Studies have shown time and time again that sensation between a circumcised man and uncircumcised are non existence. Even with ones that had sex before their circumcision shows no difference, which kinda detroyes that foreskin gives out a much greater sensation.
-
-
2> circumcision, as there will be no possible benefits until the boy is sexually active, and is not using condoms. I've also seen all the studies that show no HIV protection from circumcision, like the one done by the US Military in 2004. I have heard the claims about penile >>
-
3> cancer, but again not something that makes infant circumcision justified, as it's another condition that only matters in adults. The third claim is UTIs, which data suggests is a higher problem in the USA than in other countries, likely due to bad foreskin care instructions >>
-
4> but even then, it's known that UTIs are more common in girls than in boys, they get antibiotics, boys get surgery, which I believe always will cause sexual issues when they get older, mostly from personal experience which brought me to intactivism in the fist place.
-
As for that personal experience, it's not just myself but my sexual partners, intact and not, used as datapoints, a small sample size, but one that shows a very clear, universally true between the two test groups, difference in sexual function and sensitivity.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.