Shouldnt do it for a wife either. It's sometimes necessary to make sacrifices for your family, but a good wife doesnt ask you for body modification surgery.
As the resident degenerate, if you're looking through porntags, voluntarily getting body-modded for your would-be lover is commonly associated with the tags "humiliation", "moral degradation", "Mindbreak", and "NTR".
It's a weird moral compass, but it can provide solid context to actions, if you think "what would this action be classified as?". Notably, you will NEVER find "wholesome" as a tag alongside "body modification".
The only example that comes to mind is if a couple got tattooed wedding rings because the husband worked with heavy machinery where a physical ring would be a safety hazard.
BFF is a mechanic, and that's exactly what he did. Constantly snagging a ring in tight places, or getting fluids trapped under it meant he was Constantly forgetting his ring at work.
UPDATE2: I just wanted to update you guys. A lot of people in the comments kept asking for her picture, so here it is. I know she might not be everyone's cup of tea, but she was beautiful to me.
UPDATE3: I forgot to mention it, but she actually made a big deal about the doctor giving her my severed foreskin. I asked her what she did with it, and she said she ate it. I thought she was joking at the time but now idk.
amazing that scores of people who will object to clipping a dogs tail or ears raise no objections to altering a guys junk, even looking at you weird if you draw a comparison.
except it is mutilation when it's about little children, other than that, no moral judgments. you would call removal of labia from little girls mutilation, why wouldn't you call it mutilation for little boys. are you paid off by the big mohel?
Circumcision is an issue a lot like Gun Rights; I don’t see how somebody can still be on one side after doing any amount of research. The medical benefits of circumcising children are almost nonexistent outside of a few outlier conditions where the foreskin is improperly developed, and it can lead to ongoing loss of sensation and is unnecessarily traumatic for children.
I've literally got into arguments about circumcision where the other person claimed I don't know how sex works because I mentioned the mechanical benefits of a foreskin despite me having a foreskin and them not. The thought of having been maimed at birth by your parents is not an easy pill to swallow.
They're good people who thought they were making the correct decision, and they were wrong.
Not that hard to come to terms with. By the time men start thinking about this, they should be capable of understanding that their parents are human beings, not infallible.
Well, look what you're offering, and look what you're asking.
As you said, the payment for agreeing with you is that they accept, basically out of the blue, that their parents "maimed them at birth."
What you're offering, the boon and reward, is that they can observe their dick, which they can literally look down upon, tug a bit, and say "Seems fine to me," is actually mutilated.
Gotta say, that's not much of an incentive. Like I said, they can literally look down at their own dick, and think about their experiences with their dick, and it's going to be pretty hard to convince them that they're impaired and the people who raised them harmed them grievously. If they have children, they can think about their dick, and how that dick has basically one purpose, which is to produce children; then look back and forth between their dick and their children, then look at you, who's telling them their dick don't work because their parents are monsters, and...
Surely, you see at least a little why this argument ain't working.
this. thousands of years ago, circumcision historically was done for a few reasons...
it was cleaner and reduced infections... as daily bathing was more rare, not having a flap meant not getting gunk built up under the flap, meant less infections
it supposedly desensitizes the head, allowing the guy to last longer in bed.
it was thought to reduce masturbation, because reasons
with one religion in particular, the "practitioner" literally removes it with his mouth. sometimes he even eats it.
compared to today's circumstances, if you're not doing it for a serious medical issue, you shouldn't do it.
oh, and some guys get cut so tight, that it literally restricts how big you can get during an erection. assuming you have good blood pressure, and the internal tendon (or whatever it's called) isn't excessively short, your erection can be bigger when you're uncircumcised. i'm not a monster or anything, but a couple of girls have even commented on it... they didn't even realize i was uncircumcised until after i wasn't hard anymore.
God does not ask people to do morally wrong things period.
