First of all, I find it interesting that you have not identified yourself by profession or gender, not that that is most important. Secondly, your "not so astute" assertions about your vast knowledge of the sub-cultural sexual practices of Jewish women (non orthodox) speaks for not only narrow-mindedness, at best, but perhaps you shouldn't "insulate" yourself and maybe read or speak to other cultures to gather more facts before pontificating about topics you may need to be educated about. I apologize if I may have missed any statement regarding your academic credentials. Exactly where did you get your degree in either gynecology, epidemiology, public health or urology?? I assume,from your BROAD PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE, that the majority of your vocation deals with sexual health??
FYI, Jewish women (generally those non-orthodox, and I know it may come as a shock to you), also have sex with and not limited to, Christian, Catholic, Episcopalian, Mormon, Asiatics, Blacks, Latinos, and even people from outer space if they were available. That by itself is not to imply promiscuity unique to their subculture, but that the sexual morays in a great part of our American culture have changed significantly and crosses cultural borders.
Therefore, the assumption that they are "insulated from the rest of societal cultures sexually" and therefore, (do not have any meaurable incidence of HPV) is not only fallacious at best, but speaks of ignorance, disregard, misinformation and sophomorish childish behavior. By the way, Webster's dictionary defines "insular" in many connotations professor:
Main Entry: in·su·lar
Pronunciation: \ˈin(t)-su̇-lər, -syu̇-, ˈin-shə-lər\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Latin insularis, from Latin insula island
Date: 1611
1 a : of, relating to, or constituting an island b : dwelling or situated on an island
2 : characteristic of an isolated people; especially : being, having, or reflecting a narrow provincial viewpoint
3 : of or relating to an island of cells or tissue
With regards to "narrow viewpoint", maybe you ought to read more or broaden your friendship circles and not be quite so "insular" by nature yourself.
By the way, I am a surgeon, and I myself, separate from the rest of the "industry," do not advocate an across the board policy of neonatal circumcision unless the parents request this. Even in my adult practice I only advocate this to those that are resistant to standard therapies, whose wives can not control their yeast infections because they are passing it back and forth, men with complaints of chronic lacerations of the foreskin from inadequate stretching of the skin, diabetics with genital complications, or in general men who assert that their partners are not so motivated to perform oral sex on a phallus that blossoms forth an aroma somewhere between the stenches of a garbage heap or a jock strap that hasn't been cleaned in six months by an athlete, despite attempts at conventional therapies. Try not to take so many statements out of context for your own argument sake. That doesn't make for accumulating great points in debating.
I assume that you were too busy or disinterested to see what the American Cancer Society said in 2010, not in 1996, about risks for penile cancer. You might go the link I provided above, and I recommend that the readers go to this link as well, http://www.cancer.org/docroot/cri/content/cri_2_4_2x_what_are_the_risk_factors_for_penile_cancer_35.asp
Nowhere did I advocate circumsion to prevent penile cancer, I only made the statement that there are risk factors that maybe you would like to be informed about. These are not meant to illustrate that men should rush out and get circumcised for that reason, but that curiously so, although penile cancer represents a smaller segment of oncologic pathology in this country, in other countries, Asiatic and South American, penile and urethral cancers are more common. Oh, by the way, my friend with the AK 47 in his/her shorts, I don't have a mons pubis, by definition, check your gender sheet more carefully next time you "arm yourself."
"Mons pubis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Mons pubis
Anterior view of human female pelvis, pubic hair shaved, indicating mons pubis
Latin mons pubis
Gray's subject #270 1265
Precursor Genital tubercle
In human anatomy or in mammals in general, the mons pubis (Latin for "pubic mound"), also known as the mons veneris (Latin, mound of Venus) or simply the mons, is the adipose tissue lying above the pubic bone of adult women, anterior to the symphysis pubis. The mons pubis forms the anterior portion of the vulva, and limits the perineal region proximally and anteriorly.
Out of fairness to you , you probably couldn't discern my sex from my photo?? And your photo is, Where??
Another observation for you, the moisture present on my "mons pubis" after sex is from HER lubrication and sexual responsivity, not caused by my presence or lack of foreskin, professor. You might ask fifty women the same question and poll their response. Where did you get that from?? Maybe you need to get out more often. By the way, a man or woman should not be measured intellectually by the "weapon he packs," but for sake of continuing your bantering, I doubt if your Hasbro toy gun is "even loaded." I'm not afraid to debate you any where, any place, anytime, "Professor."
Lastly, for humanitarian sake, maybe I can get a collection up and send "Astroglide," and not KY Jelly, to the european communities that might seek some sexual relief. KY jelly, professor, is known to be a drying agent after it is left on for any length of time, and it doesn't surprises me that it's implementation or request is quite limited there or any educated society.
PS. your choice of vernacular is challenging at best, that is unless you meant further derogatory or defamatory characterization of the Jewish people. It doesn't forebode a good style at this website, my friend.
