CIRCUMCISION IS NOT THAT BAD

Deleted member 16048

Deleted member 16048

🐴👞
Joined
Nov 13, 2021
Posts
127
Reputation
224
I see a lot of you circumcucks whining about how "muh sex isn't enjoyable because muh jews mutilated muh baby penis!!!" This is untrue and anything that you have heard about the foreskin being vital to enjoying sex is bs. Anyone claiming that they lost satisfaction after getting circumcised either has other penis problems (erectile dysfunction, only able to get off to weird ass shit thanks to their porn addiction) or it's a placebo (many people have gotten circumcised as an adult and haven't reported a difference in sexual satisfaction). Anyone claiming that they gained satisfaction after restoring foreskin is definitely from a placebo or they're bullshitting (Jfl the same people claiming that vital sensitive parts of the penis are ripped off due to circumcision are saying that their sensitivity came back just because they stretched their penis skin for a while. That's not how it works jfl :feelshaha:). I have heard some people say that they are literally suicidal because the jews took some skin off their penis like ffs that's just further playing into the jewish plan. Anyway here's why you're all over exaggerating

Many circumcucks claim that the foreskin contains over 20,000 highly erogenous nerve endings that causes the majority of the male's pleasure during sex, depriving up to 75% of their sexual pleasure. I would like to take a moment to ask any of you where this retarded claim comes from, because no one seems to know the actual source.

Circumcucks often refer to the Meissner's corpuscles, the fine touch sensory receptors. They compare the sensitivity of other body parts to demonstrate that the presence or absence of these fine touch receptors determine the level of sensitivity (for example, the back of your hand is far less sensitive to touch than the palm of your hand, due to a larger presence of these receptors in the front). This is autistic.
A 2008 study by Indian researchers ranked eight hairless skin sites in terms of density of Meissner's corpuscles, and concluded that the foreskin is last on the list.

Sensitivity


A 2016 study by Queens University PhD candidate Jennifer Bossio confirms that the foreskin is more sensitive to fine touch, but also measured other types of sensitivity. She found that the foreskin, while more sensitive to heat and pain than the glans, was not more sensitive than areas on the penile shaft. She concluded that "circumcision does not appear to remove the most sensitive part of the penis." Bossio explained that heat and pain are likely more relevant for sexual sensation than light touch. "We measured heat detection and heat pain by attaching a thermode to the penis. Men would indicate either when they would feel a change in temperature or when it hurt. The nerve fibers in the penis that are activated by temperature and pain are more relevant in sexual functioning — or the feel of a sexy touch — than the light touch that past researchers had done. Even though [the foreskin] is more sensitive to light touch, I suspect that isn't implicated in sexual pleasure.”

TL;DR: Not only does the foreskin contain fewer fine touch receptors than other areas of the body, but those fine touch receptors are unlikely to factor into erotic stimulation and pleasure.

Back to the retarded 20,000 nerve endings claim, it originated from physician and anti-circumcision advocate Paul Fless in a 1997 article in Mothering magazine. He claimed that “careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off … more than 20,000 nerve endings.” He cited his source as a 1932 paper by physiologist Henry Bazett. Nowhere on this paper does Bazett mention the presence of 20,000 nerve endings in the foreskin. Bazett counted 212 nerve endings of all types in a single square centimeter. Only 2 of the 212 nerve endings were fine-touch receptors (i.e. Meissner’s corpuscles), and none were genital corpuscles, the ones that most experts attribute to erogenous sensation. Bazett had a sample size of 1 and no comparison to any other area of skin to provide a control. So we have no idea how representative the sample is – either across the entire body or among different individuals. Nerve ending density may vary from one part of the foreskin to another. But Bazett didn’t indicate the location on the foreskin for the sample that he used. And although nerve ending density may change with age, Bazett didn’t state the age of the donor. It’s likely that the sample came from a newborn – which would typically have the highest density – and which cannot indicate the nerve density in an adult.

TL;DR the 20,000 nerve endings claim is completely unsupported by evidence.

Last but not least for "muh less sensitivity!!!" claim is the ridged band. The ridged band refers to the very tip of the foreskin. Researcher John Taylor claimed to have found more nerves in the ridged band (sometimes referred to as “Taylor’s band”) than in the rest of the foreskin. However other researchers have not verified this observation. Taylor was firmly against circumcision, and he failed to provide any numbers or raw data or sufficiently define the term “ridged band.” So it’s difficult to know whether his claim is true, how much of a difference there is, and whether it has any significant effect on sexual pleasure.

