Comments on: Snip Your Weiner to Make It Cleaner http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/ ...is the practice of throwing one's arms around a side of beef Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:57:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: nena http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-129 Sun, 24 Dec 2006 21:56:52 +0000 http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-129 daaaaaaaaaaamn, guys! take it easy on christine. she was not - despite the title of the post - advocating circumcision to protect from AIDS. in fact she took measures to disqualify this young and wobbly perspective. Agitated - you are correct in asserting that circumsicion in itself can be and often is dangerous, and she admitedly prefers circumcision for aesthetic reasons. personally, i agree that uncut is better because it retains sensitivity that is really lost when the foreskin is removed, and it can lead to complications. but what she wrote was not in the least bit offensive or presumptuous. she's not an authority, but she's providing information for the rest of us to be simply more educated on the topic of sex. she's not claiming to be a scientist, but appreciate what she's doing. daaaaaaaaaaamn, guys! take it easy on christine. she was not - despite the title of the post - advocating circumcision to protect from AIDS. in fact she took measures to disqualify this young and wobbly perspective. Agitated - you are correct in asserting that circumsicion in itself can be and often is dangerous, and she admitedly prefers circumcision for aesthetic reasons. personally, i agree that uncut is better because it retains sensitivity that is really lost when the foreskin is removed, and it can lead to complications. but what she wrote was not in the least bit offensive or presumptuous. she’s not an authority, but she’s providing information for the rest of us to be simply more educated on the topic of sex. she’s not claiming to be a scientist, but appreciate what she’s doing.

]]> by: Administrator http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-126 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 17:28:23 +0000 http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-126 Anon - Thanks for pointing that out. I was simply listing safer sex supplies, and I realize I should point out that not all safer sex supplies (such as those used as contraception) are effective at preventing the spread of STI's. Anon - Thanks for pointing that out. I was simply listing safer sex supplies, and I realize I should point out that not all safer sex supplies (such as those used as contraception) are effective at preventing the spread of STI’s.

]]> by: Anonymous http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-125 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 13:10:17 +0000 http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-125 all of those other methods (spermicide, diaphragm...plastic wrap) except perhaps the dental dam, are used to prevent pregnancy, not HIV. all of those other methods (spermicide, diaphragm…plastic wrap) except perhaps the dental dam, are used to prevent pregnancy, not HIV.

]]> by: Administrator http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-124 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:19:18 +0000 http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-124 Agitated - I appreciate your concern, but I believe you have entirely misread my post. First, if you had read my post thoroughly, you would have noted that "the study was conducted in Africa" (paragraph 5), not Los Angeles -- The LA Times simply reported on the study. It was deisgned to help combat the AIDS epidemic in Africa. Yes, tribal circumcisions are dangerous, but the circumcisions offered through the study were not done in tribal villages. They were performed at health centers under the supervision of the medical group that conducted the study. I, too, have roots in Africa. I did not pull the Zimbabwe account from thin air -- the my entire maternal family hails from Zambia, Zimbabwe, and South Africa. Believe me, I know. And yes, the foreskin can protect the glans of the penis, but as the study reported, the "foreskin is composed of fragile cells more susceptible to infection in general" (paragraph 2). Circumcision, in this case, was NOT a cosmetic procedure. In my second to last paragraph, I say that "circumcision is not a solution in itself." I am NOT advocating circumcision alone as a cautionary measure against HIV. I call for a "more comprehensive sex education and a wider availability (in terms of cost, variety, and venues) of safe-sex devices," which involves condoms (paragraph 8 ). I even end the post with the disclaimer: "The study shouldn’t make you jump to conclusions. You need to put down the knife, sweetums: not all meat needs to be butchered. Just take it from me — you don’t want to serve your sausage raw." Granted, it's euphemistic and light-hearted, but it still means that circumcision is not the solution for everyone and you still need to wear a condom. The way you've read my post makes me believe you didn't read it at all. I invite you to re-read it and notice the points that you've missed. I'd hate for someone to walk away from my blog being misinformed -- that is not my goal at all. Agitated -
I appreciate your concern, but I believe you have entirely misread my post.
First, if you had read my post thoroughly, you would have noted that “the study was conducted in Africa” (paragraph 5), not Los Angeles — The LA Times simply reported on the study. It was deisgned to help combat the AIDS epidemic in Africa.
Yes, tribal circumcisions are dangerous, but the circumcisions offered through the study were not done in tribal villages. They were performed at health centers under the supervision of the medical group that conducted the study.

