What happened to the satanic panic?

[mwc]

36 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

That Mexican guy that claims to have the biggest penis in the world did this. His is all skin. That's why they don't count his as the biggest in the world. Kinda funny really. Probably can't even use the thing with all that skin in the way. 

 

I've often wondered. Whether sex is better with a circumcised penis or an uncircumcised penis. And this was actually how I got in the awkward conversation with that guy. He mentioned he had gotten a circumcision a few years back. And being the only person I had known that could possibly tell me the answer. I asked him which felt better? Before or after? And that's when it got awkward. Apparently he hadn't been able to have sex since the surgery. Before he stopped working where I worked he mentioned having a corrective surgery for the issue. I hope they got it "straightened out". Pun intended lol  

 

This is actually very interesting to me. I think that Egypt influenced ancient Semitic beliefs far more than Christians or jews will ever admit. I think they were influenced by Egypt when they became monotheistic for a short period under Pharoah Akhenaten. I believe it was during or shortly after this time period that the polytheistic beliefs started to be changed in canaan. And the Moses myth was inspired. 

 

I do know women that don't like uncircumcised men because of the sweat and smell the extra skin causes. I personally think it's a good hygienic practice to circumcise infant boys. It wasn't a religious decision when I had my boys circumcised. My sons were actually born before my salvation experience. I think for most people it's not a religious decision. That was a rule under the law of the old testament and wasn't enforced in the new testament. Just as the laws on foods weren't enforced. 

 

So the idea that kellog and Graham are still infecting the world with religious propaganda is lost on me. I see that more in politics. Not what people do with the extra skin on their kids dicks. 

 

But maybe in your time it was a big issue. I dunno. 

     My point was with those two was that ideas cast long shadows whether we think they do or not.  This is why your line of reasoning here above doesn't really fly in countries where circumcision isn't the norm.  We have this idea that people think this way or that but the reality is they don't.  Why should they?  A dick is just like that.  Since you like anecdotes I'll give you one.  I ran a very similar line of thinking as the one you posted here by a friend of mine round about 30 or so years ago.  He let me know I was wrong.  How did he know?  He was uncircumcised.  He hadn't ran into any of the issues I laid out.  None of his family was circumcised.  None here.  None abroad (they were Dutch with family in Europe and Brazil).  I got educated right quick.  It was pretty much an American thing.  Speaking with others from overseas simply reinforced this.  Many of our modern thoughts and traditions (secular and religious) come from the 1800's.

 

36 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

But to each their own. I don't take the stance that everything related to Biblical teachings are bad or useless. Some of it is good and has known non biblical benefits as we already discussed. 

 

Anyway. I'm sure we've talked enough about dicks, penises, tally whackers, Joy sticks, Johnsons, or twigs and berries enough lol.  

 

On another note it is interesting, weird, and makes sense all at the same time that arousal in a public bath house was offensive. For us. Bathing in public period would be offensive. But back then it was all good unless ya got hard. 

 

So did the males and females have separate bath houses or was it open to both genders? I'm guessing it was separate. 

 

In a way it kinda reminds me of the old phone systems when the whole community shared a line and it was considered rude and nosy to listen in on someone's conversation. 

     Roman bath houses were one building with two sections like a modern gym.  The men had a better side.  Basically, all the men's things were better than the women's version.  While I was in Rome I was told that there were baths that were unisex but they weren't sure of the details.  Whether they were to bath at the same time or if they were for both sexes just at different times.  The ones I saw all had different sections.  They had a little place to store your stuff and then the bathing area.  I guess there was one that was unclear, it was just the floor plan and only had one set of baths, but it could have been men only which wouldn't be unusual.

 

     Also, since it came up before I came across this info:

Quote

Abstract

 

Objective

To determine the species of intestinal parasites present in 7th century BC high-status residents of Jerusalem and to expose the history of regional health and sanitary conditions.

