Whatever you do, don't take my finger!
 

Get Fuzzy. Great comic by Darby Conley. I often quote it in my sigs. This week he's been doing a humorous/informational "cat facts" series. This one struck me as kinda odd...a bit of activist ideology conflict if you ask me.



Go ahead an cut it's nuts off, but for heavens sake, don't hurt those little fingers!

I'm all about not de-clawing outdoor cats. That's just cruel and begging for them to get mauled. But an indoor cat? When your argument involves appealing to the "it's mutilation" thing, that doesn't really work when you've got "slice it's balls off" two bullet points up. If it allows a cat a comfortable home and isn't going to adversely affect it, so be it. It's a perfectly safe procedure, just like spaying and neutering.

It just doesn't jive for me.

I wonder if he has had his leather couch ripped to shreds by the family cat.....Just wondering....

For a short period of time, declawing was thought to be humane. And, yes, it was much more "convenient" for us to protect the dear furniture rather than care about the cat. But, thankfully, there is a lot of information about this mis-treatment and there are many vets that will not do this proceedure any longer.

If your furniture is that important to you, don't get a cat. If you do get a cat, provide alternate places where your cat can scratch and keep it claws trimmed. If you cannot handle the responsability of either one of these alternatives, then there is a proceedure that is much less painful that severes the tendon that causes the claws to move in and out.


We seem to do a lot of inhume things when we don't know better. China thought is was OK to bind the feet of women. Well, it's not ok. And people need to stop declawing their cats.

But how is that more inhumane than spaying and neutering?

yah-

Sera was my brothers cat- and he was declawed because my bro and his ex-wfe lived in an apt that required it. I had one cat who was totally declawed for the same reason-

On the fip side- Tumbles, my newest baby, has all his claws- and he has caused some havoc but not much. I would never do that to him- or another cat, and my cats are all indoors.

They are also both neutered-

About as cruel as the surgery that makes it so a dog can't bark!

Plus humans "spay and neuter" themselves too, for equally important reasons. I don't think it's inhumane, even if it involves major surgery, because it's for a genuinely good purpose. <----- spaying and neutering, I mean, not de-clawing.

A dog that can't bark will have some serious socialization issues. An indoor cat's claws do little for it. So the only argument I've seen comes back to the "cruel" surgery which I still haven't figured how it's worse than cutting its nuts off.

For the record, I'm not advocating that everyone should get their cats declawed. I just don't follow the activism against it when there's so much accepted activism for fixing.

I don't agree with Conley in this case- I think that any surgery is a risk to a pet. Just like humans they can react badly to anesthesia- there can be infections, complications and they can die- just like we can, even from minor surgeries.

I would not personally declaw my cats anymore- because I do not find it necessary- but I do not think it worse than neutering-

I don't think I'm being clear am I? LOL- bamboozled sort of day! Sorry!

I do think cutting a dogs vocal cords so it can't bark IS cruel-

You must not be, because it sounds like you're........agreeing with me! :eek:

For males, neutring is very minor surgery. It could easily be done at home without anathesia. You basically just name a small slit in the sac, squeez out the little marble-sized thingie inside and it heals on its own. Easy as pie and not at all disruptive to the cat - but it sure makes him a nicer boy.

Spaying is major surgery and really doesn't need to be done if a cat is indoors. However, your cat will have a mensus about 2x a year and all of the local boys will want to visit her. Having litters will shorten a cat's life plus the cat population does not need to be increased, therefore, spaying and neutering is for the good of cats as a whole species.

I could probably neuter men too if they wanted it. Can't be MUCH more difficult. ;)

:cringe: :eek: :eek: :cringe:

ouch.....

GD, one thing I think you're missing is that sometimes indoor cats can suddenly become outdoor cats through someone's negligence. Say the dishwasher repairman shows up at the apartment, cat spooks around a stranger and bolts.

No claws? Suddenly outdoors? Bad news

Oh, don't be so surprised. :D

Hey don't get me wrong... the cat may have clawed the couch but we did not get her declawed. In fact I still had the couch until recently and the scratches were like little reminders of our cat.....

