Circumcision?

[The Circumcised Woman]

I've never come across circumcision before in the game, but I was wondering if it was possible for some tribes to practice circumcision (of either one sex or both sexes).

Circumcision was originally brought around because it was hygenic for people in desert environments to be circumcised. I'm not saying the tribes would know it's hygenic, but I was wondering if it was too un-Zalanthy

[Angela Christine]

Sure, why not?  Historically there have been cultures into genital mutilation for simple hygene, for religious reasons to make a body ritually clean, for esthetic reasons, as a right of passage, as a trial of courage, to increase sexual pleasure, to decrease sexual pleasure, to decrease promiscuity,  as punishment, to discourage masturbation, to appease the gods, to get ingredients for magickal potions, etc.  It isn't always cutting things off either.  I forget the name but there's this one african group that would insert small pebbles under the skin of the penis (not the foreskin, just regular skin) to increase the stimulation fo the female partner.  He's ribbed for your pleasure!  A prince albert or other peircings may be added for similar reasons.

I don't think there are any specific documented guidelines about which groups do or do not cut things off or stick things in thier genitals, but you can certainly come from a virtual tribe or family that practices genital mutilation or that finds genital mutilation horrifying.  Go nuts.

AC

[Sandferret]

I will not argue the male circumcision as I am aware that the majority of the players here are likely to be all for it. It is not done here, except for religious reasons.

The female circumcision is another thing completely. I am trying hard not to call it mutilation, but that is what it is. With the equality of the sexes on Zalanthas, it is hard for me to see the women allowing this. Perhaps there is a tribe or tribes where women are property, I cannot know that. I truly hope not, but there could be.

Ferret

P.S. I expect it could be used as a cruel and unusual punishment when death is too merciful. *shudder*

[mansa]

Zalanthas's humans aren't Earth's humans.

[Anarchy]

The female circumcision is another thing completely. I am trying hard not to call it mutilation, but that is what it is. With the equality of the sexes on Zalanthas, it is hard for me to see the women allowing this. Perhaps there is a tribe or tribes where women are property, I cannot know that. I truly hope not, but there could be.

It is mutilation, and very painful, very pointless. But thats a whole new ball park and i wont share my views and what i'd like to do to the people who do this to 13 year old girls,  on that subject.

Male circumcision...Mmm, to be honest i cant really comment on this one,
to start with, cutting the foreskin off would be dangrous, am im sure it would get infected. Also wouldn't a foreskin be useful in the desert? All that sand and salt touching an exposed and unprotected penis head would be very painful for awhile, then would kill all the nerves, hey, now that would explain why sex goes on for so long! Lets face it, male circumcision came about because someone thought masturbation was a sin and sex was the devils vice....Zalanthas just doesn't have that view.

In my mind in a desert world men would value their foreskin like they value a private oasis filled with hundred and hundreds of naked supermodels.


One thing i have noticed, almost everyone here has their eyes on the gentials. Have you talked about all other topics? Or are you just stuck in a rut and cannot stop talking about the male penis on Zalanthas, sex and sexuallity?

One rule i took when i first started playing was that everything goes on Zalanthas, even sexual related things.

If a Lightning Elementalists wanted to start up a Bondage and Punishment establishment, im pretty sure no one would bat an eyelid.

[jmordetsky]

I agree that it would not exist. For male it's a relgious institution which doesn't exist on Zalanthas.

From what I understand about it's female counterpart, which is admitedly very little, it's purpose is deny a female of sexual pleasure yea? And again in my oppinion, this practice would be forced upon a women and only stem from a male dominated society that wouldn't exist on Zalanthas.

Men on Zalanthas have not evolved with any physical prowess over women, and therefore most of the oppressive practices in desert would not be based on sex.

Though you could probably create the practice around a tribal belief if you were so inclined.....I can't see why you'd want to...

