# About helping "neophytes"



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

This is a sort of stream-of-consciousness thread. It is not directed towards anyone though I was thinking about it because of some things that have happened recently. I was pondering today: What do we want to accomplish at this board? If our goal is to educate people then we should educate people. Getting upset and accusing others of being trolls or instigators (no matter how likely that may seem to one or more of us) is counter-productive to that goal. When someone comes to us for help there are several things that could be true about them.

1. They came here specifically to learn more with an open mind







In this case we need to teach them and usually no issues arise because everyone stays courteous.

2. They came here because they saw the title of the forum and want to know why on earth nobody would circumcise because it's normal to, right?







In this case we need to educate them gently. It's not easy to look beyond one's cultural expectations/traditions and see them for what they truly are.

3. They came here accidentally and try to convert us to being pro-circumcision







In this case we also need to educate gently. Nobody wants to listen to someone who puts her down. If we want people like this to listen to us then we need to treat them with respect and remember that circumcision is very very very ingrained in American society.

4. They came here intentionally for the sole purpose of riling us up and being a mean nasty troll







In this case we need to give the facts. Give links to others threads. Educate gently for the sake of everyone who lurks here. If someone comes here to rile up, then by accusing and putting them down and getting ourselves in trouble we give them what they wanted and potentially lose the opportunity to educate a lurker.

There are many different degrees of these four basic folks who visit here (other than the die-hard intactivists who are always here














) but these are the four that I have specifically noticed.

Number 1 is easy. We can tell almost immediately when someone falls in that catagory. Numbers 2 and 3 however can potentially look to some of us like a number 4. The thing about the number 4 is that we can never really know for certain if a person truly is a 4 or if he/she is just really attached to the cultural conditioning that makes circumcision seem like no big deal. Maybe he was circumcised or he/she circumcised a son or her husband is circumcised. Maybe he/she is convinced that America is so much advanced compared to those other countries that RIC couldn't possibly be bad. Maybe doctors are always right in this person's mind.

What I'm getting at is that the only person who knows for sure what catagory (or between which catagories) a new poster belongs in is the new poster him/herself. We can guess, but there's really no sure way to tell. One of the most important ways of telling whether someone is sincere or not (tone of voice) is not available via the internet. There is no real foolproof way to tell who is here to cause trouble unless the person admits it.

No time spent on a thread is truly wasted UNLESS we decide the person is a troll and start flame wars. Then the thread (usually full of really good info and links) is shut down and lurkers may never decide to de-lurk in fear that we might decide they are trolls too









So... what are your thoughts about this?

love and peace.


----------



## coloradoalice (Oct 12, 2005)

I think when a newbie posts with the whole "Why shouldn't I" question we should simply point them to the stickies and not answer any more questions until they come back and report they have read them all!!

I know, totally uninforceable, but it sure would save a lot of strife!!


----------



## paquerette (Oct 16, 2004)

I hear you, but I think that if people start dishing out the attitude and nastiness, the gloves come off







: (er, within the contraints of the UA...)


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

trmpetplaya







:







:









I have thought of this many times, when someone comes in I give them the benifit of the doubt until they give themselves away. I also think it is best if they do just ask for a specific thing that is all we should give them. It worries me about what a lurker might think should they come across a thread were everyone seems to be ganging up on a OP. I know how hard it is sometimes to stay quiet when everything inside is screeming tell them how wrong they are. But to get the message out there we must hold back sometimes.









I am thankfull to be part of such a supportive and caring community as this and I want everyone who comes thru to feel as welcome as I do.


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *coloradoalice*
I think when a newbie posts with the whole "Why shouldn't I" question we should simply point them to the stickies and not answer any more questions until they come back and report they have read them all!!

I know, totally uninforceable, but it sure would save a lot of strife!!

There have been discussions about this very way of handling new people at the vaccination board also. Maybe even having a *you must read this before posting* thread...

love and peace.


----------



## Yoshua (Jan 5, 2006)

good post, i nominate this for a sticky.

When I first came here I was pro-circ but wanting to know why people don't do it. I figured it was a choice but had no idea what the ideas backing it were.

I was accused of being a troll and almost flamed off the board because I worded my question wrong. Cornflower and Frank PM'ed me and kept me around.

I wouldn't have the knowledge I have today if I had left because of the flamers. And it was the people with the patience to educate me that got me to stay.

Remember, the next person you flame could have been the next Yoshua.

oh yeah, stroke that ego.








:


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

I could not agree more with the OP. I think that unless we just want to have a happy little preachin' to the choir place, if we want to win the hearts and minds of fence-sitters or pro-circers, we need to assume the best until shown otherwise. I think real trolls reveal themselves soon enough. We can't forget that, although to us it's as clear as day that circ is evil, many people who come here have an entire lifetime of cultural conditioning to overcome and not everyone is going to see the light immediately.

And you're absolutely right, don't forget the lurkers! SO many people read but never post - and our attitude does make a huge difference to our credibility.

As far as sending people to the stickies...I don't think that would really work. Everyone has her own questions and concerns and wants to feel personally addressed. If you don't want to answer the newbie question, then don't, or make up a saved post you can cut and paste. But I think it would come across as too patronizing to just tell people we don't have time for them until they read the stickies.

Even the attitude that some posters project may not necessarily be trollishness...again, we've got a lifetime of brainwashing and cultural conditioning to deal with here. Just as in the Vincent Bach vulnerability of men article, we're telling people that their partners' penises are not all they could be, or that their doctors are not telling them the truth, or that they've made a horrible mistake in circing previous children, or that their partners are jerks for insisting on circing. People get naturally defensive of those they know in person and aren't just going to believe some random people online unless we establish our credibility as nice, well-meaning, honest people.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*
we need to assume the best *until shown otherwise*.

.


I think roughly 100 posts of us trying to be nice (well, most of you) and getting the "you don't know what you're talking about" crap shows us otherwise.

You think *we're* tough? Have you ever ventured over into the vax forum or even the cloth diapering forum? If you don't immediately know what you're talking about, or ask any sort of questions to clarify things in your own mind, they eat you alive. We're pushovers in comparison!

You can't win 'em all. YOU JUST CAN'T WIN 'EM ALL. That's our problem--we think that we can. We shouldn't allow this to be turned into a debate board, because it isn't.

The, "I'll only accept this kind of post from you people of whom I'm taking time and expertise" type-demand really chaps my hide.

I don't think we have to go so far as to say, "Read the stickies first" but if we haven't convinced somebody in, say, the first fifty posts, we should then insist that they read the stickies before we say anything more.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

PS. We should have a "welcome to the board" sticky. It could say something to the effect of, "We're so happy to have you here; we hope you stick around; if you regret circumcising your son previously, there's this thread........(regret thread)...... if you have basic questions, please read this article (the Fleiss article), then if you have any additional questions, please frame them in a respectful way, and we'd be happy to address them for you. Please remember that this is *not* a debate board; we will engage in healthy discussion but will refrain from debating. There are no benefits to circumcision; if you continue to insist that there are, the moderator may choose to remove your posts." Etc.

Then that "welcome" sticky would be the first thing we'd send them to.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

I like things the way they are. I like people coming in here and asking questions, and most of the time it turns out well. I think as Quirky said, people like to be addressed personally. It is such a personal topic, and these moms feel so alone, like they're the only crazy ones in their whole circle who don't want to circumcise. They need personal backup, support, not just a sticky. I don't think it usually turns out badly.

I guess it would be OK to have a welcome sticky, I just fear it would lead to fewer threads and questions. Less conversation, if you will. I visit the vax forum but I barely post there- A&A is right, they are far tougher! They do NOT appreciate answering the same newbie questions over and over, but I do. I think it's nice to talk to people about this. It's not just about facts, it's about support.


----------



## Jen123 (Mar 16, 2004)

I circ'd my boy because it was "the normal thing to do". I wondered and wondered about that for years. My mommy-feelings were telling me different.

I stumble to MDC for the vax forum and make my way over here to the CAC.
I read.
I read some more.
And some more.
Come to the conclusion that my "mommy feelings" were right and circ isn't necessary and dare I say a barbaric practice. After an awkward apology to my ds (nearly 14 now) I have forgiven myself for allowing a crucial part of his antaomy to be cut off.

I didn't come on to ask a ton of questions about "Why didn't you?"....I did the same thing I did in the vax forum.... I read.

I think a sticky is a great idea for this forum...I don't hardly ever post over here...but I send tons of people here. I encourage them to READ first , post later if necessary.

I'd also like to see a sticky thread in the vax forum for newbies.

The key to not being eaten alive in a forum like this is reading beforehand to find out the vibe of the forum.


----------



## +stella+ (Apr 17, 2005)

I can not fathom someone who is truely looking for answers reacting the way I have seen people react sometimes. I will use myeslf as an example. I knew I was having a boy, I spoke to my mother, shes says whatever, I asked if the neighbor boy was since I had no brothers, I dont even know if she answered me. I went to a debate board out there, I looked around. Now, had I wanted to do it gung ho and do it, I would never have searched things out, its that lingering doubt that makes you reach out. I looked at the debate board with a pro circ stance, it did not take long for the truth to come out. I dont think I am some big non conformist, some crunchy go against the grain personality type, but the hint of questioning lead me to see the obvious truths. I WANTED to believe the UTI thing, I wanted to find reasons TO DO IT. The only reason someone reacts the way as we have seen lately is that their mind is made up and they get angry when there are facts that dont support the circ movement shown to them. They ignore it and get angry.
I believe this is why the reaction we saw today is rare, and the reaction we find from Yoshua happens more. I was a Yoshua too once, and it does not take long to see the light if truely are looking for it.

I do think a stick with all the links and perhaps an explanation for them in better order than just the "here are the links" thread would be helpful. If anything, we can answer other posts like the one we saw lately with that link and then see if that person chooses to maturely disguss any of the things they did read in those links. I think if we are expected to give the personal touch and reach out on that level, they should be required to actually look at that stuff in some length and somewhat prove it. That did not happen with our recent situation at all.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
This is a sort of stream-of-consciousness thread...
4. They came here intentionally for the sole purpose of riling us up and being a mean nasty troll







In this case we need to give the facts. Give links to others threads. Educate gently for the sake of everyone who lurks here. If someone comes here to rile up, then by accusing and putting them down and getting ourselves in trouble we give them what they wanted and potentially lose the opportunity to educate a lurker.

So... what are your thoughts about this?

love and peace.









I think that even if we are completely convinced someone is trolling we should take the time to answer their questions, just as we would do for anyone else. Taking the high road is always the more noble choice







Also, I've read more than one post by moms who only circumcised because they got angry at some intactivists way of becoming hostile at being asked what seemed like troll questions. Though I think it's pretty dumb to have surgery done on a newborn out of what is, essentially, spite I can also understand why they would feel that doing further research just wasn't worth their time.







:

~Nay


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

I consider myself to be a polite and civilized individual until I am provoked. Personally, I will not let someone antagonize me and still try to "make nice" with them. It's just not _my style_. If someone is really on the fence about circ yet behaves in a sassy and cynical way, i really don't have the time or patience for it.

My gut tells me that if someone is genuinely interested in information about the detriments of circ, they wont bring an attitude to the table.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
Also, I've read more than one post by moms who only circumcised because they got angry at some intactivists way of becoming hostile at being asked what seemed like troll questions.

~Nay


Who ONLY circ'd for that reason? Give me a break. They were looking for a reason to do it in the first place, and with us they just found their scapegoat.


----------



## +stella+ (Apr 17, 2005)

Quote:

My gut tells me that if someone is genuinely interested in information about the detriments of circ, they wont bring an attitude to the table.
that is what my paragraph was trying to say. I was honestly pro circ for a few (totally ignorant) days of my life but really being open to things is the difference of being able to be educated and just being uncalled for. especially on a forum that doesnt support debate and is the CASE AGAINST.


----------



## +stella+ (Apr 17, 2005)

Quote:

Who ONLY circ'd for that reason? Give me a break. They were looking for a reason to do it in the first place, and with us they just found their scapegoat.
I've seen people say this before too, dont know if I belive that. That the anti circ movement made them out of spite, if it is true, there are issues far deeper than we can hope to touch.


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

Who ONLY circ'd for that reason? Give me a break. They were looking for a reason to do it in the first place, and with us they just found their scapegoat.
My thoughts exactly. People who truly want an education (even with fear in their hearts) will be the people that we reach. But we can't reach everyone. That's just reality.

If a sassy girl wants to believe that we are the reason that she finally decided to circ her child...she can fool herself, but she can't fool me. At the most i may have just been a final excuse to do it, but without a doubt, in a very long line of other lame excuses.


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

*First, about me...*

I have only posted in this forum once and have not even lurked here much (I had already chosen not to circ when I came to MDC). I have been thinking about circumcision more lately though, because I do a fair amount of advocacy around other children's issues, and have been wondering about how I could do better sharing info with people about circumcision.

*About the issue of whether it's okay to get negative with people...*

I think it is important to be strategic. There are some advocacy situations where I think it is approptiate to "pull the gloves off," and take a harsh approach to achieve the outcome you want. I think there are very, very few situations where such an approach is most effective on a board of this nature though.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Who ONLY circ'd for that reason? Give me a break. They were looking for a reason to do it in the first place, and with us they just found their scapegoat.

I think there are some people out there who think circumcision is a routine, no-big-deal thing to do that's only a shade more invasive than getting your fingernails clipped, who at the same time don't have a strong emotional committment to having the procedure done. If they unintentionally come off bad here and their only experience with folks who choose to not circ is exremely negative, they can just write off the choice to not circ as something only crazy extremists do, and not bother with gathering more information.

While getting negative with pro-circing posters on this board might make us feel better (there was a recent thread where I admit to appreciating some posts like that and sharing the opinions those members expressed), I think the possible risks of such an approach are too great. So I agree with the OP, and think it's best to assume the best of people and stay postive.


----------



## ericswifey27 (Feb 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ZeldasMom*

I think there are some people out there who think circumcision is a routine, no-big-deal thing to do that's only a shade more invasive than getting your fingernails clipped, who at the same time don't have a strong emotional committment to having the procedure done. If they unintentionally come off bad here and their only experience with folks who choose to not circ is exremely negative, they can just write off the choice to not circ as something only crazy extremists do, and not bother with gathering more information.


I think you hit the nail on the head!


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Zeldas mom:

Quote:

If they unintentionally come off bad here and their only experience with folks who choose to not circ is exremely negative, they can just write off the choice to not circ as something only crazy extremists do
I just don't buy that line of logic. You either do or you don't and _I don't_.

BTW, what exactly is your detailed definition of "crazy extremist"? I don't think that anyone at MDC/CAC displays that behavior. Are you referring to someone or something in particular? If yes, may I ask what line of text suggests that crazy extremists dwell here? Thanks.


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Thank you all so much for taking the time to respond!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
BTW, what exactly is your detailed definition of "crazy extremist"? I don't think that anyone at MDC/CAC displays that behavior. Are you referring to someone or something in particular? If yes, may I ask what line of text suggests that crazy extremists dwell here? Thanks.

I don't think she was saying that SHE thinks we're crazy extremists (after all SHE didn't circumcise and advocates against it), but that other people who are still culturally indoctrinated might think we were







Several people I know of in real life would call me a crazy extremist.... if they only knew what I believe about certain things







And I was not referring only to this recent incident and certainly not specifically to anyone on this board in the OP. It's more about how we as a whole can handle these situations that come up without alienating people who may come across as being trolls and who may not really be. And the lurkers!