I, too, have roots in Africa. I did not pull the Zimbabwe account from thin air — the my entire maternal family hails from Zambia, Zimbabwe, and South Africa. Believe me, I know.

And yes, the foreskin can protect the glans of the penis, but as the study reported, the “foreskin is composed of fragile cells more susceptible to infection in general” (paragraph 2). Circumcision, in this case, was NOT a cosmetic procedure.

In my second to last paragraph, I say that “circumcision is not a solution in itself.” I am NOT advocating circumcision alone as a cautionary measure against HIV. I call for a “more comprehensive sex education and a wider availability (in terms of cost, variety, and venues) of safe-sex devices,” which involves condoms (paragraph 8 ). I even end the post with the disclaimer: “The study shouldn’t make you jump to conclusions. You need to put down the knife, sweetums: not all meat needs to be butchered. Just take it from me — you don’t want to serve your sausage raw.” Granted, it’s euphemistic and light-hearted, but it still means that circumcision is not the solution for everyone and you still need to wear a condom.

The way you’ve read my post makes me believe you didn’t read it at all. I invite you to re-read it and notice the points that you’ve missed. I’d hate for someone to walk away from my blog being misinformed — that is not my goal at all.

]]> by: John Henry http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-123 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 02:10:43 +0000 http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-123 This comment goes out to the previous commenter. I find <i>your</i> blog post completely absurd. Please notice that Christine does not actually relate circumcisions to the AIDS epidemic. She merely references the study as a jumping off point into the problems in Africa. I believe that if you pay close attention to what she is saying, you will find that she realizes how ridiculous it is to suggest that the AIDS epidemic may possibly be curbed circumcisions. However, as not to disrespect you, I do realize that you may have a gut reaction to how ignorant much of the world is to the problems in other, less fortunate parts of the globe. There are oblivious people in this world who continue to make the situation worse by spreading their partial-truths to others, but believe me, Christine is not one of them. Yes, there is a serious problem and no, circumcision is not a magic bullet. But we have to respect few people like Christine who are doing their part by occasionally digressing from their usual web log topics and trying to do some good in this world by educating others. This comment goes out to the previous commenter. I find your blog post completely absurd. Please notice that Christine does not actually relate circumcisions to the AIDS epidemic. She merely references the study as a jumping off point into the problems in Africa. I believe that if you pay close attention to what she is saying, you will find that she realizes how ridiculous it is to suggest that the AIDS epidemic may possibly be curbed circumcisions.

However, as not to disrespect you, I do realize that you may have a gut reaction to how ignorant much of the world is to the problems in other, less fortunate parts of the globe. There are oblivious people in this world who continue to make the situation worse by spreading their partial-truths to others, but believe me, Christine is not one of them.

Yes, there is a serious problem and no, circumcision is not a magic bullet. But we have to respect few people like Christine who are doing their part by occasionally digressing from their usual web log topics and trying to do some good in this world by educating others.