[Bestatte]

Anarchy, where did you get the notion that circumcision started because of some kind of "sin factor?" In the Jewish tradition, ritual circumcision is performed as an identity measure. Apparently, there's some kind of historical basis to this, that gentiles were -not- circumsized, and so Jewish males were to identify them as "not gentiles." It had nothing to do with sex being sinful. I wouldn't know about other religions, but I'm not personally aware of any that even have such traditions or "rules" regarding circumcision. I would venture to guess that there were hygeine issues as well...

Consider your example of all that sand and grit and dirt - if a male has a foreskin, it's gonna all get STUCK in there, festering, with little water available to wash it off. A single grain of sand, and BOOM - one day your pecker just falls off because you couldn't manage to get it out of the space between the foreskin and the penis. Without a foreskin, just a nice easy wipe and it's all clean and tidy again.

Note: I didn't spellcheck and have no idea if I'm even spelling it right.

[Angela Christine]

I suppose it would have been more diplomatic to call it genital alteration rather than mutilation, but I specifically avoided the term circumscision because that word has a lot of baggage.

Male alterations can include: the removal all or part of the foreskin, cutting into the foreskin without removing it, cutting burning or tattooing marks into the shaft, peircing the skin of the shaft, the foreskin or the ball sack, inserting pebbles, rings, sticks or other objects under the skin, the removal of one or both testicals with or without removing the ball sack, crushing the testicals without damaging the ball sack, removing some portion of the penis.  If the testicals are removed but the penis is left intact, as in a castradi or unik, then there is still some possiblility of sexual function but not procreation.  If the penis is removed but the testicals are left intact then the male is still fertile and will have sexual urges, but will have difficulty working up to orgasm.  Western male circumscision is usually foreskin removal performed by a doctor in a hospital or as part of a religious ceremony by a specially trained religious worker, and is performed within days of birth.  But that is certainly not the only way to go.  Many cultures have performed foreskin removal or alteration at puberty or other ages as a right of passage.  If male circumscision was traditionally performed on 12 year olds rather than infants, then it might be seen quite differently in the west.


Female genital alteration has a similar range of practices.  The equivilent process to male circumscision would be removal of the clitoral hood.  Does anyone do just this?  I dunno, maybe.  Removing the clitoris would be equivilent to cutting off the head of the penis, not just removing the foreskin.  

You can remove the outer lips, inner lips, clitoral hood, clitoris, or any combination.  Removing the outer lips would likely be less traumatic and less damaging than removing the foreskin, and would have similar hygene benefits.  Tattooing and scarification work as well here as on penises.  Piercings of the clitoris, clitoral hood, inner or outer lips are possible.  Insterting pebbles or other objects under the skin is possible, but I haven't heard of any culture that does this.  Then you have the various ways of attempting to seal up the entrance to the vagina, temporarily or permanently.  Like male alterations, these can be performed on infants, children, adolecents, or adults.

On the whole, female genital mutilation isn't inherently worse than male genital mutilation, it's just more shocking if you aren't used to the idea.  

There are women today who pay someone to pierce their clitoris, and that's got to hurt.  How do you even sit still for something like that?  :shudder:  If there is one place on my body that I don't need an earring, that would be it.  It is considered ok because it is being done to adult women with their consent.  Would it be ok to do it automatically to all girl babies?  Yes, if your culture said that it was the thing to do.  People do freaky things for culture.

AC

[Angela Christine]

I agree that it would not exist. For male it's a relgious institution which doesn't exist on Zalanthas.

There are cultures that discovered circumsicion quite independantly of the Judao-Christian religions, so I don't think you can assume that no cultures on Zalanthas thought of it.

On legend of discovery has a young man going naked into the river to bath.  On his way out he accidentally brushed against a sharp blade of river grass that did a quick and neat job of removing his foreskin.  His people found the result so beautiful that the rest of them did it too.  The story sounds pretty unlikely to me, but that was the explanation one group had for their circumcision practices.  Not religious at all, more esthetic.  Naturally since the are taught to believe that a circumsized penis is beautiful, and a regular penis is ugly, the women are more likely to choose circumsized men and not go off with men from other villages.  


