The Official Circumcision Debate Thread

Men aren't able to complain about it because it happens to men. How much damage it does is basically irrelevant. People like @Stan preemptively bring up FGM and say you can't compare the two, except that she's the one who brought it up, and is comparing the two. This conversation will go nowhere.
 
Why are so many Americans circumcized? Sounds like cultural appropriation if you ask me.
Because Kellog the cereal magnate thought it would make boys masturbate less and somehow convinced most of society to go along with this. He also invented corn flakes because he thought they would make boys masturbate less. That fruitcake spent a lot of time thinking about boys masturbating.
 
Because Kellog the cereal magnate thought it would make boys masturbate less and somehow convinced most of society to go along with this. He also invented corn flakes because he thought they would make boys masturbate less. That fruitcake spent a lot of time thinking about boys masturbating.
It's still astounding to me that a single grifter got an entire country to mutilate their dongs without it being a religious thing.
 
"I think so much about dicks that I have a very strong opinion on this that I will bring up constantly."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gog & Magog
Is it true that getting circ'd decreases sexual pleasure or is that an intactivist cope line?
The act is meant to reduce sexual pleasure in Judaism. Quoting Maimonides:

Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible. It has been thought that circumcision perfects what is defective congenitally. This gave the possibility to everyone to raise an objection and to say: How can natural things be defective so that they need to be perfected from outside, all the more because we know how useful the foreskin is for that member? In fact this commandment has not been prescribed with a view to perfecting what is defective congenitally, but to perfecting what is defective morally. The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable. For if at birth this member has been made to bleed and has had its covering taken away from it, it must indubitably be weakened. The Sages, may their memory be blessed, have explicitly stated: It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him. In my opinion this is the strongest of the reasons for circumcision.

Practically speaking, it probably makes a difference but people I've known who have had gotten circumcised later in life said it doesn't feel that different.
 
There's no need for us to fight each other, there there is a 3rd party we can bully: Those that were circumcised and are now attempting to "regrow" a foreskin.
In light of the Stonetoss circumcision thing. I see these anti-circumcision activists doing IRL rallies and stuff, and I literally see nothing wrong with it and I appreciate their efforts, but the foreskin restoration research (which Stonetoss is pouring a lot of money into, IIRC) just seems like cope to me.

You can make a fake foreskin, but you can't restore the lost nerves or de-keratinize your glans. The research should really be going into doing those things as well, or else the fake foreskin serves no purpose except aesthetic window-dressing. I don't know if foreskin restoration focuses on those aspects.

Also, I am not circumcised, and I'm very grateful to have my foreskin intact. Apparently, a Jewish doctor told my mom not to have it done, which is surprising to me.
 
In the end, I just don't care much.
The circumcised Semites do so much more crap I despise that to moan about the foreskin of their babies would be a loss of time.
Just expropriate their banks and wealth and remove them from Hollywood and big tech, then deport all Muslims too, for good measure.
Then we can discuss foreskins, and even then, I'll still not care.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cat Phuckers
In the end, I just don't care much.
The circumcised Semites do so much more crap I despise that to moan about the foreskin of their babies would be a loss of time.
Just expropriate their banks and wealth and remove them from Hollywood and big tech, then deport all Muslims too, for good measure.
Then we can discuss foreskins, and even then, I'll still not care.
Yeah, I don't care if brown people circumcise their kids, but Europeans definitely shouldn't be partaking in such things.
 
Personally I think we should cut no parts off babies. I watched a vlog or something once where a woman filmed herself waiting outside the room while her baby boy got circumcised inside and the cries of the baby were the worst thing I have ever heard. If I was that mother I would never live with the shame of having done that to my child. You have to be fucked in the head to let someone do that to your precious baby and not run in there and snatch it away and stab the doctor in the face with the scalpel as soon as you hear that.
 
In light of the Stonetoss circumcision thing. I see these anti-circumcision activists doing IRL rallies and stuff, and I literally see nothing wrong with it and I appreciate their efforts, but the foreskin restoration research (which Stonetoss is pouring a lot of money into, IIRC) just seems like cope to me.

You can make a fake foreskin, but you can't restore the lost nerves or de-keratinize your glans. The research should really be going into doing those things as well, or else the fake foreskin serves no purpose except aesthetic window-dressing. I don't know if foreskin restoration focuses on those aspects.

Also, I am not circumcised, and I'm very grateful to have my foreskin intact. Apparently, a Jewish doctor told my mom not to have it done, which is surprising to me.
Forget what I said. Proper foreskin restoration does, infact de-keratinize the glans and restore foreskin nerve functionaity.
 
Back