. My folks are the same.
I ride a road bike regularly and would be much better off with that missing tip protection. I constantly remind myself, “you can’t fix stupid in anyone except yourself.” They did the best they could in an era when information access was abysmal.
I’d like to have mine back, too, just for fun, and I say it’s high time we demand what’s rightfully ours by birth. Foreskins! WHO’S WITH ME!?
having the tip of my penis chopped off in the name of tradition
I was clipped before people got upset about these things, far far back in the last century. just wondering why you characterize the trimming of foreskin to having your glans chopped down.
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s medieval bullshit fo sho, but if you think the tip got chopped off perhaps they made some mistakes?
I feel like its really difficult to explain the logic of the past when it comes to religion. But what I take away from that scripture is that Jesus doesn’t care if you’re circumcised or not, as long as you’re inside him.
That’s backwards, Jesus only cares that’s he’s inside you.
The Devil’s Calamari.
🤣🤣 Extra chewy…
Wait, so I’m gonna get dick shamed in heaven?
Every time a circumcision thread comes out the anti ppl come out of the woodwork and are forced to admit that in many cases a circumcision is the best route for your child’s penis health.
Phimosis is a thing. Cleaning is a huge issue in any 3rd world country and even when water is available it’s still a problem for many.
It’s basically a useless skin tag that can cause serious issues if not removed.
admit that in many cases a circumcision is the best route for your child’s penis healt
That’s just wrong. You realize people outside the US are mainly uncircumcised, right?
And phimosis isn’t that common though. In many cases, it can be resolved without circumcision. We don’t need to circumcise every male at birth because they have a small chance of phimosis needing circumcision later on.
Arguing that it should be removed at infancy because of phimosis is like arguing we should remove toenails because they can become ingrown.
Yes and you realize in many of those countries thousands of boys and men are in pain exactly because they’re not circumcised, right?
Appendicitis isn’t common either but we remove that without issue.
You dismiss all off the medical arguments out of hand because “there’s not that many”. How insulting to people suffering.
But you don’t remove the appendix preemptively, but if it’s medically necessary - same way circumcision should work.
You always remove the appendix before it becomes an issue. If u don’t you die. Same with a preemptive mastectomy.
The “loss” from a circumcision in most cases is minimal especially when compared to the risk of infection.
No, when you remove it it is already an issue, it’s just not deadly yet.
Also, yes, phimosis can almost always be corrected without circumcision, and it’s not as urgent as appendicitis.
There is no need to mutilate the penis and remove a non-useless part that actually protects and lubricates the head, allows for better sensitivity, temperature control, etc. etc. only to not have to do it in some rare medical case that is not even urgent.
I have no idea what you’re on about; you’re probably misunderstanding what I’m saying. I’m clearly not saying there aren’t medically-necessary reasons to get circumcised—it’s obviously is needed in some cases. I’m saying it’s unnecessary to give them to all males at birth. People shouldn’t undergo surgery before it’s deemed necessary.
And the appendix isn’t removed at birth or before an infection, it’s removed when it’s necessary.
circumcision is the best route for your child’s penis health
Wrong.
Circumcision is a last resort when other treatments don’t work. Phimosis can almost always be corrected without circumcision, and uncircumcised men are not in constant pain everywhere.
It’s basically a useless skin tag
Wrong. It is not useless, it provides not only pleasure, but better lubrication during sex, reducing chaffing. It also protects the penis head when not erect, keeping sensitivity up and helping keep the glans moisturized.
how many nerve endings are in it?
Doesn’t matter it’s not useful at all for any purpose.
What do u use ur spleen for?We have useless body parts and some are required to be removed at times for health reasons. Foreskin is completely useless and can carry risk.
As with all medical issues, if there is risk due to leaving it they don’t leave it. Pretty simple. Women go through preemptive mastectomies to prevent issues with cancer…this is really no different.Women do not get mastectomies unless it’s necessary. People aren’t getting them before they’re diagnosed.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
