Other What's the wierd thing that your locality/country does that other places find disgusting.

[Samuel Durr]

Lol, I know that feels. People in mine often urinate in random bushes. In Public!

Eww......seriously? In bushes?

 

[Lost Swordlance]

True cheese, not that damn yellowish madness 

 

[Little gasmask]

Eating horse. Then taking emptying it's large intestine and stuffing meat there. Then cut it up and eat it. It's taste nice. #ThingsonlyKazakhsdo

 

[The Gunrunner]

Apologize

 

[yaint]

we have a traditional dish which is literally made by squashing half-eaten vegetables together and then frying them into the shape of a pie

 

[Venom Adhamm]

In the country I'm currently living in, it's a common practice to mutilate the genitals of boys when they're born.

 

[IG42]

In the country I'm currently living in, it's a common practice to mutilate the genitals of boys when they're born.

What you mean circumcision?

 

[Venom Adhamm]

What you mean circumcision?

Yeah.

 

[IG42]

Yeah.

You do realise that that still gets done medically? It's a sensible procedure that has become wrapped in tradition, though a number of those traditions do present risks that modern medicine can remove.

 

[Venom Adhamm]

You do realise that that still gets done medically? It's a sensible procedure that has become wrapped in tradition, though a number of those traditions do present risks that modern medicine can remove.

I don't think the means of performing the procedure, nor the fact that it's "tradition" excuse it from the label of mutilation. I follow the definition of mutiliation that states "to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts." Regardless of what tradition may dictate, circumcision removes the most sensitive part of a penis, which I think constitutes the irreparable damage of parts. Unless you can reverse circumcision, which I'm not aware is possible.

 

[IG42]

I don't think the means of performing the procedure, nor the fact that it's "tradition" excuse it from the label of mutilation. I follow the definition of mutiliation that states "to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts." Regardless of what tradition may dictate, circumcision removes the most sensitive part of a penis, which I think constitutes the irreparable damage of parts. Unless you can reverse circumcision, which I'm not aware is possible.

The fact that it can potentially prevent nasty illness is the part that can excuse it. Tradition doesn't excuse shit.

 

[Venom Adhamm]

The fact that it can potentially prevent nasty illness is the part that can excuse it. Tradition doesn't excuse shit.

The primary illnesses that circumcision can prevent are various STDs. However, it doesn't negate the risk, it only reduces it, which is what condoms can do as well. Furthermore, the potential circumcision has to prevent disease, I feel, doesn't excuse it either. Cutting off a part of a person without their consent to potentially prevent disease doesn't make the action excusable and perfectly fine. As a hyperbolic analogy, if I were to cut off both of my arms, it'd prevent me from getting carpal tunnel, but doing that is definitely not a good idea.


To concede, however, I don't think circumcision is something nobody should ever do. I think people should be able to choose whether or not they want to be circumcised. Again, the primary thing that circumcision can prevent is STDs. I don't think babies typically contract STDs (barring inherited disease, which circumcision wouldn't help anyway), so there's no immediate need to circumcise and it's definitely something that can be waited out and allowed by the person to decide on.

 

[Artificial Sugar]

The babies don't remember it, it doesn't traumatize them... It honestly helps in the long run, in more than just medical ways. Waiting until they're older and can make the decision doesn't really work, since it would hurt, and they would remember it. No one would ever have it done. I think it's best to do when they're too young to remember. It's a legit medical thing, it's not some weirdo on the side of the street, you know? Don't see why people are so angry over it. 
​

 

[CastoffCaptain]

We put peanuts in our Co-Cola. 

 

[CastoffCaptain]

The babies don't remember it, it doesn't traumatize them... It honestly helps in the long run, in more than just medical ways. Waiting until they're older and can make the decision doesn't really work, since it would hurt, and they would remember it. No one would ever have it done. I think it's best to do when they're too young to remember. It's a legit medical thing, it's not some weirdo on the side of the street, you know? Don't see why people are so angry over it. 
​

It's not a medical thing, it's a Bible tenant,  and pretty much half of Europe and the Brits aren't circumcision countries. 


Here.  Some facts.

 

[CastoffCaptain]

You do realise that that still gets done medically? It's a sensible procedure that has become wrapped in tradition, though a number of those traditions do present risks that modern medicine can remove.

Actually, it's tradition that's been wrapped in false medicine. See the above link provided in the previous post. Millions of Europeans and Brits are just fine without circumcision. 

 

[Axiom Days]

We put peanuts in our Co-Cola. 

That sounds like a Massive choking hazard.

 

[CastoffCaptain]

That sounds like a Massive choking hazard.

Darwinism at its best, baby. 

 

[Artificial Sugar]

Some people are just fine without circumcision, and some aren't. Some men are glad they had it done, some men may not be. I think that it's better in the long run, due to personal reasons, but I accept that not everyone agrees with my viewpoint. I do believe we're getting off topic, though.