I would go over the claims regarding how infant circumcision causes permanent changes to the brain (which is bullshit), but I don't want to make this post too long or you autists will be too intimidated by the long text and refuse to read it. There are also a host of other retarded claims that I can disprove if anyone wants to bring them up. NO, I am not pro-circumcision, I will not circumcise my children, but it is really not nearly as bad as some circumcucks say it is. The only things I have against circumcision are the fact that the child should be allowed to choose if they want to become circumcised for themself when they are older (and they almost certainly will not choose to be circumcised), and the fact that the jews want me to do it therefore I will do the opposite.

Just for the lolz:
in 2002 Donald R Taves, a psychiatrist at the University of Washington, conducted an experiment to measure the effect of foreskin on the force necessary for vaginal penetration. Taves cut a quarter-size hole in the bottom of a Styrofoam cup to simulate a vaginal opening. He mounted the cup on a diet scale to measure the force needed for a man to enter his partner's vagina. The 76 year-old Taves penetrated the hole with his erect penis - six times with his glans exposed, and six more times with his foreskin covering the glans. Taves described penetration with his foreskin covering the glans as "comfortable", while penetration with his foreskin pulled back and his glans exposed was "uncomfortable". He concluded that circumcised men use ten times greater force to enter a female partner than their uncircumcised peers. JUST FUCKING LOL @ THESE PEOPLE.

TL;DR: KYS I tried to make the post as engaging as possible for you autists and your chicken fried dopamine receptors. But in conclusion, circumcision is not harming your sex life, it has not caused you brain damage (your brain damage came from somewhere else), and also there's the fact that circumcised penises are generally considered more aesthetically pleasing in the U.S. + less chance of infection (generally seen as cope, but it's still true).
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • Ugh..
  • JFL
Reactions: Boxingfan, thecel, Deleted member 16110 and 16 others
bump
 
  • Woah
  • +1
Reactions: thecel and Ryan
I got circumcised as an adult to reduce the risk of stds by 30%.

Doesn't make sex any less pleasurable for me.
 
  • +1
  • WTF
  • JFL
Reactions: Xangsane, Kristin, Heguldus and 8 others
Dnr but I love being circumsized :owo:
 
  • +1
Reactions: Toth's thot and Deleted member 16048
I got circumcised as an adult to reduce the risk of stds by 30%.

Doesn't make sex any less pleasurable for me.
Yeah I don't get how anyone can ignore the fact that there are plenty of adults being circumcised (there are even subreddits for it) and none of them complain about less sexual pleasure. It's a total placebo
 
  • +1
Reactions: Xangsane and noodlelover
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23937309/

Agree. The human brain is fascinating.
I've seen that study before and I should've included it but I originally disregarded it as a jewish study when I was first looking for information on circumcision. I was more intending on debunking circumcuck "evidence" than providing evidence of the contrary.
 
  • +1
Reactions: noodlelover
Holy mother of cope jfl @ u copers. I restored my foreskin and even jerking off is 5x better than it was before.
 
  • +1
  • Love it
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 17829, fauxfox, turkproducer and 7 others
Epic cope
 
  • JFL
  • +1
  • Ugh..
Reactions: Deleted member 17829, Deleted member 21146, Moggie and 3 others
I be dying seeing “men” upset they foreskin got cut. They really be in tears they don’t got a blanket around they dick.
If I wasn’t Circumcised as a baby, I would be as an adult because that shit is ugly asf
 
  • JFL
  • Ugh..
  • +1
Reactions: Heguldus, Deleted member 5786, Looks234 and 5 others
Holy mother of cope jfl @ u copers. I restored my foreskin and even jerking off is 5x better than it was before.
Read post circumcuck. The skin you pulled around your dick isn't going to restore the Meissner's corpuscles or ridged band jfl. I still highly enjoy beating my dick
 
Also got vasectomy to reduce risk of child support by like 99.9%. Circumcision was a cheap add on.
Sir, share your experiences here:
 
  • +1
Reactions: noodlelover
Also got vasectomy to reduce risk of child support by like 99.9%. Circumcision was a cheap add on.
B1901126 5023 47F2 8AB6 0DCBAFDCBEE9

You know that this reduces testosterone?
Caging at this greycel cucking himself extremely hard by reducing his testosterone and the sensivity on his dick on purpose.
 