I had two cats declawed, and I will NEVER do it again. The vet made it sound like it was no big deal, but my poor kitties paws bled for days and I felt like an absolute **** for doing it. Never again. I hate getting them fixed, but it is necessary, for my sanity and theirs. The poor things yowl and pee all over the place if you don't, and our cats are indoor only, so fixed they get. Samwise started growling in his sleep last spring and I knew it was time, but I still felt terrible when I took him in. I felt even worse when he had to wear that stupid collar-thingy, at least until I realised the little weirdo actually liked it.:rolleyes:

My kitty has an alternate scratching place...it's called the dog:)

Both my cats are declawed (front). Boris did not appear the slightest bit concerned after his surgery. He didn't even have bandages on when I picked him up. He made one attempt to climb the couch, realized it didn't work any more, and jumped. Contrast that to the time I had to have his chin shaved (under anesthetic) for his kitty acne or the recent tooth extraction, where he was clearly miserable.

Now, in contrast, Sasha's didn't go as smoothly. Different vet, different manner of procedure, markedly different impact on cat immediately post-op.

In the future? I don't want to declaw an older cat and I made sure the people I got Boris and Sasha from didn't mind declawing. (I didn't want someone to regret having given me their cat.) Also, I left back claws in case of emergency tree climbing. And anyone who thinks Boris can't defend himself with back claws is welcome to examine the ginormous keloid scar on my right forearm.

I actually would prefer not to have a kitten ever again, so I'd prefer to adopt an already declawed cat. I would also be willing to try those things you glue on their claws. I did try for some time to train B and S not to scratch things. B scratched everything. Constantly. S is a great post user, but was also a climber because her withered back leg made it hard for her to jump. (Her leg has since strengthened and, while she can't hit the top of the fridge from a complete standstill, she jumps just fine now.) I understand why people are against declawing and it's no longer my first choice. But it does remain a choice.

Then again, there's already a special circle of hell for me because I plan to have any future male children circumcised. Stoke the fires!

Come on down- we're having BBQ chicken!

My first set of cats were declawed. I thought it was the thing to do. I'm just glad I know better now what happens and what the alternatives are.

I see these two more alike that different. I mean Basenjis don't bark and socialize allright - I guess (I'm not really a dog person). And if they're a house pet, what do they need to bark about anyway? Seems about the same annoyance level as clawed furniture - possibly a greater annoyance factor for the neighbors. Sure a house cat, doesn't need to be clawing anything.

But, I'd pass on either procedure as they both seem unneccessary to me.

Sammy drives me nuts when he rips at the rug, but he so obviously loves doing it I can't get too upset. It's just stuff- cats are living beings, and so much more important. I learned that when we had the fire nearby- the only thing I was concerned about were our animals. Same with Tori- she was worried about her kitty, and not all her 'stuff'. Good kid.:)

I just saw those for the first time last week at Petsmart and couldn’t believe what I was seeing! Does anyone actually use those? I laughed all day long at the mental image of my cat clicking along on the linoleum with bright blue fake nails. It made me giggle to the point of snorting! :D Of course, that ended when I started thinking about what the process of applying them would entail. Short of a kitty proof chain mail suit, that wouldn’t work at all.



Must..... not..... reeee... plyyyyyy..........

:( Sorry to hear that

(technically that one's my husband's call, but I've got no problem going along with it. Circle of hell for two please! Oooh! Buffalo wings!)

Yes, but basenjis don't have their vocal chords cut. They make plenty of sounds, just not "barks".

Hey not to get off topic (but since Prudence brought it up) I had my son circumcised and I do not regret it. So Prudence, I will buy you the first round of beers in hell. (but you have to share the wings with me!!)

W00T! Beer in hell!

Hey... What's a little genital mutilation among family?

Will you also be nipping off the breast buds of any female children? That breast cancer is such a nasty disease. Better to go ahead and do that rather than risk having to deal with a possible case of cancer years later.

