Yes it does. If you don't like getting raped, you're into women.

Yup, simple flawless logic there. A thumb for you

fucking sarcasm never works

What sarcasm?

#47

Indeed it doesnt work... sorry bro, i was just messing around the whole time. 2 can play that game ;)

**richiehf rolled a random image posted in comment #18 at Kiss Cam ** You fool! That's a voltorb!

No you fucker, that's the lift key

Do you even play pokemon red?

And in the last worldwide census I checked. I personally think forcing a permanent decision like that on a child should be put in the same category as vaginal mutilation and molestation. It's painful, traumatic, and will be with them for their entire life.

Humans don't really start formulating memories until after neurogenesis a period of time when the brain is still growing and forming. Most memories start around the 3-4 year old mark(well after a circumcision would have been performed) so your "painful traumatic" line doesn't work there.

Calling circumcision "mutilation" is a little excessive in my opinion, especially considering that circumcision isn't permanent[source:www.mademan.com/mm/5-facts-about-circumcision-reversal.h tml#vply=0].

I'm comfortable in my opinion because I am myself circumcised and was when it was still viewed as a safer operation for a baby(as in a cut dick was cleaner and less likely to hold nastiness). I have had plenty of friends who are cut and uncut, and never in our casual conversation has come up "Oh my god, I just can't get laid because I don't have enough foreskin for the girls". It's just not a common problem, either way.

I have heard that some girls do prefer a guy one way or the other, but I haven' heard of anybody not getting laid because of it. And again, it's completely reversible anyway.

I am cut and the only problem I've had getting laid is my face.

It cannot be reversed completely the nerves are gone forever. also the procedure is completely equivalent to a clitorectomy .

No it is not completely equivalent to a cliterectomy.

yes it is they remome the same nerves and tissue ergo the same .

No they do not.
The clitoris is essentially the female equivalent of part of the penis. The clitoris is spongey erectile tissue covered in nerves, the lack of foreskin only reduces sensitivity in the manner that the head of the penis has been stimulated more and has therefore become used to stimulation more than somebody who has a complete foreskin. There is not a giant cluster of nerves located in the last 1/16th of your foreskin, it just proves as a stimulation shield.

the penis head hardens and loses sensitivity plus 50-70% of the pleasure nerves are in the foreskin .so it's pretty fucking similar

refer to comment 285

Do you have a circumcised dick?

EXACTLY, you don't have a circumcised penis. Therefore you don't have an opinion on how much or how little a man with a circumcised penis feels.

Here is a man with a circumcised penis, here are also some facts about my dick.

Only a small amount of my foreskin was cut off, if a LOT of foreskin was cut off then that is what we call a botched surgery and doesn't apply to your average circumcision. I have full or very near full sensitiviy in my dick. This means though the head of my dick may not be super sensitive I still have complete feeling in all of it. I have no issues during sex and can get off just as easy as somebody uncut. My dick head is not a shriveled up piece of beef jerky like whatever pamphlet it is that you got that bogus fact off of.

The male equivalent of a clitorectomy would be to cut the whole head of the dick off, not just a little bit of skin that surrounds the head off.

Get your facts straight before you start going around spouting off BS facts like you're the General Surgeon of Cock. You obviously have never talked to anybody who has actually had a circumcision before.

The guys you read about on the internet that are crying about a little piece of skin that they are missing and are cursing their parents are in the MINORITY. Most men who have had a circumcision are in the "I don't really notice a difference and therefore don't give a fuck" category. Another note, the vast majority of men mourning over their lost dick-skin are in the "botched circumcision" category and I feel bad for them but they are the minority.

At least cutting off the foreskin doesn't really do perminant damage. Vaginal mutilation in Africa opens the way to infections, as well as the fact that the girls cannot enjoy sex. I think it is so the girls don't cheat on their husbands since they sex no longer feels good for them once their lady parts are cut off.

it does do permanent damage .

You're cutting off a chunk of flesh, so that would be permanent damage. I meant that it removing the foreskin doesn't open the way for dangerous infections that a clitorectomy would. Plus, removing the clit removes a lot of the pleasure of sex, since the clit is an organ used solely for pleasure, I hear. Removing the foreskin still allows us to feel pleasure.

yes you still retain 30% 40% of pleasure

it does cause dangerous infections and every year 200-250 babies die from it .

I'm not saying removing the foreskin is completely safe, just that if it's going to be done people should be able to consent to it.

yes the person with the penis attached to them should have the choice just like with every other cosmetic procedure.

Definately.

Except it is permanent. The decision should be left to the person getting a chunk of skin hacked off their junk. It's a violation of basic human rights to remove a piece of someone's body not only without their consent, but before they even have a concept of consent in such a manner.

That's what I'm saying. Cutting off the foreskin should be done when people are older and can consent, if they want it done. I have a teacher who laments that he did it done to his son, and the screams will always haunt him. I'm also saying that it's quite harmless to males if done correctly (Supposing they are old enough to consent), but is actually dangerous and detremental to girls.

Foreskin. It's serious shit.

I'd like to know why the fuck they still do it if it makes the child scream louder than Jerry Sandusky hiding behind the shower curtain.

I guess it's a matter of religion and culture. Plus, people don't seem to believe that babies can really feel pain or remember anything.

...... then why would they consider a fetus a living thing if it's less developed than a baby and scientifically proven to not have a concept of pain or sentient thought, as opposed to a baby which can feel pain and is capable of sentient thought?

I think it's the Christians making the fuss about abortion. But let's try not to get into an abortion debate. Cutting the foreskin is more of a Jewish tradition.

I could not agree more.

There was one scandal I recall, a crazy sect of ultra-orthodox Jews had a ritual where the circumciser would suck the blood off of the circumcized baby. I think the baby got aids from him and died.

That's the only horror story I've heard legitimately.

Yeah I read that one....