I mean... we've all had posts that were misinterpreted, right? I had one just the other day. I didn't read it at all the way that several other people did (I understand why they did after the fact and am truly sorry







) and I corrected it as soon as possible, but I imagine that if that had been my first post here







: I would never have come back. Never. I was upset enough as it was at it being taken in a way I hadn't meant it (almost cried actually). If I hadn't been on this board as long as I have been, I would probably have been awfully snarky in reply (before leaving for good) and no doubt would have been labeled a troll. My stupid post is one reason why I'm so interested in giving people the benefit of the doubt right now (and why I won't be posting here at 2am when I'm really tired anymore







: ).

I don't think that people actually circumcise because of a bad experience with an intactivist, but having a bad experience with an intactivist could push away someone who may have listened to reason eventually. So I agree with Nay, that we should educate regardless of whether or not we're convinced someone is a troll. Having a specific thread/sticky to point them to would probably help with some of the frustration of posting a ton for their benefit though










love and peace.


----------



## cristina63303 (Apr 3, 2006)

Elaborating on the "crazy extremists" concept, there's one issue I've given a lot of thought about and don't really know how to go about solving:

Many so-called AP parenting decisions tend to live in groups: Co-sleeping, nursing, CD, organic foods, no vax, no circumcision. All "crunchy", so to speak.

The thing is, many people react instinctively AGAINST crunchiness or Eco-mamas. I know, because (don't shoot me, please) I have a little bit of that. Look, I've nursed for the past 6 years of my life non stop (through two additional pregnancies and in tandem) but I strongly believe vaxing is a good idea







: . And I really think there's not much chance of me being convinced otherwise. My kids are welcome to our bed but on the other issues I don't really care either way and I prefer traditional medicine to homeopathy and the like.

And I'm not trying to start an out-of-place vaxing debate here, I'm just trying to optimize our chances of opening people's eyes on circumcision being what it really is: an atrocity.

The problem is that IF a newbie comes in and immediately gets the sense that everyone here is a green whako (not my opinion, but possible outside perception), then they'll discount our statements on circumcision accordingly. Not good for our cause. We need to 1) separate the issues and 2) make sure we show intactness to be a mainstream option outside America, an option supported by doctors who practice traditional medicine in highly technological settings.

What do you guys think? Have you thought about it too? I seem to remember there was a recent thread about this on the (I think) AP forum that got really nasty...

P.S. Gosh, I'm scared to click on "submit reply". I hope you guys will take this as it is intended. 







If there's anything I've not worded carefully enough, please forgive me and keep in mind that English is not my first language (Spanish is)


----------



## +stella+ (Apr 17, 2005)

I guess I just feel if someone is looking for reasons not to do it, they already have that seed planted. Maybe I dont give people enough credit. But I know soo many parents who dont research A THING!!! they just do what all their friends do or saw on tv or what their parents did, and usually its mainstream stuff that is detrimental to children. Like CIO, or not trying to bf, etc. (same as pp, not trying to debate vax or saying people who do dont research it) but as much as generalizations are bad, they are generalizations based on observation. I see people only really looking for the research to back something up if they feel like they want to go against the norm. Like not circing. I feel if the seed is planted they will be open to education, and if they are just looking for a fight then they were lost to us to begin with. I guess it all has to do with the tone of the poster initially. I kinda feel "off" when someone says they tried to research circ and only found opinions on the anti circ side. I mean there are tons of anecdotal evidence on both sides but HELLO, the AAP stance isnt great but it spells out that it is not medically neccessary. ugh, its late and I know what Im trying to get across isnt making sense or even a point really. I just dont think we will win someone over who comes in here with an awful attitude to begin with and who doesnt even read the things presented to them, no matter how much we play nicey nice.

In conclusion though, I think with any newbie that makes a post asking for questions, we should answer with only the links and reputible facts and not get too emotional and/or personal until their true colors are revealed. Because the internet loves drama, and there is a lot of potential for it.

edit cause i cant type or spell ><


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cristina63303*
Elaborating on the "crazy extremists" concept, there's one issue I've given a lot of thought about and don't really know how to go about solving:

Many so-called AP parenting decisions tend to live in groups: Co-sleeping, nursing, CD, organic foods, no vax, no circumcision. All "crunchy", so to speak.

The thing is, many people react instinctively AGAINST crunchiness or Eco-mamas. I know, because (don't shoot me, please) I have a little bit of that. Look, I've nursed for the past 6 years of my life non stop (through two additional pregnancies and in tandem) but I strongly believe vaxing is a good idea







: . And I really think there's not much chance of me being convinced otherwise. My kids are welcome to our bed but on the other issues I don't really care either way and I prefer traditional medicine to homeopathy and the like.

And I'm not trying to start an out-of-place vaxing debate here, I'm just trying to optimize our chances of opening people's eyes on circumcision being what it really is: an atrocity.

The problem is that IF a newbie comes in and immediately gets the sense that everyone here is a green whako (not my opinion, but possible outside perception), then they'll discount our statements on circumcision accordingly. Not good for our cause. We need to 1) separate the issues and 2) make sure we show intactness to be a mainstream option outside America, an option supported by doctors who practice traditional medicine in highly technological settings.

What do you guys think? Have you thought about it too? I seem to remember there was a recent thread about this on the (I think) AP forum that got really nasty...

P.S. Gosh, I'm scared to click on "submit reply". I hope you guys will take this as it is intended.







If there's anything I've not worded carefully enough, please forgive me and keep in mind that English is not my first language (Spanish is)
















Totally true, IME.

Think about it this way.....think of how often LLL is labeled the "breast nazi" organization, a comparison I find highly, highly offensive. But look at how deeply FF is ingrained in our culture, and how difficult it can be for lactivists to get the BF message across to someone who FFs, was FF, everyone she knows FFs and was FF and is "JUST FINE."

You're not going to get across to that person in a day-long exchange on the Internet unless you don't write her off when she doesn't see the light right away.

The point here is we need to keep them coming back. People do get defensive when something they have believed to be good their entire lives is attacked, and they're attacked for even considering doing it! So they cop an attitude when they feel like everyone's ganging up on them. So what? If you don't like it, don't sink to that level and cop an attitude back. Just walk away. Let the person have some time to digest the stuff, she's not going to change years worth of conditioning in 8 hours' time!


----------



## njeb (Sep 10, 2002)

Thank you for bringing this up, trmpetplaya. I completely agree with you; we need to gove people the benefit of the doubt before we declare them to be trolls. It IS hard to give up a lifetime's worth of conditioning.


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *njeb*
Thank you for bringing this up, trmpetplaya. I completely agree with you; we need to gove people the benefit of the doubt before we declare them to be trolls. It IS hard to give up a lifetime's worth of conditioning.

So very true.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *+stella+*

In conclusion though, I think with any newbie that makes a post asking for questions, we should answer with only the links and reputible facts and not get too emotional and/or personal until their true colors are revealed. Because the internet loves drama, and there is a lot of potential for it.


Excellent point. And then just stop posting when the OP is obviously a drama queen (or king). Just let the thread die out. He/she will come back in a nicer manner if he/she still wants more information.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

Now THIS needs to be a sticky for US! "Rules for regular posters in CAC".


----------



## Yoshua (Jan 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Who ONLY circ'd for that reason? Give me a break. They were looking for a reason to do it in the first place, and with us they just found their scapegoat.


not being snarky.

But.... does it really matter?

Do you WANT to be that scape goat?

It is possible to change anyones mind on this subject. I don't think it is impossible.

However I would rather try to gently educate and fail, than to chastise and cause.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yoshua*
not being snarky.

Do you WANT to be that scape goat?

.


I don't own their behavior nor their feelings, so in that sense, I don't really care. Sometimes I cut my losses and move on to someone who will actually listen. I only have so much energy.


----------



## Yoshua (Jan 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I don't own their behavior nor their feelings, so in that sense, I don't really care. Sometimes I cut my losses and move on to someone who will actually listen. I only have so much energy.


I get that, and agree with that.

I just don't find being snarky or judgemental to be a good teaching tool in general. Not saying you ARE, just going from the original comment you posted.

Most times when someone uses an Intactivist as a scapegoat it is because we come off as elitest or insinuate they are naive or dumb. I'd rather take the educational, gentle approach and then cut my losses if they still don't want to listen.


----------



## bdavis337 (Jan 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I think roughly 100 posts of us trying to be nice (well, most of you) and getting the "you don't know what you're talking about" crap shows us otherwise.

You think *we're* tough? Have you ever ventured over into the vax forum or even the cloth diapering forum? If you don't immediately know what you're talking about, or ask any sort of questions to clarify things in your own mind, they eat you alive. We're pushovers in comparison!


See, that made me laugh a bit.







I can hold my own in the cd forum, but I'm a floundering moron over here and in the vax arena. I WANT to know more, so I'm following the posts and reading and lurking. The stickies are nice, but they don't always address a specific issue on it's own, and I must admit to a moderate amt of laziness.....

OT - the diapering forum is actually just that - diapering. Most of the users assume it's a cloth diapering forum, but it's not. It's Diapering, and while the majority of those who hang out there are cloth users, occasionally a sposie user wanders in and gets burned at the stake for their mistake.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yoshua*

I just don't find being snarky or judgemental to be a good teaching tool in general.


Agreed. But after 50, or 75, or 100 posts, eventually one decides that the OP isn't up for being taught.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bdavis337*
See, that made me laugh a bit.







I can hold my own in the cd forum, but I'm a floundering moron over here and in the vax arena. I WANT to know more, so I'm following the posts and reading and lurking. The stickies are nice, but they don't always address a specific issue on it's own, and I must admit to a moderate amt of laziness.....

OT - the diapering forum is actually just that - diapering. Most of the users assume it's a cloth diapering forum, but it's not. It's Diapering, and while the majority of those who hang out there are cloth users, occasionally a sposie user wanders in and gets burned at the stake for their mistake.


Hey, we don't want you to feel like a "floundering moron" here. What can we help you with?

And in the diapering forum, perhaps I just met the wrong poster, but it seems to me that if you're not already USING cloth, you're just interested in the concept, and you can't talk about what "fluffy mail" you have coming, they don't want to have you around.


----------



## kxsiven (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Agreed. But after 50, or 75, or 100 posts, eventually one decides that the OP isn't up for being taught.

And that is a sure sign of pro-circ troll. This forum has been trolled quite often lately - I wonder what is up.

The truth is MDC is pink, fluffy tinkerbell place compared to actual debate boards out there. I've never seen any posts on this forum that reach anywhere near the level used in circ debate boards on other parenting boards.


----------



## wendy1221 (Feb 9, 2004)

I haven't read this whole thread, but I get what you're saying and I agree 100%.

ANd I want to tell what happened to me about 3 years ago: I was pregnant with my 2nd boy, my dh's first. I did not circ my first ds and I was very against it. However my dh is Jewish and felt it was something he just had to do (and he IS a practicing Jew, unlike a lot of Jewish men who do it, which seems to be the first question asked.) I was not a member of MDC yet. I'm not sure how that worked, maybe you didn't need to register then? Anyway, I can't find the posts, my join date is well after that, but I'm 100% sure it was here and I know for sure there was one poster who I clearly remember attacking me who no longer posts in this forum. I have seen her on other forums, however.

ANyway, I felt attacked. People jumped right on me and said divorce my husband, take the baby and leave, what's wrong w/ me considering letting someone mutilate my baby? blah blah blah. I WAS attacked. I came here asking for info to help me convince my dh not to do it and instead of getting the support and info I wanted/needed, I was attacked.

I have seen the same thing happen on other threads. Jumping on somebody and calling them names, or telling them they're mutilating their child, etc, IS NOT HELPING THE CAUSE. It's making those people feel attacked and defensive. We need to be supportive and gently ease these people into intactivism. Harsh language that puts people on the defensive is definitely not helping. It may even be hurting the cause!

I left MDC and didn't come back for months before I joined. ANd even then, I avoided this forum for a while. Even though I had found the info ON MY OWN (b/c it was important to me) and ds2 (and ds3) was left intact, I did not feel comfortable here after the way I had been treated. I think if this had been less important to me, I would have said, screw those jerks! I love my dh and if this is important to him, I guess I can deal. But I found the info on my own, b/c it was important to me. THe language used when I came here for help turned me away when I needed a forum like this most. Just my opinion.


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Hmm...There is some threat of us hoary old vetrans terrifying/isolating new comers.

We should do our best to avoid that: the case against is so simple it does not *need* angry confrontation.


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

The truth is MDC is pink, fluffy tinkerbell place compared to actual debate boards out there. I've never seen any posts on this forum that reach anywhere near the level used in circ debate boards on other parenting boards.
This is so true. It is not always wise to tiptoe around people. Especially trolls. Polite sugar-like people don't get remembered and neither does their rhetoric. It's quite the opposite in fact. Look, we are literally involved in a battle so-to-speak. You may only think that it is an _educational effort_ that we are involved in, but it is much much more than that for alot of us.

When you are fighting something evil, it is not always wise to be polite and well-mannered. Just ask our president and a bunch of the other fatcats in DC.


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
When you are fighting something evil, it is not always wise to be polite and well-manered. Just ask our president and a bunch of the other fatcats in DC.

Hmm...

I had never considered ordering high-circ rate cities to evacuate all civilians and then bombing them before. It sounds like an unorthodox intactivist tactics but if it got results there then why not here?

_Perhaps..._


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

Hmm...

I had never considered ordering high-circ rate cities to evacuate all civilians and then bombing them before. It sounds like an unorthodox intactivist tactics but if it got results there then why not here?

Perhaps...
hahahaha.























Now. now. now. i did NOT say the word _bomb_. And I do not want you to think that I am, as a rule, always on the attack. I am not. Really. I simply choose my battles. I can smell a troll from a mile away...and when they start to agitate me, I respond appropriately.


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
hahahaha.























Now. now. now. i did NOT say the word _bomb_. And I do not want you to think that I am, as a rule, always on the attack. I am not. Really. I simply choose my battles. I can smell a troll from a mile away...and when they start to agitate me, I respond appropriately.

Aww...It would have made a *great* movie tagline:

"Intactivism...Fallujah style!"


----------



## Yoshua (Jan 5, 2006)

something i thought i'd add. even if we DO smell a troll it is against the forum guildelines to point it out or even really post to them

all we are allowed to do is use the 'report' function or we can wind up getting in trouble too.

just thought i'd point that out.

Seen a few people get in trouble for casting suspiscion on someone who was legit.

I was the legit person


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

I wont start a whole new thread like that again. Ms. Fluffer set me straight.









_But_ I wont keep my mouth shut if someone is being overtly obnoxious. Ms. Fluffer appears to have been 'ok' with the Princess thread, as it was not deleted. I am happy that she is not heavy-handed with her censorship powers. That's really cool.


----------



## zinemama (Feb 2, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
If they only new. It is not always wise to tiptoe around people. Especially trolls. Polite sugar-like people don't get remembered and neither does their rhetoric. It's quite the opposite in fact. Look, we are literally involved in a battle so-to-speak. You may only think that it is an _educational effort_ that we are involved in, but it is much much more than that for alot of us.

When you are fighting something evil, it is not always wise to be polite and well-manered. Just ask our president and a bunch of the other fatcats in DC.

I think people with this, "Why be nice when we're fighting eeevil?" attitide need to ask themselves:

What is more important, your entitlement to righteously attack those who have never really considered or are just beginning to look into circ and may perhaps phrase their question in a way that seems "ignorant"?