 

Materials

Fifteen sediment samples were collected from the cesspit below a stone toilet seat found at the site of Armon Hanatziv, southern Jerusalem. The toilet installation was located in a garden adjacent to a monumental structure with extraordinary architectural elements.

 

Methods

A light microscope was used to identify and measure the eggs.

 

Results

The presence of four intestinal parasite egg taxa was detected: Trichuris trichiura (whipworm), Taenia sp. (beef/pork tapeworm), Ascaris lumbricoides (roundworm), and Enterobius vermicularis (pinworm). This is the earliest appearance of roundworm and pinworm in the ancient Israel parasitological record.

 

Conclusions

Findings reveal that intestinal parasitic diseases most likely caused by poor sanitary conditions were a human problem in the Late Iron Age of Israel, affecting even high-status groups.

Here

 

     Seems those biblical diets and bathing rituals weren't saving their insides.  

 

          mwc

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

4 minutes ago, mwc said:

It was pretty much an American thing.  

Yep,

America is pretty fucking awesome like that  

[♦ Fuego ♦]

30 minutes ago, mwc said:

arousal in a public bath house was offensive. For us. Bathing in public period would be offensive. But back then it was all good unless ya got hard.

 

I was at Breitenbush hot springs once in a rock tub with mixed sexes. One guy kept turning his head away while clearly groping himself. Awkward. I didn't say anything, but probably would if it happened again. It was expressly against the rules. I think he wanted to be more impressive when he stood up. It was winter, so shrinky dinks was going to happen.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

11 minutes ago, Fuego said:

 

I was at Breitenbush hot springs once in a rock tub with mixed sexes. One guy kept turning his head away while clearly groping himself. Awkward. I didn't say anything, but probably would if it happened again. It was expressly against the rules. I think he wanted to be more impressive when he stood up. It was winter, so shrinky dinks was going to happen.

 

Now that's funny!!! I've never been to any of our hotsprings but every time I've seen them on the movies usually people are in their swim suits. 

[Myrkhoos]

5 hours ago, Weezer said:

 

I heard that years ago.  It was said that it cuts down on vaginal infections in women due to the foreskin trapping "imputities".  This makes sense if you live in a society where men don't have a way to wash their penis before having sex.  Also reduces yeast infections under the foreskin.

I have NEVER EVER heard about circumcision for hygiene in Romania and Europe in general. I was actually very surprised that Americans circumcise their infants.

     By the way I heard Australian aborigenes also practiced circumcision.

[Wertbag]

I always thought surgery for cleanliness was a strange suggestion.  You don't cut things off just cos they get dirty.  Sure if you live in ancient times and soap wasn't readily available, but most people in the Western world seem to do it more out of tradition than need.

The other thing to remember is that even when done by a medical professional, and not just a rabbi on your dining room table, it is still not a zero risk procedure.  There are many cases of infections, miss-cuts, or other complications, all for a procedure that is completely optional.

 

What I have seen is that rates of snipping drops in line with religion.  Here in NZ we have both low rates of religion and low rates of circumcision.  I did see this in the Washington Post "There's no question that among the world's wealthy nations, the U.S. stands out when it comes to circumcision. The WHO estimates that the overall male circumcision rate in the states is somewhere between 76 and 92 percent. Most Western European countries, by contrast, have rates less than 20 percent."  

[freshstart]

12 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

I thought we have discovered that their are non biblical medical benefits to circumcision?.

There are some possible benefits. . . .

 

https://aidsrestherapy.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12981-017-0167-6

 

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/penile-cancer/causes-risks-prevention/risk-factors.html

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5422680/

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1477524/

[midniterider]

13 hours ago, Wertbag said:

I always thought surgery for cleanliness was a strange suggestion.  You don't cut things off just cos they get dirty. 

 

My wife uses the 'hygiene' excuse to justify getting her kid circumcised. I never really had a good response for that, but now I do. Thanks! lol

[◊ Weezer ◊]

This is what happens when there are no christians to argue with.