Comment Reply
First of all, I find it interesting that you have not identified yourself by profession or gender, not that that is most important. Secondly, your "not so astute" assertions about your vast knowledge of the sub-cultural sexual practices of Jewish women (non orthodox) speaks for not only narrow-mindedness, at best, but perhaps you shouldn't "insulate" yourself and maybe read or speak to other cultures to gather more facts before pontificating about topics you may need to be educated about. I apologize if I may have missed any statement regarding your academic credentials. Exactly where did you get your degree in either gynecology, epidemiology, public health or urology?? I assume,from your BROAD PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE, that the majority of your vocation deals with sexual health??
FYI, Jewish women (generally those non-orthodox, and I know it may come as a shock to you), also have sex with and not limited to, Christian, Catholic, Episcopalian, Mormon, Asiatics, Blacks, Latinos, and even people from outer space if they were available. That by itself is not to imply promiscuity unique to their subculture, but that the sexual morays in a great part of our American culture have changed significantly and crosses cultural borders.
Therefore, the assumption that they are "insulated from the rest of societal cultures sexually" and therefore, (do not have any meaurable incidence of HPV) is not only fallacious at best, but speaks of ignorance, disregard, misinformation and sophomorish childish behavior. By the way, Webster's dictionary defines "insular" in many connotations professor:
Main Entry: in·su·lar
Pronunciation: \ˈin(t)-su̇-lər, -syu̇-, ˈin-shə-lər\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Latin insularis, from Latin insula island
Date: 1611
1 a : of, relating to, or constituting an island b : dwelling or situated on an island
2 : characteristic of an isolated people; especially : being, having, or reflecting a narrow provincial viewpoint
3 : of or relating to an island of cells or tissue
With regards to "narrow viewpoint", maybe you ought to read more or broaden your friendship circles and not be quite so "insular" by nature yourself.
By the way, I am a surgeon, and I myself, separate from the rest of the "industry," do not advocate an across the board policy of neonatal circumcision unless the parents request this. Even in my adult practice I only advocate this to those that are resistant to standard therapies, whose wives can not control their yeast infections because they are passing it back and forth, men with complaints of chronic lacerations of the foreskin from inadequate stretching of the skin, diabetics with genital complications, or in general men who assert that their partners are not so motivated to perform oral sex on a phallus that blossoms forth an aroma somewhere between the stenches of a garbage heap or a jock strap that hasn't been cleaned in six months by an athlete, despite attempts at conventional therapies. Try not to take so many statements out of context for your own argument sake. That doesn't make for accumulating great points in debating.
I assume that you were too busy or disinterested to see what the American Cancer Society said in 2010, not in 1996, about risks for penile cancer. You might go the link I provided above, and I recommend that the readers go to this link as well, http://www.cancer.org/docroot/cri/content/cri_2_4_2x_what_are_the_risk_factors_for_penile_cancer_35.asp
Nowhere did I advocate circumsion to prevent penile cancer, I only made the statement that there are risk factors that maybe you would like to be informed about. These are not meant to illustrate that men should rush out and get circumcised for that reason, but that curiously so, although penile cancer represents a smaller segment of oncologic pathology in this country, in other countries, Asiatic and South American, penile and urethral cancers are more common. Oh, by the way, my friend with the AK 47 in his/her shorts, I don't have a mons pubis, by definition, check your gender sheet more carefully next time you "arm yourself."
"Mons pubis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Mons pubis
Anterior view of human female pelvis, pubic hair shaved, indicating mons pubis
Latin mons pubis
Gray's subject #270 1265
Precursor Genital tubercle
In human anatomy or in mammals in general, the mons pubis (Latin for "pubic mound"), also known as the mons veneris (Latin, mound of Venus) or simply the mons, is the adipose tissue lying above the pubic bone of adult women, anterior to the symphysis pubis. The mons pubis forms the anterior portion of the vulva, and limits the perineal region proximally and anteriorly.
Out of fairness to you , you probably couldn't discern my sex from my photo?? And your photo is, Where??
Another observation for you, the moisture present on my "mons pubis" after sex is from HER lubrication and sexual responsivity, not caused by my presence or lack of foreskin, professor. You might ask fifty women the same question and poll their response. Where did you get that from?? Maybe you need to get out more often. By the way, a man or woman should not be measured intellectually by the "weapon he packs," but for sake of continuing your bantering, I doubt if your Hasbro toy gun is "even loaded." I'm not afraid to debate you any where, any place, anytime, "Professor."
Lastly, for humanitarian sake, maybe I can get a collection up and send "Astroglide," and not KY Jelly, to the european communities that might seek some sexual relief. KY jelly, professor, is known to be a drying agent after it is left on for any length of time, and it doesn't surprises me that it's implementation or request is quite limited there or any educated society.
PS. your choice of vernacular is challenging at best, that is unless you meant further derogatory or defamatory characterization of the Jewish people. It doesn't forebode a good style at this website, my friend.
March 20, 2010 - 6:02amThis Comment
Reply