Or giving the benefit of the doubt, taking a gentle, kind, Quirky-like approach, and quite possibly giving a prospective parent a whole new outlook on this topic, without feeling put-down and shamed?

Frankly, I think the polite people DO get remembered. And have far more of an effect in the long run than do the abrasive, self-righteous, holier-than-thou types.


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

I think people with this, "Why be nice when we're fighting eeevil?" attitide need to ask themselves: What is more important, *your entitlement to righteously attack those* who have never really considered or are just beginning to look into circ and may perhaps phrase their question in a way that seems "ignorant"?
I never attacked anyone. I would appreciate it if you would NOT acuse me of something that I am NOT guilty of.

Quote:

Or giving the benefit of the doubt, taking a gentle, kind, Quirky-like approach, and quite possibly giving a prospective parent a whole new outlook on this topic, without feeling put-down and shamed?
I resent _your_ attacks here. _Do as I say not as I do?_ I did NOT instigate a war with anyone. Why do you keep insinuating that I did????

Quote:

Frankly, I think the polite people DO get remembered. And have far more of an effect in the long run *than do the abrasive, self-righteous, holier-than-thou types.*

Thanks for the parting insult!


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

kldliam said:

Quote:

"It is not always wise to tiptoe around people. Especially trolls. Polite sugar-like people don't get remembered and neither does their rhetoric. It's quite the opposite in fact. Look, we are literally involved in a battle so-to-speak. You may only think that it is an educational effort that we are involved in, but it is much much more than that for alot of us.When you are fighting something evil, it is not always wise to be polite and well mannered. Just ask our president and a bunch of the other fatcats in DC."
I would like to elaborate on this if I may? When I say that it is not always wise to tiptoe around people, I specifically mean people who are making a point at challenging me. I am NOT referring to well-mannered, sincere people with honest questions.

When I say that "polite sugar-like people" do not get remembered and neither does their rhetoric, I mean this:

That a person's message doesn't necessarily get remembered just because they are polite and sweet. When I am engaged with someone who is actively challenging my logic without a basic level of courtesy I don't react to them in a polite way. I am not a Saint. I never meant that statement in a general sense, only in the context of dealing with a nasty poster.

I know that it is not always necessary to pull out "big-guns" with people. But honestly, I don't believe that I did pull out my Big Guns. I believe that I was reacting appropriately to what I perceived as a circ debate with a person who seemed somewhat cynical and insincere. It appeared from all of the other posts, that others sensed that too. Why aren't they on trial as well?

I take those types of situations on a case-by-case basis. I feel that I have that right, and I respect your right to handle it in the way you see fit. Thank you.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

In every part of the world inherent cultures abide. Normalcy is the life our culture dictates.

My normalcy includes whole penises. It was only when I was circumcised (as a mature adult) that I was prompted to do _any_ research on the subject. My first Internet searches were for anything that promoted circumcision, so keen was I to find something that would comfort my distress. What I found was information that simply did not 'ring true'; and the few discussion forums bordered on fetishism. The one redeeming factor was that I learned, for the first time in my life, that secular routine infant circumcision abounded in the USA. My first reaction was disbelief and horror. My culture had taught me that any departure from nature's design was abnormal; and any attempt of mankind to alter its perfection should, at the very least, be questioned. If I had been raised in the USA, would my reaction to the concept of an intact penis have been equally disbelieving and horrified? The odds are it would.

We don't have a movement activating for RIC in England, thank God. However, if we did would I treat its proponents with despair and think of them as fanatical weirdos? Possibly.

On the other hand I might want to discover _why_ some people were so keen to have every little boy circumcised. I would look for a forum and perhaps find one entitled *The Case For Circumcision*. There I would put my questions, hoping for some positive replies and good advice (just as I did prior to and following my surgery). Its members could well be as caring and welcoming as this forum, but amongst a few helpful replies there might be others who would accuse me of bad parenting, of having no care for my child's health and well-being... and so on. Would I leave and never return, knowing my first beliefs were correct? Probably.

It occurs to me that my post has been more of an exercise in double-think for my own benefit, rather than a worthwhile contribution to this thread! But it's important I try to think myself into a culture where RIC exists - and understand it - before I can justify offering opinions of my own.

Overall, I have been hugely impressed with this forum and its members. I hope you are proud of your achievements. You should be!









Christopher


----------



## baybee (Jan 24, 2005)

I came in here almost a year ago as a willing student. I had been an intactivist all my life and always spoke against circ to clients, friends and family. About a year ago, I saw the possibility of ending circumcision on the planet and not in 10 or 20 years, but QUICK. I had no clue how to do it then, and I still don't. However, I do know it's going to happen in ways that we can't even imagine and I've already seen breakthroughs that I could never have prophecied.

I posted straight from the hip and made some mistakes. Frank pm'ed me and set me straight when my facts were wrong. I think he was always surprised that I immediately took his coaching and cleaned up what didn't work. This is one area of life where I have parked my little ego at the door. It has been an amazing journey for me and I've taken what I got from here to other lists, organizations and into my community. I feel like I'm working on my Master's Degree in intactivism. That's why I'm always yearning for Frank to come back. He has made such a difference on this board and in such a fair, mature way. If he doesn't come back, he's left a legacy for you and I to continue his efforts to teach about the importance of genital integrity.

Keep welcoming all who post here and let's sort through stuff together with an open mind and an eye on the prize---every child with intact genitals.
Baybee


----------



## ericswifey27 (Feb 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zinemama*

What is more important, your entitlement to righteously attack those who have never really considered or are just beginning to look into circ and may perhaps phrase their question in a way that seems "ignorant"?

Or giving the benefit of the doubt, taking a gentle, kind, Quirky-like approach, and quite possibly giving a prospective parent a whole new outlook on this topic, without feeling put-down and shamed?


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

cristina63303, I enjoyed your post and thought you made some really good points!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*
Think about it this way.....think of how often LLL is labeled the "breast nazi" organization, a comparison I find highly, highly offensive. But look at how deeply FF is ingrained in our culture, and how difficult it can be for lactivists to get the BF message across to someone who FFs, was FF, everyone she knows FFs and was FF and is "JUST FINE."

We were actually talking about this very thing at the LLL meeting last week. How DO we teach people that ff really isn't okay when so many people did turn out "just fine?" Same with vaccinations. I mean, I was fully vaccinated and I have no allergies or any other terrible effects from it







So if I only used myself (and almost every single other person I've ever known) as a frame of reference then I would see nothing at all bad about vaxing.

Most men who are circumcised turn out "just fine" in the eyes of most people. They don't know anything different and have no frame of reference to judge by. I once asked a circumcised friend of mine how the circumcised penis even works (I honestly wanted to know! no snarkiness whatsoever) and he said a trifle huffily "just fine, thanks." Most people believe the circumcised penis works "just fine" (because in their experience it does - they haven't the experience to know anything else to compare) so why on earth should they learn more about it or not have it done?

I think the answer to how we teach people that these things are not the best, is gently. Very very gently.

About the recent incident - The very first response to the Princess thread seemed a bit snarky to me in light of the OP. I re-read it and realised it probably wasn't intended to be (giving benefit of the doubt), but I bet you all the money in the world that the OP THOUGHT it was snarky. It definitely wasn't gentle. The VERY FIRST POST. Given the point of view of the OP I bet it seemed as though she was being jumped on right away. Not after 25, 50, or 100 posts. Yoshua noticed it too... that could have put her on the defensive from the very beginning through no intention of anyone.

I'm also curious as to the way some of you claim to *know* when someone is a troll







: It's hard to tell over the internet till someone pretty much admits it. I'd love to be able to tell more easily if there's something I'm missing







But I really don't see how one can label someone as a troll because they get defensive. That can stem from any number of other reasons, not necessarily trollishness. People tend to get defensive when a long-held belief that they can't defend logically is challenged. So... maybe we should assume that defensiveness means we should be extra gentle?

I hope that all makes sense







It's getting lateish.

love and peace.


----------



## kxsiven (Nov 2, 2004)

*I'm also curious as to the way some of you claim to *know* when someone is a troll*

How do one learn to recognise trolls? Spending many years in debate boards actively. Since the actual troll gang is quite small one learn to recognise their writing styles, claims, the usual stream of reasoning. If not in first post, then later. It is a full out war out there. It is NOT the defensiveness that marks a troll - at least not for me. When one is raised in one minded culture(regards circ)to change that view takes a lot. I've said in many posts here and elsewhere that every single person who is able to change their minds under cultural pressure should get applause and big reward. I do not know if I could if I had born in USA.

I don't know. Maybe I look the language differently since english is not my first language?

Potentially every one of us could be a troll. (Let's dive in paranoia...)Well, circ fetish. I really don't care about accidental trolls, it is the circ fetish gang that really bothers me.

Some of them spend years to create a false profile on parenting boards so they could get into whole circ-world, convince parents to circ, hear circ stories and worm their way in to pro-intact organisations&groups to spy.

Kia a.k.a. Mulder from Finland(...or am I... ?)


----------



## LadyMarmalade (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kxsiven*
Kia a.k.a. Mulder from Finland(...or am I... ?)

The truth is out there ...


----------



## cristina63303 (Apr 3, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LadyMarmalade*
The truth is out there ...









:
OK, "the truth" flew right over my head. I guess I have not been here long enough. Anyone care to enlighten me? (here or via PM, whatever is more appropriate?)

Thanks


----------



## kxsiven (Nov 2, 2004)

Nothing secretive. I wrote 'Kia a.k.a. Mulder' which hints towards X-Files and Divine FBI-Detective Mulder who saw conspiracy theories everywhere. The show always had a tagline in the beginning; ' the truth is out there...'


----------



## cristina63303 (Apr 3, 2006)

Ooops. No idea. I really never watch tv. Only sometimes Fußball (soccer) or Formula 1 because my DH likes it and I like to keep him company. (some great Finn drivers, btw)

Where does one with kids find the time for tv anyway? Or am I THAT inefficient?


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Who ONLY circ'd for that reason? Give me a break. They were looking for a reason to do it in the first place, and with us they just found their scapegoat.

I don't know the people in real life, but I've read more than one person post that on other message boards.

'Tis crazy, I know.







:

~Nay


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

I don't know how i missed this thread til now. I have been away and am just getting back in the groove here.

I will read this thread fully when I get a chance today and come back with some input. Thanks for opening this dialog!


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

*About making the choice to pull out the big guns...*

Quote:

I take those types of situations on a case-by-case basis. I feel that I have that right, and I respect your right to handle it in the way you see fit.
The thing is though, when there are people being negative/snarky, to a certain degree it takes away other members' chance to deal with the situation in a gentle/non-threatening way. When people get pushed into reactive/defensive mode it can be very difficult to undo that.

I hesitate to make this post, because I feel like some posters from a previous thread are feeling picked on. That is completely not my intention. I am speaking more generally.

ITA that it can be hard not to give an angry, reactive response
when you feel passionately about something and others don't seem to be approaching the issue in a thoughtful way. I struggle with this personally all the time.


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Who is your loyality to anyway? It certainly can't be this Intactivist. It sounds like it lies more with a recent newbie.

I think i am done at CAC now. I hope that you are content with the end result.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
I don't know the people in real life, but I've read more than one person post that on other message boards.

'Tis crazy, I know.







:

~Nay

Of course they say that, but it's just an excuse. They're really going for "look like Daddy" or something.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*

I think i am done at CAC now. I hope that you are content with the end result.


Hey, PLEASE stick around. We need you. I NEED YOU!

PS. I think this entire thread was started as a "message" to me........not you.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ZeldasMom*
The thing is though, when there are people being negative/snarky, to a certain degree it takes away other members' chance to deal with the situation in a gentle/non-threatening way. When people get pushed into reactive/defensive mode it can be very difficult to undo that..


Conversely, if some members let this become a debate board (which it is not), it becomes very difficult to undo that, as well. We're all trying to work toward the common good.

Most of us (probably all of us) are very nice and "gentle" at first, until we get hit with attitude after attitude by a particular poster. I hesitate to use the word "troll" but sometimes that's exactly what the situation becomes.....someone who doesn't want actual info, but wants to stir the hive, so to speak, and laughs at our every attempt to be "gentle."


----------



## kxsiven (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Most of us (probably all of us) are very nice and "gentle" at first, until we get hit with attitude after attitude by a particular poster. I hesitate to use the word "troll" but sometimes that's exactly what the situation becomes.....someone who doesn't want actual info, but wants to stir the hive, so to speak, and laughs at our every attempt to be "gentle."









:


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

I think it is possible to become too paranoid, and start seeing trolls when really it's just someone who isn't seeing the light as quickly as we might like, and gets defensive. I know for a fact that there have been times people have been falsely accused of being trolls, a fact that has been clarified behind the scenes. There was a recent honest-to-God troll, and I wasted a lot of time trying to educate that person before the trollishness was revealed, but that person's intentions were revealed a lot more clearly than other threads where it's been more about defensiveness.

I don't think this thread was started about any person in particular, but about a pattern or a tendency that appears when a fence-sitter or a person leaning towards not circing but with concerns comes into CAC. Yes, this is not a debate forum but that doesn't mean that people can't air their questions, concerns, and lifelong cultural beliefs so that we can help them see the falsity of those beliefs.

If someone says "But I always heard circ was cleaner" and we say "SHUT UP! THIS IS NOT A DEBATE BOARD! YOU CAN'T POST IN SUPPORT OF CIRC!" rather than "I know you've always heard that, but actually it's not cleaner, and here's the reasons why, and the evidence in support of that, and go do some reading here" then we haven't fulfilled the mission of this board, which IMO is to educate others, not just sit around ranting and raving to ourselves about the evils of circ (although there's definitely a place for that, too).

I think we should take the tack of "there are no stupid questions" around here, even if it means that we answer the same questions over and over and over and over. For the person who's asking the question or expressing the indoctrinated belief, it may be the first time they've ever even thought to question circ, and the answers are new *to them.*

I am not at all claiming to be a model poster, BTW. I get so angry about circ that I feel like I'm going to burst with hatred sometimes. I know I have been snarky in the past under various circumstances. But I do think it's too easy to get caught up in what we KNOW to be the truth and recognize that it takes other people -- and their partners -- a longer time to get there. Those fence-sitters deserve our support and patience.


----------



## baybee (Jan 24, 2005)

_I think we should take the tack of "there are no stupid questions" around here, even if it means that we answer the same questions over and over and over and over. For the person who's asking the question or expressing the indoctrinated belief, it may be the first time they've ever even thought to question circ, and the answers are new *to them.*_

well said!


----------



## njeb (Sep 10, 2002)

: Excellent post, Quirky!









Education is a vital part of this board. We've got to realize that many new posters at MDC have never even thought to question circumcision, because it's just so accepted where they live; to them it's an automatic part of postpartum care for a newborn boy. When they first come here and read the title of this board, "The Case Against Circumcision," their first thought is, "What's so bad about circumcision?







The doctor said it HAD to be done, or ds would get infection after infection." If they come here and naively ask that, they're going to wonder why they're getting trounced on! We need to be gentle with these folks. They've been lied to by their doctors, parents, friends, and family. Unlearning their conditioning is going to be painful. For those who found out the truth too late to save their sons:


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

trmpetplaya (or 'my music lady', as I tend to think of you! Have you ever played the lute, by the way?)... thank you for this very worthwhile and inspirational thread!

christina and Quirky, excellent posts - thank you, too! And all the others who have spoken so eloquently.