Yes, many cats have no problem with this. Yes, by all outward appearances, it is a less major surgery than the declawing. But I can't possibly believe that removing a creature's testicles is ok and simultaneously believe that removing their claws is not ok.

If you want to discuss the pros and cons of whether each surgery is good or bad for the cat, that's another thing. But to say that it's "inhumane" to do one surgery but the other is "humane" doesn't make sense. They're both surgeries.

As for my stance, I personally wouldn't own a cat, period, so it's hard for me to understand a decision regarding altering an animal so it wouldn't destroy my property. I'd get a dog fixed because I do not want more dogs put to death in shelters.
A Jewish person more sensitive than myself might be offended by this. I'm not (I know you meant nothing by it), but I wanted to mention it. :) You might not want to talk about it being a damnable offense in mixed company. My kids are getting a traditional circumcision. Again, no hurt feelings, just a heads up :)

I chose to NOT have my sons circumcised- if they want it done they can get it done themselves!

*You must spread some Mojo around before giving it to Nephythys again.*

I choose not to have my children baptized or christened or given communion or whatever else other religions do - if they want it doen they can get it done themselves!

awww, I so rarely see those sort of posts LOL ;)

Heh- it wasn't a religious issue for me. I had an appt for Davis- and I was agonizing over it. I admit it was a verse in the Bible that convinced me that I did not HAVE to follow through- so I didn't, then with the other two boys it was an easier decision.

What I felt was societal pressure- and as a teen mom it was even harder with pressure from the medical people I dealt with. In my family I have examples of this issue to go on as well- my dad was born in Denmark and was not circumcised until his family came to the US when he was 8. His parents felt it was the thing to do- at EIGHT! Yikes- and he has always regretted their choice. My brother is not circumcised and it never caused him any issues- so I felt ok with my choice.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people making this choice. Free country, freedom of religion, etc. I also don't believe it affects anything either way, and I don't judge others on this.

For me it is a personal religious thing and it's one of the few traditions I know I'll stick with. I can't imagine making a child do it at 8 years old! :eek: No, it must be when the kid is only 8 days old and won't even remember it.

I see it as a connection with my cultural past.

Yes, I felt enormous pressure at the hospital to have it done "so he'll look like his dad" WTF??? Did they check daddy out? Will baby need to check daddy out to be okay as a man? Sheesh. We decided to not cut our babe. You will not believe (you who do not yet have kids) how many family members think this sort of thing is their business. :mad:

As long as they don't actually DO it themselves. Did you happen to see the most recent episode of the TV show House? All I can say is "OWWWWWWWIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE"!

Yeah, there's just TONS of blood letting with baptism. Scars them for life, I tell ya!

I think we should all only hold up our cultural traditions that involve mutilation for our children. All of the others can fall by the wayside. ;)


As far as surgery on animals go:

Both dogs and cats can be distuptive to one's personal property. Scoundrel has many traditional "dog" traits in that he likes to chew. Cats don't usually exhibit that type of behaviour, but he does. Training for both dogs and cats will only do so much. I'm not going to remove Scoundrel's teeth or those of a puppy because he is chewing. If you can't handle animal behavious, don't own a pet.

Yeah, I had my ear mutilated. It was a horror, but ya know ... I just kinda like the way it looks, so I did it. Hole put right through. Damn. And it hurt.

Wus.

Er? I guess I'm a bit befuddled. I was having a moment of wildly tangential thinking the other night (surprise!) and the talk about performing medical procedures to cats naturally (in my mind) led to thinking about performing medical procedures on babies and actual experiences of people telling me that I'll go to hell for mutilating my currently non-existent children if I have them circumcised. Which surprised me, because I know that people in general have different feelings about the topic, but I had thought that most Christian denominations were right there with "our Jewish brethren" on the circumcision thing (less ceremony), but something happened when I was away at college and didn't go to church and then I came back and poof! It's the worst sin ever! When did this happen? So it was meant as a snarky comment toward some people I've encountered who seem to have forgotten that Jesus was Jewish and want to pretend that their faith sprang fully formed from the mists of time and whatnot.

