Ban all genital mutilation of children

[mistermack]

I know for a fact that it reduces sensitivity.

I see no study saying that it doesn't. My anecdote is better than yours, because I'm talking first hand.
What do they mean, "doesn't reduce sensitivity" anyway. I don't see it defined.
It's easy to say that, if you use a stupid definition.

You're happy to accept what you're told. If the right people are telling you.
It's selective gullibility.
Trump loves people like you. You only believe what you are fed by your favourite people, and you gobble it up like a hungry puppy.

[pErvinalia]

I know for a fact that it reduces sensitivity.

I see no study saying that it doesn't. My anecdote is better than yours, because I'm talking first hand.

I suspect you are right, going from my own experience. But given neither of us have a circumcised penis, we can't actually compare the sensitivity.

[tattuchu]

I know for a fact that it reduces sensitivity.

I see no study saying that it doesn't. My anecdote is better than yours, because I'm talking first hand.

I suspect you are right, going from my own experience. But given neither of us have a circumcised penis, we can't actually compare the sensitivity.

Well you can rub the tips of your dicks together

[Brian Peacock]

You cam compare dicks though.

[pErvinalia]

Yo momma's a dick.

[Brian Peacock]

And yo momma sucks it and then kisses you on the mouth.

[mistermack]

I suspect, if they say there is no detectable change in sensitivity, they are comparing the sensitivity of the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis, with the sensitivity of the glans of a circumcised penis.
Which is not the same thing at all.

If I left my foreskin pulled back, I wouldn't be able to even wear clothes. The pain of any contact with pants would be too much.
I don't see circumcised people walking around without underpants or trousers. So I know perfectly well that the glans of their dick isn't as sensitive as mine.

Except maybe Scotsmen in kilts. You never know what they're wearing down under.

[Alan B]

Gosh! You must have a dinky little glans...

[mistermack]

Gosh! You must have a dinky little glans...

I don't know what's average.
I haven't seen many.

How big are they usually?

[Alan B]

My glans outgrew my prepuce in my 'teens.

[mistermack]

My glans outgrew my prepuce in my 'teens.

Did it outgrow it, or did you wear it down?

[Forty Two]

I know for a fact that it reduces sensitivity.

At most, in your case (assuming you recall its sensitivity prior to having it done, then had it done, and you're able to compare.

I see no study saying that it doesn't.

Here's one - Journal of Urology published a study in 2016 - http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/862071

My anecdote is better than yours, because I'm talking first hand.

I'm not citing an anecdote. I can't possibly have personal experience of the sensitivity of both circumcised and uncircumcised penis.

What do they mean, "doesn't reduce sensitivity" anyway. I don't see it defined.

If you haven't seen a study, what are you looking at wherein you "don't see it defined?"

It's easy to say that, if you use a stupid definition.

You're happy to accept what you're told. If the right people are telling you.
It's selective gullibility.

Not at all. I'm simply citing the information that I've found which is available. I haven't seen any evidence from you. If you were uncircumcised into adulthood and then circumcised, such that you can tell the difference, then that's your experience. However, and experience of one is not really determinative. I don't think you'd accept it in any other context.

Trump loves people like you. You only believe what you are fed by your favourite people, and you gobble it up like a hungry puppy.

As opposed to gobbling up what you, some person posting on a message board, have to say? What are you even on about here? You're seriously arguing that looking into what the major medical associations say about medical issues is somehow "gobbling up what I'm fed by favorite people?" How am I supposed to proceed here, sir? What should I look at? Should I just take your word for it? Is that more rational?

[Forty Two]

I suspect, if they say there is no detectable change in sensitivity, they are comparing the sensitivity of the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis, with the sensitivity of the glans of a circumcised penis.
Which is not the same thing at all.

If I left my foreskin pulled back, I wouldn't be able to even wear clothes. The pain of any contact with pants would be too much.
I don't see circumcised people walking around without underpants or trousers. So I know perfectly well that the glans of their dick isn't as sensitive as mine.

Except maybe Scotsmen in kilts. You never know what they're wearing down under.

I don't think it's normal for such pain to occur. You may wish to consult a physician. I wouldn't want to have a penis that hurts if the head brushes up against something. Your posts actually sound like an argument for, not against, the procedure.

[NineBerry]

It's quite normal that anything touching the glans without lubrication creates an intense sensation. Both the penis and the vagina produce secrets that function as lubricants when their owners are aroused so that sex is even possible. That cut people can tolerate things touching their glans without lubrication is a clear sign that the sensation in the glans has been lowered. Like listening to too much too loud music harms the hearing.

[Forty Two]

It's quite normal that anything touching the glans without lubrication creates an intense sensation. Both the penis and the vagina produce secrets that function as lubricants when their owners are aroused so that sex is even possible. That cut people can tolerate things touching their glans without lubrication is a clear sign that the sensation in the glans has been lowered. Like listening to too much too loud music harms the hearing.

Sensation is not necessarily pain. What he's talking about is intense pain, at least that what his words are. I have sensation in my penis when it rubs. But, my underpants (boxer briefs) keep things in order. The study that I linked to says, in its results, that via controlled testing the sensitivity of the glans was not lowered.