Uncut penises look like a disgusting slug.
Only people who aren’t circumsized complain about this shit because they got shafted by their “high-minded” parents.
Other than the “mutilation” part, the OP’s line of reasoning applies equally well to vaccinations. If he wants to be consistent, he’s going to have to be against vaccinations too.
Alternatively, if you’re going to say that vaccinations are necessary because of their benefits, you should know that most medical authorities agree that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the drawbacks.
QFT.
You are 100% wrong. I cite my experience as a former jizz moper. 
Cut or Uncut, they all look fine to me.
So was Harry Blackmun.
Uncircumsized men who dont wash thoroughly are a health risk to their partners.
So? That’s what they’re supposed to look like.
Cut penises look like a weird mushroom. Is that somehow more acceptable to you?
Not to be too blunt about it, but during penis in vagina intercourse (and a variety of other sex acts) it’s not like anyone is looking at the penis so what does it matter what it looks like?
Why?
Seems to me vaccinations are MUCH more conducive to physical health
Both of those are American authorities - Europeans weight the matter differently.
Cut men with poor hygiene are also a risk to their partners. Again, what’s the point here? Teach the kids to wash their dicks properly, end of problem.
I’ve found that having a glorious non-mutilated superior European penis attracts the curiosity of a number of American women who’ve ever only seen the smaller US version. I call it the uncut privilege and try to revel in it.
Not so much.
I don’t think any sane person is going to dispute the value of vaccination (plenty of nuts out there though). But I don’t think the case for circumcision is as strong. Circumcision is comparatively rare in places like Europe, Canada, and Japan and comparatively common in places like the United States, Australia, and South Korea. I’m assuming if there were significant health problems connected with being uncircumcised we’d see the empirical evidence of it. And vice versa - there doesn’t appear to be any significant health risk in being circumcised either.
I am sure there is conclusive evidence that mastectomies greatly reduce the chance of getting breast cancer as well.
I think what is being discussed here is if someone should be afforded the opportunity to decide for themselves when they reach sexual maturity if they wish to get circumcised. If they perceive the risk of HIV (or other) to be too great, then they can get it done. If they do not see the risk as great, they can pass. Same for females regarding a host of potential serious illnesses: One could argue that girls should have their breasts removed because it would greatly reduce the chance of them getting breast cancer later in life.
When I was born they cut off the end of my dick. It hurt so much I didn’t walk for almost a year.
Water. All over my keyboard.
The HIV infection rate among men in most western nations, outside of drugs users, is actually pretty low. It’s dropping among homsexuals. Maybe we could drop it further by encouraging more use of safe sex practices and discouraging needle sharing, then we won’t have to chop bits off little baby boys.
The data supporting lopping off foreskins to prevent HIV is from Africa, where homosexuality is still outlawed in many nations and circumcision is strongly correlated with being Muslim, which is likewise correlated with different sexual practices than non-Muslims on the continent. I am not convinced those other social and religious factors aren’t skewing the data. I certainly have never seen those results replicated in studies from other continents.
It’s pretty damn sad when the problems of another continent are used to justify slicing off bits from US baby boys.
You must be female, as any male would disagree that there is such a thing as a “small portion” of his penis.
My penis is a “small portion” in its entirety…
But, seriously, no, I’m circumsized…and could still cope with losing a bit more tissue. There are entire cubic millimeters I could comfortably spare.
Foot-binding and neck rings in childhood cripple a person for life. Circumcision does not. They are not remotely comparable.
No, male. But the hyperbole in these thing always turns into “Let’s cut off our arms to prevent arm cancer!” when circumcision doesn’t come anywhere near that level of alteration. Circumcised men have perfectly healthy sex lives and, of course, urinate just fine. Everything you need your penis to do, it still does.
I had a feeling you’d come along and tell me you were male. But I was just playing with the ideas around size anxiety with men- just a joke. I wasn’t taking issue with your actual premise.
My paternal grandfather was circumcised as an adult during WWII. He reported that sex was better after circumcision.
I was circumcised as a baby.