Oh jeez. :rolleyes: Let me assure you that this level of sensitivity is very pleasurable when the stimulation is through the foreskin manually (the “gliding action”), or when the exposed glans is inside the slippery, low friction environment of the vagina.
And what other body parts would you nominate to be routinely surgically altered in infancy? Why are none of them in or on girls? I grant you that boob jobs and such are getting much more common, but not so much among newborns.
But you can’t say that it’s more pleasurable than it is for anyone else. I can happily say that I get all sorts of “very pleasurable” action out of sex and have never winced in pain just because my doodle touched my underwear 
Show me a medical reason to do it and describe the benefits and potential drawbacks and, well, pretty much anything that can be adequately defended. I’m not going to just start naming random body parts but if you can make an argument for the benefits of little-toe removal, I’m not going to reject it as a knee jerk reaction.
People sometimes have their baby girls’ ears pierced. I believe the medical consequences of doing that are close to nil, and while I didn’t do it to my daughter, I can’t get excited if other people do it to their daughters.
Well, nobody has responded to my question about ear-piercing in baby girls. I assume that all the anti-circ people here are also out there advocating strongly against babies having their ears pierced against their consent.
Also, your response to my noting that when circumcised women become aware that there is an alternative they are unhappy but when circumcised men become aware that there is an alternative they really don’t care is to say that most American men are not aware that the majority of men on the planet are not circumcised? Not only does this not apply to my statement specifically about how men react AFTER becoming aware that other men are not circumcised, it also ignores the fact that many American men are not circumcised. You are aware that the rate of circumcision in the US is around 80%? Most men I would think are aware that there are options? Is this not taught in health class any more? The anti-circ people act like there is some sort of requirement in the US to circumcise babies when in fact it is entirely the choice of the parents who have to consent to the procedure before it can be done.
I said it was irrelevant to European populations, who are the economic, social, and cultural peers of the United States. You are aware HIV rates are lower across Europe, even without the “blessings” of circumcision, right?
Point of order - I started one thread. One. There is no “other” thread I started about this. Another figment of your warped imagination.
Yes, and I’m still waiting for “the wonders” to be demonstrated. Still waiting. At this point, I am led to conclude that you have no scientific rationale for preferring male circumcision, and it instead reflects an arbitrary, deeply-ingrained, American cultural practice, and nothing more.
Oh, there’s no feigned offense. At this point, I genuinely think that you’re an asshole, and likely not only on-line.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I find ear-piercing baby girls (and boys) to also be a regrettable choice, but one that doesn’t rise to the level of bodily disturbance expressed by circumcision. After all, earholes can close up and heal over.
I doubt your average American guy is aware that circumcision is the exception, not the rule, world-wide. Even if they were, it’s not likely he is going to change his way of thinking (let alone, way of life) based on what “them damn furr’ners” are doing.
All I can say is that from personal experience, growing up in New England in the 70s and 80s, I was the only one in my class uncut. I remember asking a question in health class in '83 about foreskin retraction, and was met with nothing but derision by my peers. If that’s a less likely state of affairs in 2017, well, that’s great.
Also, the anti-circ crowd states that those circumcised at birth don’t know what they have lost while those circumcised as adults usually have it done for a medical reason so of course they prefer being circumcised.
Here is a study that specifically excluded men circumcised for medical reasons and compares them before and after routine circumcision as adults. Of note, the study had a low drop-out rate and went up to 2 years.
Most of the argument about increased sensitivity of the uncircumcised is judged by subjective criteria. Here is a study that used objective criteria to compare sensitivity in circumcised versus uncircumcised men.
Here is a meta-analysis from Australia, a country where the majority of babies are now uncircumcised, which shows the benefits for routine infant circumcision.
Again, I am NOT for routine circumcision. I feel that is best left up to the parents, since although the benefits appear to outweight the risks, as the OP pointed out, the risk of serious disease such as penile cancer are still rare.
I said “yet another thread” which means that there were previous threads, not that you started each one. If Taco Bell announces a cheeseburger and I say “I don’t know why they need to add yet another burger to the market” it doesn’t mean that they produced every previous line of burgers. Don’t let your martyrdom complex get in the way of understanding English.
Fortunately, I give zero shits about your self-appointed role as arbiter of what’s a “wonder” or not so your conclusions don’t matter much to anyone. Congratulations on patting your back and telling yourself that you were right all along. Maybe give yourself a participation ribbon.
My mom loves me. I think. She did pay someone to mutilate my peepee after all 
I find it strangely telling that someone who keeps insisting that everyone circumcised is fooling themselves out of some desire to think that their way is best has a story of childhood trauma at learning he’s different.
