I asked for you to show me a scientific study. Do you know what those are? Also, you're going to have a hard time arguing using circumcision, because there's evidence justifying the claim of net medical benefit, at least in terms of male circumcision.
-
-
FGM is a bit more confusing, though its persistence might be the result of a reduction in STI transmission due to decreased sexual pleasure, etc. Regardless, I asked for a scientific study, not your own ignorant analysis of anecdotes. No offensive, but if you don't give a fuck
-
about scientific robustness of such claims, then you're not worth my time. Actually, offense is fine. I don't really care. I waste too much time talking to scientifically illiterate people.
-
Thanks for enlightening me. Please tell when you win the Nobel prize if you haven't already. I'll be sure to check out your field of expertise.
-
Well, I don't have a "field" because that's idiotic. You answer questions, not fields. Here's one of them: what is religion?https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/xqduv/ …
-
You're no better than someone saying that "vaccines harm" and who cite anecdotes as "evidence." No; that's not how science works. Where the fuck did you learn how to think?
-
** cites
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.