ravensheart18 said:
People keep repeating that but the science is actually mixed. Even the nerve ending question is disputed, in particular because the type of nerves that give you most of the pleasure during sex are not the type on the foreskin.
I don't need science to know that I can just rub my foreskin to orgasm. It's THAT sensitive. Hell, even urinating is an enjoyable activity due to the stimulation. If I retract my foreskin when urinating, i actually feel a slight frictionburn in my urethra because there's nothing to adjust the speed at which the urine moves through your urethra. I would imagine that it'd get less sensitive and hardened after awhile if you're circumsized.
So proof one; the foreskin is in fact more sensitive than the glans itself, this is proven because WE who haven't had our foreskin amputated can tell you that.
Proof two; the fact that we experience more sensitivity that circumsized men generally can't even relate to shows that there is in fact a physical difference.
You don't need a research team to figure that out, it's as simple as asking us. But circumsized men aren't interested in finding out whether or not they got the ugly end of a stick. They just want everyone else to shut up and stop telling them that it's an unecessary and life-altering procedure.
Then they want their children to be the same as them. It's a vicious circle that won't end until we educate children on the matter, and let them form their own opinions so that when it's their turn to decide whether or not to amputate the foreskin on their children, they can weight their options with a more educated view.
Very few adult men would ever willingly go through with circumcision without a damned good reason. Such as experiencing a medical issue such as Phimosis. So why would we assume children would appreciate it being done to them?
No one is saying circumcision shouldn't be done at all anywhere. But that it should be up to the person whether or not he wants a permanent procedure done or not. He never even gets the choice. And the child won't suffer or die from having a foreskin so there's no valid reason to circumsize the child to begin with.
It's very very simple.
Circumsized men can't get uncircumsized, so they never get to choose or try both.
Uncircumsized men can get circumsized. They can even pull the foreskin back and get the same sensation as being circumsized and decide whether they want it like that permanently or not.
Whether or not it'd hurt to get circumsized later is irrelevant, because you HAVE THE OPTION TO DO IT IF YOU REALLY WANT TO.
People do the stupidest cosmetic surgeries today and suffer from the pain caused by said surgeries. Why would circumsizion be any different?
If circumsizion is an acceptable procedure, it should be perfectly fine to perform other cosmetic surgeries on children to make them "perfect" in the eyes of their parents and their society.