  • +1
Reactions: stevielake and Deleted member 15899
are these studies funded by shekels or not.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao, Deleted member 15899 and WontStopNorwooding
Read post circumcuck. The skin you pulled around your dick isn't going to restore the Meissner's corpuscles or ridged band jfl. I still highly enjoy beating my dick
You are retarded jfl.
The restored skin covers up the glans which causes it to become more sensitive over time
 
I see a lot of you circumcucks whining about how "muh sex isn't enjoyable because muh jews mutilated muh baby penis!!!" This is untrue and anything that you have heard about the foreskin being vital to enjoying sex is bs. Anyone claiming that they lost satisfaction after getting circumcised either has other penis problems (erectile dysfunction, only able to get off to weird ass shit thanks to their porn addiction) or it's a placebo (many people have gotten circumcised as an adult and haven't reported a difference in sexual satisfaction). Anyone claiming that they gained satisfaction after restoring foreskin is definitely from a placebo or they're bullshitting (Jfl the same people claiming that vital sensitive parts of the penis are ripped off due to circumcision are saying that their sensitivity came back just because they stretched their penis skin for a while. That's not how it works jfl :feelshaha:). I have heard some people say that they are literally suicidal because the jews took some skin off their penis like ffs that's just further playing into the jewish plan. Anyway here's why you're all over exaggerating

Many circumcucks claim that the foreskin contains over 20,000 highly erogenous nerve endings that causes the majority of the male's pleasure during sex, depriving up to 75% of their sexual pleasure. I would like to take a moment to ask any of you where this retarded claim comes from, because no one seems to know the actual source.

Circumcucks often refer to the Meissner's corpuscles, the fine touch sensory receptors. They compare the sensitivity of other body parts to demonstrate that the presence or absence of these fine touch receptors determine the level of sensitivity (for example, the back of your hand is far less sensitive to touch than the palm of your hand, due to a larger presence of these receptors in the front). This is autistic.
A 2008 study by Indian researchers ranked eight hairless skin sites in terms of density of Meissner's corpuscles, and concluded that the foreskin is last on the list.

View attachment 1406669

A 2016 study by Queens University PhD candidate Jennifer Bossio confirms that the foreskin is more sensitive to fine touch, but also measured other types of sensitivity. She found that the foreskin, while more sensitive to heat and pain than the glans, was not more sensitive than areas on the penile shaft. She concluded that "circumcision does not appear to remove the most sensitive part of the penis." Bossio explained that heat and pain are likely more relevant for sexual sensation than light touch. "We measured heat detection and heat pain by attaching a thermode to the penis. Men would indicate either when they would feel a change in temperature or when it hurt. The nerve fibers in the penis that are activated by temperature and pain are more relevant in sexual functioning — or the feel of a sexy touch — than the light touch that past researchers had done. Even though [the foreskin] is more sensitive to light touch, I suspect that isn't implicated in sexual pleasure.”

TL;DR: Not only does the foreskin contain fewer fine touch receptors than other areas of the body, but those fine touch receptors are unlikely to factor into erotic stimulation and pleasure.

Back to the retarded 20,000 nerve endings claim, it originated from physician and anti-circumcision advocate Paul Fless in a 1997 article in Mothering magazine. He claimed that “careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off … more than 20,000 nerve endings.” He cited his source as a 1932 paper by physiologist Henry Bazett. Nowhere on this paper does Bazett mention the presence of 20,000 nerve endings in the foreskin. Bazett counted 212 nerve endings of all types in a single square centimeter. Only 2 of the 212 nerve endings were fine-touch receptors (i.e. Meissner’s corpuscles), and none were genital corpuscles, the ones that most experts attribute to erogenous sensation. Bazett had a sample size of 1 and no comparison to any other area of skin to provide a control. So we have no idea how representative the sample is – either across the entire body or among different individuals. Nerve ending density may vary from one part of the foreskin to another. But Bazett didn’t indicate the location on the foreskin for the sample that he used. And although nerve ending density may change with age, Bazett didn’t state the age of the donor. It’s likely that the sample came from a newborn – which would typically have the highest density – and which cannot indicate the nerve density in an adult.

TL;DR the 20,000 nerve endings claim is completely unsupported by evidence.

