Send Message to
IF YOU WERE CIRCUMCISED AS AN INFANT, YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN COMPENSATION
This may be the largest civil action lawsuit in United States history. Potentially a thousand times larger than cigarettes,, asbestos, and all personal injury lawsuits combined filed in the United States. As a victim myself, it is difficult to set my emotions aside, so forgive me if I call this what it really is: MALE GENITAL MUTILATION. Outlawed by the 1942 Geneva Convention as a crime against humanity, if you were circumcised as an infant, today may be your lucky day. Despite this, even as you read this, thousands of newborns have their genitals senselessly mutilated with no end in sight aside from criminal arrest of those responsible. In order for that to happen, the California Legislators, who have previously unrevoked laws allowing molested children a oneyear window to file suit against their molesters outside of the statute of limitations. My hope is that a comprehensive lobbying plan will succeed in convincing legislators that MALE GENITAL MUTILATION is far worse a crime than molesting a child. The reality is that children are having their genitals cut off. It's beyond comprehension, yet it continues unabated.
If I could afford it, I would lobby in Sacramento to have these laws changed, especially the laws regarding the medically unnecessary removal of foreskin, a.k.a. circumcision which like eating pork chops used to be a religious ritual. What it is in reality MALE GENITAL MUTILATION. I was deprived of my God given foreskin and have never recovered from the procedure. For more than half my life I have tried every possible means of stretching new foreskin, but as the saying goes, "You can't get blood from a turnip". Under recent laws which have since been revoked, every single male circumcised as an infant should be allowed to seek financial compensation for their medically unnecessary procedure; moreover, even if the doctor who performed the procedure is no longer living, the hospital, and malpractice insurance carrier are liable not only for your own foreskin, but if you Father was circumcised, a claim may be filed in the name of their estate to collect a minimum sum of $20,000 per instance. It's a shame though, you cannot collect for your Grandfather's circumcision even though the fact he was circumcised may have played a huge role in their decision to have their son circumcised.
If you are interested in becoming a complainant, I need a minimum of seven people willing to have their names placed on the original complaint that will be filed in a California Superior Cour and eventually pave the way for millions of other additional claimants to seek out the compensation they deserve. Unless you died as a result of your circumcision procedure which would entitle those victims to a maximum $270,000, victims who survived the procedure will most likely receive maximum awards of $90,000 and no cents. That is if this case is assigned to a Judge in Indio, California. Provided that Judge Hudspeth does not see this as conflict of interest, it is likely that the entire suit could actually be arbitrated to completion within 7 years.
This case will likely be tied up in the court system for upwards of ten years once the California Legislators pass a Senate approved bill that would allow victims to seek justice against their victimizes beyond the statute of limitations. The only way to bring about this action is to combine all men victims of circumcision clumped together in a single independent action.
The California Bar Association requires me to inform anyone reading this that in the event you need professional legal assistance, the California State Bar can provide you with the name of a licensed attorney free of charge. Please leave only the initials of your name, penis size, including girth, and it's likely size had you not been unlawfully circumcised, and if available the name of the hospital or doctor's office where the procedure was performed.
F.A. 9"; 2 3/4"; 10" .Dr. Chalfant / San Antonio Community Hospital
I once had an uncut 19yr old boyfriend who told me he was over his foreskin and was contemplating getting the chop. I told him he was mad.
You know no difference because you cannot possibly know what you're missing since you've never had it... the frenulum is he most sensitive part of the penis.
I call bullshit. I am cut. I know no difference in being cut or uncut. All I know is I love my cock. So does my husband. Who BTW is uncut.
Maybe I can blame the my bipolar on my being cut LOL.
Why even put this false shit on here; this is a perfect example of fake news that is hurting society.
So presumably every Muslim boy ritually circumcised in the name of Allah will get his day in court too? I guess in a country where fat people can sue Mackas for making them obese, anything is possible.
As a cut boy, I can't say I have ever felt traumatised or disadvantaged although I am partial to a nice foreskin and wonder what it would have been like to own one. (Probably awesome! Haha.)
When I was born in 1960, my parents asked the doctor about circumcision, and his response was that it was totally unnecessary.
That was almost 57 years ago in a "piss-ant" little sub-antarctic island nation of about 3-4 million people (at the time).
It's just like the global warming theory - these's those that realize it, and those with their heads still stuck firmly up their asses. My dick hasn't dropped off yet, so what's the real issue?
It is child mutilation no matter what spin you put on it. It's like dragging your kids off to church every Sunday to brainwash them into the belief of God. Let the child grow and develop their own choice on circumcision and the belief of a God.
BTW, I like any cock, cut or not. Worship and celebrate the cock!!!
Circumcision was not "outlawed by the 1942 Geneva Convention as a crime against humanity". That is factually inaccurate. You may thinking of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights, articles 3 and 14, which do mention it as a potential harm and in terms of male infants being discriminated against regarding their genital rights.
I'm personally not coming down on either side on this issue. I was circumcised as an infant because the hospital doctor, like quite a few at the time in the early 70s, believed it was more hygienic. I've never suffered any harm from it that I'm aware of. Maybe there was some trauma but I can't remember any and there have been no long term effects at all. Ultimately, I prefer to be circumcised. I like my dick this way (and so have plenty of other people.)
There might be a legitimate case for arguing that males should be able to choose, which they can't while babies. I can see the logic of that. But the effects of not having a foreskin being so terrible is hard for me to understand. I accept it if you feel that way. I just don't get it.