It could be argued that it wasn't morally wrong because God asked it of them but could be morally wrong otherwise. Kind of like wiping out Canaanites; generally genocide is morally wrong, but if God tells you to it's morally wrong not to.
Agreed. Assuming that the Bible is a 100% accurate record of human events and God's interaction with those humans, circumcision was a commandment for a very specific tribe for a very specific period of time. It cannot be extrapolated to refer to the whole human race.
It could also have been morally correct in a time where it would improve quality of life and safety, wherein the progression of technology and knowledge has removed those from being the case rendering it simple mutilation with no benefit.
God ain't spoken to us in a long time, his teachings can in fact have become outdated by the passage of time. In fact, its even possible that he has sent people out to argue against it as his new messengers to remove the need for his direct intervention.
And I'm guessing the basic ass knowledge necessary to not die of horrible diseases and untold suffering wasn't considered "need to know." He'd give us all that in cryptic verses like "chop up your dick" and "eat fish, not pork" and we were supposed to just keep doing it cuz reasons after we managed to beat them on our own.
I was just making up arguments about new messengers and outdated to give you an out in which the two can be allowed to coexist. But you seem committed to mutilating children based on nothing but "yeah but my daddy said so, so give me your son!" so fuck you and your religion my guy.
Actually the circumcision that was practiced in Biblical times was significantly different from the form of circumcision that is practiced today. In Biblical times, circumcision just referred to cutting off the part of the foreskin that overhangs off the glans, leaving the glans largely covered. This preserves most of the functions of the foreskin.
The Rabinical leadership changed circumcision to be more radical, removing more tissue roughly around the year 140 A.D. This was changed because Jewish men were stretching their foreskin remnants to totally cover their glanses, in order to assimilate with the dominant Greek society. Greek culture embraced nudity, but saw the exposed glans as indicating an erection, and therefor obscene to show in public.
The only thing I find weirder than couples who date each other for years without getting married are the couples who get married despite never wanting kids. Especially when neither person is religious.
I know some couples like this, and it doesn't make any sense to me at all.
maybe legal reasons like hospital visitation and property assignments or they are still serious about the formality of being committed to the relationship
Yes but then marriage becomes something more akin to a business partnership with negotiated costs and benefits. You gain hospital visitation, tax benefits, etc... You risk unfavorable disposition of communal assets if there is a divorce.
And I doubt any of these couples sat down with a lawyer and/or accountant to do the due diligence one normally would for a comparable business partnership.
Imagine seeing two people happily cohabitating, for an extended period of time, with no contactually obligation to one another, and then thinking “that’s weird”.
I'm with my girlfriend (3 year relationship now) because she's amazing and we complement each other in so many ways. We're considering children but it seems like it's not a must for either of us right now. I don't know man, she's incredible and that's why I want to be with her. Everything else is a bonus.
Even if you remove the religious aspect from consideration, it ignores the primary benefit for monogamy: to provide a more stable environment for procreation and rearing of young.
Otherwise why not just do what Leo does: catch at 18, release at 25?
Well the religious aspect is what turned it from "serial monogamy" into "committed." From simply being together until it no longer benefits, into a sealed deal until death.
Because if it was only for raising young, there would be little point at remaining together past 55~ when nearly all possible children are fully grown.
The OP in this fictional story is a garden variety simp, and he got what he deserved, as all simps should. No man should do anything for a woman that he would regret if they broke up. This is 100x more true when the girl is the more assertive one.
This isn't an anti-circumcision post.
Maybe your intention isn't, but the screenshotted post is 100% a fake story and anti-circumcision propaganda. You should always assume 100% of TIFU stories are fake, anyway, that whole sub is a creative writing LARP.
I don't know why some men are so fucking obsessed with opposing circumcision, but they are. It's a really weird phenomenon. Personally, I think it's because they feel deeply insecure about the fact that women see uncut dicks as less aesthetically appealing, and when it comes to men and feeling insecure about their dicks, it's practically a psychosis.
