Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 0 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 1 |
Debates: | 0 |
Reducing the chance of acquiring HIV is a desperate justification. The 60% reduction you cite is relative risk for female-to-male HIV transmission in Africa. F-to-M is the least common form of transmission among heterosexual men in North America. The epidemic here involves M-to-M and IV drug use. Circumcision helps with neither, so its potential benefit is negligible here. An individual heterosexual male's absolute lifetime risk of HIV infection is something on the order of 0.02% in North America. Simply put, circumcision is effectively meaningless on this topic. Children do not need it.
As for your last assertion, I was circumcised as an infant. I despise it. My parents were wrong to force it on me. It's medically unnecessary and morally offensive. No one has a legitimate right to surgically alter another healthy, non-consenting individual, full stop. No excuses, such as the aesthetic preferences of shallow women, changes that basic human right.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |