PeterRS

I have heard about lack of sensitivity several times before, but how does anyone know unless a man has chosen - or been persuaded - to be circumcised after becoming sexually active. The Old Testament tells us Abraham was circumised at the age of 100. Pity he did not leave any notes on sensitivity or lack thereof! For Christians, circumcision was never prescribed and this goes as far back as the Apostle Paul and the New Testament. Indeed at the Council of Florence in the mid-15th century, the Roman Catholic Church specificallly forbade the practice. Going further back, the Greek and Roman civilisations were basically revolted by the idea. The much more modern practice got a major boost in the mid 19th century when a British physician Jonathan Hutchison was searching for either a cure or means to control the rampant spread of syphilis. He had noted that Jews in paricular had a lower incidence of syphilis. This led to the belief that circumcision was a major help and this view quickly spread to the USA. But another as comelling reason helped spread that popularity for the good people of the USA. Hurchison and his colleagues believed that absence of the foreskin would reduce the sensitivity of the organ and hence reduce the prevalence of masturbation in males. In his later 1893 article titled On Circumcision as a Preventive of Masturbation, he wrote - "I am inclined to believe that [circumcision] may often accomplish much, both in breaking the habit [of masturbation] as an immediate result, and in diminishing the temptation to it subsequently." This was prticularly appealing to certain US Churches which very quickly promoted circumcision amongst their members. Although I believe not true today, Hutchison continued to preach this 'doctine' for the next 50 years. 15 years after Hutchison, an American orthopedic surgeon Lewis Sayre latched on to this view about circumcision being effective in promoting good health. With the end of World War 2 and the establishment of the National Health Service in Britain, a 1949 article The Fate of the Foreskin by Douglas Gairdner in the UK argued that evidence showed the risks outweighed the benefits. In the USA however, the popular physician Benjamn Spock was an outspoken proponent of the procedure. His book The Comon Sense Book of Baby and Child Care led to a huge rise in demand from parents, all this while Europe was slowly turning away from circumcision and it had never caught on in Central and South America. I suppose it is not really possible to discuss circumcision without a note on religion. The Old Testament mentions it being an essential covenant between God and man. - hence its particular appeal to those of the Jewish faith. Trying not to be flippant about a serious subject, I wonder how excision of the foreskin can be regarded as an essential "covenant". Christianity has basically replaced this with baptism for two millannia. Yet in the same NT volume, the Book of Genesis mentions God creating man in his own image. Does this mean God had no foreskin? If not, why was man created with one? I have had little interest in religion but find much of its teachings, shall we say, strange.

Is this a reason for Rama IV being written Rama but pronounced Palam?

Before the Tawana Ramada, that hotel had been a Sheraton. It was one of the few where you had to pay for joiners. They had a table set up by the lifts manned by a flunky with a room list. He would then check your key against the list. Can't recall how much the joiner's fee was but I think quite substantial compared to bar off rates.