Going online and ranting about how circumcision is evil is their cope.
The exact moment I left the MRA movement for good is when the MRA podcast I listened to defended bronies saying that society hates sensitive men or whatever. I couldn't abide by it anymore.
Yes, that is retarded, as is the identitarianism. But they're right about this truly sick practice.
I don't know why some men are so fucking obsessed with opposing circumcision, but they are. It's a really weird phenomenon.
Absolutely, 'circumcision' is a really weird phenomenon how you Muricans slice off parts from the genitals of babies. Cause no adult would actually agree with it, as you see here.
No wonder that country is so comfortable with "children's hospitals" slicing off the breasts of 13-year-old girls and even castrating minors.
I think it's because they feel deeply insecure about the fact that women see uncut dicks as less aesthetically appealing,
Not women in normal parts of the world. I can't account for the nose-ringed, purple-haired landwhales in America - who aren't used to anything better.
The majority of men who get circumcisions as adults, which is not the same as getting it as an infant, saw it as a positive improvement.
No wonder that country is so comfortable with "children's hospitals" slicing off the breasts of 13-year-old girls and even castrating minors.
Not the same thing at all. Circumcision has been around since the beginning of humanity in prehistorical times. Tranny shit for kids only started to show up in the last few years.
Not women in normal parts of the world. I can't account for the nose-ringed, purple-haired landwhales in America - who aren't used to anything better.
You're clearly one of "them". I've seen many studies on the subject. The vast majority of women everywhere, including in europe, prefer cut dicks. They give superior aesthetics, hygiene, and STD protection as reasons.
You think circumcision is an American thing? We are only average in the world for circumcision rates. Europe is lower, but the jews and muslims and south korea are all higher.
Translation: no one except Americans, Jews and Muslims. Oh, and Korea, if they had a measurable birth rate. Basically, all the most violent places in the world. I wonder if the violence that Americans and Muslims engage in is the product of their childhood trauma.
The majority of men who get circumcisions as adults, which is not the same as getting it as an infant, saw it as a positive improvement.
I'm shocked, shocked that people who voluntarily choose something, are satisfied with it. If you ask most men who slice off their balls, they'll tell you the same thing.
Not the same thing at all. Circumcision has been around since the beginning of humanity in prehistorical times. Tranny shit for kids only started to show up in the last few years.
Who said it was 'the same thing'? I didn't. I did say that there may be a reason why Muricans are so comfortable slicing off the genitals of kids, considering that they mutilate most of them to begin with.
The vast majority of women everywhere, including in europe, prefer cut dicks. They give superior aesthetics, hygiene, and STD protection as reasons.
LOL! Seriously dude. I get that you need to persuade yourself that it's great that others inflicted this on you, but Jesus Christ.
LOL! Seriously dude. I get that you need to persuade yourself that it's great that others inflicted this on you, but Jesus Christ.
It's weird that you're accusing me of coping when I'm not. You're projecting your own coping onto me. You know how I know cut dudes don't cope? Because it isn't cut dudes coming online REEEEEing about circumcision and calling it mutilation, it's uncut dudes like you who - if you weren't coping - wouldn't care about it at all since it didn't happen to you. But since you do feel so strongly about it, the only explanation for that is that you're coping. I don't see you on here REEEEing about all the weird body modification shit they do in africa, because long necked dudes with lip plates aren't stealing yo gurl.
Benefits of circumcision:
superior aesthetics for women, this alone is enough to justify it
superior health outcomes, avoiding various foreskin related medical conditions and illnesses
superior hygiene as the foreskin traps bacteria and promotes infection
proven reduction in sexually transmitted diseases
omg it was done to you without consent
literally everything involving children done for their own good is without their consent, including things like vaccination, education, and eating their vegetables.
You know how I know cut dudes don't cope? Because it isn't cut dudes coming online REEEEEing about circumcision and calling it mutilation, it's uncut dudes like you who - if you weren't coping - wouldn't care about it at all since it didn't happen to you.
