Ban all genital mutilation of children

[Forty Two]

Sensitivity is one point, not the only point.

You claim sensitivity is reduced. The peer-reviewed data I cited says, statistically, it generally isn't.

Trolling? I'm citing world-renowned medical sources, and peer-reviewed research. You're citing the Huffington Post and your own anecdotal experience. And, you think I'm trolling?

I get why you're against it. That's fine. I'm not saying you're wrong to be against it. Do what you want. You're the one saying it should be banned because your own experience leads you to believe that if you were circumcised you'd be less sensitive because you happen to have a penis which, if exposed to fabric, suffers extreme pain. So, it should be banned for everyone. Have I got you right? Or is there a reason for the ban that I'm missing?

[mistermack]

Reasons don't mean anything to trolls.

[Forty Two]

Reasons don't mean anything to trolls.

Game, set, match, my columbidae friend.

[mistermack]

In your head I'm sure that's right.

But only one person was trolling, and trolling is a pathetic game for pathetic people.

It takes two to make a real game. But only one to be a wanker.

[Animavore]

It’s not my charming accent or dapper dress-sense that sets me apart as an Englishman in America: It’s my foreskin.

I'm renewing this thread against my better judgement, but this is a good article. There's something sickening about arguing with people who think sexually assaulting defenceless babies is ok.

[Rum]

Anecdotal and statistically insignificant - unless you are me of course. I was diagnosed with penile cancer ten years ago. Two operations followed and the treatment was successful, however one of the several doctors I saw at the time told me that it was highly unlikely I would have developed it if I had been circumcised.

I don't like the idea of inflicting the practice on babies either however I am not too happy with having developed cancer and would happily have put up with it if I could have avoided a pretty nasty period in my life.

[NineBerry]

I am sure, doctors don't usually tell women with breast cancer they could have avoided that by amputating their breasts.

[Rum]

I'm sure they don't but there you go.

[Svartalf]

just look whant angelina jolie did... was that right?

in any case, I'm too sensitive to even think of getting my foreskin removed... rubbing against the underwear would be torture.

[Scot Dutchy]

Women do have a double mastectomy as prevention when indications are in the family. So maybe you should have had your genes examined if there was an indication in your family.
One cancer case in how many? Does not give any reason for mutilation. Imagine all women were to have a double mastectomy as prevention? Madness just as it madness to mutilate boys for just in case.

[Animavore]

Maybe we should all also have our tonsils, appendix, and gallbladders removed as babies as well. And as many other bits as we can chop off without being lethal just in case.

[Svartalf]

I still have all three, only my adenoids got removed...

[Scot Dutchy]

In my youth in Scotland every child when nine got there tonsils removed. Since it has been proven it was bad move and not required.