As an addendum to my earlier post (No.43), I'd like to add a couple of thoughts:

1. There's a very thin line between debate and discussion, and sometimes that line can become blurred. Online, we cannot debate in the tradional manner where a subject is chosen and two opposing speakers argue the pros and cons for a fixed timespan, with the result being decided by an audience vote. In essence, therefore, all online is debate is discussion. So how do we decide where discussion ends and the cut and thrust of debate takes over? Does the answer lie in the phrase 'cut and thrust', perhaps? If so, how do we determine that point?

2. Throughout this forum I've come across several references to doctors/parents/friends, etc. _lying_ about RIC. If we lie we know we are not telling the truth. Do folk actually lie about this issue? Or is it more a case of ignorance - a lack of education? I ask this because it occurs to me a newbie coming to this board might take exception to a suggestion (however indirect) that their respected doctor, parent or friend has lied to them.

If in fact some do lie, then the adage, "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive," springs to mind. Their lies will find them out!

Christopher


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*

I don't think this thread was started about any person in particular,



I completely disagree. I used the term "newbie" in the thread being primarily discussed, and that, lo and behold, showed up as a term in this thread. Coincidence? I think not. That's ok; I'm tough enough to take it.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*

If someone says "But I always heard circ was cleaner" and we say "SHUT UP! THIS IS NOT A DEBATE BOARD! YOU CAN'T POST IN SUPPORT OF CIRC!"
.


Your hyperbole is insulting. No one told anyone to shut up, and we're not talking about mere questions from new posters. We're talking about a very specific attitude that continued on over 100 posts! How long do we let it go on?


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I completely disagree. I used the term "newbie" in the thread being primarily discussed, and that, lo and behold, showed up as a term in this thread. Coincidence? I think not. That's ok; I'm tough enough to take it.

Uh...

It is a fairly commonly utilised term.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Another case in point: the poor woman who initially planned to circ her nephew whom she had just taken custody of. The vast majority of posters (including me) were very nice to her and guided her in the right direction. She had questions; she had heard the "cleaner" myth, but she didn't have the attitude.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Revamp*
Uh...

It is a fairly commonly utilised term.


But the *timing* of my using it and then it showing up in this thread in quotation marks was not a coincidence.


----------



## ericswifey27 (Feb 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Your hyperbole is insulting. No one told anyone to shut up, and we're not talking about mere questions from new posters. We're talking about a very specific attitude that continued on over 100 posts! How long do we let it go on?

I never saw the other thread people are talking about so perhaps that's why I always thought the original post was referring to newbies in general, no one specific.

I think others are looking at this hypothetically too and using hypothetical situations to get their point across, not actual attacks at individuals.

But people have called me naive before, so perhaps I am missing something


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
But the *timing* of my using it and then it showing up in this thread in quotation marks was not a coincidence.

It's quite true that I "got" the term from reading your post and many many many other posts that use that term all over MDC (you didn't invent the term "newbie"







). This thread (as I have stated repeatedly) is NOT about anyone or any specific situation in particular. The recent situation had me thinking about it and the thread about newbies in the vax forum had me thinking about it so the timing seemed right to bring it up. That's all







If you want to think it's about you (and if kldliam does too) then that's your business, but it's not about you







: It's about all of us (including me) having a discussion about how we can better educate people about this issue. I don't really know how to tell "trolls" from anyone else so I was curious about how others can (or think they can... because I'm still not completely convinced that anyone CAN tell such a thing over the internet - one can make a reasonable guess, but how can one know for absolute certain? Yes, I expect an answer! It's not rhetorical.). Maybe I haven't been around long enough yet because I definitely haven't spent more than five years on any sort of message boards and four of those years were on a trumpet geek message board









Kldliam - Don't leave. You have been a great help around here







and this thread is most assuredly not about anyone in particular (though I think this is the last time I'm going to say it!). Read again what Quirky posted:

Quote:

I don't think this thread was started about any person in particular, but about a pattern or a tendency that appears when a fence-sitter or a person leaning towards not circing but with concerns comes into CAC. Yes, this is not a debate forum but that doesn't mean that people can't air their questions, concerns, and lifelong cultural beliefs so that we can help them see the falsity of those beliefs.
She's absolutely correct! I've seen the tendency to jump on people who are not sure about circumcision the entire time I've been here. I, like Quirky, am far from a perfect poster. I struggle about how to tell people about circumcision in a way that is both powerful enough to change their mind, but sensitive enough to prevent them from shutting themselves away from what I want to teach them about circumcision. This thread is as much about me as it is about any of the rest of you. I'm self-centered like that







: The OP was a stream of consciousness partly to help myself see the goal more clearly and partly to get dialogue going between all of us. If anyone wants to take it personally, then go ahead, but I don't think it'll enrich your life to believe that... and it wasn't intended to be taken personally anyhow.

I'm looking forward to PuppyFluffer's contribution for sure!!!

love and peace.


----------



## mom2savannah_grace (Jul 31, 2004)

Thank you, trmptplaya, for directing me to this thread. I was gone this week so I was unable to respond in the original thread that helped to spawn this one.

I can tell you without a doubt that the person many of you were fighting with was not a troll. She is my cousin and a new young mom to be born and raised in the midwest (talk about being culturally conditioned to circ). I sent her this way when we were discussing circ at a recent family party. I haven't had the chance to talk to her much, so I glad she came her looking for info. Honestly, I can understand why she became defensive, however, she did not necessarily respond in the most appropriate way, but how many of us do when we feel we are being attacked?

I agree that all new posters need to be treated gently as you don't know their true intentions or their knowledge about circ. I also agree that we should have a sticky welcoming newbies (I forgot who posted an eloquent choice of words) encouraging them to read and lurk here first before posting. I have found how difficult it is to change the minds of those who are culturally conditioned to circ IRL, so we need to find a good way of doing that here without causing people to go on the defensive.

I am sorry if this isn't all coming out right, but I am emotionally involved in this type of situation since the most recent one involved someone I care about very much. I just think that even after 100 posts it shouldn't be jumped to conclusion that they are a troll. The most recent situation is proof of that. Thank you to all of those who no matter the situation respond to posters in a kind and informing way. Remember you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar.


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *njeb*
Education is a vital part of this board. We've got to realize that many new posters at MDC have never even thought to question circumcision, because it's just so accepted where they live; to them it's an automatic part of postpartum care for a newborn boy. When they first come here and read the title of this board, "The Case Against Circumcision," their first thought is, "What's so bad about circumcision?

Yeah. And, I want to point out that there is a big difference between a poster who's been around MDC for awhile and one who wandered in off a Google search for porn or whatever.









A mom who shows up at MDC looking for breastfeeding advice or cloth diapers can hang around for quite awhile without ever venturing in here, and gets a fair chance to notice that the overall vibe of the place is anti-circ. Siggies, off-handed comments, etc, give away the fact that a lot of folks here _don't_ consider it a neutral or a beneficial practice.

So if or when she finally posts her questions, she's more likely to phrase them in a way that's palatable to the denizens of the CaC. And we're more likely to respond in kind, and the whole thing almost always goes smoothly.

Someone who comes in "off the streets" so to speak may have her mind changed, but it's gonna be a tougher case to make. Chances are decent that the person didn't even show up expecting a serious debate, let alone have any idea how to phrase their questions in a halfway respectful way.

I'd probably not send a friend here who wasn't already heavily leaning toward the anticirc side of things and aware of the issues-- it does come off as extreme to call such a common operation "mutilation" when it's all you know.

That doesn't mean anyone here needs to actively tone it down. Just that the CaC almost works as more a base for activists who are already convinced, or who are just on the verge of being convinced, than a place of educating the masses. Places like NOCIRC probably do a better job of that, on a large scale.


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mom2savannah_grace*
I can tell you without a doubt that the person many of you were fighting with was not a troll. She is my cousin and a new young mom to be born and raised in the midwest (talk about being culturally conditioned to circ). I sent her this way when we were discussing circ at a recent family party.


Aw, I hope she's all right. And that she at least did some reading! Lots of people posted some good info to her that day.

I admit I got a little frustrated when she kept refusing to say why she was posting in such a... cryptic sort of way. It drives me crazy when people say, "why can't you acknowlege the BENEFITS of circ, too?"

"Because there aren't any!"

Sigh. Culture is a beeyotch, eh?


----------



## Yoshua (Jan 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I completely disagree. I used the term "newbie" in the thread being primarily discussed, and that, lo and behold, showed up as a term in this thread. Coincidence? I think not. That's ok; I'm tough enough to take it.


Noob is not a new term to the internet....

Newbie Noob Nooblet Nubles Nub

I wouldnt worry about this thread being about you specifically. Since I have been here I've seen many people this thread can be geared towards, but I agree with everything this thread says.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

I and some others have been given to understand that Princess was genuinely looking for information. Heidi's post has now confirmed this.

I think Princess found it hard to phrase her wishes coherently in open forum; hence we found it difficult to understand her apparent reticence to acknowledge our relpies. In any event, her intentions were squeaky clean.

I fully support the purpose of this thread and its many thoughtful posts. It's been something of a cathartic experience and all the better for that! We can learn from it.









(trmpetplaya: the lute? You didn't answer me. Off-topic I know, but just a short reply?







)

Christopher


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
(trmpetplaya: the lute? You didn't answer me. Off-topic I know, but just a short reply?







)

Sorry, I forgot about that bit when I posted last... I've never played the lute, but I've played almost everything else. Flute, clarinet, oboe, bassoon, baritone, tuba, slide trumpet, trombone, violin, viola, cello, and percussion. My main instruments are (valve/regular) trumpet, piano, and French horn







I can also sing pretty well.

I hope that ConfusedPrincess comes back.... the misunderstanding that occurred is totally understandable from both sides. I wish that there were no trolls because then we wouldn't get gun-shy (for lack of a better term) about anyone who seems to be one but isn't really









love and peace.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*
the mission of this board, which IMO is to educate others, not just sit around ranting and raving to ourselves about the evils of circ (although there's definitely a place for that, too).


Just an idea, but how about this main forum being for educating people who come by who are confused about why they should leave their son's healthy penis alone, and create a subforum where we dedicated intactivists can go to rant, rage, and let out some pent-up emotion at the sheer stupidity of this even being legal?

~Nay


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
Just an idea, but how about this main forum being for educating people who come by who are confused about why they should leave their son's healthy penis alone, and create a subforum where we dedicated intactivists can go to rant, rage, and let out some pent-up emotion at the sheer stupidity of this even being legal?

~Nay

That would might be smart. Kind of like the separation between the "Breastfeeding" and the "Lactivism" boards.

Could there be an "Intactness Beyond Infancy" board?







Or a "Child-led Retraction" board?


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
Just an idea, but how about this main forum being for educating people who come by who are confused about why they should leave their son's healthy penis alone, and create a subforum where we dedicated intactivists can go to rant, rage, and let out some pent-up emotion at the sheer stupidity of this even being legal?

~Nay

That makes a lot of sense... I can see how a lot of our rants could very easily scare neophytes off. Maybe cause them to think that we're a bunch of complete wackos. But I also like just having one board to check (I'm not lazy... not at all







). So if we did something like this, would the main forum also be for people who have questions about anything not having to do with ranting? Like why a foreskin is red? When will it retract? Etc. (I'm trying to visualise it, being the visual learner that I am







)

love and peace.


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes*
Could there be an "Intactness Beyond Infancy" board?







Or a "Child-led Retraction" board?









Child-led-retraction is awesome! Maybe that should be a sticky all about the benefits of letting the child retract in his own time









love and peace.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
Child-led-retraction is awesome! Maybe that should be a sticky all about the benefits of letting the child retract in his own time









love and peace.









I agree, child-led retraction (sort of like the CLW board in breastfeeding







) is a wonderful idea.

~Nay


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
That makes a lot of sense... I can see how a lot of our rants could very easily scare neophytes off. Maybe cause them to think that we're a bunch of complete wackos. But I also like just having one board to check (I'm not lazy... not at all







). So if we did something like this, would the main forum also be for people who have questions about anything not having to do with ranting? Like why a foreskin is red? When will it retract? Etc. (I'm trying to visualise it, being the visual learner that I am







)

love and peace.









Yeah, exactly. The main forum (what we have now) will be for the typical low-key discussion and for newbies to post their questions. The rant forum would be dedicated only to letting us blow off some steam. Any questions would be moved to the main forum.

Example 1: "Should I circumcise so my son looks like daddy" would be answered (nicely!







) in this main forum.

Example 2: "I can't believe people actually think it's a good idea to amputate healthy parts off their baby! Are they lining up to have all their healthy, yet non-essential to life, parts chopped off them! Would they? Hell no, they wouldn't...grumble, gripe, rant" would go in the rant section.










~Nay


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
I agree, child-led retraction (sort of like the CLW board in breastfeeding







) is a wonderful idea.

~Nay









Oh, I was actually kidding about that.







: I imagine it'd be a sloooowwww-moving forum, for all the right reasons. There just isn't much to discuss there.

"Should I retract him yet?"

followed by fifteen posts of "nope."


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes*







Oh, I was actually kidding about that.







: I imagine it'd be a sloooowwww-moving forum, for all the right reasons. There just isn't much to discuss there.

"Should I retract him yet?"

followed by fifteen posts of "nope."










Well, you had me fooled!









~Nay


----------



## wendy1221 (Feb 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes*







Oh, I was actually kidding about that.







: I imagine it'd be a sloooowwww-moving forum, for all the right reasons. There just isn't much to discuss there.

"Should I retract him yet?"

followed by fifteen posts of "nope."










Yeah, but there'd also be all the people whose docs are telling them that since ds is x years old he needs to be retracted.

And people w/ questions about adhesions, etc. My ds is 7 and has had adhesions breaking up lately. ANd it apparetnly hurts (he was forcibly retracted by a ped at 1 yr, so *I* think that might be why, but who knows.) If I didn't already know this was normal, I'd be asking about it.


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky*

I think we should take the tack of "there are no stupid questions" around here, even if it means that we answer the same questions over and over and over and over. For the person who's asking the question or expressing the indoctrinated belief, it may be the first time they've ever even thought to question circ, and the answers are new *to them.*

You know, I think this is a great point. For instance, for me, leaving my kids intact, homebirthing, cloth diapering, co-sleeping, and not vaxxing were my defaults. I didn't come to those "decisions" from days/months/years of research. I did them because my default is "do nothing" and because that's what I was raised with (my parents did all of those things). So coming here to this board was less about feeling bad or guilty about having not researched and done it, but about learning how to get the word out, and I have learned a lot about it. Going to the Vax forum was a bit more, ummm, about figuring out if my "do nothing" was actually a disservice or lazy parenting. And even coming in having not vaxxed, I felt out of place. I didn't want to post at first with my "I'm really confused about the polio vaccine, where can I look for more info?" until I had a handle on the forum. I never posted because I saw new person after new person told "be responsible and do your own damned research, we won't do it for you, I bet you have tylenol in your medicine cabinet, don't you, if you can't even research tylenol, we don't have time for you." Nope, even coming from a "I won't do if there's no reason and I haven't done it" stance, it was too scary for me. I would be sooo sad if people thought of us that way.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Nay, it's a novel idea and a good one - and several posters have applauded it. I can understand your reasoning but I do wonder just _how_ two forums discussing the same subject will work in practice. Neither can be a debate board because Mothering won't allow it.