Last but not least for "muh less sensitivity!!!" claim is the ridged band. The ridged band refers to the very tip of the foreskin. Researcher John Taylor claimed to have found more nerves in the ridged band (sometimes referred to as “Taylor’s band”) than in the rest of the foreskin. However other researchers have not verified this observation. Taylor was firmly against circumcision, and he failed to provide any numbers or raw data or sufficiently define the term “ridged band.” So it’s difficult to know whether his claim is true, how much of a difference there is, and whether it has any significant effect on sexual pleasure.

I would go over the claims regarding how infant circumcision causes permanent changes to the brain (which is bullshit), but I don't want to make this post too long or you autists will be too intimidated by the long text and refuse to read it. There are also a host of other retarded claims that I can disprove if anyone wants to bring them up. NO, I am not pro-circumcision, I will not circumcise my children, but it is really not nearly as bad as some circumcucks say it is. The only things I have against circumcision are the fact that the child should be allowed to choose if they want to become circumcised for themself when they are older (and they almost certainly will not choose to be circumcised), and the fact that the jews want me to do it therefore I will do the opposite.

Just for the lolz:
in 2002 Donald R Taves, a psychiatrist at the University of Washington, conducted an experiment to measure the effect of foreskin on the force necessary for vaginal penetration. Taves cut a quarter-size hole in the bottom of a Styrofoam cup to simulate a vaginal opening. He mounted the cup on a diet scale to measure the force needed for a man to enter his partner's vagina. The 76 year-old Taves penetrated the hole with his erect penis - six times with his glans exposed, and six more times with his foreskin covering the glans. Taves described penetration with his foreskin covering the glans as "comfortable", while penetration with his foreskin pulled back and his glans exposed was "uncomfortable". He concluded that circumcised men use ten times greater force to enter a female partner than their uncircumcised peers. JUST FUCKING LOL @ THESE PEOPLE.

TL;DR: KYS I tried to make the post as engaging as possible for you autists and your chicken fried dopamine receptors. But in conclusion, circumcision is not harming your sex life, it has not caused you brain damage (your brain damage came from somewhere else), and also there's the fact that circumcised penises are generally considered more aesthetically pleasing in the U.S. + less chance of infection (generally seen as cope, but it's still true).
200 1
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Heguldus and germanlooks
are these studies funded by shekels or not.
All of the studies used by circumcucks to prove it's harmful are made by a small anti circumcision group with a small sample size so it would be biased either way. But I would argue that not all of the dozens of studies on circumcision are funded by the jews.
 
You are retarded jfl.
The restored skin covers up the glans which causes it to become more sensitive over time
Where have you learned that from jfl :feelshaha:
 
Where have you learned that from jfl :feelshaha:
Bro are you legit this low iq?
When the glans isn’t covered up by the foreskin it looses sensivity over time because it drys out.
On the other hand if the dried out glans gets covered again it will gain sensitivity back after time because now it’s covered and the clothing doesn’t rub against it anymore
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
I see a lot of you circumcucks whining about how "muh sex isn't enjoyable because muh jews mutilated muh baby penis!!!" This is untrue and anything that you have heard about the foreskin being vital to enjoying sex is bs. Anyone claiming that they lost satisfaction after getting circumcised either has other penis problems (erectile dysfunction, only able to get off to weird ass shit thanks to their porn addiction) or it's a placebo (many people have gotten circumcised as an adult and haven't reported a difference in sexual satisfaction). Anyone claiming that they gained satisfaction after restoring foreskin is definitely from a placebo or they're bullshitting (Jfl the same people claiming that vital sensitive parts of the penis are ripped off due to circumcision are saying that their sensitivity came back just because they stretched their penis skin for a while. That's not how it works jfl :feelshaha:). I have heard some people say that they are literally suicidal because the jews took some skin off their penis like ffs that's just further playing into the jewish plan. Anyway here's why you're all over exaggerating

Many circumcucks claim that the foreskin contains over 20,000 highly erogenous nerve endings that causes the majority of the male's pleasure during sex, depriving up to 75% of their sexual pleasure. I would like to take a moment to ask any of you where this retarded claim comes from, because no one seems to know the actual source.

Circumcucks often refer to the Meissner's corpuscles, the fine touch sensory receptors. They compare the sensitivity of other body parts to demonstrate that the presence or absence of these fine touch receptors determine the level of sensitivity (for example, the back of your hand is far less sensitive to touch than the palm of your hand, due to a larger presence of these receptors in the front). This is autistic.
A 2008 study by Indian researchers ranked eight hairless skin sites in terms of density of Meissner's corpuscles, and concluded that the foreskin is last on the list.

