Most of these traditions are now a part of history (and in most cases that is a good thing) and most are considered barbaric or evil. Yet some of them have only stopped recently. This is the list of the top 10 bizarre traditions that are now mostly lost to mankind. Warning: Contains adult material.
The full traditions of the Geisha have now been replaced with a modern system. Once Geisha were plentiful in number. In 1900s, there were over 25,000 geisha. In the early 1930s, there were 80,000 geisha. Most geisha were in Kyoto, the old capital city of Japan. Nowadays, there are less than 10,000 geisha left. In Tokyo, there are only 100 geisha left. However, true geisha are much more rare. Modern geisha are not bought from poor families and brought into the geisha house as children. Becoming a geisha is now entirely voluntary, and women who are not the children of geisha can now become geisha. However the training remains as rigourous as before. Young girls have to be very committed to learn the art of traditional Japanese dancing, singing, music, and much more.
Traditional Geisha did not offer the services of prostitution, though some modern ones are rumored to.
As practised from the 15th to 20th centuries in Western societies, a duel was a consensual fight between two people, with matched deadly weapons, in accordance with rules explicitly or implicitly agreed upon, over a point of honor, usually accompanied by a trusted representative (who might themselves fight), and in contravention of the law.
The duel usually developed out of the desire of one party (the challenger) to redress a perceived insult to his honor. The goal of the duel was not so much to kill the opponent as to gain “satisfaction,” i.e., to restore one’s honor by demonstrating a willingness to risk one’s life for it.
Duels could be fought with some sort of sword or, from the 18th Century on, with pistols. For this end special sets of duelling pistols were crafted for the wealthiest of noblemen. After the offence, whether real or imagined, the offended party would demand “satisfaction” from the offender, signalling this demand with an inescapably insulting gesture, such as throwing the glove before him, hence the phrase “throwing down the gauntlet”.
First off, in case you are confused, the photograph above is of a male Eunich. A eunuch is a castrated man; the term usually refers to those castrated in order to perform a specific social function, as was common in many societies of the past. In ancient China castration was both a traditional punishment (until the Sui Dynasty) and a means of gaining employment in the Imperial service. At the end of the Ming Dynasty there were 70,000 eunuchs in the Imperial palace. The value of such employment—certain eunuchs gained immense power that may have superseded that of the prime ministers—was such that self-castration had to be made illegal. The number of eunuchs in Imperial employ had fallen to 470 in 1912, when their employment ceased
Eunuchs castrated before puberty were also valued and trained in several cultures for their exceptional voices, which retained a childlike and other-worldly flexibility and treble pitch. Such eunuchs were known as castrati. Unfortunately the choice had to be made at an age when the boy would not yet be able to consciously choose whether to sacrifice his sexual potency, and there was no guarantee that the voice would remain of musical excellence after the operation. You can read more about castrati here.
Play / Download an MP3 of a true castrato – taken from Top 10 Incredible Recordings.
The photograph here shows a group of concubines standing behind their protectors (usually Eunuchs). Concubinage is the state of a woman or youth in an ongoing, quasi-matrimonial relationship with a man of higher social status. Typically, the man has an official wife in addition to one or more concubines. Concubines have limited rights of support from the man, and their offspring are publicly acknowledged as the man’s children, albeit of lower status than children born by the official wife or wives.
Historically, concubinage was frequently voluntary (by the girl and/or her family’s arrangement), as it provided a measure of economic security for the woman involved. Involuntary, or servile, concubinage sometimes involves sexual slavery of one member of the relationship, typically the woman.
Seppuku (Hara-Kiri) was a key part of bushido, the code of the samurai warriors; it was used by warriors to avoid falling into enemy hands, and to attenuate shame. Samurai could also be ordered by their daimyo (feudal lords) to commit seppuku. Later, disgraced warriors were sometimes allowed to commit seppuku rather than be executed in the normal manner. Since the main point of the act was to restore or protect one’s honor as a warrior, those who did not belong to the samurai caste were never ordered or expected to commit seppuku. Samurai women could only commit the act with permission.
A Samurai was bathed, dressed in white robes, fed his favorite meal, and when he was finished, his instrument was placed on his plate. Dressed ceremonially, with his sword placed in front of him and sometimes seated on special cloths, the warrior would prepare for death by writing a death poem. With his selected attendant (kaishakunin, his second) standing by, he would open his kimono (clothing), take up his tantō (knife) and plunge it into his abdomen, making a left-to-right cut. The kaishakunin would then perform daki-kubi, a cut in which the warrior was all but decapitated (a slight band of flesh is left attaching the head to the body).
Human sacrifice is the act of killing a human being for the purposes of making an offering to a deity or other, normally supernatural, power. It was practiced in many ancient cultures. The practice has varied between different cultures, with some like the Mayans and Aztecs being notorious for their ritual killings, while others have looked down on the practice as primitive. Victims were ritually killed in a manner that was supposed to please or appease gods or spirits. Victims ranged from prisoners to infants to Vestal Virgins, who suffered such fates as burning, beheading and being buried alive.
Over time human sacrifice has become less common around the world, and sacrifices are now very rare. Most religions condemn the practice and present-day laws generally treat it as a criminal matter. Nonetheless it is still occasionally seen today, especially in the least developed areas of the world where traditional beliefs persist.
Footbinding was a custom practised on young females for approximately one thousand years in China, beginning in the 10th century and ending in the early 20th century. In Chinese foot binding, young girls’ feet, usually at age 6 but often earlier, were wrapped in tight bandages so that they could not grow and develop normally; they would, instead, break and become highly deformed, not growing past 4-6 inches (10-15 cm). Today, it is a prominent cause of disability among some elderly Chinese women.
First, each foot would be soaked in a warm mixture of herbs and animal blood. This concoction caused any necrotised flesh to fall off. Then her toenails were cut back as far as possible to prevent ingrowth and subsequent infections. To prepare her for what was to come next the girl’s feet were delicately massaged. Silk or cotton bandages, ten feet long and two inches wide, were prepared by soaking in the same blood and herb mix as before. Each of the toes were then broken and wrapped in the wet bandages, which would constrict when drying, and pulled tightly downwards toward the heel. There may have been deep cuts made in the sole to facilitate this. You can read more about the terrible practice of foot binding here.