Bestatte, have you had a good look at an uncircumsized penis?  The foreskin isn't some immobile forcefield.  In an adult male it is usually a fairly loose protective covering, that serves to protect the sensitive head of the penis from grit and things.  The hygine issue isn't that sand can get up there and become impossible to remove, any more than sand gets up under your eyelid or clitoral hood and is impossible to remove.  The foreskin should be able to be easily pulled back exposing the head of the penis and the underside of the foreskin for easy cleaning.  The hygene issue is that if you don't bother to pull back he foreskin for cleaning, or if you were taught to never touch your penis for any reason whatsoever, organic material sometimes called "smega" can build up and smell bad.  Smega is a white or yellowish material sometimes described as being cheesy or like custard, with a noticable smell.  Females usually produce a similar material that can build up between the lips of vagina if they don't clean themselves.  It is reported to be easier to clean under the foreskin than between the lips of the vagina, because there are fewer folds, but I haven't had the opportunity to try this out myself.  Just my luck to not be born a hermaphadite. Mmmm, hermaphadites.  

Anyway, the hygene thing is really just a red herring.  A penis is not difficult to clean if you are willing to touch it.  Without the foreskin the penis is slightly easier to clean, but the glans drys out and becomes less sensitive.  Immagine if you did not have the clitoral hood protecting your clit, so that it was exposed to air and abrassion by clothes 24/7.  Sure, sand wouldn't stick to it and it would be slightly easier to clean, but would it really be a big improvement?

The foreskin is no more likely to make your penis fall off than an eyelid is to make your eyeball fall out.  Also, I do not believe the sound a pecker makes when it falls off is BOOM.  


AC

[jmordetsky]

I wish I hadn't joined this one...

Run! They are comming for your C&Bs!

[sarahjc]

Ac.. I think you missed your calling..Clearly A nurse practitioner  or someone who works in a piercing shop.. not sure..

[Ix Machina]

Yeah in the Judaic religion it wasn't about sex being a sin at all, but it was an offering to god, I believe, that was to mark one as a follower of the Judaic god. It is actually a symbolic sacrifice that doesn't have to do with sin.

In a nutshell, god goes to Abraham (I think it was him) "Prove your faith and devotion to me by sacrificing your son." Abraham was understandably upset, and I believe Abraham pleaded to sacrifice a sheep instead, but was still told to sacrifice the child. Long story short, Abraham brings child to altar and sacrifices son to prove faith to god. God replaces the son with a sheep, and gives (now living) son back to Abraham less foreskin. God tells Abraham that it was removed to symbolize the sacrifice Abraham made, and that all followers should give this sacrifice henceforth as a symbolic gesture of their faith.

Or something... it's been a while.

Anyhow, while there wouldn't be judeo-christian overtones, I'm sure ritualism and spiritualism might offer some pseudo-religious or proto-religious overtones that require such an act occur, especially within more insular tribes.

[Anonymous]

Ix Machina - Abraham never actually sacrificed his son.  He was about to and God sent a ram.
http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?passage=GEN+22&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on
Verses 8-13

Anyways, back on topic, a lot of the early rules and laws found in Leviticus that people laugh at now were actually instituted because of their pragmatic value.  Laws against sexual immorality, bestiality, homosexuality, these were all put in place to help slow the spread of disease that might have otherwise torn the fledling nation apart.

An eye for an eye was a law calling for leniency as previously the cost of taking someone eye was death.  Instead this law called for punishments fitting the crime.

Not having garments made of different types of material helped keep them from having clothing that wouldn't last long.

So, I can see tribes/groups circumsizing themselves just for the health factor.  Besides, I don't imagine it would hurt much more than some scarring/ear piercings you see.

[Ix Machina]

Yeah, it's been a while.. but essentially, it was a symbolic sacrifice, but didn't have to do with sin.

I think that's the point I was trying to make.

But thanks. Torah study was never my strong point :p

[Lazloth]

More than you want to know here.