- it looks better (objectively—anyone who disagrees is a fucking idiot—and no, being gay doesn't make you more objective)
- it's cleaner, since you get to spend less time in the shower (yes, even if it were just one second, that is STILL time saved—absolutely no intelligent person wants to put up with cleaning their smegma, because it's the most disgusting thing in the world)
- it's healthier, as having foreskin just makes it easier to contract some pretty horrible diseases like HIV, and it's also one less organ that can potentially get cancer
- getting the procedure done-and-over-with as a baby means that you won't have to make the conscious choice to get it done as an adult, which is fantastic, because at that point, you're going to become too attached to your junk to make the right decision
- it also has the slightest chance of killing you before you get to live out your shitty fucking life, which is fucking awesome
- the idea of decreasing your nerve endings, making sex feel less good, is inherently appealing to anyone who is intelligent

It would seem to me as though having foreskin has no benefits whatsoever, and anyone who'd want to keep theirs is stupid. It's absolutely superfluous, and being cut is superior in every conceivable way that matters to anybody with a brain.

Your ONE linchpin argument has to do with the consent issue, and if that's your argument, you'd pretty much have to concede to broader consent-concerned arguments as well, such as anti-natalism, in order to be logically consistent. So if circumcision is wrong because "muh consent," in spite of the fact that it's impossible to get that from a baby, then it's also wrong to conceive a child in the first place, because they can't consent to that either. So you're either wrong, or an anti-natalist. You can only pick one.

As for the benefits, I just listed a plethora of them, and every single "con" you could possibly think of is actually an argument for circumcision, not against it.

And for the love of god, don't talk about psychological issues. That doesn't come close to being a compelling argument, because fucking everyone has psychological issues. I'll take a few of those in exchange for a cleaner, healthier, and better looking dick, thank you very much. You're bound to develop a few mental issues anyway, because it's a fucked up world that we live in. So you might as well get a better cock out of the deal, because you're stuck with that cock for life.

I should also acknowledge that most of your sexual partners will prefer circumcised men (as they should, because it's objectively better). If they say otherwise, they're either lying to make you feel better, or they're stupid/crazy—and as the bros say, you're not supposed to stick your dick in crazy.

that's not to say you should ever make personal life decisions based on what other people want, or anything

but it's still an argument for circumcision, and i'm going to use every argument possible

Serious discussion lol

Serious discussion lol

yeah, how isn't it?

It also doesn't benefit males in any possible way. Prove me wrong.

I agree with you. Its fucking unnecessary. That kind of shit should be left up to the dude to decide if he wants to cut a piece of his own dick off at 18, not at infancy.

Quote from: Decimator Omega on July 07, 2019, 09:46:50 PM

Quote from: path1k on May 26, 2019, 04:49:17 AM

It also doesn't benefit males in any possible way. Prove me wrong.

I agree with you. Its fucking unnecessary. That kind of shit should be left up to the dude to decide if he wants to cut a piece of his own dick off at 18, not at infancy.

Except almost nobody is going to choose to get circumcised when they're an adult.

Then that's their choice. I just don't think its right for that to happen to an infant.

I'm gonna leave it at that.

still laughing at this thread

no one can touch me on this subject

Quote from: Verbatim on August 14, 2019, 01:46:45 PM

still laughing at this thread

no one can touch me on this subject

Repeating really stupid and illogical things to the point that no one bothers responding doesn't make you right. It's just kinda pathetic to see.

i know, i'm better than you at everything that matters, i get it

the problem here is that i never said anything stupid OR illogical; it's more to do with the fact that you're too stupid and illogical to fight back, and you suffer from some dunning-kruger effect shit

fact is, i relentlessly slaughter you every single time the subject comes up, and it's embarrassing for you, because of your perceived status as the "smart guy" of the forum (which has always belonged to me)

what's truly pathetic is your continued insistence that you're right on that tenuous basis alone—that you ARE seen as the smart guy, because you post long paragraphs and cite your sources (sources that have always been utterly rife with confirmation bias), but because you've never had a controversial opinion about anything in your milquetoast life, everyone ends up on your side anyway, and as a result, you've never had to worry about truly defending yourself on any serious subject in any serious fashion

the real reason you don't bother is because you're weak, and because you're lucky enough to have the majority on your side, so there's literally no benefit or necessity in doing so

the tragic part being, of course, that you ARE wrong, and you may never realize it