Sati was a Hindu funeral custom, now very rare and a serious criminal act in India, in which the dead man’s widow would throw herself on her husband’s funeral pyre in order to commit suicide. The act of sati was supposed to take place voluntarily, and from the existing accounts, most of them were indeed voluntary. The act may have been expected of widows in some communities. The extent to which any social pressures or expectations should be considered as compulsion has been the matter of much debate in modern times. It is frequently stated that a widow could expect little of life after her husband’s death, especially if she was childless. However, there were also instances where the wish of the widow to commit sati was not welcomed by others, and where efforts were made to prevent the death.
Sokushinbutsu were Buddhist monks or priests who allegedly caused their own deaths in a way that resulted in their being mummified. This practice reportedly took place almost exclusively in northern Japan around the Yamagata Prefecture. Between 16 and 24 such mummifications have been discovered.
For three years the priests would eat a special diet consisting only of nuts and seeds, while taking part in a regimen of rigorous physical activity that stripped them of their body fat. They then ate only bark and roots for another three years and began drinking a poisonous tea made from the sap of the Urushi tree, normally used to lacquer bowls. This caused vomiting and a rapid loss of bodily fluids, and most importantly, it killed off any maggots that might cause the body to decay after death. Finally, a self-mummifying monk would lock himself in a stone tomb barely larger than his body, where he would not move from the lotus position. His only connection to the outside world was an air tube and a bell. Each day he rang a bell to let those outside know that he was still alive. When the bell stopped ringing, the tube was removed and the tomb sealed. You can read more about this practice here.
Sky burial or ritual dissection was once a common practice in Tibet. A human corpse is cut into small pieces and placed on a mountaintop, exposing it to the elements and animals – especially to birds of prey. In one account, the leading mok cut off the limbs and hacked the body to pieces, handing each part to his assistants, who used rocks to pound the flesh and bones together to a pulp, which they mixed with tsampa (barley flour with tea and yak butter or milk) before the vultures were summoned to eat.
In several accounts, the flesh was stripped from the bones and given to vultures without further preparation; the bones then were broken up with sledgehammers, and usually mixed with tsampa before being given to the vultures. In another account, vultures were given the whole body. When only the bones remained, they were broken up with mallets, ground with tsampa, and given to crows and hawks that had waited until the vultures had departed.
The Communist government of China outlawed it in the 1960s so it was nearly a lost tradition, but they legalised it again in the 1980s.
The photograph above was taken by Rotem Eldar and you can see more rare photographs on his site here. WARNING: These photos are graphic.























August 13th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
ok now granted i heard this on a movie but it sounded reasonable enough to at least ask if there was some truth behind it. was it also customary for ninjas or anyone else for that matter that when captured they would bite through their own tongue and drown in their own blood rather than be tortured for information. i imagine if anyone could find out it would be you
August 13th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
zombiejorge: as far as I am aware that is not true. It is not mentioned on Wikipedia, or Encyclopaedia Britannica. Also, for what it is worth, I studied Ninjutsu (with the Bujinkan Dōjō) and we were not told about this even as a historical occurrence. I would say you are better off believing that it is not true
August 13th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
zombiejorge i also have heard the same thing i do martial arts and me and some of my friends were talking and one of them said that but then another told us that its just a myth
August 13th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
Biting through your tongue would not create enough blood to drown. Trust me, I know. And I’m not a “ninja”. That’s just a silly idea anyways, and you are a silly person. As for the list, it fails. There is FAR worse, and why is Geisha on there? That was an honorable profession, as was dueling and sepukku. Full of honor I tell ya. And as for the Tibetian sky funeral, who cares? They’re already dead. This list seems based on Western/Christian morals and not “humanity” in general.
August 13th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Your mom: you are complaining that the list is based on western morals and then you say I shouldn’t have included the non-western items. Isn’t that a bit contradictory? I did point out that Geisha did not perform sexual acts until it was modernised. The lost aspect is the true traditional form. I think it does have a place here. Bizarre does not mean bad – it means unusual. As I am not Tibetan, nor a Geisha, nor have I duelled – they are bizarre in my mind
August 13th, 2007 at 10:15 pm
what was the purpose of foot binding???????? couldn’t be for beauty the feet are horribly deformed
August 14th, 2007 at 6:35 am
Stella: it was for beauty – the women never removed their bindings in front of men and they wore very pretty little shoes at all times. The men didn’t know how deformed the feet were. Here is a photo of a lady with shoes on – it is actually appealing on some aesthetic level.
August 14th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
I find the notion of using large tracts of land that would better serve the living as burial grounds far more bizarre than ’sky burial’. It seems entirely sensible and enviromentally friendly!
August 14th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
kate: I agree that is a good use of the land, it is just very alien to our western ways of thinking to imagine our bodies being hacked up and bones crushed to be fed to birds.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Dear Kate:
I agree with you. Our bodies should be fed to other living creatures. Why not make it a law to be dumped over-board so that we become fish food for our oceans? Or leave our bodies out in the woods to become composte for our trees. We can still have a cement marker stating our birth and death dates. I say we should all give back what we take from our planet earth.
August 15th, 2007 at 12:19 am
Actually, the practice of foot binding went beyond aesthetics. It kept an errant wife from running away from her husband, quite literally, as with bound feet it was impossible to run. I’m surprised I didn’t see things like FGM (female genital mutilation, which is still practiced to this day in some countries) or the neck rings that Burmese women wear on this list.
August 15th, 2007 at 7:30 am
Crystal: while your idea is a good one, you can’t really pass laws for that area of life (except in times of pestilence) because the religions that are held by large numbers of our populations have their own specific rules already. Burial is not such a bad one as it at least makes one food for the worms and provides fertilisation for the earth. The one that does the least good is probably cremation as you still get a headstone (often) but your ashes sit in a jar!
August 15th, 2007 at 7:32 am
Melissa: Female circumcision is not on this list as I am saving it for another list – something to do with human abominations! Thanks for the comment on foot binding – very interesting.
August 15th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
this is a very eurocentric view expressed, what about consumerism, thats a pretty fucked up unnatural process, or smoking, inhaling burning sticks of plants, thats not right…?
August 15th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Hi! Interesting list! Yet I find it curious that Geishas and Concubinage is included, yet the much more bizarre and cruel “tradition” (or better horrendous crime) of female genital mutilation omitted.
August 15th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Pete: see my reply above (number 13).
Matt: smoking is an accepted behaviour in most societies of the world – it is hardly a bizarre tradition. And consumerism is not a bizarre tradition, it is an effect of the free market.
August 15th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
those things are kinda gross for me:D
August 15th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
troy: I wouldn’t recommend looking at the link under Sky Burial then – it only gets worse!