The main forum (this one) already has a sensible name in my opinion. Does it really need a new one? I can see some sense in making the new one a _support_ board, for those who have chosen or will choose not to circumcise. We could certainly rant and rave there, if we wish. But I fear any new board may also become a venue for patting each other on the back and preaching to the converted. Is there any mileage in that?

Now... getting back to guests, lurkers and newbie posters; how would they be encouraged to stick to the main forum and not venture into the other? Since the purpose of your idea is to facilitate the gentle approach we all agree is the right way, it's important they don't see us 'sounding off'!

Do you understand my concern? How have others envisaged the way these two boards would work in practice?

Christopher

(Music Lady







, my favourite instruments are the oboe, closely followed by the violin. The oboe is fiendishly difficult to play, but ohh so beautiful to listen to!)


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dnr3301*
I never posted because I saw new person after new person told "be responsible and do your own damned research, we won't do it for you, I bet you have tylenol in your medicine cabinet, don't you, if you can't even research tylenol, we don't have time for you.".

Ugh. I know. And I don't want this place to be like that.

I _think_ that most people here are very forthcoming and helpful when newbies show up. At least till the fifth page or so.


----------



## mom2savannah_grace (Jul 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
I hope that ConfusedPrincess comes back.... the misunderstanding that occurred is totally understandable from both sides. I wish that there were no trolls because then we wouldn't get gun-shy (for lack of a better term) about anyone who seems to be one but isn't really









love and peace.









Thanks for your concern. She and I had a long discussion on the phone yesterday, so I think I planted some seeds and also got her to understand why what happened did. I did encourage her to keep coming here and read. In a few weeks I'll know if I need to continue the good fight with her or not as she will be finding out the sex then if he/she cooperates.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
Nay, it's a novel idea and a good one - and several posters have applauded it. I can understand your reasoning but I do wonder just _how_ two forums discussing the same subject will work in practice. Neither can be a debate board because Mothering won't allow it.

The main forum (this one) already has a sensible name in my opinion. Does it really need a new one?

If my idea were implemented the main forum would stay exactly as it is now...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
I can see some sense in making the new one a _support_ board, for those who have chosen or will choose not to circumcise. We could certainly rant and rave there, if we wish.

...and the new subforum would be for members to let off steam at the idiodicy of it all. You have to admit that, even though 99% of parents who chose circumcision have their child's best interests in mind based on what they know, it's still damned pathetic they're even given the choice of having normal and healthy parts cut from their sons. This subforum could be a protected forum like the surviving abuse forum. That way parents who are here for information and are one step from just having their son circumcised because it's their comfort level will not be able to read our rants and decide to go ahead and circumcise because we've made them feel guilty.

~Nay


----------



## njeb (Sep 10, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
Just an idea, but how about this main forum being for educating people who come by who are confused about why they should leave their son's healthy penis alone, and create a subforum where we dedicated intactivists can go to rant, rage, and let out some pent-up emotion at the sheer stupidity of this even being legal?

~Nay

I like this idea!







One of the reasons I haven't been posting as much here is that it seems the forum has turned from helping expectant/new parents understand why circumcision is a bad idea to a rant/rave outlet for intactivists. Yes, there's a place for that, but I was saddened by another post which said that this place was better as a forum for intactivists than as a place for new parents to get information. How are we going to make the circumcision rate go down if all we're doing is preaching to the choir?


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *njeb*
I like this idea!







One of the reasons I haven't been posting as much here is that it seems the forum has turned from helping expectant/new parents understand why circumcision is a bad idea to a rant/rave outlet for intactivists. Yes, there's a place for that, but I was saddened by another post which said that this place was better as a forum for intactivists than as a place for new parents to get information. How are we going to make the circumcision rate go down if all we're doing is preaching to the choir?

I have worried about that often before...


----------



## Lara vanAEsir (May 24, 2006)

A "rant" section is a wonderful idea.

The words "mutilation", "sexual abuse", "abuse", "vile", and "sickening". Should only be permitted there. They only scare debating people away, and result in an other boy being circumcised, because "eeeewwww, circumcised looks so much better".


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

I think if we do have a "rant room" it should somehow be protected from newer people. We really wouldn't want a new person who doesn't understand why we are using those inflamatory (and rightly so!) words getting in there and seeing how nuts this makes us. Because, even I sometimes go a little crazy when I think about it. I get so disgusted, I can't handle it. And a safe room to talk about that with people who understand would be great sometimes. Somewhere we can post the "OMG what an idiot!" posts without some new person coming along and saying, "maybe they just .... or dad wanted it done, so.... or but it is cleaner", and making us more angry. Maybe have it like the Trading Post, three months and certain # of posts before you even see it here. When they started that with TP, I was long past the time/post counts, but there were references to TP and there were people saying "What is TP? I can't find it anywhere" and I couldn't figure out why they didn't see it there. I'm kinda clueless sometimes though.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
If my idea were implemented the main forum would stay exactly as it is now...

...and the new subforum would be for members to let off steam at the idiodicy of it all. You have to admit that, even though 99% of parents who chose circumcision have their child's best interests in mind based on what they know, it's still damned pathetic they're even given the choice of having normal and healthy parts cut from their sons. This subforum could be a protected forum like the surviving abuse forum. That way parents who are here for information and are one step from just having their son circumcised because it's their comfort level will not be able to read our rants and decide to go ahead and circumcise because we've made them feel guilty.

~Nay

And that neatly answers my query about how to prevent such parents from reading posts in the subforum. Thank you. I had no idea a forum could be protected in Mothering.

So... is the next step to PM Karen? Hopefully she has continued to read this thread.

Christopher


----------



## wendy1221 (Feb 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *njeb*
I like this idea!







One of the reasons I haven't been posting as much here is that it seems the forum has turned from helping expectant/new parents understand why circumcision is a bad idea to a rant/rave outlet for intactivists. Yes, there's a place for that, but I was saddened by another post which said that this place was better as a forum for intactivists than as a place for new parents to get information. How are we going to make the circumcision rate go down if all we're doing is preaching to the choir?

I T A ! ! !


----------



## Kathryn (Oct 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yoshua*
Remember, the next person you flame could have been the next Yoshua.


Maybe I'll just stick with the flaming then.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes*

I admit I got a little frustrated when she kept refusing to say why she was posting in such a... cryptic sort of way. It drives me crazy when people say, "why can't you acknowlege the BENEFITS of circ, too?"

"Because there aren't any!"

Sigh. Culture is a beeyotch, eh?


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
Just an idea, but how about this main forum being for educating people who come by who are confused about why they should leave their son's healthy penis alone, and create a subforum where we dedicated intactivists can go to rant, rage, and let out some pent-up emotion at the sheer stupidity of this even being legal?

~Nay


I'd much prefer that it stay one forum. Why should we go in "hiding" about our rantings? Perhaps if lurkers read those posts, it will strike a chord in their mind as to how heinous circ is.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes*

I _think_ that most people here are very forthcoming and helpful when newbies show up. At least till the fifth page or so.










Another







:


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lara vanÆsir*
A "rant" section is a wonderful idea.

The words "mutilation", "sexual abuse", "abuse", "vile", and "sickening". Should only be permitted there.

Then I for one won't be sticking around. I don't believe in (that much) censorship, and I like to call things like they are.

When championing for change, some people take the Martin Luther King, Jr., approach, and others fight more like Malcolm X. Both have their place.

PS. Did I miss a PuppyFluffer post on this thread, or has she not posted yet?


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

PS. WHY fix it (change the forum) if it *AIN'T BROKE*??? I'm sure we have saved (by far) more boys than we have lost, out of the people who have ventured here--with the forum just the way it is.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

And yes, yet another post from me. An intactivist I admire very much wanted to add this to the discussion (but the intactivist vs. intactivist negativity in this thread---the point of her post--prevents her from saying it under her own username) : (Bold and underline mine)

"I think you are describing accurately here part of the problem we face in ending circumcision, and *not* a valid reason for steering clear of emotional expression in the effort to do so. I believe much of the negativity expressed in intactivist circles ............ is actually motivated more by the desire for self-protection ...than in any documented superior results obtained by rational argument.
*
While claiming to be interested in protecting babies by discouraging emotional engagement, I think these intactivists are often more interested in the desire to protect themselves from the very criticism they are directing at others.* Being afraid of receiving this kind of criticism from circumcision advocates, they dish it out to [other] intactivists. I think this is mistaken.

I am not advocating that those who believe they can be more effective in the rational educational realm change their tactics. *I am advocating that they think more deeply before trying to discourage intactivists who want to enter the emotional fight. I think we need intactivists winning the rational AND the emotional struggles.* I think both are necessary fronts in the war on genital mutilation. If someone is very uncomfortable with the emotional struggle, let them stay out of it. I have no problem with that. My problem with them comes when they try to keep the rest of us out of it as well."


----------



## Lara vanAEsir (May 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Then I for one won't be sticking around. I don't believe in (that much) censorship, and I like to call things like they are.

When championing for change, some people take the Martin Luther King, Jr., approach, and others fight more like Malcolm X. Both have their place.

I didn't have censorship in mind at all. Perhaps I should have worded it differently. I had in mind more of an encouraged guideline.

Although Martin Luther King and Malcom X each have their place, the "Malcom X" should be reserved for the "Intactivist" area, and the "Martin Luther King" should be reserved for a "Circumcision" area. Saying outright that circumcision is mutilation scares many debating people far away, and makes us out to be little more than foreskin obsessed wackos.

Quote:

PS. WHY fix it (change the forum) if it AIN'T BROKE??? I'm sure we have saved (by far) more boys than we have lost, out of the people who have ventured here--with the forum just the way it is.
But, well, there is something wrong with this forum. Namely we are _too quick_ to dish out the emotional responses, like we did on the thread which lead to this thread being created. Despite a specific request to not recieve emotional arguements, we dished them out to the poster anyway, and when the OP protested, without directly saying it, we accused the OP of being a troll and chased the OP away. So either seperate things into a "Cirumcision" forum and an "Intactivst" forum (we have a Breastfeeding and Lactivism don't we?), or tone down language when people come looking for information. Telling somebody circumcision is mutilation is less effective than giving them the information and having them conclude it themselves.

Quote:

While claiming to be interested in protecting babies by discouraging emotional engagement, I think these intactivists are often more interested in the desire to protect themselves from the very criticism they are directing at others. Being afraid of receiving this kind of criticism from circumcision advocates, they dish it out to [other] intactivists.
Your assumption is wrong and offensive.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lara vanÆsir*
Saying outright that circumcision is mutilation scares many debating people far away, and makes us out to be little more than foreskin obsessed wackos.

But, well, there is something wrong with this forum. Namely we are _too quick_ to dish out the emotional responses, like we did on the thread which lead to this thread being created. we have a Breastfeeding and Lactivism don't we?),


1.) It IS mutilation. If that makes me a "wacko," so be it.

2). Breastfeeding is a very active process...........I breastfed my son every day for almost two years. I only made the choice to leave him intact once. It makes a lot more sense to have a separate breastfeeding and lactivism forum.

3). You perhaps missed my post where I pointed out another major thread here recently (I'll find the link if you need me to), where the poor aunt asked about circ'ing her nephew and received lots of helpful, gentle advice and decided really quickly not to circ her nephew. I've been posting at CaC for literally years, and that's what I see, more often than not. People get the advice they need and make the right decision, more often than not. So, I disagree--this forum is not broken.

4.) Do you not see the irony of saying where "Malcolm X-type" intactivism can occur? Malcolm X himself never would have stood for being told where to be active.


----------



## Lara vanAEsir (May 24, 2006)

_1.) It IS mutilation. If that makes me a "wacko," so be it._ Content. But if someone sees you as a wacko, they are unlikely to listen to your reasoning.

_2). Breastfeeding is a very active process...........I breastfed my son every day for almost two years. I only made the choice to leave him intact once. It makes a lot more sense to have a separate breastfeeding and lactivism forum._Yes, but it's about having people form an opinion on circumcision. Society already tells us breastfeeding is best. On the contrary, society tells us that circumcision is best.
_
3). You perhaps missed my post where I pointed out another major thread here recently (I'll find the link if you need me to), where the poor aunt asked about circ'ing her nephew and received lots of helpful, gentle advice and decided really quickly not to circ her nephew. I've been posting at CaC for literally years, and that's what I see, more often than not. People get the advice they need and make the right decision, more often than not. So, I disagree--this forum is not broken._ I read that discussion and I participated in it.

_4.) Do you not see the irony of saying where "Malcolm X-type" intactivism can occur? Malcolm X himself never would have stood for being told where to be active._ If you see a fire-and-brimstone type agenda as most effective, I can't change your opinion.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lara vanÆsir*
Society already tells us breastfeeding is best. On the contrary, society tells us that circumcision is best.

If you see a fire-and-brimstone type agenda as most effective, I can't change your opinion.


There's still a lot of "formula is perfectly fine and NIP is gross" attitude out there, so society doesn't necessarily tell us that breast is best. Even so, what does that prove? How does that prove your point that we should have separate forums?

Secondly, I never said that I *always* see "fire and brimstone" as most effective. Most of the time, I play nicely.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

I seem to have been misunderstood. If a new subforum were created it would be where the hardcore intactivsts would go to rant, rage, complain, gripe, and otherwise let off steam about the sheer stupidity of the fact parents even have to face this decision. The forum we already have would stay exactly as it is now. I agree with what A&A said, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Well, adding a new forum wouldn't be _fixing_ this one, in fact it wouldn't change this one at all.

I also strongly agree with what Linda said earlier (paraphrasing) about how we need to give people information and let them figure out on their own, and in their own time, that circumcision is mutilation. It is _definitely_ mutilation, and that's even going by the standard dictionary defintions.
"1. To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple.
2. To disfigure by damaging irreparably: mutilate a statue. See Synonyms at batter1.
3.To make imperfect by excising or altering parts." All three of those definitions describe infant circumcision perfectly. The problem with using inflamatory language around hypersenstive parents is that they immediately assume they are being attacked (instead of the practice itself being attacked), they feel threatened and violated, don't do any more research, and harm is done that could have been prevented.

The thing is, _some_ people would respond favorably to "only a freakin moron would cut off part of their healthy newborn's body". They stop and think a second and say, "I never thought of that, but hey, you're right!" But _all_ people would respond favorably to calm, rational reasoning, answering their questions, and in many cases telling them what their questions are, giving them time to digest the information, and recommending further reading. Some people will undoubtably be harder to convince than others, but I think a little extra frustration occaisionally has to be expected. Again, the subforum would be a great place to let out the aggression that comes from 50 posts of "it's not medically necessary to amputate healthy parts from your baby!" "What?" "It's not medically necessary to amputate healthy parts from your baby!" "But it has to be!" "IT'S NOT MEDICALLY..."

I guess to summarize, anger doesn't teach. Anger is healthy, it needs to be expressed, but there needs to be an appropriate place. People don't respond well to feeling attacked and invalidated, which is why I believe having a subforum as a place to release anger is a good idea. I'm not the best at explaining things, so if I haven't been perfectly clear I implore anyone to keep firing questions, just as Islay did earlier, until I do make sense.

~Nay


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AntoninBeGonin*
Well, adding a new forum wouldn't be _fixing_ this one, in fact it wouldn't change this one at all.


Yes, it would. This forum wouldn't have the same impact without it. I'm not saying that "ranting" on specific questioning threads is usually a good idea, but we should be able to start "rant" threads of our own in the main forum. There's no need to hide in a subforum. Secrecy has perpetuated circ for long enough. If I were new to this board, and I saw a thread (in the main forum) about, "Oh, I'm so incredibly sad that I couldn't talk my brother out of circ'ing my nephew...." etc., it would really pique my interest.