Anyway, my understanding of the whole "covenant" issue was that it originally involved a "prick" (excuse me!) as in just a little touch of blood-letting there to sanctify the child, back when people were all into pouring blood (sacrificial lambs, chickens, what-have-ya) for to show homage to the all-mighty. Not a scalpel-induced "trimming" as it were. Which is what we've got going for the kiddies now. So why I chose no on the thang. I consider myself very spiritual, but picky when it comes to my rituals.

I would just like to take this moment to state, for the record, that I am aware of the many forms of punctuation available to me. Furthermore, with a few exceptions (en-dash v. em-dash) I generally feel rather comfortable using punctuation. In fact, I have a favorite form of punctuation: the semi-colon. ; ; ; Isn't it beautiful? Like a comma and a colon, all rolled up into one.

I shall now depart to practice using punctuation in furtherance of my quest to utterly disrail threads everywhere.

It's funny the circumcision thing came up. I'm not sure whether I'd have my male children circumsized or not. I keep thinking about it, but there seem to be good arguments on both sides.

I'm guessing my bf will probably have pretty black and white ideas on the topic (as he does on most topics) so I guess we'd do whatever he wanted. Hey, he's the guy, he's in a better position to decide a "guy" thing like that anyway. Better HE decides it's okay to cut than me, I have no "attachment" to the topic ;)

General advice for der womenfolk: Let the father of the child decide what's to be done with your boy's dick.


Also, LB, as I have studied the Bible on this issue - - it was always removal of the foreskin that was the jewish covenant with God. A small prick of bloodletting upon the prick was, to my knowledge, never sufficient for the purpose.



Let's face it folks, those of us who are cut have this special deal with God. We get 40% off in exchange for that 1% off. If you don't want in on the deal, that's your choice.

But, trust me, let the father choose.

if the father gives a rat ass- sure....if they are gone and don't care and don't even see the kid because he's a useless jackass- I don't think I would bother-

And I did! I didn't think it involved "removal" but yeah, since I don't have one (a lovely little shrimp), I deferred to an owner on this issue. In spite of enormous pressure my ex just *couldn't* do it to his little offspring guy. And he was pretty sure, before said little guy was born, that he wanted "similarity." I know he wonders if he made the right choice, as do I from time to time, but it's [not] done, now. Maybe that "pricking" I read about is for adults who decide to embrace Judaism?

*stay calm, sam you can do this*

Barring medical necessity, why not let the child decide when he's of the age to?

Medical authorities, the AMA no less, say there is no medical reason for this procedure on a newborn.

Why is it right and proper to operate on a boy's genitals with the parent's consent, but not a girl child? How many of you are ready to argue for female genital modification on a newborn?

*hold on, sam*

You do realize the surgery is done without anesthetic? Many mothers report how "quiet" their sons are after the procedure without realizing their son is in shock. Without getting too graphic, these body parts infolved are fused together much like the fingernail joins the flesh underneath. They can't be cut apart, they must be pulled apart, or ripped if you prefer. And without anesthetic, remember.

*easy... back off a little bit*

I don't understand how thinking people will allow their newborn sons to be treated in this manner. I don't know what to say. I guess I'm thankful I've seen most of your pictures and I know for a fact most of you don't have bones in your noses.

*FOUL! alright, that was outta line apologize now*

I'm sorry. That was a cheap shot. But I don't get it. Somebody please explain to me why this is right. Please?

The whole circumcision thing surprised me when it happened. I delivered a boy (after I was told I was having a girl) and I didn't even think of it till my mom mentioned "are you getting him circumcised?" I sat back in shock and thought holy crap, I didn't even *think* about that. So we talked it over and after a rather awful story told to me by my boyfriend and some other things we decided yes, we would get it done. I did not do it for religious reasons though. I just understand why Prudence said what she said because people will make awful comments to you about it. (I just wanted to tell her hey I support you even if other peole don't.)

