It was only a matter of time before pop-news outlets pounced on a biological explanation for the tidal wave of bad credit and risky decisions that has engulfed the U.S. this month: it was those dang men and their raging hormones!
pretending that this is baseless sexism utterly ignores evidence & fact. Take a good look in the male & female prisons. Notice that assault is a very common cause of landing in a male prison. Notice that it isn't so common a cause of landing in female prison. Ignoring that we are, in some sense, 2 complimentary races, each with our own way, for political reasons, isn't intelligent, objective, or even useful. Consider the likelyhood of a child being assaulted by a man vs a woman... Significantly more likely that it be a man? Notice how our western history proves we guys committed aggression against ALL women by preventing 'em from having human rights, by law? I don't claim women don't commit abuse of others, but it's a different kind of abuse ( see the recent research where mothers use "low opinion" of their daughters to snuff out their potential ). I don't see why we can't be "man enough" to admit objective facts.
Liberté, égalité, fraternité . . . foreskin? Who knew that penises had anything to do with the French Revolution?
"Startledgnu", I like the way you consider reduced AIDS rate to NOT count, but loss of foreskin ( not glans, which WOULD be the equivalent to female "circumcision", which isn't circum-anything, it's removal of the organ itself ) to be such a horrible loss. Your commenting that that foreskin keeps the glans more soft & permeable is exactly why HIV gets into it more. Your argument that every element of anatomy evolves for a Reason, is IntelligentDesign/Creationism, not evolution: things evolve because That's The Way They Happened To Happen. Ask an octopus, some time, about how "intelligent" it is for it to have located its brain around its throat, resulting in unfortunately frequent braindamage/death when eating spiny things like urchins. Ask yourself how come men have nipples, if every element of our bodies is there for a Designed Reason. UNanesthetized circumcision of babies is abuse. Period. Their entire previous experience was loving embrace, and to swing 'em upside down by their ankles in a cold harshly-bright room and assault 'em, as was Traditional among western doctors, or to snip off their foreskin without anesthetic ( doctors said "babies don't really know pain", making believe that they aren't human enough to do so -- same as blacks, of course ) Anesthetized circumcision, however, benefits the life by a) preventing that problem with too-small-foreskin. b) reducing infection-rate of HIV/AIDS c) reducing infection-rate of other STIs, too. thereby reducing the infection-rate among women whom men are intimate with, AND increasing the likelyhood of their family being able to afford quality of life, long-term. Maybe reducing the rate of infection is non-real to you? As for it being dubious to use statistics from ACTUAL LIFE, that's daft: what more accurately represents actual life than actual life? I hope your higher-infection-rate, and higher-disease-burden world is segregated from my suppress-disease-systematically world, so I don't have my family subject to the increased HIV pressure your religion would push on 'em. God takes care of those who take care of their god-given worth.
Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing
Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed
Share links with friends, comment on stories and more
In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.
Check out the best of what's new here.