View attachment 1406669

A 2016 study by Queens University PhD candidate Jennifer Bossio confirms that the foreskin is more sensitive to fine touch, but also measured other types of sensitivity. She found that the foreskin, while more sensitive to heat and pain than the glans, was not more sensitive than areas on the penile shaft. She concluded that "circumcision does not appear to remove the most sensitive part of the penis." Bossio explained that heat and pain are likely more relevant for sexual sensation than light touch. "We measured heat detection and heat pain by attaching a thermode to the penis. Men would indicate either when they would feel a change in temperature or when it hurt. The nerve fibers in the penis that are activated by temperature and pain are more relevant in sexual functioning — or the feel of a sexy touch — than the light touch that past researchers had done. Even though [the foreskin] is more sensitive to light touch, I suspect that isn't implicated in sexual pleasure.”

TL;DR: Not only does the foreskin contain fewer fine touch receptors than other areas of the body, but those fine touch receptors are unlikely to factor into erotic stimulation and pleasure.

Back to the retarded 20,000 nerve endings claim, it originated from physician and anti-circumcision advocate Paul Fless in a 1997 article in Mothering magazine. He claimed that “careful anatomical investigations have shown that circumcision cuts off … more than 20,000 nerve endings.” He cited his source as a 1932 paper by physiologist Henry Bazett. Nowhere on this paper does Bazett mention the presence of 20,000 nerve endings in the foreskin. Bazett counted 212 nerve endings of all types in a single square centimeter. Only 2 of the 212 nerve endings were fine-touch receptors (i.e. Meissner’s corpuscles), and none were genital corpuscles, the ones that most experts attribute to erogenous sensation. Bazett had a sample size of 1 and no comparison to any other area of skin to provide a control. So we have no idea how representative the sample is – either across the entire body or among different individuals. Nerve ending density may vary from one part of the foreskin to another. But Bazett didn’t indicate the location on the foreskin for the sample that he used. And although nerve ending density may change with age, Bazett didn’t state the age of the donor. It’s likely that the sample came from a newborn – which would typically have the highest density – and which cannot indicate the nerve density in an adult.

TL;DR the 20,000 nerve endings claim is completely unsupported by evidence.

Last but not least for "muh less sensitivity!!!" claim is the ridged band. The ridged band refers to the very tip of the foreskin. Researcher John Taylor claimed to have found more nerves in the ridged band (sometimes referred to as “Taylor’s band”) than in the rest of the foreskin. However other researchers have not verified this observation. Taylor was firmly against circumcision, and he failed to provide any numbers or raw data or sufficiently define the term “ridged band.” So it’s difficult to know whether his claim is true, how much of a difference there is, and whether it has any significant effect on sexual pleasure.

I would go over the claims regarding how infant circumcision causes permanent changes to the brain (which is bullshit), but I don't want to make this post too long or you autists will be too intimidated by the long text and refuse to read it. There are also a host of other retarded claims that I can disprove if anyone wants to bring them up. NO, I am not pro-circumcision, I will not circumcise my children, but it is really not nearly as bad as some circumcucks say it is. The only things I have against circumcision are the fact that the child should be allowed to choose if they want to become circumcised for themself when they are older (and they almost certainly will not choose to be circumcised), and the fact that the jews want me to do it therefore I will do the opposite.

Just for the lolz:
in 2002 Donald R Taves, a psychiatrist at the University of Washington, conducted an experiment to measure the effect of foreskin on the force necessary for vaginal penetration. Taves cut a quarter-size hole in the bottom of a Styrofoam cup to simulate a vaginal opening. He mounted the cup on a diet scale to measure the force needed for a man to enter his partner's vagina. The 76 year-old Taves penetrated the hole with his erect penis - six times with his glans exposed, and six more times with his foreskin covering the glans. Taves described penetration with his foreskin covering the glans as "comfortable", while penetration with his foreskin pulled back and his glans exposed was "uncomfortable". He concluded that circumcised men use ten times greater force to enter a female partner than their uncircumcised peers. JUST FUCKING LOL @ THESE PEOPLE.

