Kraichgauer wrote:
femme wrote:
I could care less if men have a circumcision but women should not I am totally against that.
Yes. The whole point of female circumcision is to literally slice off the clitoris in order to deprive the girl or woman of the ability to have orgasms, which is considered aberrant in cultures practicing such a method. This procedure is done without the girl's consent, without the benefit of anesthesia, sterilization, or even proper medical training.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Not always. Only the more extreme forms of female circumcision completely prevent the ability to orgasm, and even that's questionable. And everything you said about female circumcision holds true for male circumcision, with the exception that all commonly practiced forms of male circumcision must leave enough sensitive tissue to orgasm (as a biological imperative). Generally, cultures that practice the more extreme forms of female circumcision also take off more during male circumcisions, intending to desensitize the penis as much as possible - so they take off all the internal foreskin (the pink part) and the frenulum. At that point, basically the male must orgasm through pressure on the penis and prostate, rather than stimulation of the skin of the penis as most men, even men who are circumcised in a less severe way do. So go ahead, feel the part of your penis above your circumcision scar, which is more sensitive, and below, which is less sensitive, and imagine how much sex would suck if the skin above were gone.
30 Oct 2011, 6:24 pm