Accepting that @unicorn is a doctor and I believe also American, it is hardly surprising - in my view - that he argues in favour of the standard American practice of male circumision. But the fact is that it is in the USA where the practice is most prevalent in terms of percentage of male children when the reasons are neither religious or cultural. I find it interesting that when the USA essentially took over South Korea for a time after the Korean War, it was American doctors who manned most of the hospitals, for which I am sure the Koreans were very thankful. Understandably, though, they followed the standard American practice of circumcision, a procedure never performed in South Korea until that time. In 1945 less than 0.1% of Koreans were circumcised. When I first visied Seoul at the start of the 1980s, the young men I met (admittedly not very many) were virtually all circumcised. Today, though, the rate of circumcision of babies and older children has dropped dramatically. In a study performed in 2002, it was found that 88.4% of young men in the 14-16 age group had been circumcised. Ten years later the percentage had dropped to 56.4%. And it has since dropped considerably further. Most studies on the issue are done in Seoul plus perhaps one of the larger cities. The assumptiom is that the numbers are less than official figures because analysis is rarely done in the countryside. Two papers illustrate the reason for circumcision having been so prevalent in South Korea. Emeritus professor of physics at Seoul National University, Kim Dae-sik, has been at the forefront of research on the history and social perception of circumcision in Korea. He is one of such critics [of the procedure]. Professor Kim has been a staunch advocate for abolishing the surgery as a widespread practice. He’s written multiple theses on the subject and co-written a book called “Korean Circumcision Reconsidered,” released in 2014. “I thought it was odd at the time that the activity was becoming so widespread in the 1970s, and later during my studies abroad, I realized that Korea had a strikingly high circumcision rate — and all because of misconceptions.” As Professor Kim put it, “It was as if society as a whole was under a trance for dozens of years. The newspapers at the time weren’t writing about why people should get circumcised. They were writing about when.” "Koreans came to believe that practicing circumcision was ‘advanced and modern,’ just like the American soldiers,” U.S. sexologist Robert Francoeur wrote in “The International Encyclopedia of Sexuality” (1997). “If Americans did it, it must be good,” he said. The reason for the drop in numbers is partly the reduction in the influence of American doctors and partly the centuries-old Confucian belief that a body should ideally be buried whole. Partly for such reason, in China and Japan few males as a proportion of the population are circumcised. During the Imperial system in China, the eunochs who formed the vast majority of those who inhabited the Forbidden City in Beijing, always had their genital organs placed in a jar with preservative fluid, These would then be buried along with the bodies on death. Strangely, perhaps, the maladies listed by @unicorn seem to be rarely found in north Asian countries. Several countries have already called for the banning of elective childhood circumcision - Iceland Sweden and Germany. Denmark and the Netherlands have said they are ready for a ban but have concerns that might drive the practice underground. Routine circumcision is already banned in public hospitals in Australia - and this is a country where about 90% of males were themselves circumcised. @unicorn failed to state that the World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend considering circumcision only for individuals in high-risk areas for HIV or sexually transmitted infections, or for those with specific medical conditions. The Canadian Paediatric Society recommended even earlier in the late 1990s that circumcision of newborn males should not be routinely performed. The USA is slowly becoming isolated on this issue. For @unicorn even to suggest that these countries have got the arguments against circumcision wrong when he wrote "The health benefits of male circumcision, particularly in substantially reducing the risk in urinary tract infections in infants and toddlers, far outweigh the risks--and that's a solid fact," is in fact qute wrong! Maybe fine for the USA, but not for the medical authorities in many other parts of the world. So it can hardly be FACT! https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3526493/ https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/health/20250719/should-you-circumcise-your-son-parents-weigh-pros-and-cons https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/2024-04-20/national/socialAffairs/WHY-To-snip-or-not-to-snip-Korean-society-and-circumcision/2029413

Well, here's something I thought i would never see! We know that roughly 40% of men around the world are circumcised, the majority for religious (Jews and Muslims) and cultural (The Philippines, many African countries etc.) reasons, and the remainder with many allegedly for health reasons (prevention of HIV etc.). An article in today's Observer/Guardian newspaper states that the UK Crown Prosecution Service has issued the draft of new guidance for prosecutors under which male circumcision would be classified as "a potential form of child abuse." The draft CPS guidance states that, unlike female genital mutilation, “there is not a specific criminal offence of carrying out male circumcision”. “However, this can be a painful and harmful practice, if carried out incorrectly or in inappropriate circumstances. It may be a form of child abuse or an offence against the person,” it adds. It goes on to illustrate its findings with a number of cases where boys under 18 have died as direct resut of the procedure, the most recent being a 6-month old baby in 2023. The article continues - Jonathan Arkush, a former president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and co-chair of Milah UK, which promotes and protects the right of the Jewish community to carry out religious circumcision, said the wording in the draft CPS guidance was misleading. “To suggest that circumcision is in itself a harmful practice, is deeply pejorative and misplaced,” he said. “Any procedure that is carried out inappropriately or without proper controls, including piercing a child’s ears, could be a harmful practice and a possible case of child abuse.” He added: “We shall certainly be talking to the CPS. I would very much expect that final draft not to include it, as it is so obviously incorrect and/or misleading.” Arkush, who is also a barrister, accepted that if performed incorrectly, circumcision could constitute abuse, but he insisted the “stringent standards” applied by the Jewish community ensured this did not happen. “The incidence of complications in circumcision performed in the Jewish community is vanishingly rare,” he said.“Circumcision is a core part of our identity. I have never met any Jewish man who thinks they’ve been harmed by circumcision.” I hardly think that piercing a child's ears can be equated with the excision of part of a male child's God-given anatomy. But I have always wondered why it is that those who practise circumcision on males for religious reasons regard it as "a core part of their identity." What has this to do with religion? I have heard Jewish friends tell me that the foreskin is an unnecessary part of the body, so why have it? Others suggest why interfere with nature. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jan/10/circumcision-classed-as-possible-child-abuse-in-draft-cps-document

Back in the mid-1960s our family found this LP made by a Jewish comedy group based somewhere in the USA. We are not Jewish but we found the short sketches absolutely hilarious. When I saw it had come out on CD, I immediately purchased it and still find much of it hilarious, as do most of my friends. Typical is The Reading of the Will starting at 3'35". On the other hand, in the 1990s I attended a Club in Singapore called the Boom Boom Room. This was fronted by a local comedian named Kumar and was incredibly popular. I went with a friend, got a table and we were enjoying our drinks when the show started. We were so surprised that we could understand less than half of what was being said. It was all so fast and in Singlish, not a language but a sub-language best described as the local patois based on English and including elements of other languages of native born Singaporeans. The mainly young Singapore audience absolutely adored it and laughed themselves almost on to the floor!