August 16th, 2007 at 4:28 am
Interesting list. To those who are grossed out by foot-binding, they should probably look at the much more accepted use of corsets in the western world: in extreme cases of tightlacing it is certainly comparable! Women would shrink their waists down as low as 7 inches IN DIAMETER – this would shatter the ribcage, permanently damage internal organs, and even cause organs to migrate very unnaturally.
Also, I personally don;t think Geishas are very bizarre. They were entertainers, not unlike mimes, minstrels, jesters or even clowns, and at the time apprenticeship at a young age was not at all uncommon. To all the feminists out there, they should be reminded that a parge proportion of geisha were male!
August 16th, 2007 at 4:34 am
Also, to YourMom, biting through your own tongue (while a difficult feat) would prevent you from spilling any secrets while being tortured. You may not drown but it is possible to bleed to death, what with that massive artery running along the bottom and all. Or you could bleed so much that you choke on it (there are cases of people choking on vomit and dying, so why not)
August 16th, 2007 at 7:35 am
Jackie: thanks for the comments – corsets were indeed a strange tradition – a worthy addition to the list
August 16th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Matt: smoking is an accepted behaviour in most societies of the world – it is hardly a bizarre tradition. And consumerism is not a bizarre tradition, it is an effect of the free market.
So… just because smoking is widely accepted means it’s not bizarre? All of those other things were accepted, as well….
just making a point.
August 16th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Emily: How many times have you been in a bar and seen a person light a cigarette and suddenly think: “wow – that is bizarre! He is inhaling smoke”? You don’t because it isn’t
The reason people continue to smoke is through addiction. If there was no addictive property I would possibly agree that smoking is bizarre.
August 19th, 2007 at 12:59 am
hi i enjoyed the read
August 19th, 2007 at 7:48 am
Patricia: thanks – I am glad you did
August 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
I enjoy your lists – am a list person myself. Do you know if the the practice of creating eunichs is still occuring somewhere to this day? Also, where did the concubine pic originate? Somewhere in No. Africa? thanks!
August 19th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Liz: thanks. I think the Concubine picture was in a muslim country though I am not sure which. As far as I am aware no one is making eunuchs any longer.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:29 am
jfrater- yeah, but they’re not born with cigarette addiction. They do it on their own at first. Which could be considered bizarre :p
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:16 am
Emily: They do – but as most do it in their adolescent years I think it would be better regarded as stupid
August 25th, 2007 at 12:44 am
Like the posters who asked about Female Genital Mutilation, I’ve got to ask why Male Genital Mutilation was left off the list. The MALE version is practiced a lot more in the world, and it’s usually done on non-concenting infants!
August 25th, 2007 at 1:10 am
frizzen: Boy is that a big can of worms
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:52 pm
frizzen: There is a huge difference between female and male circumcism. Female circumcism is intended to make orgasm impossible. It is considered by some Muslim extremist communities (especially in Egypt) to be a sin for a woman to experience pleasure during sex.
On the other hand, male circumcism actually may have medical benefits like better hygiene and far fewer infections of the penis. Studies also point to circumcised males being less likely to contract the HIV virus and other STD’s due to the fact that many uncircumcised males have more frequent infections of the penis.
Circumcism also does not have the same effect as female genital mutilation since these males are still able to have a orgasm. The two are not even close to being comparable.
September 7th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
Not true. This is american propaganda. Circ. is purposed to diminish the men’s sexual pleasure, thus to make the sex less enjoyable for them; this will generate a low sex drive and a poor sex life, with one marriage per life, one or very few children; extra sexual manifestations like masturbation, wife cheating, hiring a prostitute or sexual experiments will be less seen at a circ. man. The final purpose is, as explained, to control the men’s sex life and natality.
September 7th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
MAX: That is just a crock of shit. Circumcism has no effect on how enjoyable sex is. If what you said was true, then the US would have one of the lowest birthrates in the industrialized world. The same would be said of divorce rates, wife cheating, prostitution and STD’s. The fact that none of these are the case is proof you are wrong. In fact our birthrate is higher than our death rate unlike most of the rest of the industrialized world.
I also know first hand that circumcism has none of those effects whatsoever. (I happen to be circumcised and my Father was uncircumcised.)
The reasons you stated for circumcism were believed in America in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. These myths were spread by the various religious communities during the Victorian period.
The reason the practice continues is because the medical community here has documented health benefits that circumcised men have over uncircumcised men. It is now recommended by pediatricians for medical reasons. The religious traditions behind it have long since passed.
September 8th, 2007 at 9:29 am
“documented health benefits that circumcised men have over uncircumcised men”
A matter of logics: if you want to protect yourself, put something on, don’t take it off. If you ask a serious doctor(not an american-jew crook) he will tell you that circ. is reccomended only when facing serious medical conditions, like phimosis; I don’t mean phimosis, the natural state of the newborn, when the foreskin covers the glans and cannot be retracted(which is normal), I mean the adulthood phimosis, when the foreskin is too tight to be retractedl; yes, in the 2nd case, rarely seen(0,6%) beside other methods to treat it, the final solution is to circumcise. The rest 99,3% normal men don’t need to circumcise.
The foreskin has a primary role of protection, it protects the glans the same way the eyelid protects the eye, or the mouth protects the tongue; these are sensible internal organs, purposed to be uncovered only when used. Like the others, the glans must be warm and humid, smegma is not something “dirty”, it keeps the glans moistured and facilitates intercourse(same thing with the female vaginal secretions), and can be easely cleaned. Someone said that “The Animal Kingdom Would Probably Cease to Exist Without Smegma”. After the circ. the penis becomes dry, the externalized glans is exposed more than ever to infections(a baby’s poo may have contact with the glans and infect it), much of the sensitivity is lost(of course they don’t say it in US).
Circumcision protects from NOTHING; it is purposed to control the men’s sex life; as I said, the glans is exposed to infection, lacking the foreskin protection; a circumcised penis is in fact more dirty. And all those studies about AIDS, and how circ. may prevent HIV infection are AMERICAN BULLSHIT! lies, to promote circumcision, because they are loosing the field, more and more americans don’t circumcise the babies, they started to wake up, to know the effects of this unnecessary operation. Let’s think, US has the most circumcised men in the world, but also US has the most HIV-infected men in the world. What’s the effect of circ.? none. The proper campaign is “Educate not Mutilate”, to proper educate our offspring to have a regular and healthy sex life, to enjoy it and to procreate as much as they can.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:01 am
You lost all credibility with this statement I am fixing to quote you.
