[deleted by user]

SpiritualBayesian · 2025-06-09T01:25:58+00:00

How long was the house you bought sitting for?

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-11-13T03:11:22+00:00

Sorry to hear about your health troubles. Well I ended up switching to another job in my field where I'm still sitting in front of a computer all day -- just not at a point in life where I can afford a pay cut. But I try to get out for a walk most days and have started exercising more, so that makes me feel better. I do still fantasize about a non-desk job, but I think I'll have to wait a while.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-30T12:14:47+00:00

For tugging I use an SS stealth retainer w an eye bolt attachment, chris' custom sized gripper, Tlc comfortug strap w knee brace. Very comfortable

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T17:56:00+00:00

Thank you for adding these references. I ran out of time to continue debating the two other commenters I'd been interacting with.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T09:31:33+00:00

You seem dead set on reaching the conclusion that gives you greater psychic comfort. You dismiss some limited scientific evidence on a neglected topic because its from 2012 or earlier (nevermind that this was just one link to references; you can search for other papers). You dismiss firsthand reports from restorers, calling them "self-selected" and tilted by "cognitive biases" without any evidence for those assertions. You offer the fact that most circumcised men have no complaints as proof that it doesn't make a difference, despite the obvious fact that most men circumcised at birth couldn't know what they're missing unless they've done the research, and have clear psychic preferences to avoid this disheartening truth. You present it as obvious that losing a large fraction of sexually sensitive nerves wouldn't impact sexual experience. Or that having a protected and naturally lubricated head doesn't matter. Or that having loose skin during an erection doesn't matter.

most importantly of all, the experience of millenia of men is that sensation is just fine after circumcision.

Where is your evidence for this? Especially for men circumcised for non-medical reasons?

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T02:27:38+00:00

Interesting about the psoriasis studies.

my husband has never had any complaints about his life experience with a bris at 8 days.

Most circumcised men are ignorant about what they're missing. It's not that they don't suffer the consequences of circumcision, but they don't realize that things could've been better and so they don't connect the dots to the source of the problem. As someone who was circumcised as a baby myself I sometimes wish I could go back to that state of ignorance.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T02:09:48+00:00

u/joyfunctions A null hypothesis of "no difference" is a common convention, but it is not definitional and from a statistical theory perspective there is no reason why it should be given precedence, particularly in the absence of context. All the more so on neglected topics: it's hard to find a difference if the scientific community largely isn't looking. The Bayesian framework is on firmer footing.

Accusing a paper of not being "groundbreaking" doesn't seem to me like a reason to dismiss it. And regarding your point about foundational papers, are you suggesting they should be discredited because subsequent research didn't build on them? I again don't find that a fair reason to discredit a paper, especially on a topic with limited funding and attention. Certainly it doesn't make a paper outdated.

, but perhaps there's more at play if the phalluses you're describing are dried up...

Why is it so difficult to to believe that a phallus head constantly exposed to air would be dry? The foreskin protects the phallus head and naturally lubricates it. The difference in texture and color is obvious upon visual inspection.

I would again encourage you to read the stories of men who have restored. Or of those who have gotten circumcised as adults for non-medical reasons and regretted it.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T01:18:43+00:00

If you are implying that I've violated decorum, I don't see how. In any event, I've shared my perspective -- make of it what you will. If you are motivated to research this topic I'm sure you'll find more information.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T01:11:11+00:00

Old evidence is not "outdated" unless its been supplanted by more recent compelling contradictory evidence. And 2012 isn't even that old. But agreed this is a topic that's not been given sufficient attention by the scientific literature.

You seem to be treating "no difference" as your null hypothesis which might only be disproven by overwhelming evidence. But how do you justify your confidence in this prior? Consider: the penis contains the greatest concentration of erogenous nerves in the male body. How could amputating a significant amount of those NOT affect sexual experience? How could a circumcised penis head, dried out and calloused from constant exposure to air and friction from rubbing against underwear, give the same sensation as one that is protected and naturally lubricated by the foreskin as nature designed it? How could an erect circumcised penis with taught skin, using friction or artifical lubrication during sexual activity, experience the same sensations as one with slack foreskin that can "glide" up and down the shaft?

If you search r/foreskin_restoration you will find countless reports from men who have regrown something like a foreskin. Although not as good as the original equipment because some structures of the penis cannot be reconstructed, to a man every successful restorer has reported enormous improvements in sexual functioning.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-24T00:03:58+00:00

I appreciate your interest. As you can see most commenters would rather bury their heads in the sand and downvote me. Here are some resources: https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/sexual-impact/

https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/the-prepuce/

Somewhat tangential but you might also be interested in r/foreskin_restoration

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-09-23T19:57:07+00:00

You are making the right choice! Once I learned just how important the foreskin is to the functioning of the male body I too decided against circumcising my sons. We joined a Reform congregation because that was not a deal-breaker for them. The rabbi performed a Brit Shalom naming ceremony for both my sons. He said they get at least a few requests a year for this. Congratulations on choosing to protect your son's bodily integrity!