Ah - I see. Once again, it’s not “(my idiosyncratic) way of understanding English”, it’s “(the implicit uniform standard) way of understanding English”. Kind of like you approach other issues thinking your way is naturally The Way.
So why post in the thread at all? I thought I was going to hear arguments as to why male circumcicion was the optimal practice. You’ve offered none. I’ll stick with my conclusion, assface.
And I find it strangely telling that an asshole who’s been called upon to substantiate his opinions, can’t, and rather than accpeting that either way of doing things is valid, has to try and emotionally upset his opponent. (I say TRY, you fucking simpleton, because as I was the one who shared my personal info in the first place, it’s not as if you’re breaching some new grounds of self-awareness.)
Hi. I was circumcised, but only for purposes of curbing excessive masturbation, thus preventing psychological problems, imbecility, crime and death. Frankly, I’m grateful not to know what the sociopaths and drooling idiots have that I’m missing.
There are of course, broader societal implications. An informal study conducted in Borough Park showed a near-absolute correlation between the prevalence of circumcision and the absence of anti-Semitism. There are about 15 million circumcised American males who express dissatisfaction that they attribute to the procedure. There are also about 15 million male gun owners in the U.S. who believed that they were in imminent danger of Barack Obama confiscating firearms. What has not been realized until now is that there is 100% overlap between the two groups: those who think a black man is about to come take their gun away, and those who can’t shake the feeling that there’s something missing “down there.”
So I’m sure that the choice for increased sexual enjoyment and ease of masturbation is a noble one. I’m just not sure that, given current rates of bigotry, disease, and gun violence, it’s a responsible one.
I made my arguments in the GD thread. This is the Pit. The burden for posting in a Pit thread is “I am mildly amused by posting in this Pit thread”.
…said the guy who has made about a hundred attempts to link people talking about the benefits of circumcision to some deep shame at being circumcised 
I’m not trying to upset you. I sincerely, legitimately, find it telling that you’ve spent so much energy trying to convince everyone else that they only accept circumcision because of some inner shame and then it turns out that you yourself were shamed for being different. It’s like your classic “Homophobic congressman caught tapping his foot in bathroom stalls” twist. Interesting stuff.
nm
Hey, thanks. I guess I’m one of the world’s dick-slicers. Well, I’ve never actually done a circumcision, but I am Jewish, I’ve attended several ritual circumcisions, I chose to have it done to my infant son, and I held my godson as the moyel cut him. (yeah, you can all throw those rotten tomatoes now.)
I certainly don’t think the medical benefits are worth doing it in modern America, but there are important social reasons for Jewish men to be circumcised, and my research led me to believe that the sexual harm, if any, was very minor, and the medical implications were slightly positive. You didn’t give me any new info on the medical implications (yup, slightly positive in modern America, probably moreso in primitive societies where these customs arose) but I’ve never seen a good study on the impact of circumcision on male sexual pleasure before. I’m happy to see these frankly reassuring results.
Pffft…that’s the dumbest reason of all. :rolleyes: But congratulations, you’ve mollified a Bronze Age deity with your blood sacrifice. Hopefully the rabbi didn’t give your godson herpes when he was sucking his cock like a fucking depraved child molester.
Such as?
Cite, please.
Cite, please.
For your enlightenment: Functions and Mobility of Real Foreskin
(missed the edit window)
Just beware that there’s a clear bias in the literature. US American studies show some advantages to circumcision, but not enough to merit a recommendation. Studies done by scientists from other parts of the world show a clear recommendation to refrain from cutting off pieces of little boys’ penises.
And the USA is - to my knowledge - the only industrialized country where male circumcision is popular. What a coincidence!
Did you even read my cites above, which are NOT from the US?
(To clarify, from Kenya, Australia, and Canada)
The U.S, is the only country where circumcision is not an ancient tribal ritual yet is still common today. And it is becoming passe here as well. Do you really think in a hundred years people will look back on this debate and think “I can’t believe anyone was against it back then”? Will they see Russell Crowe as the crazy one? Seriously?
Oh, you know, being considered part of the tribe. Being acceptable husbands for Jewish women. That sort of thing.
cite for circumcision not harming men’s sexual pleasure:
Yeah, I stole it from psychobunny. In fact, the complete purpose of my post, that you attacked with CITE! CITE! was to thank the bunny for his cite. But hey, maybe you’ll read it. It’s a surprisingly nice bit of scientific research, and no pay-wall.
His third cite, which I’m not going to bother to re-post, answers this question. It’s really weird that you somehow failed to see those.
Er, I’m at work and don’t want to watch videos of penises in action. But I’ve dated intact men, and I’m familiar with how they work. Thanks anyway.
It seems likely the custom will die out, sure.