“Let’s think, US has the most circumcised men in the world, but also US has the most HIV-infected men in the world. What’s the effect of circ.?”
For your information, South Africa and almost all nations on that continent have more HIV infected people than the US does. The US is among one of the nations with the lowest infection rates in the world.
The US is not the one promoting circumcism worldwide for your information. It is being promoted by the UN who happens to sponsor the health report on the the link between uncircumcised males and a higher HIV infection rate. This is not AMERICAN BULLSHIT but it is sponsored by physicians from around the world. Get your facts straight.
You have not made your argument that female mutilation and male circumcism are the same. All your arguments fall apart when the evidence is presented to you. So you can go on promoting beliefs based on religious superstition and I will go on basing mine on actual scientific facts.
September 8th, 2007 at 11:55 am
And who controls the UN? The americans. Who created HIV(despite many theories, HIV is artificially-created)? The same americans.
My point is that circumcision is NOT necessary for the 99,3% normal men, it has NO benefits; any serious doctor can tell you that, even the American Academy of Pediatrics don’t reccomend it it anymore. Foreskin is an important part of the body, nature created it with a precise meaning and function; it’s not just a “piece of skin”. Watch this vid to see:
And what about the “sciencific facts”?. That’s pseudoscience to produce false answers, as the americans always do; using these answers they fool the poor and uneducated people, mostly through TV commercials(using pseundoscience language, like “studies have confirmed that 70% will… blah, blah, blah; a good example is the toothbrush commercials, especially Colgate). In US the LIE is a national industry. Same with the circumcision, they invented those studies regarding the foreskin, to lie the people that circ. men don’t contract HIV; what you call “science” i call “biased studies belonging to the pseudoscience”; there is no difference, the chance to contract HIV is the same.
In fact, you “promote beliefs based on religious superstition”, because you belive those jewish lies, converted to “scientific answers”, as I explained you before.
Considering the absurd, that you are right, and circ. has some benefits, still remains a MUTILATION, because it’s done without the individual consent, at an age when the person can’t decide what’s good for him, and has no civil rights to retaliate; it’s done mostly in improper conditions(mohels don’t wash their hands, don’t use gloves, don’t use sterile scalpels) without anesthesia, causing extreme pain and disturbing the victim’s life(usually the breastfeeding is very affected).
And of course the Male Genital Mutilation(MGM) and Female Genital Mutilation(FGM) are not the same, I don’t intend to say this, it’s not the true; but they bear the same flag: the flag of SEXUAL OPRESSION, control of the sexual life.
My message is “Be free. Educate, not mutilate”
September 8th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Max,
I would find your arguments more compelling if you would tone down your hate speech. It is hard to take someone seriously when they are attacking a group of individuals such as the 302,819,832+ population of the United States and your obvious hatred towards those of the Jewish community. Keep to the medical facts of your argument and I think more will be willing to listen to what you have to say.
September 9th, 2007 at 2:05 am
This is so interesting!
I have to pipe in about the circumcision though. I am a registered nurse. The poster who said it is recommended by doctors is incorrect. All medical organizations world wide either state the procedure in unnecessary or they are neutral on their stand and say it is a cultural/cosmetic procedure to be decided by parents. I could go on but that isn’t my intent here. I just wanted to say it isn’t “recommended” like it used to be in the US.
Here’s what I wanted to say. Now this isn’t nearly as exciting as what you’ve already posted but what about dieting/anorexia/cosmetic surgery? This seems like such a bizarre thing to me, although I understand why it is done. But those (usually women) with such a low body image who would risk surgery and then deny their body when they are hungry are quite bizarre. It’s like they are going against their basic need for food (I’m speaking of those already of a healthy target weight).I hope they don’t find out about the effects of the Urushi tree!
Something else that seems to be bizarre happening right now in the US – dressing your dog in human-type clothing. I wonder if this will make the “list” in 100 or 1,000 years? Probably not, but still interesting.
Thanks for the fun read!
September 9th, 2007 at 2:08 am
soonerproud:
“The reason the practice continues is because the medical community here has documented health benefits that circumcised men have over uncircumcised men.” Yet it has been abandoned in the UK and NZ, and largely in Australia (and it was nearly universal in the latter two) all of which probably keep better health than the US. Certainly no epidemics of the things it’s supposed to prevent.
“It is now recommended by pediatricians for medical reasons.” Quite false. No national medical organisation in the world recommends it, and outside the US, some are more or less actively discouraging it.
“The religious traditions behind it have long since passed.” The great majority of male circumcisions in the world are Muslim, followed by Americans, South Koreans, Philippinos, tribal Africans, Jews, Polynesians and Australian Aboriginals.
FGM is usually worse physically than MGM, but their origins are similar, and as human rights violations, there’s nothing to choose between them.
As for sex, one recent study (Sorrells et al) found circumcision removed the most sensitive part, another (Solanis) found that men circumcised as adults, and their partners, found sex to be worse.
September 9th, 2007 at 3:04 am
Thanks for the very interesting comments everyone – it is nice to see the debate take a more intelligent turn
September 9th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
truebeedoo, Lindsay, Hugh77: Thanks for turning the debate into one based on logical arguments and not based on hatred.
I just want to state first that I was not defending the practice itself. I was merely giving the reasons why the practice continues to exist in the US. Very few in the US do it for religious reasons.
Lindsay: It is still being recommended by some in the medical community. It is true that most medical organizations have dropped recommendation of the practice. It is also true that some medical organizations are beginning to recommend it again because of the link of higher HIV infection rates with the uncircumcised. I personally think more studies need to be done before the medical community recommends the practice again.
Hugh77:
“Yet it has been abandoned in the UK and NZ, and largely in Australia (and it was nearly universal in the latter two) all of which probably keep better health than the US. Certainly no epidemics of the things it’s supposed to prevent.”
It is also being abandoned by many here in the US. Better hygiene and the wide spread use of condoms are the reasons why there is no epidemics of what circumcism is supposed to prevent in these countries. The lack of universal socialized medicine in the US (We do have socialized medicine in the US for the poor, Native Americans and the military/veterans.) does not mean the quality of the actual care is lacking. The quality of the care itself is among the best in the world. But that is another debate.
“Quite false. No national medical organisation in the world recommends it, and outside the US, some are more or less actively discouraging it.”
Actually, it is being actively promoted by the UN especially for countries in Africa as a way to reduce HIV infections. You are correct that most medical organizations are not actively promoting it or even discouraging it.