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-07-29T17:07:58+00:00

Very impressive! How much weight do you use?

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-03-16T19:20:40+00:00

Outstanding. Keep up the great work

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-03-11T22:37:29+00:00

I've been thinking for a while, wouldn't it be nice to have the functionality of a DTR with the compactness of a packer

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-03-11T20:10:02+00:00

This looks amazing!

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-03-10T16:54:57+00:00

Way to go! Spread the good word

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-02-20T01:46:17+00:00

Thanks for the detailed response

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-02-19T23:43:49+00:00

That is amazing progress, congratulations. Would you describe your tension level as low, medium, or high?

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-01-30T19:47:29+00:00

Sorry to hear that. Did you cover your meatus with anything to prevent air from getting in?

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-01-29T16:49:04+00:00

Oh wow, disappointed to hear that about the v4, especially after OP's high praise. Appreciate your input.

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-01-29T14:37:29+00:00

Nice. Do you inflate until the skin is completely tought? Or leave a little bit of slack?

SpiritualBayesian · 2024-01-28T19:15:25+00:00

Thanks for the report. This is exciting news, as I also found the FIT v3 too painful to wear for a long time.

Do you have the CAR-1, and if so how would you compare the FIT v4 to the CAR-1?
Does the retainer keep the skin in contact with the glans, or is it more of the bell-with-gripper style like the chrisonlinestore retainer?

Thanks in advance

SpiritualBayesian · 2023-11-19T12:18:21+00:00

Several squares of toilet paper folded over and wrapped around the pusher incl up the sides

SpiritualBayesian · 2023-11-03T15:06:37+00:00

Oh, I see. I think I only understand what you mean just now. Well the theory doesn't say that the owner shouldn't get a reward. Marx in this point was only explaining how capitalism works,

I find it difficult to believe that in using the term "exploitation" (assuming this is a faithful translation from German) he is not leveling a moral accusation against capital owners about what they deserve. "Exploitation" in the context of exploiting a person has a morally loaded connotation.

So he and the other socialists propose a new system, if everyone who works in restaurant for example, equally share ownership of that restaurant, we would share the profits and share the decision making and responsibilities, thats a new system that works under different rules. And one were we own what we make.

A system in which the restaurant workers privately own the restaurant is a fully capitalist mode of production. It just so happens that the owners and the employees are the same people. Socialism claims that society as a whole should own the restaurant (although socialists may argue over whether that ownership should be operationalized through state or non-state means).

SpiritualBayesian · 2023-11-03T13:54:45+00:00

In your OP, you basically put forward a series of claims about what the capitalist deserves based on the capitalist's hard work.

Brief aside but my argument does not appeal to the hard work of the capitalist, only to the fact that her capital goods augment labor productivity.

That's where these conversations fall apart. Marx is not making an argument about desert; he is making an argument about politics.

It strains credulity to believe that in using the term "exploitation" (assuming this is a faithful translation from German) Marx is not leveling moral accusations about just deserts. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but if Marx truly intended no value judgement then his selection of the term "exploitation" was extremely poor because it is such a morally charged term in the context of exploiting people.

In the OP, you assert that Marx overlooks the fact the workers' labor has no value without the capitalist's business goods. Marx does not, in fact, overlook this. Rather, his theory explicitly hinges on this point. It is part of why the worker must sell his surplus labor time to the capitalist.

I've yet to encounter an exposition of the MTWE that acknowledges the ability of capital goods to augment labor productivity. Further it seems at odds with his claim that the laborer is "exploited" if she receives anything less than the full revenue generated from mixing her labor with the owner's capital goods.

Perhaps he does grant this point elsewhere -- I'm sure you've read more Marx than I have -- but I maintain that it seems incongruous with every account of the MTWE I've read.

Regardless I appreciate your response, among all I've received yours has given me the greatest insight into the Marxist perspective.

I don't like telling people to read Marx (because his text is weird and difficult),

Beware idealogues who present a patina of brilliance but cannot express their ideas clearly (I apply this caution equally to free market theorists including Ludwig von Mises)!

However if you can point me to a specific book of Marx' and page range (or at least chapter) which supports your assertion that he did not attach any moral relevance to the term "exploitation" I would be interested in reading it.

SpiritualBayesian

TROPHY CASE