I did not want to offend anyone else either by buying drinks for Prudence in hell. (hey I am going there anyway for the chicken comments right?) but then it occured to me.... Maybe the circumcision is what has now caused my son to love all things Jewish. (no I am not kiddingnor am I trying to make fun of anything or anybody...) He totally loves menorahs,the prayers,wants to celebrate all the holidays, he tries to repeat all the Hebrew phrases on his baby einstein dvd. I mean I come into the den and he says "Shalom mommy. Can I learn Hebrew so you will get me a Menorah?"

And hey does anyone watch Pen and Teller Bulls**t? They showed a guy who MADE his foreskin come back. (after a LOT of tugging of course.) Just thought I would throw that out there. It was pretty weird.

some men consider, as Scrooge does, that it is mutilation. Some men HAVE had surgery done to "repair" the damage- yes

I totally feel that my sons can make the decision when and if they want to- there has never been a medical problem, concern, or anything else that would convince me I was wrong to do it this way. In fact, just like my brother, my oldest seems to appreciate it.

No, the guy didn't have surgery.... he FORCED the skin to move forward. That is why it was weird. He showed how he did it too.

So there's no such thing as an inhumane surgery? Lobotomy ethically equivalent to apendectomy?

way to bring us back to the original topic......

What a party pooper he is!

I'm just hanging my head in grammatical shame now. Who cares about the topic!

Can my massive run-on sentence of doom and I join you? I brought some semi-colons. And I think there are still some wings left.

I just..........well.....I never seem to need a semi-colon.....In real life I don't speak...like Ross Geller..............really:)

Uhmm, actually- no wings. Sorry. (*burp*)

Oh all right - I resent my parents for having me circumsized without my consent. It was inhumane, I want my Willy back!

Free Willy!

My husband frequently says that I keep his penis in my purse. I'm not precisely sure what that means, although I'm pretty sure I have an idea.

If you're insinuating that circumcision scars a child for life, you are wrong. Anything that happens 8 days after a child is born will not be remembered. Ask any man who had one.

To me, it's the same as any religious ritual, blood or not.

I'm sure there are some men who grow up and eventually feel slighted that their flap of skin was removed. There are plenty of other people who grow up feeling slighted because they were raised with a certain religion or culture or whatever. Or maybe their parents never took them to Disneyland, or maybe they couldn't eat pork, or whatever. We all have baggage.

I've seen babies with pierced ears. Blood and pain so the baby can look good?
If you are insinuating that I want other cultural traditions to fall by the wayside, you are wrong again.

My point exactly. I would never make my pet have a surgery just to convenience me. I only mention the difference in my mind between dogs and cats because I can deal with the damage a dog will inflict. If the dog has damaging problems, I'd train it. (I owned three dogs in my youth.) Cats are far less trainable. I say the same thing to all possible pet owners - if you can't handle animal behaviors, don't own a pet.
The claim that people make regarding the inhumanity of the claw surgery is that it is overly painful. Any surgery is very painful.
Because it COULD scar you for life if you have it at an older age. I don't have a dick but lordy, I think that one should do it before the age of awareness.
Very few people today would claim otherwise.
You are working on misinformation about the differences between "female modification" and the Jewish Bris. The female procedure, done by some Islamic cultures, removes the freakin' pleasure centers. The Bris removes a flap of skin unnecessary for sexual pleasure.
Again, untrue. I've witnessed many a Bris. The rabbi (who also always a certified MD) uses a scalpel. No pulling or ripping involved. The exterior flap is removed. And the baby is given a small amount of wine on a cloth to suck on.

You can't say whatever you want just because you apologize a line later. :rolleyes:

I'd really rather people didn't test me by trying to say that me and my entire culture are brutal neanderthals. This coming from someone who is from an even smaller minority group that's discriminated against, namely being gay, is incredible to me.

Scrooge, I love ya, please don't insult me.

I try not to apply standards of "humane" to animals. They're animals and as much as I like having pets, they're still simply possessions and sometimes things are done for convenience that would never be done to another human for any reason.