“The great majority of male circumcisions in the world are Muslim, followed by Americans, South Koreans, Philippinos, tribal Africans, Jews, Polynesians and Australian Aboriginals.”
I was speaking about the US. It was in response to MAX’s assertion of the reasons why circumcism is practiced here. It is correct it still has a religious connection in most places it is practiced. That connection was dropped by the mid twentieth century in the US, Western Europe and Austrailia/NZ.
“FGM is usually worse physically than MGM, but their origins are similar, and as human rights violations, there’s nothing to choose between them.”
FGM is always worse. It is the equivalent of removing the head of the penis. Removing the foreskin is not intended to have the same effect as FGM. FGM is practiced specifically to deny all sexual pleasure because it is considered a sin for the woman to enjoy herself during sex. The two are not comparable.
“As for sex, one recent study (Sorrells et al) found circumcision removed the most sensitive part, another (Solanis) found that men circumcised as adults, and their partners, found sex to be worse.”
The first study is debatable. The foreskin does not have the concentration of nerves that are contained in the head of the penis. The second study has more merit. It is a known fact that removal of the foreskin removes protection and can lead to less sensitivity in some men. The constant friction clothing causes to the penis is the primary cause of this. This is why I believe circumcism should not be practiced unless there is a compelling medical reason behind it.
September 9th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
soonerproud:
Thank you for your kind remarks.
The rate here in NZ is
September 10th, 2007 at 2:36 am
(Whoops! don’t use a “less than” sign, it thinks you’ve opened an HTML tag)
soonerproud:
Thank you for your kind remarks.
The rate here in NZ is less than 1% for paalangi (non-Pacific Islanders). It is not offered in hospitals: that is the main way parents were discouraged from asking for it. That is what I meant by “abandoned”.
You still seem to assume circumcising would have the benefits claimed for it, lacking modern hygiene. There is no evidence for that.
I said “national” deliberately to exclude the UN, which has been hijacked. The randomised controlled tests claiming to show circumcision prevents HIV were faulty (they were not, of course, double blind, and the experimental groups were treated differently in more ways than just the operation from the control groups). The amount of protection circumcision gives, even if they are correct, is not cost-effective.
FGM =/= clitoridectomy. Milder forms, commonly practised, are physically no worse than circumcision. An average 39 youths/year died in Eastern Cape alone from circumcision in 2001-5. One girl dies in Egypt and FGM is banned there, illustrating the double standard. Your claims about the purpose of FGM are disputed. If they are true, why is it women who do it? I’m not minimising FGM. Both are evil, both must go.
The foreskin is not just to protect the glans, it has a complex structure and function of its own. Taylor showed it is much more richly innervated than the glans, not only in number but quality. Men circumcised in adulthood compare the effect to going colourblind.
September 10th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Hugh77:
As I stated earlier, I am not assuming any actual benefits. I was simply stating if there were benefits that hygiene definitely has a big role to play in that equation. You can not rule that out as a factor if they ever actually prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a real link between HIV infection and uncircumcism. I previously stated that I suspect the results are faulty and more studies need to be done.
FGM as it is practiced in the Sudan and Egypt are performed for the very reasons I stated. The surgery is performed on infants and young girls in the vast majority of cases. It is to deny them of all sexual pleasure as that is deemed sinful in those cultures. One reason a grown woman may do it is because they have a condition that they have constant orgasm while performing normal activities. But that is rarely the case when FGM is performed.
“The foreskin is not just to protect the glans, it has a complex structure and function of its own. Taylor showed it is much more richly innervated than the glans, not only in number but quality.”
I have a hard time believing that. Just because a few so called experts make a claim does not make it true.(As is the case with uncircumcism and HIV.) If his claims are true then it is easily verifiable by the rest of the medical community. So far, that has not happened. There are plenty of reasons to oppose circumcism without resorting to making claims that are not easily verifiable.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
soonerproud:
“if they ever actually prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a real link between HIV infection and uncircumcism.”
My guess when the dust has settled, 10 or 15 years from now, it will emerge that circumcision reduces HIV by some fraction like 5-10% – not enough to justify doing it. But by closing off the experiments for “ethical reasons” (after “ethically” sending out human guineapigs to see if they get HIV), no more experiments can be done (nor can those ones be followed up, because the control group has now been circumcised), and circumcision will be “rolled out” (as they keep saying) along with real safe-sex information and other measures, but circumcision will get the credit for any reduction in HIV.
“…and more studies need to be done.” – or these studies properly analysed. The Number Needed to Treat (NNT) is the figure these studies glaringly failed to give. My calculation is that they showed it would take 34 circumcisions to prevent one HIV infection in South Africa, 30 in Kenya and 56 in Uganda, but I’m not a medical statistician. The danger of circumcised men taking risks because “circumcision is a vaccine” is vastly greater than that little protection.
“It is to deny them of all sexual pleasure as that is deemed sinful in those cultures.” But it’s not as simple as that. Where FGM is the norm, men consider intact girls “unclean”. (The same is true in reverse to a lesser extent in the US.) When that is the case, mothers may do it to ensure their girls can marry. You can’t abolish FGM without also changing that aspect of the culture.
““The foreskin is not just to protect the glans, it has a complex structure and function of its own. Taylor showed it is much more richly innervated than the glans, not only in number but quality.”
I have a hard time believing that. Just because a few so called experts make a claim does not make it true.” Read the study at http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor/ The pleasures of the foreskin were widely understood for centuries until circumcision became widespread. See http://www.circumstitions.com/Pleasure.html
“If his claims are true then it is easily verifiable by the rest of the medical community. So far, that has not happened.” No, because the US medical community has a vested interest in circumcision, both personal and financial. How else to explain the wide publicity given to the study by Payne et al. claiming to show no difference between circumcised and intact penis sensitivity, when it didn’t look at the foreskin?
September 12th, 2007 at 11:41 am
My point is that circumcision is NOT necessary for the 99,3% normal men, it has NO benefits; a
…
sure it does, it makes your dick not look like a sloppy old sock with a ping pong ball stuck in the end. And taking a leak is easier and cleaner, I would think…
September 12th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
sakul, Thanks for turning the debate back into one based on hatred and not on logical arguments.
“Easier and cleaner”? The man who is too lazy to pull back his foreskin is too lazy to live.
