Why does Brian Morris link his site to a circumfetish page?

The casual observer landing on Brian Morris‘ website (circinfo.net) may believe that it is in fact “an evidence-baised appraisal”. However, as one advances through it, one can’t stop but wonder why Brian Morris includes links on his website to a circumfetish page.

A circum… what?

Yes, a circumfetish website. A page to share circumcision-themed erotica, often involving forced circumcisions, sexual acts during circumcisions, often involving minors, and other similar smut.

Could it be an oversight? A site that changed after Professor Morris initially linked to it?

No. In fact the link has existed for years on Morris’ website, and the page itself has existed for years as it is, known by many who are aware of Morris’ darker links.

The page says it was created for the “benefit of the circlist members” and “not aimed at the general public”. One would wonder why.

We will not reveal the “secret password”, but let’s take a look at this dark side.

Links and resources page, on Brian Morris’ website.

morris1

Notice link #16.

morris2

When we click on link #16, a new tab opens:

morris3

We clicked on the last link (images) and entered the password. (We will not reveal the password at this time)

morris4

We clicked on one of the “stories”. Notice this one is about a 15 year old whose dad “needs” to have him circumcised and then goes on to tell the story of dad’s own forced circumcision during adolescence. We don’t need to see it all. We already feel dirty reading this garbage.

morris5

Now, given how meticulous Brian Morris is with his references, can anyone think that it is an accident that his website has included a link to a password protected circumcision fetish website describing forced circumcisions, sexual acts during circumcisions involving minors and similar trash,  for years?

11 thoughts on “Why does Brian Morris link his site to a circumfetish page?

  1. I nevertheless didn’t die because I was cut. OK, let’s stop costing thousands of dollars on it, and also, don’t pretent I can’t fuck your wife with a cut dick. :) They’re fine.

    1. Rick,

      It’s perfectly fine that you are happy and satisfied – and alive! We in no way try to deny, argue or disrespect the value of circumcised males’ experiences – some of the editors on our site are also circumcised males.

      What we argue is that the procedure does expose babies to some risks (some of which have big impact, even if they are rare) and does not take into consideration the possibility that upon becoming adults, they may wish they had not been circumcised. In that sense, it violates the physical integrity of children and their rights. Just like parents couldn’t force an adult son to become circumcised, well, when it’s a baby the procedure is effectively forced and irreversible, and the child will one day be an adult who has been forcefully circumcised.

      That’s why we fight, for a future where no man -or woman or intersex individual- has to feel annoyed or angered thinking about genital surgical procedures performed on his/her body when he/she was too little and too vulnerable to be able to refuse.

    2. I strongly disagree with the notion that someone who feels the need to make extremely vulgar comments regarding someone else’s wife is “okay” or “fine”. Clearly there were, at a minimum, serious psychological deficits caused.

      1. I’ve learned that many circumcised males, upon reading something against circumcision, assume that it was written by uncircumcised (intact) males “trolling” them, mocking them or otherwise bragging of their foreskins. Nobody should mock or otherwise bully anybody else because of the status of their genitals. I do believe that the anger, both in circumcised males, and in intact males who have been bullied or mocked in the locker room, is a form of psychological trauma. That, however, does not negate the importance or value of a person’s sexual experience, whether that person is circumcised or not. Every person has an individual baseline by which they judge their own sexual experiences.

  2. When you’re a newborn (and maybe through a lot of your pre-pub life), circumcision is nearly painless (aside from some very rare conditions, which could be caused through combinations with other conditions anyway). After puberty, it may as well be called male genital mutilation.

    I theorize that those “20,000″ nerve endings actually go somewhere else in someone who was circumcised before puberty, or perhaps the normal nerves in the penis become more “specialized”. That makes a lot of sense to me, considering how drastic puberty is and how suddenly important (like a lot of the body) the foreskin becomes.

    Aside from that, I do not agree with circumcising for the purposes of supposed health benefits and definitely not for religious reasons. Instead, I think it looks better compared to the rest of your outside body; the foreskin seems a bit like a nasty growth to me, just like human body hair. It does have a bit more use than human body hair, I guess.