At 11:00 in the morning and 3:00 in the afternoon, the off-peak times I am usually looking for taxis, so many drivrs are going off shift? in my view very doubtful.

Yes, to both. I was outside Paragon early-afternoon a couple of days ago standing on the side opposite hoping to get a taxi towards the centre - nowhere near rush hour. No less than nine empty taxis drove by without even bothering to stop to find out where I was going. One stopped and asked for 200 baht for what would normally be half that. Four others stopped but would not consider taking me to my destination. I finally walked around the corner to the road opposite MBK. The first empty taxi coming from the street next to Discovery Centre stopped, asked me to jump in and although traffic around Rama IV was bad, he got me to my destination with no fuss and less than half 200 baht. He had been super efficient and friendly and deserved the largish tip I gave him. Taxis are certainly cheap in the city and I think the drivers do deserve more. But far too many fail to observe the Transport Authority guidelines. Taxis with the meter showing available (and without the BUSY sign lit) driving past without even stopping to check where you are going are very much on the increase. And those who do stop but will not use the meter are also on the increase. Both practices were supposed to be stopped at the last round of drivers' wage increase. But the police do nothing about it and complaining means reporting and backing up preferably with photos from your phone. Too much hassle, and I am sure the drivers know it.

Today's Guardian newspaper ranks this actor's top 20 movies in order - although who does the ranking is not stated. I had not realised his career and that of his pal Ben Affleck were basically on the skids until they turned to screenwriting and won the Oscar for Best Screenplay with Good Will Hunting in 1997. It achieves #11 on the list. The last two are 1990s movies which I have not seen. #18 is Syriana which I did enjoy. #13, #14 and #15 are three of probably his best-known movies - The Martian, Saving Private Ryan and Oppenheimer in that order. Perhaps inevitably the first three in his Bourne series come in at #10, #5 and #3. Thankfully his last one titled simply Bourne, in my view the worst, is not on the list. But two of my favourites are there. Behind the Candelabra comes in at #6. And for me the most fascinating and the one i enjoyed almost the most is The Talented Mr. Ripley which is there at #1. The Ripley movie is out on Netflix in mid-January. Perhaps of interest is that Leonardo DiCaprio turned down the role given to Damon. And Jude Law took a lot of persuaion to sign for the Dickie Greenleaf role. He did not want to be playing what he thought would be a "pretty boy" role - something he stated later was "insane arrogance" on his part. A econd Ripley movie was made with Ripley now living in a mansion in Italy as an assassin with John Malkovich in the lead. The novelist Patricia Highsmith wrote four Ripley sequels and all were made into much less good early movies or later TV series. The Malkovich movie Ripley's Game was in fact based on the third in that series. I wish the director Antony Minghella could have been persuaded to make a second with the adventures of Matt Damon as he develops his role as a serial killer. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/jan/08/matt-damons-best-films-ranked

I often miss the years I worked in Tokyo.

Careful guys! Get on @Olddaddy's bad side and he'll start downvoting all your posts - even those which are 100% true! Funny how some people get their kicks! 🤣

I wonder if they make ones which moan and tell you to go at it harder and how great you are at sex - in Japanese of course!🤣

There used to be a vdo on youtube taken by a bystander in Wellington Street in Hong Kong - not far from SoHo. It was late afternoon and a small crowd had gathered because in an apartment on the first floor of the building opposite two guys were going at it with, shall I suggest, considerable enthusiasm. The problem (for them) was they had left the light on and forgotten to close the curtains. When the deed was done and they presumably went for a shower, the crowd applauded! The vdo was up for some months but then taken down.

Until reading your post, I had no idea that Tyler Wu had been a profesional skater. (Nor that he was in fact born in the UK). He is certainly an excellent porn actor, although I have never liked his vdos when he has had that Prince Edward thing. Oh, and it's your lucky day because I see on the internet that he has his own Tenga now. It is described on the Fleshjack site as - The Tyler Wu Fleshjack: “Skater Boy” Thin, muscular, limber… the prototypical figure skater boy you’ve always crushed on but never had a chance with, is now all yours to enjoy . . . Spread his little twink cheeks and glide into one long narrow textured chamber lined with various crisscrossing textures. Tyler’s Fleshjack texture can best be described as a long cluster of densely-packed diagonal ribs and nubs designed to snuggly spiral around your cock with perfection. https://www.fleshjack.com/blogs/the-daily-jack/introducing-new-fleshjack-boy-tyler-wu

Inside as well as out?