Cú Chulainn

No I saw your source from a psychology journal, first psychology is not the right science to measure physical pleasure, and second, there are alot of subjective arguments in that article. just because you can enjoy sex without a foreskin does not mean it should be removed.

Your argument, unless I’m mistaken, is that circumcision hampers sexual satisfaction. If circumcised men, especially those who underwent the procedure as adults, don’t think so, I think that means something.

that is but one of many arguments against infantile sexual mutilation--the lifetime mental trauma is not an accidental but a deliberate outcome of this procedure, as the jewish literature explicitly attests

Many different reasons for it have been suggested, but the truth is we don’t know. Circumcision is a chok, a law that is performed as God’s decree, and according to traditional Judaism, no further explanation is needed.

https://twitter.com/alijayne_mcnabb/status/1046415837190606849 … What happened to arguing science, not religion?

I was addressing a religious point. Dolt.

No he was citing Jewish literature that admits our point, that circumcision damaged a man sexually, intentionally, that it is an excision of the pleasures of the flesh to bring a man closer to their god. Or at least that's what I read into it, @Cukullen could confirm or deny that

Which is a religious point.