Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 23:19:01 UTC No. 16203199

>>16203188
Trust the science, bigot, and cut your fucking dick off. Or at the very least just the tip.

Anonymous at Fri, 31 May 2024 23:24:02 UTC No. 16203206

>>16203188
Five thousand years ago in the very humid and warm and disease-bearing Nile valley, foreskin infections were a serious problem and circumcision solved that problem.
(So obviously we should still be doing it today in cool, dry places with no such preponderance of infections and safe treatment methods.)

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 00:00:30 UTC No. 16203249

>>16203206
If this is true, why didn’t males evolve to not have a foreskin? People evolved light/dark skin to deal with the sun in a matter of only 10,000 years

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 00:25:03 UTC No. 16203281

>>16203188
What are the benefits to circumcision in America? What did they come up with?

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 00:36:13 UTC No. 16203303

>>16203206
you must be retarded
what do you think causes an infection?

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 00:42:50 UTC No. 16203317

>>16203249
some parts of Africa are drier.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:50:04 UTC No. 16203398

>>16203249
>People evolved light/dark skin to deal with the sun
Yeah no wonder the eskimos are so dark because they totally evolved in a hot tropical climate. Also no wonder they sell sunscreen in finland and norway because the fair skinned blonde people who evolved there obviously have skin well adapted to the Sun at that latitude.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:57:19 UTC No. 16203407

>>16203398
>"heard u was talkin' shit bout us"

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 01:58:20 UTC No. 16203408

>>16203398
>>16203407

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:02:19 UTC No. 16203415

>>16203249
The foreskin of the male penis has an important function. You know that, you midwit?
It makes sex (and naturally also masturbation) easier and pleasurable, because without a foreskin you gland dries out.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:05:05 UTC No. 16203418

>>16203415
Glans*

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 02:35:37 UTC No. 16203452

>>16203398
Impressive. Now let's see a photo taken after 1910, not using primitive orthochromic film which is insensitive to red.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:41:51 UTC No. 16203830

>>16203188
There's plenty of benefit to those being paid to conduct the procedure. Then there are the members of a certain tribe who see it as a symbol of subservience for those not of their tribe to be ritually marked in a manner prescribed by the tribe.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:49:06 UTC No. 16203837

>>16203452
This is what they really look look, you can see his true skin tone on the upper part of his fact thats protected from the sun when he is outside

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 08:52:09 UTC No. 16203839

>>16203398
Northerly latitudes have stronger sun during the summer than the tropics do, but they have much, much weaker sun during the winter.
Before plentiful supplemental vitamins and fortified foods, the benefits of pale skin being able to synthesis vitamin D in low intensity sunlight was stronger than the loss of protection against high UV during the summer.
>>16203837
BTFO

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:00:55 UTC No. 16203845

>>16203206
LMAO

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 09:03:05 UTC No. 16203846

>>16203188
Not science

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 11:38:23 UTC No. 16203992

>>16203206
lies.
It's done because it causes aspd (anti-social personality disorder). This is also known as 'the convenant'.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 12:02:33 UTC No. 16204029

America is third world shithole tier

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 12:14:21 UTC No. 16204038

For once, I am happy to be European. Imagine that amerilard parents DEMAND circumcision for their boys

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 15:47:18 UTC No. 16204425

>>16203188
Jews.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 15:49:44 UTC No. 16204429

>>16204425
This.

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:17:25 UTC No. 16204531

>>16203281
From what I understand, the policy was pushed by Puritan quacks like Kellogg who thought it would prevent or at least discourage masturbation.

Ainsley at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 17:28:30 UTC No. 16204859

>>16203188
There is no scientific consensus that circumcision is beneficial. Views vary widely and the 'correct' answer ultimately depends on how the cost/benefit analysis is constructed. A botched circumcision where flesh is accidentally removed along with skin has complications not worth the benefits. In the most extreme cases a botched circumcision can make it nearly impossible to have sex. If having a 0% risk of such an outcome is counted as an absolute necessity then circumcision fails a cost/benefit analysis. On the other hand if such outcomes are probability weighted then the lower risk of STDs may make circumcision 'worth it.'

Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:05:11 UTC No. 16204962

This thread was moved to >>>/pol/469857009