DeaconBlues (imported) wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 10:16 am At one time, I leaned to circumcision for males mostly because I had heard it was easier to keep clean and that is might reduce the probability of a man getting some STD's, then I watched "The Red Pill" and actually saw a circumcision performed, and ever since I have said NO WAY would I ever want that to happen to any baby boy. If an adult man decides he want to be circumcised then fine, he can do to his own body what he wants, but there is NO WAY IN HELL I would ever want that done to any baby boy. As for cleanliness and STD's, we live in the 21st century and clean washing water is relatively available most places, there is no reason for anyone to inflict this on a baby boy, if you don't agree with me, please WATCH the part of "The Red Pill" and I am pretty sure that you will then agree with me.
I agree that male circumcision is very brutal and has lifelong affects on males penis healthy, sensativity, protection, and sexual pleasures. Clearly there are immense numbers of sexual pleasure nerves cut off in circumcision, especially in removing the entire frenulum which only serves to give males sexual pleasures and can t possibly be any hygine problem to leave those intact. Even torn frenulums can be stretched or heal up like every female s hymen does after being torn open. No one cuts off infant female hymens to prevent them from being torn in use some day.
Hopefully circumcision will require each male s adult permission some day. Most cultures where infant male circumcision is not routine, prove the lies of hygine, or torn frenulums, or widespread phimosis as excuses for any routine circumcisions. And few uncircumcised males in those cultures seek circumcision as adults.
I think both cut and uncut penises are great ! Both look incredibly good. I think each male should choose for himself at any time after he reaches age 18. And I bet few intact males would choose circumcision after enjoying their foreskins for 18 years.
I think lots of females who are used to seeing routinely circumcised males fear foreskins. They falsely claim foreskins are breeding places for disease and bacteria and yet very conveiniently don t see the other tissues of their own vaginas similarly. Or seek " cleaner " or " better looking " vagina cutting for themselves. The uncut male populations of the world prove that foreskins are healthy and clearly protect penises from all kinds of injury and many diseases as the protective penis shield nature designed them to be. Uncut men do not transmit more diseases than cut men. That is a lie used to sell circumcision for profit worldwide. But uncut populations prove no more disease transmission because of foreskins than cut populations transmit.