That said, I would not base the argument against declawing on the amount of pain felt by the pet but rather on the fact that, as has been metioned, sometimes indoor-only cats find themselves in the outside world. A declawed cat is essentially a defenseless cat and I personally wouldn't view the benefit of less household damage to outweigh the risk of a cat unable to defend itself. But that is a personal calculus and while I wouldn't agree with someone who decided differently I figure it is a personal choice.

My decision regarding spay and neutering also has little to do with what will happen with a cat properly contained but rather with a cat that suddenly isn't. I neither want my cat impregnated nor other feral cats impregnated. If there were a readily available relatively cheap chemical sterilization option I would probably use it over surgery.

Finally, I have no issues with the state of my penis. In fact, I liked it so much I had it done twice. If I were to descend into the hell that would be parenthood I would not circumcise my children, regardless of gender. Not because I'm opposed but because I don't see any positive reason for me to have it done.

So is beating my dog/cat, which causes pain the same as surgery?

Is allowing my dog/cat to go through the pain of childbirth inhumane?

Perhaps humane/inhumane is something more than just surgery/pain?

Some surgery is more painful than others. Nutering is relatively painless for a male cat while spaying is major surgery - but well worth it for several reasons.

I may be wrong because you say I'm wrong, but, according to several medical studies I've found, I an actually correct. Here's a nice neat synopsis of several articles on the subject. There are easily more - they are everywhere ion the internet.

Personally, I would err on the side of caution. If there is ANY chance that there might be trauma, I would not do it. Religious culture or not. I come from a background where "spare the rod and spoil the child" was the proper way to raise children. Sometimes religion and tradition is just plain wrong.

From the link Not Afraid provided, I find this claim interesting:

Obviously I've never had a woman say "wow, you're circumcised penis is much less pleasant than the uncircumcised ones I've experienced." But perhaps they were just protecting my feelings.

So, those who have experienced both, do you find one better than the other?

I also like the other cite that says the only reason I'm not upset about being circumscised is that I don't understand what it is and have repressed my anger.

Yeah, there are a lot of "overreactive" things mentioned in the link I cited. There are many others out there but, personally, I don't have the time today to read about something that will never effect me. I chose an article that collected information from various studies in an atempt to get at least an overview.

And, believe it or not, I've never "had" an uncircumcised penis.

All I can say is that it's a good thing we had a girl, because Eric and I would have gone a few rounds over this one. He is anti- circumsion, even though he had one, and I am pro, so long as some some of anesthetic is used.

I don't see the problem with circumcision, either for or against....

I certainly don't hold any ill will towards the decision made by my parents on the subject.

There are many arguments that say un-circumcised has a lot of maintenance to prevent crud buildup in the area, but that shouldn't be a problem to those that have good hygiene practises.

I am not going to divulge the current state of my foreskin, as it really holds no bearing on the discussion.

I really doubt that leaving a child uncut, or removing the extra fold of skin, will hold any long lasting effects on the child for any amount of time. The child will probably grow up thinking that his member is exactly as it should be, unless undue stress is placed on the situation.

No stress has ever been placed on the status of my member as I grew up, so I figured that my member was always just as it should have been, and as I said earlier, hold no ill will towards my parents on the decision made in my case....now on other things....:evil:

And as far as the argument about the sexual satisfaction, doubt that has anything to do with the status of the foreskin.....probably more to do with their skillz with their member.

I tried reading the site you linked to NA, but I found most of it to be reactionary and misinformed.

The studies they mention have very small test groups. A "survey of 35" or a voluntary survey which only 139 women actually responded to (from here which was referenced on the page NA linked to) is not compelling.

I also tried to read the "Jewish Circumcision" section of this site and thought it was interesting how all religious people pick and choose which part of the old text they want to follow. I do the same thing, as there is plenty in the Torah that I don't believe in, but to claim in the same breath that "Circumcision is not universal among Jews" and "A male born of a Jewish mother is a Jew, whether he is circumcised or not" is kind of silly. Obviously, the concept of being a "Jew" is up for debate, and stating "facts" like these is odd.