----------



## Lara vanAEsir (May 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
There's still a lot of "formula is perfectly fine and NIP is gross" attitude out there, so society doesn't necessarily tell us that breast is best. Even so, what does that prove? How does that prove your point that we should have separate forums?

Society does teach us breast is best. Arguing that formula feeding is fine, is not arguing that formula feeding is just as good as breastfeeding.

The radical degree of the emotive responses often is great, so great, it scares people away. This is why I would either like to see a seperation of a forum, or an toning down of this degree when people come here seeking information.


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Yes, it would. This forum wouldn't have the same impact without it. I'm not saying that "ranting" on specific questioning threads is usually a good idea, but we should be able to start "rant" threads of our own in the main forum. There's no need to hide in a subforum. Secrecy has perpetuated circ for long enough. If I were new to this board, and I saw a thread (in the main forum) about, "Oh, I'm so incredibly sad that I couldn't talk my brother out of circ'ing my nephew...." etc., it would really pique my interest.

I have to go eat dinner, but I wanted to say that A&A, you have made some really good points which I will comment on further later when I have time. I wanted to say that you've made a great contribution to this discussion and that I at least appreciate hearing your point of view (other than about the thread being about you, 'cause it's not)







Thank you for telling us how you feel and not holding back! This discussion would have fizzled long ago if it wasn't for you and kldliam (who I really hope is still around







). Time to eat!

love and peace.


----------



## MamaTT (Aug 29, 2003)

I used to frequent three main forums here at MDC. Diapering, Lactivism (formerly bf activism), and CAC.

When Diapering got split up so that the newbies wouldn't be flooded with "OMG! Kiwipie stocked!" and the like, I quit going (as did many others) even though prefolds were a huge chunk of my stash. It just didn't feel the same.

Similarly, even though I had a lot of challenges with bf, and I prolly *could* help out on the other bf boards, I only go to Lactivism. A person has only time enough for so many forums...and the favorites will get clicked first.

I believe it is wise not to get too narrow of a focus, and put my vote against having a separate *vent* or "intactivist" forum.


----------



## MamaTT (Aug 29, 2003)

Society may say that breast is best, not better, which is subtle but significant difference, since that means that formula can be justasgood and in fact, more convenient since you don't even have to be there, and look! we just added ingredients to make your child a rocket scientist! and if you do bf, you'll have to supplement vit. D and you'll prolly get bit and your dh won't like it......

There's a helluva lot of cultural fallacies being promoted in that arena, ones that lactivists spend plenty of time trying to combat. Don't believe me? pick up a mainstream parenting mag, or turn your tv to The View.

Even if society were saying that intact is best, but circumcision has its benefits too, we would *still* have our work cut out for us. Which is where it is at in many areas, though sadly still not mine. We have a long way to go before the joe schmoe reaction is to say, "Formula? what, do you want to make your kid sick and stupid?" or "You want to cut off half your kids dick? to make it look cute *TO YOU*? WTF?"

JMTC.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
And yes, yet another post from me. An intactivist I admire very much wanted to add this to the discussion (but the intactivist vs. intactivist negativity in this thread---the point of her post--prevents her from saying it under her own username) : (Bold and underline mine)

Why? Her second-hand post in itself is surely an example of the very thing she complains of: protecting herself from criticism.

Quote:

"I think you are describing accurately here part of the problem we face in ending circumcision, and *not* a valid reason for steering clear of emotional expression in the effort to do so. I believe much of the negativity expressed in intactivist circles ............ is actually motivated more by the desire for self-protection ...than in any documented superior results obtained by rational argument.
Negativity? Which is more 'negative': speaking with firm conviction but gently and with understanding or peppering our replies with perceived invective?

Quote:

Being afraid of receiving this kind of criticism from circumcision advocates, they dish it out to [other] intactivists. I think this is mistaken.
I welcome criticism from circumcision advocates and if this was a debate board I would relish it. But it isn't. This forum is purely for discussion and an opportunity to state the case against circumcision, whether we like it or not.

Quote:

I am not advocating that those who believe they can be more effective in the rational educational realm change their tactics. *I am advocating that they think more deeply before trying to discourage intactivists who want to enter the emotional fight. I think we need intactivists winning the rational AND the emotional struggles.* I think both are necessary fronts in the war on genital mutilation. If someone is very uncomfortable with the emotional struggle, let them stay out of it. I have no problem with that. My problem with them comes when they try to keep the rest of us out of it as well."
Isn't every reply to questions from newbies filled with emotion? It is for me. But can we not think twice before we phrase that emotion? Does it really make us any the less persuasive if we speak with sensitivity? I totally understand the wish sometimes to use words and phrases that say _exactly_ what we think; but is that productive? Does it help our cause? Or does it just make us _feel_ better?

Stickers and billboards, etc. are another matter. They can shock, cajole, make us laugh, make us cry. They are anonymous. We had a series of drink-driving TV commercials recently, the like of which I never hope to see again - except that they were _stunningly_ effective. There's a place and time for this kind of persuasion. But is it here, on this board, and now?

Christopher


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

Christopher: Why? Her second-hand post in itself is surely an example of the very thing she complains of: protecting herself from criticism.
I'm baaackkk.......









I am not hiding, and neither should any of you.


----------



## Lara vanAEsir (May 24, 2006)




----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

Christopher says: Isn't every reply to questions from newbies filled with emotion? It is for me.
Christopher-
Your definition of 'emotion' and my definition of 'emotion' are two entirely different things I think. If the group is going to ban all forms emotion on this board, then shouldn't there be a consensus about what the definition of emotion is? For instance, what words are strictly off-limits here? What words are too emotional to use???

Can I say 'forced genital cutting'?
Can I say 'cutting culture'?
Can I say disgusting?
Can I say evil?
Can I say ignorant?
Can I say "give me a break?"
_What can i say?_

How much will the group want to censor? It's going to turn people off if you try to control their every word. I left CAC because there was too much censorship here...not because I was trying to protect myself from your criticism.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lara vanÆsir*

Let me also say that perhaps a toning down of emotive language when parents seek information here would be just as effective as creating a different forum. But it seems some would have a problem with this.


Never said I had a *problem* with it. Just that I reserve the *right* to post however, as long as it is within UA guidelines, of course. You'll find that, eh, probably 95% of my posts to new people on this board are very welcoming.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
I left CAC because there was too much censorship here...not because I was trying to protect myself from your critisism.


And I'm glad you're back.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaTT*

Similarly, even though I had a lot of challenges with bf, and I prolly *could* help out on the other bf boards, I only go to Lactivism. A person has only time enough for so many forums...and the favorites will get clicked first.

I believe it is wise not to get too narrow of a focus, and put my vote against having a separate *vent* or "intactivist" forum.

Thank you. Good point.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
This discussion would have fizzled long ago if it wasn't for you and kldliam (who I really hope is still around







). Time to eat!

love and peace.










Perhaps we should have just let it fizzle!





















:







:


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

A&A, may I join 'MusicLady' in her appreciation?

(Sorry, trumpet. Please tell me if you don't like my pet name for you; but I can never remember your acronym for trumpet player! And I love music, as you know!)

With nearly 4000 posts in Mothering, you are not only a veteran of some stature but also remarkably eloquent. I have read many a 'gentle' post of yours and I know trumpet isn't the only member here who acknowledges that. You have a wisdom born of experience that is enviable.

There... have I buttered you up nicely?









Seriously though, I mean every word of it.

However, my last post needs a response!







:

Christopher


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*

With nearly 4000 posts in Mothering, you are not only a veteran of some stature but also remarkably eloquent.


Some would say _*long-winded.*_







: (And this thread alone may put me over 4000!) But thank you.

I think kldliam answered you nicely.

But usually, again probably 95% of the time, I _*do*_ try to speak with "sensitivity," as you put it, to new people, but I reserve the right not to. (And I really don't understand why you would "relish it" if this were a debate board. I would leave. It would drive me crazy.)


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Ok, y'all, so now that we've made up







:, what, in your opinion, is the best way to respond to "you're not giving me enough scientific information so I'm not listening, nahnahnahnhanaaaaaa" from new people? (Obviously you don't think I chose the best way to respond to that previously.







)

I think, IMHO, that we should test them on the links we HAVE provided, to make sure that they've actually read them.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

And we're working our poor mod to death! Lovefest for PuppyFluffer!











































:


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

Christopher says:
Does it really make us any the less persuasive if we speak with sensitivity?
I really don't have a problem using sensitivity. _I use it more often than not in fact._ On some occasions, my patience wears thin. I should not be persecuted for it either. If I exercise "patience" in the majority of my posts, I should think that THAT should make you happy enough. If I am attacking people in 99% of my posts, I could understand your upset, but I am not.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
I really don't have a problem using sensitivity. _I use it more often than not in fact._ On some occasions, my patience wears thin. I should not be persecuted for it either. If I exercise "patience" in the majority of my posts, I should think that THAT should make you happy enough. If I am attacking people in 99% of my posts, I could understand your upset, but I am not.











(I need a "me, too" icon).


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Now, let's get back to work. Come help this mama:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=496578


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

kldliam, so it was you... I did wonder: recognised your expressive style.









I am SO glad you're back! As trumpet said, without your and A&A's input this valuable thread might have fizzled out.

Emotions cover a huge spectrum, of course. Yours and mine are not at odds. I, too, _think_ 'torture', 'mutilation', etc. I simply choose not to use those terms here in response to a newcomer, for the reasons I've given. It doesn't mean I don't feel them.

The biggest problem in forums is the absence of facial expression, tone of voice or the touch of a hand.

A scenario:

Discussion, face to face, with a parent who is thinking seriously about RIC and cannot drag him or herself away from the social pressures of conformity and the tales of 'cleanliness', 'infection' - and so on. After much heartfelt effort, you finally touch an outstretched hand or gently hold an arm or shoulder and with care and concern you softly say: "[Name]... it's mutilation."

OK, so this probably sounds soppy and over sentimental, but it makes my point.

~nay~ has spoken very thoughtfully on this issue. I do hope we can reslove it successfully. Karen posted one message, saying she couldn't understand how she missed this thread but would respond as soon as she had an opportunity. Karen, are you there?









Christopher


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
(And I really don't understand why you would "relish it" if this were a debate board. I would leave. It would drive me crazy.)

I can explain that another time, perhaps. But right now it's waaaaay too late for me!

Christopher


----------



## kxsiven (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
The biggest problem in forums is the absence of facial expression, tone of voice

Well, we just have to start webcam dates


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

kldliam, I have bent over backwards - both here and in PMs - to be open, fair and appreciative of you. I cannot understand why you think I'm persecuting you. It isn't in my nature to persecute anyone.

Then A&A backs you up. I'm saddened and disillusioned.









----------------------------------

Kia, now that's an idea - if I had a webcam!

Christopher


----------



## ericswifey27 (Feb 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
I, too, _think_ 'torture', 'mutilation', etc. I simply choose not to use those terms here in response to a newcomer, for the reasons I've given. It doesn't mean I don't feel them.

Ditto


----------



## jessjgh1 (Nov 4, 2004)

I have caught a bit here and there... but not nearly enough to comment on the exchange.

I think that we usually do a nice job of backing each other up and tempering each other at times. Sometimes I feel compelled to say something in a certain way just because the tone turned in a way that I think is unnecessary

I think when we bring up that the term mutilation/abuse/ etc. it should refer to the action of circumcising or the person that does it. The parents choosing circumcision are not choosing to abuse their child, they are misguided. A very very very few of them are in the category of pro-circ/fetish.

The problem is that newbies do not get that distinction and feel attacked with those type of terms unless they are explained clearly. And they might leave before they feel encouraged to explore the issue.

We all have our stages to go through in uncovering the layers of deception involving circumcision-- remember your audience and where they are at.

Jessica


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
Isn't every reply to questions from newbies filled with emotion? It is for me. But can we not think twice before we phrase that emotion? Does it really make us any the less persuasive if we speak with sensitivity? I totally understand the wish sometimes to use words and phrases that say _exactly_ what we think; but is that productive? Does it help our cause? Or does it just make us _feel_ better?









: emotion = GOOD, but sometimes (seeing as how this IS an internet message board and it's so easy to misinterpret what someone means) it needs to be toned down a bit - more like, rephrased to be more clear. [I can't even think of a clear way to convey this.... gah!]

(I also love the oboe! As long as it's played well







Which reminds me of the quote "No one should be allowed to play the violin until he has mastered it" ~Jim Fiebig







)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I'm not saying that "ranting" on specific questioning threads is usually a good idea, but we should be able to start "rant" threads of our own in the main forum. There's no need to hide in a subforum. Secrecy has perpetuated circ for long enough. If I were new to this board, and I saw a thread (in the main forum) about, "Oh, I'm so incredibly sad that I couldn't talk my brother out of circ'ing my nephew...." etc., it would really pique my interest.

I agree that the threads about helping/failing to help others can be beneficial. Not all of those are "rants" per se though. There are good reasons on both sides of whether to have a separate forum. This is why I'm glad that you and kldliam are here. What sounds like a good idea on the surface can have bad consequences too and we need to acknowledge what those would be (thank you for doing that!!!). Specialising can make things either simpler or more complicated depending on the circumstances.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
How much will the group want to censor? It's going to turn people off if you try to control their every word. I left CAC because there was too much censorship here...not because I was trying to protect myself from your criticism.

I haven't noticed any censoring here... it maybe was mentioned in this thread (not by me), but I do NOT believe in censoring (other than self-censorship) because it goes against all my wacko libertarian beliefs







The only censoring that should be going on (other than the UA, of course) is a personal decision. Obviously that's going to be different for every one of us. I think the criteria for self-censorship should be every one of us asking a question such as, "how can I best convince this person, given what I know about them based on their posts, that circumcision is a heinous, evil, mutilating, abusive act." and then post accordingly. Ha, at least that's MY criteria for MY self-censorship







: Does anyone else do that?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
But usually, again probably 95% of the time, I do try to speak with "sensitivity," as you put it, to new people, but I reserve the right not to. (And I really don't understand why you would "relish it" if this were a debate board. I would leave. It would drive me crazy.)

You certainly can post however you like. Nobody would argue with that, I don't think. Part of this thread is talking about how to be effective and sometimes taking a less sensitive approach is effective







But sometimes it's not.... And you definitely are mostly perfectly welcoming and wonderful. Goodness... I am SO glad this isn't a debate board!!! Not that we wouldn't win, hands down, but it would drive me crazy too...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Ok, y'all, so now that we've made up







:, what, in your opinion, is the best way to respond to "you're not giving me enough scientific information so I'm not listening, nahnahnahnhanaaaaaa" from new people? (Obviously you don't think I chose the best way to respond to that previously.







)

Well... I didn't quite get the impression from that particular thread that you did, but I think that we should give the scientific info and then set back and give it time to sink in. The thread you refer to wasn't open more than a couple of days and that's not much in real time to have information sink in. Especially with someone who really didn't know anything about the topic (as evidenced by the "but Europeans DO circumcise" bit







). I think had she had more time to absorb the facts, then we could have brought up more of the anecdotal stories and such. She did take kindly to my anecdotal story and non-scientific reason for not circumcising (maybe that's why I have a different view of the thread). The main reason for that, I think, is that I acknowledged that she only wanted science and let her know that I only gave her my story because others had already given her a plethora of links to absorb and I wanted to share my personal experience.