    Note that I was circumcised at birth, so I probably have all the biases in the world.

    1. You have many things wrong Satori, sorry to say.

      First, a recent study from Oxford University shows that babies process pain in the same way as adults do. Even if there is no verbal memory of it, it is troublesome because we know that traumatic experiences during the neonatal stage have lifelong consequences. http://time.com/3827167/this-is-a-babys-brain-on-pain/

      Second, even if it was painless, there is still that loss of tissue. Heck, with anesthesia, I can cut my hand off without pain, and I can keep myself drugged until the wounds heal. But the result is, I’m still without one hand.

      Third, we don’t know for sure if those nerve endings are 1000, 10,000, 20,000 or how many. That number was a guesstimate never meant to be an official number. What we know for sure is that parts of the foreskin are highly innervated. There is no debate about it.

      Now, the structure of the body is already formed when the baby is born. So if someone cuts the foreskin, is not that those nerves can “go somewhere”. Imagine you have electrical wires reaching to bulbs on an outside wall. You take out the wall, the bulbs are gone and the wires are left there hanging, incapable of setting any light on anymore. They may send random signals to the brain, but that’s all.

      Sure, during infancy and childhood children are not so focused on their sexual sensations. This is a hormonal phenomenon. Puberty, more testosterone, sexual awakening. But everything was there already waiting for that signal.

      It’s good that you don’t agree with circumcising for the typical myths. You seem to have the typical American aesthetic ideas, hair is nasty, normal odors are nasty, foreskin is nasty. What’s important is to recognize that those are subjective appreciations, not objective reasons, and much less reasons to force surgery on a child who may grow to have different appreciations about his own body.

  3. I do not understand the reason to circumcise could ever have been to get stop or prevent masturbating. I learned just after my circumcision to masturbate, before it I did not like it so much. And still these days I think it was the best thing what I ever have undergo. What could be more erotic than three beautiful asian girls laughing and circumcise you, while nursing students watching around you the procedure?? I say nothing!

    1. Sounds like you are filipino. I consider circumcision in the pre-teen/teen years, as done in the operation tuli, to be a pedophillic interference in the development of a teenager, almost like a BDSM initiation of a child. Humiliation, public nudity, public handling of the genitalia, followed by the permanent branding and alteration of said genitalia. It has to mess up your head.

      Now, let me answer your question:

      For the Victorians, masturbation -in a child- did not necessarily mean stroking to orgasm. It just meant fondling or touching their own genitalia. The regular curiosity that leads a child to touch and maybe tug on their foreskin, was seen as impure and conductive to mental disease and other maladies. It had to be irritation of the foreskin what compelled the child to touch it and pull it, so the foreskin had to go. The pain from doing it without anesthesia (as indicated by J.H.Kellogg) would also attach the idea of punishment, to discourage future attempts.

      Furthermore, in a non-circumcising society, most people masturbate by grasping the penile skin and using it to slide the foreskin back and forth over the glans. Thus, a rigid mind would see the foreskin as essential to adolescent or adult masturbation. Removing the foreskin would prevent the foreskin from sliding over the glans, thus the foreskin had to go.

      Of course those of us who were given the short end of the stick, whether by a doctor or your three beautiful Asian girls, had no other resource than to learn to masturbate using the parts that were left. And never having had the chance to masturbate with a foreskin, we couldn’t tell the difference in sensation, as those who were circumcised as adults -lacking a pathology- can.

  4. Cutting my penis without consulting me first is a crime. I will forever hate my parents for that. I have no contact with the bitch that gave birth to me and the dick head who made this bitch pregnant. They can rot in hell.

  5. Wow. I got here because some news org used his info saying circumcision. Was great and canada shpuld do it like america. I was like what because its actually less common to be circed in other countries. They used this guy as an expert and now im like ew wtf. How seriosulu how thats like perverted and really fucked

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Comments Protected by WP-SpamShield Spam Blocker