There are plenty of sites out there pro and con, and plenty of studies, pro and con. For instance, here's one that says that circumcision may reduce HIV risk by 70% (not conclusive, other studies underway). There are plenty of studies cited by various "academies" or "family" or "parent" groups for both sides. Some say it actually prevent penile cancer, some say it prevents cervical cancer in women, some say that it really doesn't do either, and from what I've read today it becomes obvious that this has more to do with hygeine. In the end it seems to me that all of it is a wash (get it, wash?) and that it helps/hinders both ways enough that the scientific side doesn't come into play.

I do not believe that it causes more harm than not getting it done, if it's done correctly.

And I further contend, IMHO, that any man who feels like he's missing something because he was circumcised at 8 days probably has the same self-esteem issues as a small breasted woman who gets silicone shoved under her skin. Grass is always greener.

A think an important distinction is being missed. A traditional Jewish circumcision performed by a mohel at a bris is NOT the same procedure as a medical cicrumcision performed at a hospital.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah

OMG, we just watched that episode last night. I had to pause Tivo for a while to recover from the shock of it. I was EXTREMELY uncomfortable for quite a while afterwards.

For those who do not watch House (and you should - it's a great show), here is what happened (this is NOT for the squemish - hence the spoiler tags):


As far as the comparison between declawing and spay/neuter: while any of the procedures are surgery, spaying or neutering is highly beneficial to the cat population at large (by decreasing the SEVERE cat overpopulation issue), whereas declawing is simply for the convenience of the owner.

Let us not forget that some cultures circumsize the girls!
____________________________________________

I was a mohel for a while. It didn't pay well, but the tips were good!

Correct. And, I think my feelings about that follow in the same lines as male circumcision. Why. Or, why are you still doing it?

Actually, no I'm not.

As to my ill advised rant of yesterday, I wan't even talking about a Bris. I was talking about the radical circumcisions performed in hospitals. Reading back, I understand that I have to take a lot of backlash about that, because I realize I was not NEARLY as specific as I thought I was being.

And you're right. The Bris has almost none of the characteristics of the surgery I'm talking about. I don't doubt what you've seen, nor do I doubt your ability to comment on that authoritatively. Please afford me that same courtesy.

I'm willing to bet that you have NOT seen a radical hospital circumcision performed. A radical circ is so different from a Bris as to make it difficult to even compare the two. It would be somewhat akin to comparing cutting your fingernail to having your fingernail pulled out by the root. GD has a post upthread making note of the difference in the 2 procedures.

A Bris involves removing the tip end of the prepuce that extends past the end of the glans. The glans is uninjuired in this procedure if done correctly. Yes, there is damage to the body, but not on a scale even approaching the damage caused by a radical circ. A radical circ involves slicing the foreskin lengthwise and tearing it away from the surface of the glans, literally skinning the glans alive.

Radical circumcision as performed in hospitals is very similar to female genital modification. 75% of the erogenous tissue of the penis is removed during a radical circumcision. The same is not true of a Bris.

CP, I want to thank you for addressing this in thread. It's been brought to my attention how my post was received and I appreciate the opportunity to set this right. Editting the original post seemed dishonest, so I'm happy to clear up any misunderstanding this way. I hope this post has done that.

Of ourse, the cat population at large got to that state (over population; bred traits that make bearing litters a health risk) due to human actions.

I thought this thread was about cats? It seems to have gone from *****'s to Cocks...lol

No problem. I just didn't want the confusion to continue.

Missed this before:
You misunderstand my point. My contention is with those that say that one surgery is different from another when it comes to being humane/inhumane, and I take issue with that. I'm not saying that surgery is inhumane - in fact, I said above that I support spaying and neutering.

Simply put:
Bad argument: "Declawing is inhumane because you are putting a creature through pain."
Good argument: "Declawing is inhumane because you are putting a creature through pain only to benefit YOU."

Well, you know....there's only so much you can say about cats.


NOT! (I could talk pets all day long - and in my job, I do!)