September 21st, 2007 at 10:48 am
jrafter Comment 27 “As far as I am aware no one is making eunuchs any longer” I stay in India and around here some elder eunuchs ‘make’ young boys into eunuchs. On every Friday you will find a lot of eunuchs go from one shop to another begging (I don’t see it as begging more in the line of extortion). Many superstitious people belive that not only can eunuchs ward off the evil eye but can also put a curse on you so they always pay some money to them when they come begging. Many a time if somebody gives them what the eunuch thinks is too little the eunuch may 1) Throw the money to your face literally, 2) Spit in your lap if you are in your car and the eunuch is begging at a traffic signal, or worst of all 3) lift up his ’sari’ or gown like dress to expose himself. The last one is supposed to bring bad luck to the person outside who’s shop the act is performed. Works too as many customers just run away from the shop. To avoid the bad stuff many people prefer to just pay something and get on with their business making begging in this form a very lucrative business and hence the making of eunuchs.
September 21st, 2007 at 11:53 am
Sorry about the name it should be jfrater of course.
September 21st, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Lalpasha: wow – I am speechless! okay – that’s not true – I am never speecheless – but does that truly happen? How do they convince the parents to allow the children to be castrated? Oh – and jrafter is a lot better than the jfarter I often get!
September 21st, 2007 at 1:35 pm
cool list! some of those things were very gross! as for sky buriel i guess its more benficial than putting people in coffins and having them rot. but it is a strange idea to introduce to the western world. as for Crystal comment number 10: I agree with you on one thing , we should give back when we die like the animals do on the other hand wouldn’t it be creepy if you were fishing or walking in the woods and found someones grandma? not alive?
September 21st, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Hey – let’s not ignore the fact that in traditional western burial we become food for worms – do you all hate worms so much that you want to deprive them of food?!
September 21st, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Incineration is the best solution, belive me!
September 24th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
so…how can the concubines have babies if the guys are eunichs? I think I missed something.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
SmellyLynn: I think the concubines would have had the children of their masters – not the Eunuchs.
September 24th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
jfrater: How do they convince the parents to allow the children to be castrated? They mostly pick the kids off the streets they are mostly orphans or runaways, many a time they are unwanted kids maybe from redlight areas so no problem of parents, but sometimes the parents themselves sell off the infants to the eunuchs for a sum of money. You may not believe the following but it is true, as begging is one of the most lucrative businesses in India many parents of infants ‘hire’ out their babies to people who want to beg using the baby as a prop to garner more sympathy. These babies are then drugged using the cheapest off the street drugs to make them sleep throughout the day and not pester the hirer for milk or other baby needs. The drugs definitely affect the babies brains and the pollution on the streets of India would affect their lungs but the parents just don’t care as long as the baby is brought back alive and in good condition to be hired out the next day. The last I heard the going rate for hiring out a baby was IRS 100 or 2.5 USD.
September 25th, 2007 at 12:34 am
Lalpasha: that is just so tragic and awful. Does anyone try to put a stop to it?
October 20th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
I am half Japanese and I’m living in Japan, and to state that ’some’ modern Geishas are prostitutes or do such things, is completely wrong.
It is a stereotype that Westerners hold, and Geishas have NOTHING to do with prostitution, even modern geishas.
Modern geishas are not prostitutes, nor would I say that even ’some’ are, either.
I’m appalled to see such blatant stereotyping.
December 16th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
I always bring up concubinage in RE because it makes my RE teacher really awkward. Its completely pathetic and hilarious to watch.
December 28th, 2007 at 11:50 am
Ok, I’ll bite, if Geisha didn’t involve sex, then, WTF is the POINT?!?!?! I thought concubines were for sex also, damn I must be horny or something…
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:38 am
Geisha’s were entertainer’s,can’t u be that simple bout things =3=”.
Castration is painful for anyone involved thats it….
January 3rd, 2008 at 6:51 am
Karina – “Modern geishas are not prostitutes, nor would I say that even ’some’ are, either.”
I guess it depends on how liberally you want to define the term “prostitute” or how emotive you want to be about it. There is no doubt that a geisha having a patron who offered financial support whilst maintaining a sexual relationship with her was not uncommon. That is not to say all geisha lived in this manner…but how else do you describe the role of the geisha in these circumstances ?
Or maybe this only applied in the distant past ?
Incidentally, you are probably right about the stereotyping, but I don’t see why this is something to be “appalled” about…
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:11 am
i don’t think anyones been a prostitute in this commentary includin me lol, so we don’t even really have the right to suggest bout it anyways unless we’ve been through it…..
should learn more before to type….
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Very Interesting, Asia Has Some Weird, But Very interesting Customs, Thanks For The List Another Good One!!
January 3rd, 2008 at 9:50 pm
If I recall, the purpose of eunuchs was mainly to act as harem keepers and guards for the master’s wives/concubines. They were castrated so that they posed no threat (i.e. not wanting to have sex with the master’s women, no genitalia, no problem).
January 4th, 2008 at 1:59 am
it was more to keep away from the emperor’s wives and concubines, also the emperor feared that the children from his wives and concubine that were born were his. the emperor also feared to be over ruled hence castration….don’t ave the balls to take over lol
January 18th, 2008 at 11:24 am
They’re all strange and yet there are things that are still done like beheadings by a certain group of religious fanatics. I noticed a comment about stereotyping geishas too. Nobody stereotyped anyone, it’s a common western misconception but not a stereotype. This is all just proof of human stupidity. As a species we elevate ourselves to a level that we’re nowhere near when it comes to our actually intelligence compared to perceived intelligence.
January 30th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Ew, foot binding.
February 8th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Re: #3
Castration doesn`t necessarily mean penilectomy.
“Unfortunately the choice had to be made at an age when the boy would not yet be able to consciously choose whether to sacrifice his sexual potency, and there was no guarantee that the voice would remain of musical excellence after the operation.”
The boys lost their fertility, not potency. Some of the castrati (who were rock stars of their time) had wild sex lives. Sometimes the husbands of the ladies involved didn`t believe it, because they didn`t understand that a castrato`s genitals were still functional. You seem to make the same mistake.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
that picture on #9 is NOT a Geisha! Her kimono is to short, her make up isn’t right, the hairstyle is wrong, she isn’t wearing the proper shoes. so yeh you should fix it
February 9th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
71. EvilMe
Published on August 12, 2007 so this is an older list. so there may’ve been issues re: images used. hopefully the text makes up for the picture.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:42 am
I wish I was in better shape, I would like to start Sky Burials in the united states.
Like others here I agree, what a waste of land to bury people.
How many times do they dig up and move Grave yards?
I would like to be gone the same way, the idea of being buried in a box or cremated does not sound good to me.
I like the idea of being laid out in the sun in the mountains and then let the birds do there thing.