TL;DR: KYS I tried to make the post as engaging as possible for you autists and your chicken fried dopamine receptors. But in conclusion, circumcision is not harming your sex life, it has not caused you brain damage (your brain damage came from somewhere else), and also there's the fact that circumcised penises are generally considered more aesthetically pleasing in the U.S. + less chance of infection (generally seen as cope, but it's still true).
Hope this is lifefuel, I was circumcised at 10 and I remember that the glans almost hurt to touch when I rolled my foreskin back.
Wish I wasn't circumcised tbh
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
Holy mother of cope jfl @ u copers. I restored my foreskin and even jerking off is 5x better than it was before.
How long did it take for decent coverage, I am going to start
 
  • +1
Reactions: germanlooks
Bro are you legit this low iq?
When the glans isn’t covered up by the foreskin it looses sensivity over time because it drys out.
On the other hand if the dried out glans gets covered again it will gain sensitivity back after time because now it’s covered and the clothing doesn’t rub against it anymore
Nice bro science jfl. There is 0 evidence that the glans dries out if it's not covered by your foreskin. I've never even heard that theory before and I've heard all the circumcuck arguments in the book
 
Nice bro science jfl. There is 0 evidence that the glans dries out if it's not covered by your foreskin. I've never even heard that theory before and I've heard all the circumcuck arguments in the book
No bro science but basic biology.
Ask any guy who isn’t circumcised to pull his foreskin back and then doing some activity. The friction will hurt on his glans because it isn’t used to being exposed.
But if it is exposed for ever it will get used to it. The same way your skin on your palms gets thicker when you do lots of pull ups.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
Hope this is lifefuel, I was circumcised at 10 and I remember that the glans almost hurt to touch when I rolled my foreskin back.
Wish I wasn't circumcised tbh
Your glans doesn't hurt anymore right?
How long did it take for decent coverage, I am going to start
I hear people saying it takes over a year to stretch it enough to grow it back, I can promise you that restoration is a waste of time but other than that you have nothing to lose if you're really desperate.
 
My uncut mate told me as you get older it becomes less sensitive, but for me now being circumcised I don't feel much on glans tbh
I think it's worth a try tbh as I think my dick will look better restored
Girls prefer circumcised overall but idaf about girls

Your glans doesn't hurt anymore right?

I hear people saying it takes over a year to stretch it enough to grow it back, I can promise you that restoration is a waste of time but other than that you have nothing to lose if you're really desperate.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
OP
AE131F94 A1A8 4FC7 BFF4 324396B2FBEB
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao, Amexmaxx and Deleted member 15338
No bro science but basic biology.
Ask any guy who isn’t circumcised to pull his foreskin back and then doing some activity. The friction will hurt on his glans because it isn’t used to being exposed.
But if it is exposed for ever it will get used to it. The same way your skin on your palms gets thicker when you do lots of pull ups.
The moisture you're referring to exists solely to provide the lubricating movement of the foreskin over the glans during sex. It's the reason smegma exists (but it shouldn't build up to be clearly visible). If you don't have foreskin then this moisture is unnecessary. Give me a single source that says the moisture of the glans provides greater sexual satisfaction
Actually if I could've chosen I wouldn't have been circumcised, but this is only because I'd rather not be missing a part of my natural body, even if that part provides near to no benefit. The point of the post is to stop the whining circumcucks from tying their noose over some dick skin. Seriously look at this shit https://www.reddit.com/r/CircumcisionGrief they would've never had a problem with circumcision if they didn't see all these other circumcucks crying about it JFL
My uncut mate told me as you get older it becomes less sensitive, but for me now being circumcised I don't feel much on glans tbh
I think it's worth a try tbh as I think my dick will look better restored
Girls prefer circumcised overall but idaf about girls
That is probably unrelated to circumcision. My dick is extremely sensitive and I usually last 20 seconds before busting jfl (I need to work on that)
 
The moisture you're referring to exists solely to provide the lubricating movement of the foreskin over the glans during sex. It's the reason smegma exists (but it shouldn't build up to be clearly visible). If you don't have foreskin then this moisture is unnecessary. Give me a single source that says the moisture of the glans provides greater sexual satisfaction
I don’t know what study I even should search for to prove you this.
Just use your brain and common sense for this.

