Just because you don't see it as a problem doesn't mean it's not a problem.

No shit. Do not patronize me.

Kindly demonstrate why it's a problem.

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 05:59:37 PM

Just because you don't see it as a problem doesn't mean it's not a problem.

No shit. Do not patronize me.

Kindly demonstrate why it's a problem.

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves, basically genital mutilation without consent, and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2014, 06:00:56 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 05:59:37 PM

Just because you don't see it as a problem doesn't mean it's not a problem.

No shit. Do not patronize me.

Kindly demonstrate why it's a problem.

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves

Fewer nerves = less sensitivity. I'm okay with that. I don't want to get a stiffy from a soft spring breeze.

basically genital mutilation without consent

until you're 18, your parents are in charge of your medical choices

and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

Yes, it's possible.

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 04:37:44 PM

Quote from: Flee on December 03, 2014, 04:34:44 PM

Quote from: Kupo on December 03, 2014, 04:30:29 PM

Despite the overwhelming evidence that the medical benefits do exist, no one is denying their existence, but instead arguing that the benefits have been blown way out of proportion.

Problem is that these medical benefits are virtually non-existant in a first world country with decent medical institutions, and that they do not always compare to the benefits that come with not circumcising a child.

Besides, cutting off a body part to avoid unlikely problems that are usually easily treatable isn't very solid reasoning.

Yes with the same logic we should start cutting off all women's breasts to reduce the chance of breast cancer.

Or removing the appendix to stop the chance of it bursting on us.

That one makes a lot of sense, actually.

Holy crap we're actually arguing about this XD

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves, basically genital mutilation without consent, and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

"Without consent."

So you're an anti-natalist, then? Excellent.

Quote from: SuperIrish on December 03, 2014, 06:04:54 PM

Or removing the appendix to stop the chance of it bursting on us.

That one makes a lot of sense, actually.

It just seems like something that doesn't need to be done unless it happens. A lot of people can go their lives without any complications arising from it.

Quote from: Mad Max on December 03, 2014, 06:06:36 PM

Quote from: challengerX on December 03, 2014, 06:05:57 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:03:42 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2014, 06:00:56 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 05:59:37 PM

Just because you don't see it as a problem doesn't mean it's not a problem.

No shit. Do not patronize me.

Kindly demonstrate why it's a problem.

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves, basically genital mutilation without consent, and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

I remember reading you lose upwards of 50,000 nerve endings when the foreskin is removed.

Basically, slowly rub your finger across your palm, then do the same to the top of your hand. The former being normal, the latter being a circumcised penis.

BUT MUH NIRVES!

Basically you enjoy sex a lot less having a circumcised penis. Thankfully you don't know what you're missing so I'll leave you to delude yourself into thinking you're better off than I am.

#sickburn

Really though, I'd be fucked if my dick was more sensitive. I wouldn't last a minute.

Basically you enjoy sex a lot less having a circumcised penis. Thankfully you don't know what you're missing so I'll leave you to delude yourself into thinking you're better off than I am.

This is how you argue with everyone, isn't it? So obnoxious.

No, you're gonna have to provide hard evidence for your claims. I really don't buy the idea that foreskin makes sex better. That, to me, seems ludicrous. It's fucking... what is it? It's protective skin. Itch skin. It's not sensual skin. It has absolutely nothing to do with good sex. It's to prevent your cock from getting pricked by pricker bushes and shit--you know, the kind of stuff you're not running around in anymore? So we should KEEP artifacts for no reason?

Prepare for le monkey.

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:07:15 PM

Quote from: Mad Max on December 03, 2014, 06:05:35 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:03:42 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2014, 06:00:56 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 05:59:37 PM

Just because you don't see it as a problem doesn't mean it's not a problem.

No shit. Do not patronize me.

Kindly demonstrate why it's a problem.

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves

Fewer nerves = less sensitivity. I'm okay with that. I don't want to get a stiffy from a soft spring breeze.

Quote

basically genital mutilation without consent

until you're 18, your parents are in charge of your medical choices

Quote

and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

Yes, it's possible.

Just because they can make the decision does not hide the fact from what it really is.

Mutilation? Everything still works as designed.

The human penis was designed with a foreskin. It's like saying a car missing a steering wheel still works as designed. It was not designed that way.

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:11:22 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2014, 06:07:42 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:03:42 PM

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves, basically genital mutilation without consent, and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

"Without consent."

So you're an anti-natalist, then? Excellent.

The consent argument is absolutely bogus. I can make the same exact argument that my parents didn't ask me if I wanted to get born in the first place. If you're gonna make any consent argument and you're not an anti-natalist, you're a hypocrite.

That's preposterous.

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:11:22 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2014, 06:07:42 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:03:42 PM

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves, basically genital mutilation without consent, and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

"Without consent."

So you're an anti-natalist, then? Excellent.

The consent argument is absolutely bogus. I can make the same exact argument that my parents didn't ask me if I wanted to get born in the first place. If you're gonna make any consent argument and you're not an anti-natalist, you're a hypocrite.

There's a difference between having your parents vaccinate you as a baby for your own protection and your parents circumcision you for little benefit.

Quote from: challengerX on December 03, 2014, 06:08:15 PM

Basically you enjoy sex a lot less having a circumcised penis. Thankfully you don't know what you're missing so I'll leave you to delude yourself into thinking you're better off than I am.

This is how you argue with everyone, isn't it? So obnoxious.

No, you're gonna have to provide hard evidence for your claims. I really don't buy the idea that foreskin makes sex better. That, to me, seems ludicrous. It's fucking... what is it? It's protective skin. Itch skin. It's not sensual skin. It has absolutely nothing to do with good sex. It's to prevent your cock from getting pricked by pricker bushes and shit--you know, the kind of stuff you're not running around in anymore? So we should KEEP artifacts for no reason?

Please leave this thread because it is clear you have no idea what you are talking about.

Quote from: Mad Max on December 03, 2014, 06:07:52 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:07:15 PM

Quote from: Mad Max on December 03, 2014, 06:05:35 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 06:03:42 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 03, 2014, 06:00:56 PM

Quote from: Septy on December 03, 2014, 05:59:37 PM

Just because you don't see it as a problem doesn't mean it's not a problem.

No shit. Do not patronize me.

Kindly demonstrate why it's a problem.

Because it's a loss of sexual nerves

Fewer nerves = less sensitivity. I'm okay with that. I don't want to get a stiffy from a soft spring breeze.

Quote

basically genital mutilation without consent

until you're 18, your parents are in charge of your medical choices

Quote

and it can make erections painful for circumcised men since the skin can be cut very tight.

Yes, it's possible.

Just because they can make the decision does not hide the fact from what it really is.

Mutilation? Everything still works as designed.

The human penis was designed with a foreskin. It's like saying a car missing a steering wheel still works as designed. It was not designed that way.

No, it would be like if you took off the entirely-unnecessary spoiler on your grocery-getter hatchback.

I think everyone should agree that  "dick cheese" isn't anything really worth of note, since it takes 5 seconds to address while bathing, and that there's nothing that's significant enough of an issue to say circumcision is bad.

Now, can we please move on and stop trying to prove whose dick is better?