]]> by: Agitated http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-122 Fri, 22 Dec 2006 01:46:18 +0000 http://carnalembrace.blogsome.com/2006/12/19/snip-your-weiner-to-make-it-cleaner/#comment-122 I will remain anonymous for this post to not entice tons of angry emails or whatever. I find your blogpost completely absurd. To try and relate a study done in los angeles to the problems of the African AIDS endemic shows a clear misunderstanding of the situation in Africa. What makes me any more qualified on the topic? Allow me to inform you that I'm from Africa, grew up there, lived there, and was immersed in the culture there. You take no consideration that most circumcisions in Africa are done in extremely unhygienic conditions. Many of the African tribes have rituals where men are circumcised as their passing rights to adulthood. Minor infections are almost always present and fatalities have occurred. This does little to help the AIDS problem. Also, where the foreskin might make a slight change in the men's susceptibility, this does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to change the dangers of AIDS on the women's side, and all evidence shows that AIDS is a problem for all relationships, not only homosexual (as the stereotype was until some years ago). Also, the foreskin serves a vital role in keeping the penis glans health. Any circumcised penis loses a degree of sensitivity to handle the large amount of nerve endings which are left in the open by removing the foreskin. I cannot see any reasonable reason why diminishing your sexual capabilities are desirable above using a condom, which has statistically at least an order of magnitude better chance of preventing AIDS. Those two arguments completely ruin your approach both in the western world and in Africa, so I see little reason left why I would subject myself to be butchered for the sake of having a statistical probability of only 50% to not contract AIDS... 50% will NOT change the good habit of wearing a condom OR making sure both you and your partner are HIV negative. By spreading the idea that by a "simple" circumcision you can take away some of your risk, you are sure to entice many young couples into risky sexual contact since they believe that they have some degree of safety "built in" (or should I say "cut out"). And lastly, a circumcised penis should never be confused with a medically healthy penis - that is a COSMETIC or RELIGIOUS decision, NOT a medical reason. If you think a circumcised penis is "more attractive", leave it at that. It won't change the fact that a man with HIV will give it to you through sexual contact, or if you have HIV, you still have a responsibility to let the man know this, and not trust on the idea of his cosmetically altered penis to "protect" him. I will remain anonymous for this post to not entice tons of angry emails or whatever.

I find your blogpost completely absurd. To try and relate a study done in los angeles to the problems of the African AIDS endemic shows a clear misunderstanding of the situation in Africa. What makes me any more qualified on the topic? Allow me to inform you that I’m from Africa, grew up there, lived there, and was immersed in the culture there.

You take no consideration that most circumcisions in Africa are done in extremely unhygienic conditions. Many of the African tribes have rituals where men are circumcised as their passing rights to adulthood. Minor infections are almost always present and fatalities have occurred. This does little to help the AIDS problem. Also, where the foreskin might make a slight change in the men’s susceptibility, this does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to change the dangers of AIDS on the women’s side, and all evidence shows that AIDS is a problem for all relationships, not only homosexual (as the stereotype was until some years ago).

Also, the foreskin serves a vital role in keeping the penis glans health. Any circumcised penis loses a degree of sensitivity to handle the large amount of nerve endings which are left in the open by removing the foreskin. I cannot see any reasonable reason why diminishing your sexual capabilities are desirable above using a condom, which has statistically at least an order of magnitude better chance of preventing AIDS.

Those two arguments completely ruin your approach both in the western world and in Africa, so I see little reason left why I would subject myself to be butchered for the sake of having a statistical probability of only 50% to not contract AIDS… 50% will NOT change the good habit of wearing a condom OR making sure both you and your partner are HIV negative. By spreading the idea that by a “simple” circumcision you can take away some of your risk, you are sure to entice many young couples into risky sexual contact since they believe that they have some degree of safety “built in” (or should I say “cut out”).

And lastly, a circumcised penis should never be confused with a medically healthy penis - that is a COSMETIC or RELIGIOUS decision, NOT a medical reason. If you think a circumcised penis is “more attractive”, leave it at that. It won’t change the fact that a man with HIV will give it to you through sexual contact, or if you have HIV, you still have a responsibility to let the man know this, and not trust on the idea of his cosmetically altered penis to “protect” him.

]]>