An uncircumcised guy would feel uncomfortable or even pain if he pulls his foreskin back and the underwear rubs against the glans.
A circumcised guy wouldn’t feel uncomfortable or pain when the underwear rubs against the glans because his glans got desensitized over time.
And this is the prove that the coverage of the glans is connected to sensation
 
Read post circumcuck. The skin you pulled around your dick isn't going to restore the Meissner's corpuscles or ridged band jfl. I still highly enjoy beating my dick
Your ignorance is astounding I know more about the subject than you can comprehend jfl @ your autism if you think I don’t know what it does and does not restore after 4 years of research and putting the methods into practice. Keep coping hard.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
Someone clearly doesn’t have a foreskin :lul:
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
I don’t know what study I even should search for to prove you this.
Just use your brain and common sense for this.

An uncircumcised guy would feel uncomfortable or even pain if he pulls his foreskin back and the underwear rubs against the glans.
A circumcised guy wouldn’t feel uncomfortable or pain when the underwear rubs against the glans because his glans got desensitized over time.
And this is the prove that the coverage of the glans is connected to sensation
Did you actually read the post or nah.

"Results: Penile sensitivity did not differ across circumcision status for any stimulus type or penile site. The foreskin of intact men was more sensitive to tactile stimulation than the other penile sites, but this finding did not extend to any other stimuli (where foreskin sensitivity was comparable to the other sites tested). Conclusions: Findings suggest that minimal long-term implications for penile sensitivity exist as a result of the surgical excision of the foreskin during neonatal circumcision. Additionally, this study challenges past research suggesting that the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the adult penis. Future research should consider the direct link between penile sensitivity and the perception of pleasure/sensation." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26724395/ (note that the "past research" is the same shit I've already debunked)

The fact that your dick hurts more when you're uncircumcised doesn't mean anything.
Someone clearly doesn’t have a foreskin :lul:
this is the precise response I expected, multiple times over. Dnrd, cope cope cope.
 
The fact that your dick hurts more when you're uncircumcised doesn't mean anything.
Cope.
Of corse it means something you brainlet. Because the easier it causes pain the easier it also causes pleasure.
 
Cope.
Of corse it means something you brainlet. Because the easier it causes pain the easier it also causes pleasure.
Men aged 18–37 years who had either undergone neonatal circumcision (n = 30) or were intact (n = 32) were studied, with modified von Frey filaments used to assess tactile and pain responses, and a thermal sensory analyser to assess warmth detection and heat pain thresholds. Tactile, pain, and heat protocols were tested on the forearm (control site), the middle of the dorsal glans penis (with the foreskin retracted, if present), the anterior midline penile shaft, and the anterior proximal-to-midline penile shaft, plus on the unretracted foreskin, if present.
No differences in tactile or pain thresholds, or sensitivity to warmth and heat pain, were observed between circumcised and intact men. Pain (punctate and heat) thresholds of the foreskin did not significantly differ from any other penile site tested, although the study suggested that the foreskin was more sensitive than the glans penis, but not the penile shaft in terms of warmth sensation. The authors conclude that their data “do not support the idea that foreskin removal is detrimental to penile sensitivity.” Furthermore, as foreskin sensitivity did not significantly differ from the forearm for any stimulus tested, and given that other genital sites were more sensitive to pain stimuli than the forearm — and, therefore, the foreskin — removing the foreskin does not, in fact, remove the most sensitive part of the penis.

Just fucking lol there is a plethora of evidence supporting what I'm saying and barely any studies, 0 of which are well-produced, support your claims. Give it up circumcuck a million studies will not convince you of what you learned from incel communities jfl.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 7098
A7AB6FB8 0DCC 40CB 92E8 AA4973BD173D
7392D114 736A 4F31 B3D2 1CD684F27050

Op youre also completely missing the psychological effects of mgm as well. It literally is branding males as second class disposable citizens. Its is stripping males of bodily sovereignty, humanity, and dignity.
6C949562 5079 4E05 B9A3 8B3E50F284AD
08AC6315 915E 475C 9B95 50FD0C5746CB
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 12218 and Lmao
All of the studies used by circumcucks to prove it's harmful are made by a small anti circumcision group with a small sample size so it would be biased either way. But I would argue that not all of the dozens of studies on circumcision are funded by the jews.
you’re either muslim or jew or a brainwashed american to defend it so much?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao and Amexmaxx
Cope.

