Genital mutilation of young girls. But it's a religious thing!

Fuck you for trying to equate me with the alt-right, and to imply that I am not in fact myself a liberal. Which I most assuredly am.

Furthermore, you still don’t really understand virtue signaling, although you’re getting closer. Someone who virtue signals need not be lazy, or even using “empty words”. They need only be peacocking about how exceptionally generous/kind/“woke” they are, and contrasting themselves with their ordinary and less virtuous counterparts. It’s basically a kind of bragging without explicitly doing so, and the braggadocio need not be false or even insincere.

The point is, as we’ve been saying over and over, to prevent it from being done to more infants and young children who cannot meaningfully consent. Your post also illustrates why it is important not to delink MGM and FGM, as everything you said could be applied to women/girls, even those who are victims of the most severe cutting. Was that your intent?

The hypocrisy here is that you are the one who never posts anything of substance. Just these short, uncapitalized ad hominem attacks. I mean, it’s a big board and I read very little of it, so I guess it’s possible you contribute something substantive elsewhere. But I haven’t seen it, so I have my doubts.

This is really something, if you unpack it. Wow. :eek:

First of all, you and others have apparently misunderstood my “jackhammer” reference, par for the course ITT. I was referring to hand jobs, not to intercourse. I get the job done just fine in the latter area, though—and before you snark that my partners have probably just been faking it, I really don’t think my ex-girlfriend was such a Method actor as to pretend to momentarily lose control of her body (from the cowgirl position) such as to smack her head against mine and give us both nasty goose-eggs.

But what really blows my mind is that you seem to be shrugging that sure, maybe uncut guys (who are, let’s remember, in their naturally evolved state) get more pleasure, but this leads them to be too self-absorbed in bed, leading to less satisfaction for their partner. Well, gee: I had a girlfriend who was kind of obsessed with fingering her clit during intercourse (doggy style or cowgirl), and I did sometimes have fleeting thoughts that it led her to be off in her own world and not paying enough attention to me. I guess I should have wished for her to have a clitorectomy to selfishly increase my own satisfaction in sex! And I mean, aren’t those infibulations supposed to make it tighter and more pleasurable for the guy as well? I mean, Jesus fucking Christ, think about what you are saying!

I have another idea: how about everyone keeps all their erogenous tissue, and tries to seek out maximum mutual pleasure from there? A radical concept, I know! :smack:

Someone else who misunderstood what I meant. But this “more functional” thing is really rich. You are on a board that prizes science and logic. What sense does it make to argue that evolution got the penis wrong, and people with knives a few thousand years ago figured out how to improve on it? :dubious:

#jackhammer

You were referring to handjobs? You expect us all to believe that? Though Im sure your slight movement delicate masturbation style translates into very non-tiresome yank work for the lady involved, I doubt it manages to help you with actual sex.

So he has you all talking about his dick and how he uses it, not the FGM.
It is brilliant, the playing of the tune.

Given the obtuseness of so many ITT, I don’t know what I expect. But why would I be lying about this? Here, let’s look again at what I posted:

If I was saying what you took me to be saying, I would have said “circumcised guys need TO DO it”, not just “need it”. “Need it” implies one is receiving, not so much delivering. See what I mean?

I’m not so sure about that, but I won’t argue the point because I don’t need to (although I do dispute the notion that anything other than penis-vagina intercourse is not “actual sex”, which frankly some people might well find offensive). There is a certain primal satisfaction, for obvious evpsych reasons, in ejaculating inside the vagina. But for pure, toe-curling orgasmic intensity, nothing can match the pleasure I get from what you call “yank work” (which, when properly administered, is nothing like that appellation). Why on earth would it be okay to miss out on that even if intercourse were still the same (which, again, I have my doubts about but w/e)?