Quote:

I think, IMHO, that we should test them on the links we HAVE provided, to make sure that they've actually read them.
A pop quiz sounds like fun!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jessjgh1*
We all have our stages to go through in uncovering the layers of deception involving circumcision-- remember your audience and where they are at.

I'm gonna do a stream-of-consciousness thingy again -

That's very well said. Just to remember that some of these people have never known any different. If the US circumcises and the rest of the world doesn't then that means the US is superior, right? If the US does it, then surely everyone else follows suit, right? Doctors wouldn't do it if it was bad, right? The AAP would take a stronger stance against it if it had such adverse effects, right?

I f*king HATE those misconceptions (and many more, but it's getting early in the morning here). But they're out there and many people truly, honestly believe them. How can they not believe them when that's all they know? It requires a complete paradigm shift to believe that something the all-knowing doctors condone can be THIS horrendous and THIS damaging.

How can we best facilitate the paradigm shift for people who are so entrenched in the societal beliefs that they don't even think twice (or once) about circumcision until they find this message board? By remembering where these people are at. Where they're coming from (a decidedly pro-circumcision society). How we thought before we knew any better (if there was a time when we thought it was okay or no big deal or hadn't researched it). How would we want to be convinced about something like this?

Take... bare feet. If I came up to you and told you that the shoes you were wearing were disgusting, germ-breeding, foot coffins that deform and cripple you, you'd probably think I was a nut (I love my Dvorak keyboard typos - I totally just typed nit then nun and then keybeard). All those things are true, but would me telling you that compel you to learn more about barefooting or just run (while still wearing your shoes) far away from the crazy hippie lady?

Some people will be swayed by blatant facts that prove that they are wrong, but others will need to be convinced with patience and understanding and TIME. The most important thing, IMO, is time. Time for the new folks to digest this extremely disturbing procedure. When I was first looking at circumcision in depth when I was pregnant (there was no chance of us having it done 'cause we want our sons to be intact like their dad, but I was curious) I could only stomach so much information at one time. AND I had neither circumcised a son nor do I have a circumcised dh/dp. It was still hard for me to read this stuff. Very very hard. I still cannot watch that circumcision video. And I've been a hard-core intactivist for well over a year now.

This is not an easy subject to study. It's an easy subject to see is wrong once one reads a bit, but it's so disturbing and sick and wrong. It's so obvious to us. We've read. We've learned about it over time. But other people haven't had that time. I think we need to encourage new posters to TAKE THEIR TIME and digest these disturbing facts.

Sorry for getting so long-winded and I hope it makes as much sense here as it does in my head. I was just writing what came into my head and what made sense to me.

This board has meant so much to me in the past year and a half. I'm so grateful to all of you! We are making a HUGE difference in our world and what a blessing to actually be able to SEE a the difference we make in the intact boys we have helped save









love and peace.


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I'd much prefer that it stay one forum. Why should we go in "hiding" about our rantings? Perhaps if lurkers read those posts, it will strike a chord in their mind as to how heinous circ is.

Or perhaps we will look border-line unstable?

Obviously once you know a little about this issue you become more receptive to such notions and more accepting but it must be remembered that for those in many areas this is just something which is a routine, it occurs as standard and with only a single question (the "Do you want...?" to which they are required to respond to with an affirmative, as their doctor instructed), if even that on occasion.

So seeing something so standard and ingrained referred to in such absoloutist negative terms considering that prior to their arrival they will only have seen an inversion, if even that.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

I just wanted to make clear to everyone that I have not once encouraged censorship on this main forum. I believe in our first admendment rights.









~Nay


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

I just wanted to make clear to everyone that I have not once encouraged censorship on this main forum. I believe in our first admendment rights.

~Nay
I thought we were all discussing censorship of the _emotions._ Many people have voted that the (high)emotions should be censored here, under ALL circumstances.


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

We all have our stages to go through in uncovering the layers of deception involving circumcision-- remember your audience and where they are at.
I agree with this. I also appreciated Trmpetplaya's long and thoughtful post. But when I am faced with someone who is being outright snotty, it makes my job more difficult. _Remember, I'm not even getting paid for this either._ I do my best to keep my cool but it isn't always easy.


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Superb post Playa!


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
But when I am faced with someone who is being outright snotty, it makes my job more difficult. _Remember, I'm not even getting paid for this either._ I do my best to keep my cool but it isn't always easy.

yep.


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Ok, y'all, so now that we've made up







:, what, in your opinion, is the best way to respond to "you're not giving me enough scientific information so I'm not listening, nahnahnahnhanaaaaaa" from new people? (Obviously you don't think I chose the best way to respond to that previously.







)

ummm, I don't know, but I'm glad to see we've all made up. I hate to fight with people I agree with.

Actually, A&A, after reading your posts explaining why you would be against a separate forum, I have to admit I'm torn. I would love a place where I could just go and write, "I hate my BIL, he's so dumb and won't research it" and that's it and everyone else there would know what I was talking about and all I would get was support, but my BIL couldn't see me saying that, my SIL couldn't see me saying that, so I could still work on them gently IRL, even though I'm furious. (note: I don't actually hate my BIL and SIL. I love them. And they didn't circ my niece or my nephew.)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
I think, IMHO, that we should test them on the links we HAVE provided, to make sure that they've actually read them.

That is exactly what scared me away from the vax forum. All I wanted to know was info about polio, but I saw over and over that to get a simple answer about one thing, you had to prove that you had done research on everything else. But if you had done more research, you probably wouldn't have a simple question in the first place.

Yes, it gets annoying to answer, "no one should retract your son's forekin but him" the 800th time, or talk about the faults in the HIV or UTI studies over and over, but that's the 1000th time we've heard it; it might be the first time they are hearing it. So maybe we should have a protected place where we can say "when will they learn?" and not scare the newer people off.

The point about feeling scared of negativity is valid, I think. I often find myself thinking, "I'm advocating NOT CUTTING OF PART OF THE BABY'S PENIS. why am I trying not to offend her?" I am sometimes amazed that this is even an issue. Why is this end the radical one?


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
I thought we were all discussing censorship of the _emotions._ Many people have voted that the (high)emotions should be censored here, under ALL circumstances.

I just want to make it clear that I don't see thinking about the possibility of a separate "rant room" in my mind equals censoring emotions. In my mind, it would be less about changing what happens here and more about giving us a space where we don't have to explain ourselves every stinking second. the threads would be "I hate them!!!!" and everyone would say, "me too, I know what you mean" and out here we would still answer questions about why we shouldn't let dr.x retract timmy when he turns 1 and why looking like dad is a silly reason to cut off your kid's foreskin, then back to "rant room" and say, "AAAAHHHHH. if one more dad asks me about looking like him, I'll cut off his arm".

ok, that was longer than I meant, but I don't want to advocate tuning down emotions.


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jessjgh1*
We all have our stages to go through in uncovering the layers of deception involving circumcision-- remember your audience and where they are at.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dnr3301*
I just want to make it clear that I don't see thinking about the possibility of a separate "rant room" in my mind equals censoring emotions. In my mind, it would be less about changing what happens here and more about giving us a space where we don't have to explain ourselves every stinking second. the threads would be "I hate them!!!!" and everyone would say, "me too, I know what you mean" and out here we would still answer questions about why we shouldn't let dr.x retract timmy when he turns 1 and why looking like dad is a silly reason to cut off your kid's foreskin, then back to "rant room" and say, "AAAAHHHHH. if one more dad asks me about looking like him, I'll cut off his arm".

ok, that was longer than I meant, but I don't want to advocate tuning down emotions.

That is exactly what I had envisioned. Thank you.

~Nay


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

*trumpet said:*

_"I think the criteria for self-censorship should be every one of us asking a question such as, "how can I best convince this person, given what I know about them based on their posts, that circumcision is a heinous, evil, mutilating, abusive act." and then post accordingly. Ha, at least that's MY criteria for MY self-censorship Does anyone else do that?"_

Well, yes, I try every time to do just that. But because I live in England, I also read (present tense) with great interest the posts made by USA residents - questions and answers. Over the past few years I have learned so much... and still learning. I strive to think myself into an advanced nation's culture where RIC is practised with barely a second thought. It's not easy. It's an assault on my concept of all things true, just, pure, lovely and of good report.

I will never cease to be in awe of the folk who live their daily lives fighting an abomination like this in the country they love.

So, thank you Trumpet. Your thread has given us the opportunity to air our views with a thoroughness long overdue, whatever the final outcome.

Christopher


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

I have just gotten to the end of this thread and I will take a bit to mull over the thoughts that are coming up and return to post a bit later tonight.

My real life is getting in the way of giving you all feedback on this issue but I will put it on hold this evening to toss out some ideas.

I want to thank everyone for their contributions to this forum. It is a subject that evokes such passion - and rightfully so. It's just the communication of that passion that needs to be thought about carefully.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Ok, I'm back.

I think, in general, the board does run fairly smoothly. This is a subject that many feel very deeply passionate about and educating people new to the idea of circ can be frustrating, especially when you've had time to educate yourself on the facts and to simmer in your emotions and work out exactly how you feel about the topic.

I think words like mutilation and other strong emotion-evoking words are applicable to RIC but I think the use of them needs to be weighed on an individual basis. Also, how we phrase those words makes a huge difference in their perception. For instance, to say "Circumcision is mutilation and I'd never do that to my child." evokes a different reaction than saying "I believe circumcision is mutilating to a child and it's not a thing I would do." The first is a blanket statement, the second is an "I" statement and takes ownership of the opinion that circ is mutilation. It's easy to go on from there and explain why you believe this but to answer a newcomer's inquiry about circ with a frank statement that can imply shock and blame is not so productive. I think it's fine to express your passion as long as you own the statements as your own thoughts (and there is plenty of information to back up those opinions) and don't throw accusations along with your opinions.

It is never appropriate to cast suspicion against another member or their motives for posting here. It is actually against the User Agreement (see "Rules" at the top of any MDC page for the UA.) It is always fine to PM me or report a post which you think is made by a member who does not have honest intentions. Trolls always out themselves eventually and are dealt with by administration or they go away on their own in the face of facts.

When new posters come to this forum with questions, we have a Web Resources sticky that they can be directed to. The knowledgabe members of this community can always take excerpts from webpages to help answer questions as long as you include a link to the source. That sort of thing would help newbies to pinpoint tidbits of info that addressed their specific question and give them a place to research more if they are the type that want "facts" as opposed to personal experience type feedback. Then we could always dialog with them about the link, whether they read it, if it answered their questions, if it raised more questions. It is each person's responsibility to research and make informed choices. This board can't do the research for people. I see the mission here as one of directing people to facts and info and sharing personal experiences. Some people want facts backed by what they can call "science" like info from medical establishments and medical journals. Some people have social concerns and want to discuss peer issues and need personal accounts. Everyone has their own thing that will resonate with them. I think when we are posting to new members, we need to really ask ourselves what our onw motive is. Do you want to educate this person to empower them to make the best choice for their child? OR are you feeling angry that yet another person thinks they have the right to authorize cutting their kid's private parts. How you are feeling will color how you post. If you're angry, maybe skip hitting the reply button for a bit. It's not fair to put our own anger onto others who don't know enough yet about RIC to know how terrible it is. When we empower the inquirer with facts, they will find their own anger about the subject and hopefully move forward to help others see the truth as well.

As for making a seperate forum for venting, I don't see the function in that as a community service. It would serve as a place to allow devoted intactivists to let off steam but wouldn't serve the community and it's effort to educate very well I think. We allow venting threads here but one must abide by the User Agreement. We don't allow namecalling for instance. You can't say that your BIL is a total stupid jerk but you can say that he is acting in a stupid bullheaded way and that it angers you immensely. Do you see the difference?


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
But because I live in England, I also read (present tense) with great interest the posts made by USA residents - questions and answers.



Interesting point. It just struck me how many of you who are saying, "tone down the attitude" (or similar) are European. For you, it's academic, as if I were fighting FGM in Africa. Of course I would also tell fellow intactivists to get less emotional, if it weren't all around me, every day, IRL.


----------



## LadyMarmalade (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yoshua*
Seen a few people get in trouble for casting suspiscion on someone who was legit.

I was the legit person









But at the same time, it's not okay for anybody - no matter how legit they may be - to say pro-circ stuff unknowingly. I think it's very important to point out if someone has said something pro-circ, whether they recognise it or not. Subtle pro-circ language is something we have to fight against, and it DOES cause problems because when newbies come here saying stuff which we know is anti-intact, they need to be corrected. Unfortunately most of them will deny anything they said was pro-circ and they get offended and take every opportunity in the future to remind people that even *they* came good


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LadyMarmalade*
But at the same time, it's not okay for anybody - no matter how legit they may be - to say pro-circ stuff unknowingly. I think it's very important to point out if someone has said something pro-circ, whether they recognise it or not. Subtle pro-circ language is something we have to fight against, and it DOES cause problems because when newbies come here saying stuff which we know is anti-intact, they need to be corrected. Unfortunately most of them will deny anything they said was pro-circ and they get offended and take every opportunity in the future to remind people that even *they* came good









I agree that anything that is pro-circ needs to be addressed but that can be done with facts without calling a person pro-circ and starting down the slippery slope of speculating whether someone has sincere intentions. If just the pro-circ statement(s) are addressed with facts, it's pretty obvious that one has two choices, to accept the facts or to stick to their pro-circ postion. A poster who continues to stick to a pro circ stance would then be dealt with by a moderator sending them a PM informing them of the title and purpose of the the forum and letting them know that no advocacy of circ is allowed in the forum. It is not the membership's place to accuse one of being pro-circ or to hint at it because that derails what could be a very informative thread into casting suspicion, violations of the User Agreement and then post removal and edits and a lot of work behind the scenes for a mod to PM people (and your mod is on dial up unfortunately - it takes ALOT of time!) A thread that debunks common myths and reasons for circ that is civil and factual stands in the forum for other lurkers to learn from!


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Interesting point. It just struck me how many of you who are saying, "tone down the attitude" (or similar) are European. For you, it's academic, as if I were fighting FGM in Africa. Of course I would also tell fellow intactivists to get less emotional, if it weren't all around me, every day, IRL.

That's very true... I'm not European, but I only have one friend who might have circumcised her son (I'm scared to ask...) and ALL the rest are intact







The rates are so low around here especially among the types of people I hang out with.... I'm not faced with it every single day. Sometimes I'll see a cut boy at the park or swimming pool, but it's the exception not the rule. My parents want us to move to GA near them and one of my reservations about moving there is that most of the people there have circumcised sons









Wow.... PuppyFluffer, you're on dial-up









I'll be back later once dd and dh are asleep...

love and peace.


----------



## kxsiven (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
It just struck me how many of you who are saying, "tone down the attitude" (or similar) are European.









Well, here is one European who has no idea what political correctness is.

I agree 100% that honey is better choice than vinegar but when the personal name calling or accusations about being a liar start then I will whip out my vinegar bottle.


----------



## ericswifey27 (Feb 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Interesting point. It just struck me how many of you who are saying, "tone down the attitude" (or similar) are European. For you, it's academic, as if I were fighting FGM in Africa. Of course I would also tell fellow intactivists to get less emotional, if it weren't all around me, every day, IRL.