Circumcision makes sex less pleasurable. There is no need to mutilate boys' genitals.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 17217, Deleted member 12218, Deleted member 5786 and 3 others
View attachment 1407661View attachment 1407663
Op youre also completely missing the psychological effects of mgm as well. It literally is branding males as second class disposable citizens. Its is stripping males of bodily sovereignty, humanity, and dignity.
View attachment 1407678View attachment 1407680
I could debunk nearly everything there (the ones that I can't debunk are true but irrelevant), but the amount of wasted time just for no one to care would be insufferably cucked. If you want me to go over the psychological effects, sure. All of it is made up shit.
you’re either muslim or jew or a brainwashed american to defend it so much?
None, I'm giving lifefuel to the poor autistic souls who unironically spend days on end loathing themselves because they were circumcised. IIRC someone actually killed themself because of it, someone who was leading a community of "intactivists." If you want to deny all the evidence then stay pessimistic jfl.
Cope.

Circumcision makes sex less pleasurable. There is no need to mutilate boys' genitals.
I agree, there is no need to fuck with baby penises, but that doesn't change the fact that the entire issue is so insanely exaggerated it boggles my mind. And I don't see why anyone would WANT to stay miserable about it, even seeing plenty of evidence that they're miserable for no reason.
 
  • +1
Reactions: FreakkForLife
I could debunk nearly everything there (the ones that I can't debunk are true but irrelevant), but the amount of wasted time just for no one to care would be insufferably cucked. If you want me to go over the psychological effects, sure. All of it is made up shit.

None, I'm giving lifefuel to the poor autistic souls who unironically spend days on end loathing themselves because they were circumcised. IIRC someone actually killed themself because of it, someone who was leading a community of "intactivists." If you want to deny all the evidence then stay pessimistic jfl.

I agree, there is no need to fuck with baby penises, but that doesn't change the fact that the entire issue is so insanely exaggerated it boggles my mind. And I don't see why anyone would WANT to stay miserable about it, even seeing plenty of evidence that they're miserable for no reason.
I was circumcised at a age where I can remember how much more sensitive the head was

There is a big difference, what age did you have it done?

I remember recoiling from how much more sensitive my head was

and now i can’t even stay hard or finish during sex jfl.

don’t give me low t cope btw, i have top tier frame + muscle building genetics and look high T, circumcuckcision ruined me and other men
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao
I could debunk nearly everything there (the ones that I can't debunk are true but irrelevant), but the amount of wasted time just for no one to care would be insufferably cucked. If you want me to go over the psychological effects, sure. All of it is made up shit.
Wow. God tier deflection. You cant refute shit so you say its bullshit or made up. You sir are coping. Coping with the fact that you were a VICTIM. That you had no CHOICE. Male Genital Mutilation solidifies how worthless society sees your life and you boyo are COPING WITH THAT.
 
Reminder op is going through the first stage in recovery, the denial phase.
 
  • JFL
  • +1
  • So Sad
Reactions: Deleted member 21146, The Moggee, Deleted member 5786 and 5 others
Wow. God tier deflection. You cant refute shit so you say its bullshit or made up. You sir are coping. Coping with the fact that you were a VICTIM. That you had no CHOICE. Male Genital Mutilation solidifies how worthless society sees your life and you boyo are COPING WITH THAT.
Like I said, if you want me to disprove the psychological effects, I will. The rest of it is a waste of time because I know damn well no one will give a shit. Even if I disprove the psychological effects no one will give a shit jfl. A large part of debunking the psychological effects can be summed up with "anesthesia" but something tells me you are too retarded to grasp that concept.
Reminder op is going through the first stage in recovery, the denial phase.
I already went through all the phases and now I'm at ascension. I used to be kinda fucked up about it but I didn't let it fuck with me too much because some sexual pleasure lost isn't the end of the world, I don't place such a high emphasis on sex as most people here in the first place. I had to do deeper research to actually find all of the autistic "evidence" that circumcision is nearly as detrimental as circumcucks claim, which clearly everyone losing their shit about circumcision hasn't done because they take the words of an incel community and let it make them feel miserable 24/7.
 
dn rd your cope
 
  • +1
Reactions: Lmao, Marsiere214 and Amexmaxx

Similar threads

depressionmaxxing
Replies
49
Views
674
JoshuaG
JoshuaG
Yuhbwoynadia
Replies
84
Views
4K
Sub0
Sub0
yandex99
Replies
12
Views
609
yandex99
yandex99
mogstars
Replies
74
Views
4K
mogstars
mogstars
kwacker777
Replies
69
Views
1K
kwacker777
kwacker777

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top