Also those who would not want to see it would not have too.
February 18th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
lol aye it is nice to have sky burials i guess
….u make it sound like a holiday ^^.
maybe graveyards in the end r the attatchments to those who r alive and who remember u….i mean the reason to say that is because of sky burials and the tibetan way of finkin. sigh who knows…
March 14th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I think this is an interesting list! I want to know more! I’m so glad that (for the most part) humans have advanced in traditions. I would hate to live back when there was feet binding!! I feel so bad for the castration of males! And I don’t feel bad for guys that have been circumcised! It still feels way better for men than women!!!
March 15th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Cool article, but how is Geisha a strange tradition? The concept exists in virtually every culture, under different names, “courtesans”, “gypsies”, “bar maids”. What’s so odd about that?
March 15th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I find it curious that the much more bizarre and cruel “tradition” (or better horrendous crime) of male genital mutilation is omitted.
It must be that one person’s mark of Chaim is another persons genital mutilation.
March 15th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Circumcision is by far one of mankind’s oddest and cruelest practices.
March 30th, 2008 at 1:48 am
Circumcision does not even BEGIN to compare to female genital mutilation. That is the most disgusting practice that is still in existence today.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/FGC_Types.jpg/548px-FGC_Types.jpg
Sick.
March 30th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
It depends what you’re comparing. In severity, the worst of male genital cutting is worse than the mildest of female genital cutting. The death rate, comparing like with like, is probably comparable – nearly 40 males a year 2000-2005 in Eastern Cape Province alone. As human rights violations, they are equivalent. The only reason male cutting is defended is that we do it. To see female cutting defended with equal eloquence, read Indonesian blogs. Both are evil, both should be abolished.
April 27th, 2008 at 8:26 am
female genital mutilations has been practiced by CHristians, Jews and Muslims alike tho it is not sanctioned by any of those religions. It is more of a tradition practiced most commonly in AFrica in countries like Somalia, Eritrea and the like. There are rare cases in Egypt mainly among uneducated villagers. The point is to promote chastity of women so they remain virgins thus making them ‘marriage material’. The idea is that if she cannot enjoy sexual pleasure, she will not sin (pre-marital sex or adultery).
It is illegal in almost all if not all Muslim countries.. It is not allowed to be performed even in more ‘extreme’ countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. In any case it is a gruesome practice and there should be more done to educate people in these places about the effects of it to women physically and psychologically.
April 27th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
PityTheNation: “There are rare cases in Egypt mainly among uneducated villagers.” According to WHO (http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/fgm/fig1.htm) the prevalence in Egypt among women aged 15-49 is 97%. “It is illegal in almost all if not all Muslim countries.” It is certainly not illegal in Indonesia. Here (http://www.indonesiamatters.com/1626/fgm/) you’ll see professors openly saying it is neither required nor forbidden.
So when PityTheNation says “It is illegal in almost all if not all Muslim countries.” excuse me if I don’t instantly believe it.
Why not just say “genital cutting”? It’s bizarre on whomever it’s done.
May 18th, 2008 at 10:44 am
I don’t think that there needs to be an argument over which genital mutilation is worse. As a woman, I would think that most female circumcision is worse, mostly because it is forced without any anesthetic. But when a male baby is circumcised, I would think the hospital would make sure that the baby doesn’t feel anything.
BUT, and this is a bit BUT, I could be wrong. Either way, both are horrible, so why argue which is worse?
By the way, I love the list
May 18th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
“…when a male baby is circumcised, I would think the hospital would make sure that the baby doesn’t feel anything.” You would, wouldn’t you, but until very recently, anaesthetic was not used at all, and it is still far from universal. (They just make sure the circumcising room is soundproof and/or far from the parents.) There are risks (methaemoglobinaemia!) with anaesthetics on newborn babies, and the myth is still widespread that “babies don’t feel pain”. The baby still has the pain of urine in the wound for the next two weeks or so.
“Either way, both are horrible, so why argue which is worse?” EXACTLY. Just list “Genital cutting”.
June 7th, 2008 at 5:55 am
Female genital mutilation is by far the most tragic and horrible tradition. I don’t see how women who know what it feels like can help hold down the girls getting it done.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:14 am
Just wanted to talk about the male circumcision thing I myself am circumcised and I haven’t researched it at all because frankly I don’t give a shit all I know is I have great sex and frequently so your theory about lowered sex drive is probally incorrect and I wouldn’t want to not be circumcised because it looks so ugly
June 20th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
“I have great sex and frequently so your theory about lowered sex drive is probally incorrect” I don’t think anyone says it reduces drive. Cutting the most sensitive part of the genitals off reduces the quality. Glad you have great sex. “Great” is not as good as it gets.
“I wouldn’t want to not be circumcised because it looks so ugly”. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So is ugly. That’s why we don’t normally go making permanent changes to other people’s bodies for aesthetic reasons alone.
June 21st, 2008 at 12:47 am
umm at least its better than castration lmao. not that i have been circumsized, but in the end the ‘little dude’ is there. thats all i typed in to say lol.
September 16th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
another sacrifice in ancient cultures was to get the man & poke his eyes out befor feeding him alive to a rabid pack of divorced women…
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
eunuchs were a very high entrusted position of power and were typically the closest relationship to the king other than his family. Back in those days, kings had multiple wives and eunuchs were castrated to ensure they would not fool around with the wives which is why their status was so high.
October 12th, 2008 at 3:14 am
my grandma has bound feet. they’re tiny. but i never really got to see them because she’d always be wearing those shoes, even when she’s in the house.
January 26th, 2009 at 2:47 am
Back to MAX (comment #35)
“If you ask a serious doctor(not an american-jew crook)…”
I need some clarification on this subject. What’s the test to determine whether or not my physician is an “american-jew crook?” I actually happen to be quite fond of americans, jewish people and just about anybody else – except for crooks. So I was thinking…should I just propose the question of circumsition, and then I’ll know, based on their answer, wheter or not they’re crooks.
Or…is it just a matter of simple fact that American-Jewish people that happen to be doctors are crooks?
Or…maybe it’s just any doctor that happens to be in any way American and/or Jewish is a crook – like a volatile combination. For example – baking soda and vinegar on their own are quite docile, but put them together and you get quite a fancy 5th grade volcano.
I just HATE getting robbed, so I was hoping for some tips to help protect myself from those vile medical providers always trying to get paid by mutilating my “boy parts” (That’s the term we use in our home when having sensitive discussions with my six-year old son.)
