Post by Robin (admin) on Sept 11, 2016 17:24:11 GMT
rewritten html page
any ideas on how this could be clearer ? :
THE ORIGINS OF THE PRACTICE OF ROUTINE MALE CIRCUMCISION
or, for people who think problems from phimosis are a delusion
THE MEDICINE MAN HAD A DELUSION
SUMMARY
Experts in anthropology and more recently psychology have been unable to
establish the origin of the practice of routine male circumcision.
The anthropological and psychological theories on the origins of the practice,
discuss if this began as a manifestation of cultural requirements (e.g. hygiene,
initiation, fertility, tribal mark, sacrifice); or the expression of unconscious
tendencies (e.g. castration complex, menstruation envy, regression).
The modern anthropologist regards the origin of circumcision as an
unsolvable mystery.
Phimosis was last discussed by Ploss (1884) and Bryk (1931).
Ploss claimed phimosis was the origin of routine male circumcision, but his
basic argument and summary is "the foreskin covering the glans appears to
be an abnormal state of affairs".
Bryk thought phimosis was far too great a rarity to be considered as the
originating factor. However this was previous to any statistical studies. A
clear understanding of the statistics is important to this subject because at
present the reason anthropologists dismiss phimosis, is because they believe
it is a rarity.
All the available reports up until 2006 show statistics between 2.4% and 14%.
Most show that at least 8% of young men have problems of retraction in the
non-erect state. This figure does not include the frequency during erection or
for frenulum breve (there are no statistics). And, this figure is only relevant at
one time in life, it does not tell us how many men have problems with phimosis
during their entire lives (there are no statistics for adults).
What is most interesting though is, we are not discussing a modern scientific 8%
measured among a sample group of 1000s. The practice originated among the
hunting peoples. Hunting peoples lived in tribal groups of a size of around 30.
No modern scientist would dream of establishing statistics from a group of only
15 males, because in such a small sample group the statistics are known to
fluctuate erratically. There would have been times when no-one had a problem,
and times when phimosis was prolific.
The full effects of these conditions have only recently come to light, due to the
anonymity of internet where adult men have been able to record their experiences
openly for the first time.
There are a number of individual degrees and combinations of foreskin conditions,
each causing specific physical effects during erection. Some conditions occur at
specific times like the infant apparent phimosis. Problems occur often at the
beginning of puberty or during first love making. A secondary phimosis can develop
throughout manhood or in old age as the skin becomes less flexible. Therefore,
phimosis can easily occur simultaneously in 3 generations of the same family.
Some conditions are merely irritating others are painful, some typically result in
inflammations and disease, some cause problems by urination, others during
masturbation; some during penetration, others during intercourse and still others
for several days after intercourse.
We are considering a large variety of difficulties influencing various different
areas of health, sexual activity and obviously, enjoyment.
A man who had personal experience of the problems involved with phimosis has
motives for introducing the practice, which no anthropologist has ever discussed.
In pre-literate times it would not have been possible to start understanding and
classifying all these problems, the symptoms would have been totally mystifying,
but contrary to this confusion, for a people who required practical answers and
cut tough animal skin on a regular basis, the cure would have been simple and
obvious.
I suggest routine male circumcision was originally introduced - by men who had
personal experience of foreskin problems - as a practical and simple solution to,
and prevention of, a number of confusing and chaotic problems.
A further section examines the various reasons why and when the practice became
established as a cultural tradition.
If routine circumcision had initially been introduced for this most obvious reason
of eliminating difficult foreskins; it would underline the importance of an
alternative modern solution.
any ideas on how this could be clearer ? :
THE ORIGINS OF THE PRACTICE OF ROUTINE MALE CIRCUMCISION
or, for people who think problems from phimosis are a delusion
THE MEDICINE MAN HAD A DELUSION
SUMMARY
Experts in anthropology and more recently psychology have been unable to
establish the origin of the practice of routine male circumcision.
The anthropological and psychological theories on the origins of the practice,
discuss if this began as a manifestation of cultural requirements (e.g. hygiene,
initiation, fertility, tribal mark, sacrifice); or the expression of unconscious
tendencies (e.g. castration complex, menstruation envy, regression).
The modern anthropologist regards the origin of circumcision as an
unsolvable mystery.
Phimosis was last discussed by Ploss (1884) and Bryk (1931).
Ploss claimed phimosis was the origin of routine male circumcision, but his
basic argument and summary is "the foreskin covering the glans appears to
be an abnormal state of affairs".
Bryk thought phimosis was far too great a rarity to be considered as the
originating factor. However this was previous to any statistical studies. A
clear understanding of the statistics is important to this subject because at
present the reason anthropologists dismiss phimosis, is because they believe
it is a rarity.
All the available reports up until 2006 show statistics between 2.4% and 14%.
Most show that at least 8% of young men have problems of retraction in the
non-erect state. This figure does not include the frequency during erection or
for frenulum breve (there are no statistics). And, this figure is only relevant at
one time in life, it does not tell us how many men have problems with phimosis
during their entire lives (there are no statistics for adults).
What is most interesting though is, we are not discussing a modern scientific 8%
measured among a sample group of 1000s. The practice originated among the
hunting peoples. Hunting peoples lived in tribal groups of a size of around 30.
No modern scientist would dream of establishing statistics from a group of only
15 males, because in such a small sample group the statistics are known to
fluctuate erratically. There would have been times when no-one had a problem,
and times when phimosis was prolific.
The full effects of these conditions have only recently come to light, due to the
anonymity of internet where adult men have been able to record their experiences
openly for the first time.
There are a number of individual degrees and combinations of foreskin conditions,
each causing specific physical effects during erection. Some conditions occur at
specific times like the infant apparent phimosis. Problems occur often at the
beginning of puberty or during first love making. A secondary phimosis can develop
throughout manhood or in old age as the skin becomes less flexible. Therefore,
phimosis can easily occur simultaneously in 3 generations of the same family.
Some conditions are merely irritating others are painful, some typically result in
inflammations and disease, some cause problems by urination, others during
masturbation; some during penetration, others during intercourse and still others
for several days after intercourse.
We are considering a large variety of difficulties influencing various different
areas of health, sexual activity and obviously, enjoyment.
A man who had personal experience of the problems involved with phimosis has
motives for introducing the practice, which no anthropologist has ever discussed.
In pre-literate times it would not have been possible to start understanding and
classifying all these problems, the symptoms would have been totally mystifying,
but contrary to this confusion, for a people who required practical answers and
cut tough animal skin on a regular basis, the cure would have been simple and
obvious.
I suggest routine male circumcision was originally introduced - by men who had
personal experience of foreskin problems - as a practical and simple solution to,
and prevention of, a number of confusing and chaotic problems.
A further section examines the various reasons why and when the practice became
established as a cultural tradition.
If routine circumcision had initially been introduced for this most obvious reason
of eliminating difficult foreskins; it would underline the importance of an
alternative modern solution.