BTW, I note that exchanges like this continue to treat circumcision as the norm and being uncut as some sort of exotic condition. The fact is that the majority of the men in the world are uncut, as are the majority of American boys born in the past few years. The remaining overwhelmingly circumcised population in this country is roughly congruent with the FOX News, #MAGA cohort. And this “othering” of people like me is par for the course from that crowd. :dubious:

Yeah. I’m willing to engage with blalron, because I feel sorry for him, and he’s obviously sincere. I’m leaning towards thinking the slack guy is a troll, and I will try not to be sucked into more discussion with him.

Yeah, I’m done giving a certain pathetic asshole jump off points for fantastic descriptions of his awesome cock status.

Although I personally don’t object to any adult man’s personal preferences about either keeping or losing his foreskin, and I support the general principle of not performing medically unnecessary permanent surgical modifications on minor children, this type of argument from “wise Nature” is nonetheless intrinsically dumb and unpersuasive.

Evolution gets a whole lot of things “wrong”, in the sense of not optimally efficient or robust, in the anatomy of organisms.* Evolution is not trying to perfect human genitalia, or even to make them too good to be improved upon by prehistoric cultures with knives. As long as human genitalia are good enough for humans to successfully reproduce with, that’s all evolution requires.

So yes, there is absolutely no a priori scientific reason that evolution couldn’t have got the human penis “wrong”, at least to the extent of being capable of being improved upon by prehistoric cultures with knives. I’m not claiming it did, mind you, I’m just saying there’s nothing in biology guaranteeing that it wouldn’t.

  • See also: the persistence of human wisdom teeth, the suboptimal shape of many human eyeballs, the dual respiratory/ingestive function of the human pharynx, the imperfect anatomical adjustments to human bipedalism, the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe, the “thumb” of the panda, and countless other evolutionary “design flaws”.

Did you not look at the link I posted from my blog post years ago? Why would I do all that research and post about it on my own blog (not someone else’s!) if my intactivism were mere trollery? Use Ockham’s Razor, c’mon. :rolleyes:

Because you’re an attention-desperate weirdo. Tons of trolls have expended lots of effort on trollery.

You are clearly just defining “trollery” as “activism I don’t personally share a passion for”. :rolleyes:

Uh, no… not anywhere near that.

I am curious however, if you’ve ever managed to find a tactful way to discourage potential parents from snipping their boy children. It’s not exactly baby shower conversation.

I didn’t accuse you of trolling. Just pointed out that your supposed great effort (whether accurate or not) doesn’t refute the charge of trolling in any way. I think you’re a desperate (and bigoted) weirdo, but I don’t know if you’re a troll.

Okay, if I’m all about trolling, please look at my posting history and explain why so many of my posts are about “Survivor” and other TV shows, or time travel, or music, or recent movies, or the sociopolitical impact of AI and automation. Could it perhaps be that I have sincerely held opinions about a variety of topics, some controversial and many less so? Ya think?

The opinions that offend you, you attempt to delegitimize by calling them “trolling”, which isn’t far from Trump’s reflex to call stories he doesn’t like “fake news”. :dubious:

Then you should rethink your position, because everything you said applies equally well to FGM.

Indeed not, but then I have never attended a baby shower. I have had several expectant mothers on Babycenter boards tell me my testimony convinced them to eschew the knife for their boys. And one RL friend said the same (he is the only close friend of mine who has had a son and wasn’t already in the anti-circ camp) after I sent him an email presentation and asked him to please consider it but that I would not bring it up again if he didn’t.
I also had a RL friend get pretty mad at me after a comment I made on Facebook (not directed at him). But that’s the risk of taking a definitive stance on any controversial topic. I’m sure being anti-FGM doesn’t go over well in places where FGM is the cultural norm.

Now you’re arguing with phantoms! Not sure if it’s trolling, but it’s definitely weird.

Andy, you’re not the only one here, bud. At least two other people accused me of being a trroll.

And yet you keep dancing to it.

THAT’S your source? Some crazy conspiracy nut?

Get therapy.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST WILL YOU PEOPLE JUST PAY ATTENTION TO SLACKERINC FOR A GODDAMN CHANGE??? obligatory lower case text goes here

Sorry again.