My son, by the way, happens to be circumcised (as well as I am, my father is, and my grandfather before him) as this was a customary religious practice in our family. Unfortunately, I can’t say whether or not this has hurt my sex-life because I have no comparison and there’s probably no going back on the procedure. Personally, however, I think it’s pretty good – foreskin or not.
P.S.
First post for me – thanks for all the lists. I’m completely addicted to top 10 anythings. Is that considered a bizarre tradition?
February 6th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
I’m surprised you guys are not talking about the self mummifying Buddhist monks more because that is the most bizarre of all on this strange list. That’s as hard core as it gets.
February 7th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
I didn’t read all the posts on circumcision or read through all of the ones I did read, but it seems that people are misconstruing male circumcision with castration. Circumcision, at least the kind practiced today, is pretty harmless compared to hacking off the penis. I would say that female circumcision can be compared to male castration rather than male circumcision. I hate the idea of female circumcision.. -shudders-
Anyway, good post! You should have added some “rights of passage” in there, since some of them across the world are extremely bizarre!
February 10th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Rawrger – I actually just did read through all that (took me a while but so interesting) and no, no one was getting confused; the discussion about male circumcision was always making the distinction between circumcision and castration. No worries.
But yeah, FGM is awful but there is one type that directly corresponds with male circumcision, where they just cut off the clitoral hood but nothing else. I’m pretty sure that is the female equivalent of the average male circumcision, and as far as I know, sex is still pleasurable for these women.
Not to say that it is an okay practice though. In my opinion, genital cutting of all kinds is bizarre and has virtually no (significant) proven health benefits. So unless it’s being done for religious reasons or because the parents don’t want their child to feel like the odd one out – not a great reason to be circumcised, but understandable – then I feel it should be discouraged, for all the reasons above and more. One other thing that I don’t think was really mentioned is that people say circumcision prevents penile cancer, but less than 1 in 100,000 men get penile cancer every year. And if men with foreskins cleaned properly, the infections would be that much less likely to occur in the first place. And to add a bit of perspective, 1 in 8 women get breast cancer (WAY higher statistic), but you don’t see anyone saying we should cut off amputate all the boobs in America.
Also, as far as a reduced risk of HIV transmission, well, even if that is significantly true, there are FAR better ways of preventing HIV. :p
March 4th, 2009 at 3:29 am
Apart from SATI covered here, DOWRY is another bizarre tradition from the subcontinent.
DOWRY is NOT a religious practice but a social tradition in South Asia where the father of the bride pays monetary and or liquid/illiquid assets to the bridegroom or his family.
Dowry is banned in India and is punishable offense but is practiced widely. Dowry related bride killings were common till the 1980s/1990s in India and has (hopefully) gone down in the recent past.
Anti-Dowry laws in India are draconian and though still not enforced correctly in most cases, gives women right to walk into a police station and write a complaint against her husband and in-laws. Reason enough for travellers not to bring unhappy wives to India.
It is reported that in the India prison social strata, only rape, murder of minors is considered worse than murder for dowry.
March 24th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
though most of the time women were not allowed to commit seppuku, i have heard that they used a different practice called jigaki, where they would tie their ankles together (to keep from being found in an immodest position) and use a sharp blade to slice the major vessels in each side of the throat.
March 30th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
What a fascinating list!! These practices are all more than jsut a little weird…
Re GEISHAS: Anyone remember the book “Memoirs of a Geisha”? I think it was supposed to be based on fact and if I remember correctly, her virginity was auctioned off to the highest bidder… Isnt that prostitution?
Re CIRCUMCISION: I had no idea there was such an intense debate about it! Here in Peru most males are circumsized. Well, at least all the boy babies I’ve seen be born, plus I know my brothers are, and my husband… I’ve always heard that it is more hygienic and caused no ill effects so why not… I guess I’ll have to research more carefully and get back to you…
Re FGM: All I can is, I cant believe anyone is even comparing it to circumcision. It is barbaric and has absolutely NO health benefits… Not even the hygiene one!!
April 16th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
I wish someone would tell my husband he is supposed to have a diminished sex drive and less enjoyment, cos I am tired out after all this boinking.
April 17th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
“Our bodies should be fed to other living creatures. Why not make it a law to be dumped over-board so that we become fish food for our oceans? Or leave our bodies out in the woods to become compost for our trees.”
Well, modern medication makes many people being toxic waste. Especially people who underwent certain chemo therapies etc. So those corpses are to be cremated by law, at least in Germany. And I think it’s similar in other countries, too.
Why not leave the laws as they are and spare the animals from being fed with excessive amounts of hormones (like from the pill), toxic chemicals and whatnot?
Concerning circumcision: Ever heard of soap or water? Wash your genitals, it’s that easy.
The mutilation practice in Africa is not circumcision (then only the clitoral hood would have to be removed) but complete clitoral amputation. Sometimes even in combination with sowing the labia together, leaving only a small opening for urine and menstrual period.
This is just another barbaric practice to “control” the “animalistic sexual drive” of women.
April 29th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Well , i think the list should have included the weird custom of wearing large rings around their neck by the women of Paodang tribe of Thailand.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:45 am
Its the Padaung tribe and i think you will find that they actually originated in Myanmar. They are in Thailand to earn some money from pictures taken with overweight tourists.
May 12th, 2009 at 9:42 am
To add to that list, you should add male genital mutilation and female genital mutilation, benignly referred to today as male circumcision and female circumcision. Most Americans can agree that female circumcision is absolutely wrong. But most Americans refuse to acknowledge that male circumcision is absolutely wrong because they still commit this mutilation today and don’t want to admit it as a wrongdoing.
There’s nothing bizarre about geishas. It shouldn’t even be on the list. Put on the list male and female circumcision as a bizarre tradition that is still practiced today that should have been extinct a long time ago.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:34 am
Dueling?! That’s bizarre? I’d replace it with Trepanning. Or O-kee-pa However it’s spelled. Anyway, I liked the bit about the monk.
July 18th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
eeekkk #10 is horrifying
but #1-#9 were all pretty normal in the olden days i guess…
October 8th, 2009 at 5:58 am
#10 is definitely horrifying
October 28th, 2009 at 3:22 am
There’s nothing ‘bizarre’ about dueling or seppuku. Both express the want for honor. Why isn’t circumcision mentioned? Now THAT is a bizarre tradition.
November 15th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
I find it highly entertaining that this is the second list I have viewed within the hour that features a lengthy and heavy debate about circumcision!!! Never before have I been so subjected to people’s personal opinions about foreskin!!!