I'm not European


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

I think one thing that is somewhat unique about CaC compared to the other forums on MDC that I have frequented... is how we tend to "take matters into our own hands" instead of reporting questionable posts to Karen (or mods on other forums where the "how AP is AP" threads and others like them show up). Which gives her more work ultimately. I appreciate not having threads shut down just as I'm getting to the juicy parts (I'm bad... I LOVE reading drama-filled threads







). But having just found out that PF is on dial-up... man.

The reason I don't report things to mods (I don't think I ever have - and I think I'd remember something like that) is because I'm never quite sure WHEN I should. Sometimes I think something is off kilter and so I just answer even though maybe it should be reported. I always figure that someone else will report it if it really needs to be reported. Maybe someone can help me with this...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LadyMarmalade*
But at the same time, it's not okay for anybody - no matter how legit they may be - to say pro-circ stuff unknowingly. I think it's very important to point out if someone has said something pro-circ, whether they recognise it or not. Subtle pro-circ language is something we have to fight against, and it DOES cause problems because when newbies come here saying stuff which we know is anti-intact, they need to be corrected. Unfortunately most of them will deny anything they said was pro-circ and they get offended and take every opportunity in the future to remind people that even *they* came good









Pro-circ is definitely NOT okay for sure! But we can correct people without accusing them (or even seeming to accuse them) of being blatantly pro-circumcision.

Even someone who sees that circumcision is wrong could still think that in some cases (like with a UTI or other ridiculous health claim) it's justified. Then if they only posted something such as "Why shouldn't I circumcise my son? My brother had to be circumcised due to health problems when he was five. He kept getting recurrent UTIs and I really don't want my son to have to deal with that" then we could either jump all over that person and berate them for bringing pro-circumcision propaganda here (even though they haven't told us how they feel about it other than this one concern) which would make them defensive. Or we could just give them the facts/personal experience of our own and they would be able, in good conscience, to make the decision that they really wanted to make in the first place.

Just because someone seems to be pro-circumcision doesn't necessarily make it so. We only get a sliver of a person's life and beliefs from a post (especially if they are new to MDC or if we haven't read any of their other posts here) and that sliver can be very misleading. Not always, but sometimes. So correcting gently is a good thing. Of course, if the person has been here for a week or at least a few days (giving them the TIME they need to absorb the facts and change their perceptions) and still is giving us the runaround...














:
















Quote:


Originally Posted by *PuppyFluffer*
As for making a seperate forum for venting, I don't see the function in that as a community service. It would serve as a place to allow devoted intactivists to let off steam but wouldn't serve the community and it's effort to educate very well I think. We allow venting threads here but one must abide by the User Agreement. We don't allow namecalling for instance. You can't say that your BIL is a total stupid jerk but you can say that he is acting in a stupid bullheaded way and that it angers you immensely. Do you see the difference?

The main virtue that I can see in having a separate forum (and I'm on the fence about it now having read all the posts regarding it...) is that we could talk about how to convince someone and then send them to the main forum and they wouldn't be able to read about themselves







I would have sent my friend over here after talking to her if I hadn't felt the need to vent about how talking to her IRL went... ya know? I wouldn't have sent her over here to even lurk with that thread here, even though it was cathartic and necessary to my well-being that I get out what I felt about that conversation. In that way, a separate forum could help others by allowing us to direct them here without having to worry about them reading about themselves... Maybe I'm just sneaky though







The points about why it wouldn't be good probably outnumber the reasons it would be good (that haven't been addressed), but I'm not really keeping track. Just on the fence for now. And I was also envisioning it as being like the abuse forum... not a set number of posts or anything, but PMing to become part of. I dunno







Just my thoughts about that.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dnr3301*
That is exactly what scared me away from the vax forum. All I wanted to know was info about polio, but I saw over and over that to get a simple answer about one thing, you had to prove that you had done research on everything else. But if you had done more research, you probably wouldn't have a simple question in the first place.

Yes, it gets annoying to answer, "no one should retract your son's forekin but him" the 800th time, or talk about the faults in the HIV or UTI studies over and over, but that's the 1000th time we've heard it; it might be the first time they are hearing it. So maybe we should have a protected place where we can say "when will they learn?" and not scare the newer people off.

I definitely think that we should answer everyone personally. But when we give them links and such, we need to give them the time to digest and go through them and then dialogue with us about the links. Excerpts are a wonderful way to ensure that the person is actually getting at least SOME of what we're linking to. I know that on some threads I wouldn't go to half the links that are posted except that they have excerpts that get me interested in what else the link has to say. I'm not saying that people don't use excerpts, just telling my experience with them and how important I find them.

Quote:

The point about feeling scared of negativity is valid, I think. I often find myself thinking, "I'm advocating NOT CUTTING OF PART OF THE BABY'S PENIS. why am I trying not to offend her?" I am sometimes amazed that this is even an issue. Why is this end the radical one?
This side should not be considered the radical side







I wish that it wasn't. Sadly, we do have to remember that we are considered as such and act/post accordingly. We can either be labeled as wackos or educated, concerned people because we're the radical side







: I hate labels (though I sometimes use them myself














... they make others see the labeled group as that label and not as people.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
I agree with this. I also appreciated Trmpetplaya's long and thoughtful post. But when I am faced with someone who is being outright snotty, it makes my job more difficult. _Remember, I'm not even getting paid for this either._ I do my best to keep my cool but it isn't always easy.

Thank you







Though... we're not getting paid either







And _sometimes_ snottiness is in the eye of the beholder







: I'm not taking a cheap shot at you either. *NOT MEANT PERSONALLY* It's something we ALL need to keep in mind. I try to remember it (though I don't always...)... it's one of my favourite quotes:

"People seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character." ~Emerson

Sometimes we can project our own feelings or frustrations on the people posting. I know that I do that. Everyone does. It's human nature to project. I know at least some of you took college psychology courses! And it's not easy in the least to try to read some of these aggravating posts (yes, I find them aggravating too) and give the poster the benefit of the doubt. Everyone is just doing the best they can (and if they aren't we DO eventually find out) just like we are. They just haven't always broken free of that [email protected] cultural conditioning









Quote:


Originally Posted by *ericswifey27*
I'm not European









Me neither, but that's why she said "many"









Man, I am sure getting long-winded in my old age







:

love and peace.


----------



## LadyMarmalade (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
Pro-circ is definitely NOT okay for sure! But we can correct people without accusing them (or even seeming to accuse them) of being blatantly pro-circumcision.

Exactly (and I agree with Karen's post too). However, it has been the case many times that someone has pointed out pro-circ phrasing or wording and the person - not being fully informed - has had a volatile reaction. There doesn't seem to be a way anti-intact posts can be addressed if the person thinks they're anti-circ. It's similar to the racism issue - if someone uses subtle racist language without knowing, their ignorance doesn't mean what they said isn't racist ... and they'll protest when it's pointed out (no matter how gently they're informed).


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ericswifey27*
I'm not European










I didn't say everyone.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LadyMarmalade*
Exactly (and I agree with Karen's post too). However, it has been the case many times that someone has pointed out pro-circ phrasing or wording and the person - not being fully informed - has had a volatile reaction. There doesn't seem to be a way anti-intact posts can be addressed if the person thinks they're anti-circ. It's similar to the racism issue - if someone uses subtle racist language without knowing, their ignorance doesn't mean what they said isn't racist ... and they'll protest when it's pointed out (no matter how gently they're informed).

If they protest, we're not responsible for that. We're not responsible for anyone's reaction, just our posts. If a person posts in a genuinely sincere manner, addressing the incorrect reasoning and avoiding getting into the "you're pro circ and don't you know the title of this forum...." then you have to have a clear conscious that you have helped the person to the best of your ability. I'd suggest letting it go if they insisted on their stand and reporting the post to me to evaluate rather than getting into it with the poster.

Also, explaining how you perceived their postings could help them to understand. Instead of saying something like "You just want to justify circing your child" you could say something like "It seems to me that you are still trying to defend circ." The first sentence accuses the person and makes assumptions about where they are in their thought process. The second makes an observation that you are willing to own (by saying "It seems to ME"). The second sentence gives the person a chance to see how they are being perceived by another and to reflect on that - if they are inclined. It takes a while to open the door and shed light on what a horror circ really is when you have been so culturally indoctrinated to accept it as the necessary normal thing to do.


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
The reason I don't report things to mods (I don't think I ever have - and I think I'd remember something like that) is because I'm never quite sure WHEN I should. Sometimes I think something is off kilter and so I just answer even though maybe it should be reported. I always figure that someone else will report it if it really needs to be reported. Maybe someone can help me with this...

I have only reported stuff here, and then it was only when it got to the "well if you don't know how to use your penis to pleasure a woman, it's your fault, not the circ" type stuff, or blatant name calling directed at one person, as opposed to "all you crazy non-circers" type stuff. I always figure by the time I'm fed up, so are others, and I'm probably not the only one to cllick the little !. On other forums, stuff always seems to disappear too fast. I love the juicy stuff too. I need a life, apparently.


----------



## dnr3301 (Jul 4, 2003)

dur, double post.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
And I was also envisioning it as being like the abuse forum... not a set number of posts or anything, but PMing to become part of. I dunno







Just my thoughts about that.


Yes, like that. Perhaps with an X number of posts needed to join.

~Nay


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A*
Interesting point. It just struck me how many of you who are saying, "tone down the attitude" (or similar) are European. For you, it's academic, as if I were fighting FGM in Africa. Of course I would also tell fellow intactivists to get less emotional, if it weren't all around me, every day, IRL.

Yes, which is why I thought it important to mention. And why it's equally important (at least for me) to learn all I can about this unique culture of RIC in the USA and try to transport myself into that environment before I post.

Conversely, is there some benefit, do you think, in Americans looking beyond their shores to the example offered by the wide world beyond?

Christopher


----------



## njeb (Sep 10, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Islay*
Yes, which is why I thought it important to mention. And why it's equally important (at least for me) to learn all I can about this unique culture of RIC in the USA and try to transport myself into that environment before I post.

Conversely, is there some benefit, do you think, in Americans looking beyond their shores to the example offered by the wide world beyond?

Christopher

Absolutely!







It really helps to know that other developed countries do NOT view the intact penis in the same negative light that the U.S. does. I value our European posters.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *njeb*
Absolutely!







It really helps to know that other developed countries do NOT view the intact penis in the same negative light that the U.S. does. I value our European posters.

















As my grown-up son would still say: "Cool!"









Christopher


----------



## kldliam (Jan 7, 2006)

Quote:

Christopher: Conversely, is there some benefit, do you think, in Americans looking beyond their shores to the example offered by the wide world beyond?

I hate to point this out, _because I am an American_, however I (& the rest of the world I think) perceive Americans to be too arrogant and self-righteous to consider other "examples" worldwide... I really doubt that they would care about non-American customs & habits. But *I never fail to mention them* none-the-less.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
I hate to point this out, _because I am an American_, however I (& the rest of the world I think) perceive Americans to be too arrogant and self-righteous to consider other "examples" worldwide... I really doubt that they would care about non-American customs & habits. But *I never fail to mention them* none-the-less.

So I've noticed - and good for you.

I have to agree that, by and large, the world does view Americans this way. Americans have a certain swagger about them which is sometimes interpreted as arrogance; but the few I've met face to face have been a pleasure to meet and get to know. And online I've met many more!

Perhaps this insularity is one of the reasons why RIC persists beyond the debunking of myths.

Christopher


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kldliam*
I hate to point this out, _because I am an American_, however I (& the rest of the world I think) perceive Americans to be too arrogant and self-righteous to consider other "examples" worldwide... I really doubt that they would care about non-American customs & habits. But *I never fail to mention them* none-the-less.

I perceive most Americans to be exactly the same way (as an American.... though I don't perceive myself to be that way







). The idea that the way WE do it is better because WE'RE Americans







:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dnr3301*
I have only reported stuff here, and then it was only when it got to the "well if you don't know how to use your penis to pleasure a woman, it's your fault, not the circ" type stuff, or blatant name calling directed at one person, as opposed to "all you crazy non-circers" type stuff. I always figure by the time I'm fed up, so are others, and I'm probably not the only one to cllick the little !. On other forums, stuff always seems to disappear too fast. I love the juicy stuff too. I need a life, apparently.

Wow.... I must've missed those posts! Maybe not the name-calling, but the other







Yeah... maybe I need a life too. I live entirely in the world of dd, books, and internet (with some dh time too







). At least I have no internet during the day right now. Then I'd REALLY have no life!

PuppyFluffer - I totally agree about the "me statements." Maybe that's what it all boils down to... since it is so hard to tell over the internet what someone's intent is... that could very well solve most of the problem (which I think is misunderstandings). Gosh, you're an awesome mod







You do a wonderful job with this forum!

love and peace.


----------



## AntoninBeGonin (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *trmpetplaya*
Gosh, you're an awesome mod







You do a wonderful job with this forum!


I was thinking the exact same thing.









~Nay


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Thanks for the applause. The topic is really dear to me and the education of people is really important to me me. It is a fine balance between sharing info and giving attitude. As I've said many times before, being passionate about something does not absolve you of the obligation to be polite about how you speak.

And the previous point of giving people time is really important too. When something is so culturally ingrained, you can't erase that in a day. By giving people facts step by step, and having many of us say the same things in various different ways, we can begin to show truth on a subject that someone may have thought that they knew all they needed to know.

As for reported posts, I do get them and I really appreciate them! I can't read every post every day and still have a life. Most often the posts that get reported to me have religous discussion, unnecessary sexual content, troll accusations or just snarky stuff. It's not common that I disagree with a post report, most of the time you folks are right on and I appreciate the help.

Now the dial up thing! Boy am I frustrated. I live 4 miles from a university town and cannot get cable or dsl out here. I'm just a little bit too far from what ever bit of equipment the phone company needs to hook me up to. I call and request dsl service freqeuntly just to bug them but it hasn't happened yet. So, when you guys go all snarky on a suspected troll and I have to remove posts and PM members as to why I removed their posts and issue alerts and such, you can eat up hours of my night on just one thread...so have some sympathy for me and be nice please!









Again, I appreciate all this disucssion!


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Karen, I concur wholeheartedly with Trumpet and ~nay. You even have the ability to reprimand us in the nicest possible way!

Yes, awareness and integrity in our posts is the key.









For your sake, I do hope you get a broadband service very soon. Not only is it fast but much better value for money. If things keep dragging on, you could investigate satellite broadband. However, it's still evolving and either uploading or downloading (can't remember which) is currently as slow as dialup!

Best of luck!

Christopher


----------



## Revamp (May 12, 2006)

Thank you for the time and effort devoted to this forum Karen, it really is very much appreciated!

A little OT with regards to broadband: do you have anyone in America offering that for free yet? A little earlier this year someone did that here in Britain and it turned the market totally upside down.

And Chris, it is uploading when someone downloads something from you and downloading when you let them upload something to you.


----------



## Islay (Apr 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Revamp*
Thank you for the time and effort devoted to this forum Karen, it really is very much appreciated!

A little OT with regards to broadband: do you have anyone in America offering that for free yet? A little earlier this year someone did that here in Britain and it turned the market totally upside down.

And Chris, it is uploading when someone downloads something from you and downloading when you let them upload something to you.

Yep, James... I know.









I was referring to satellite broadband - can't remember whether it's uploading or downloading which is still very slow, but one of them is. So you get a sort of half-broadband on satellite for the time being!

Christopher


----------



## Lara vanAEsir (May 24, 2006)




----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

Thank you so much, everyone for contributing to this thread. I appreciate every single one of you! We make a difference!









love and peace.


----------

