Anonymous #2 1w

You know it staves off germs/infection and most doctors recommend it nowadays, right?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

It’s not necessary at all and doctors recommend it bc it’s a dominant cultural practice. Germs can be avoided with proper washing, do u think the majority of men in the world are disease ridden bc they aren’t circumcised?? And circumcision also reduces penis sensitivity. It’s definitely mind boggling to me how much our society values this antiquated religious blood ritual as some sort of necessary medical intervention.

24

Anonymous #4 1w

The man who introduced circumcision to America (dr kellogg) introduced it to make masturbation harder and reduce pleasure. He also advocated for removal of girl’s clitorises. The health benefits of lower uti and HIV risk are substantially outweighed by just washing regularly and using condoms. Even if youre cut you will be unclean and diseased if you dont take care of yourself, so why commit this harm? Especially on a baby who cant consent to it. Would we allow other cosmetic surgery on babies?

6

Anonymous #2 1w

“Abuse” have you ever met a single cut person who’s like “damn i miss my hypothetical dick cheese”, it’s only insecure uncut guys who gaf Also a bad person can still distribute good ideas, even if the health benefits aren’t crazy why not do it other than trying to control parent’s decision making

-3

Anonymous OP 1w

Im one of them dumbass 😭 and you’ll have dick cheese if you dont clean your dick even if youre cut. Once again, it shouldnt be the parents decision to make cosmetic changes to a fucking baby its a violation of bodily consent. If parents wanted to cut off a baby’s clitoris that would obviously not be okay so how is this different

6

Anonymous #2 1w

Because foreskin and the clitoris are not the same, there’s a reason why one is accepted and the other isn’t, it’s not a big deal, it’s not a limb, its excess skin, if you can invent a way to ask a newborn if they want their shit cut then go ahead, but it’s a complete non-issue

-2

Anonymous OP 1w

It is clearly an issue and it is definitely an equivalent. The foreskin protects the tip from abrasion and moisturizes it. Removing the foreskin causes keratinization of the tip and reduces sensitivity/mucosal lubrication. Circumcision also removes the frenulum which is sexually sensitive tissue. Circumcision also is tied to ED by reducing the blood volume of the penis.

5

Anonymous OP 1w

Circumcision also impacts with maternal bonding due to the stress and pain from the surgery, and complications from it are rare yet severe. Theres a reason why most countries dont do this shit

1

Anonymous #2 1w

The biggest function of the foreskin is for the sake of infants specifically: it protects a baby’s more sensitive areas (which are even more sensitive for babies!) from the friction of the diaper or whatever else. They don’t have the bodily control to move in ways that keep them comfortable and are usually carried by others, which makes rug burn, drying and such a lot more likely. It may not be important as an adult, because it’s only useful for pleasure by then, but it prevents pain in babies.

5

Anonymous #8 1w

do you genuinely believe in the not so deep depth of your brain that foreskin evolved to protect babies from diapers…

0

Anonymous #8 1w

I do not dispute this, just another reason why the practice is harmful

1

Anonymous OP 1w

There’s no need to resort to insults. I do believe it, because it’s a known and accepted fact, although there are other reasons for the foreskin which you could feasibly argue are more significant. Did you even try researching it before you decided to turn around and call me stupid?

5

Anonymous #8 1w

The human body did not evolve foreskin for the purpose of protecting babies from something invented less than a hundred years ago😭

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Oh my god. You cannot be serious

1

Anonymous OP 1w

[Furthermore, Gairdner noted, the foreskin plays an important protective role in newborns. “It is often stated that the prepuce is a vestigial structure devoid of function,” he wrote. “However, it seems to be no accident that during the years when the child is incontinent the glans is completely clothed by the prepuce, for, deprived of this protection, the glans becomes susceptible to injury from contact with sodden clothes or napkin.”] - ‘Vital or vestigial? The foreskin has its fans and foes’

1

Anonymous OP 1w

https://icnarelief.org/blog/who-invented-diapers/#:~:text=The%20Inuit%20would%20place%20moss,tighter%20protection%20around%20the%20baby. Diapers have been used since prehistoric kinds. Only the standard disposable diapers we have today were invented less than a hundred years ago. Throughout all of time, babies have shat, and we were not just apes until recently. We would wrap baby bottoms in cloth or whatever and wash the cloth. We did not just have babies poo all over us at random.

2

Anonymous #8 1w

Please please do your research and don’t pull baseless ideas out of your ass 😭

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Hop off 8’s tip we all on the same page about circumcision being harmful

6