You guys are very sensitive whenever the butchery inflicted on your body is criticized in even the mildest possible forms (only place where you still have sensitivity left). I think deep down you know that this is pretty gross and disturbing, but cognitive dissonance won't allow you to accept it.
Now, why do I care? Because I don't like disgusting and cruel practices inflicted on babies. What's more, I don't want to have to look at dried out mushrooms and scars.
The mushrooms have a nice kind of Catch-22. If a mutilated fellow objects, you say: "AHA, you're complaining about your stolen foreskin. lolz frustrated". If a normal fellow objects, you say "why do you even care that we disfigure babies?"
I don't see you on here REEEEing about all the weird body modification shit they do in africa,
I'm REEEEEEing about people who have piercings, because it's just gross and disgusting. How much more would I REEEEEE if they were doing this to babies?
because long necked dudes with lip plates aren't stealing yo gurl.
You're playing with me. No way this is real. This is like a fat guy being told by a guy with a sixpack "lose some weight fatso", and replying "hey, don't be jelly, women LOVE dadbods. Are you afraid that I'm gonna steal your girl?"
Be real.
superior aesthetics for women, this alone is enough to justify it
lol, this is not even true, but thinking it makes you that guy from the Stonetoss cartoon sawing off his legs because he heard "women prefer shorter guys".
literally everything involving children done for their own good is without their consent, including things like vaccination, education, and eating their vegetables.
Or trooning them. Oh wait, you draw the line on mutilation somewhere, which is just as well, but it's a shame that this (like Russia) is one of your blind spots.
You guys are very sensitive whenever the butchery inflicted on your body is criticized in even the mildest possible forms
Not at all. I've engaged in these arguments many times on reddit, and it's always me alone vs like 20 lunatics calling it mutilation like you, even though they all profess, like you, to being uncircumcised.
Why do you care so much? Why do you feel so strongly about circumcision when it didn't happen to you, and the men who it did happen to, like me, think it's great and are glad it happened. You act like my positive attitude towards it is invalid, and you rail at me that I should feel traumatized and victimized. LOL
Honestly, my old explanation for this is that at some point in your life, someone called your dick ugly because you're uncircumcised, and that you became traumatized as a result, so your ego overcompensated by lashing out at circumcised men. "It's not ME who is inferior and defective, it's YOU!!!!!!" so you, and all these other guys who got your dicks trash talked and never recovered, need to do this to validate yourselves and cope with your feelings of insecurity and inferiority.
That's my honest take. I'm not talking shit to make you feel bad, I honestly believe that's what motivates the dynamic at issue here of uncircumcised men railing against circumcision.
(only place where you still have sensitivity left).
Scientific studies have shown that men who received adult circumcisions reported no loss of sensitivity and no sexual problems. So your belief that cut men have less sensitivity is invalid.
I think deep down you know that this is pretty gross and disturbing, but cognitive dissonance won't allow you to accept it.
Please stop projecting. I think nothing of the kind, and if I have a male child, I will 100% have him circumcised. Any responsible parent would.
Now, why do I care? Because I don't like disgusting and cruel practices inflicted on babies.
Bullshit. There is a ton of shit in the world that you don't complain about, and even with female genital mutilation, you don't get worked up like you do about this. Same with all the other guys just like you who insist circumcision is mutilation when it's not. It's no different than getting your tonsils removed, except even better.
What's more, I don't want to have to look at dried out mushrooms and scars.
The overwhelming majority of people find cut dicks to be more aesthetically pleasing. Maybe you're in the minority, or maybe you're traumatized because you ran into one or more persons from the majority who prefer cut, and he/she told you your dick is ugly.
I know men get whole ass complex whenever they feel insecure about their dicks. I'm super happy I've never been insecure about mine, and I have circumcision to thank in part for that.
You know the kind of person who would call circumcised dicks "dried out mushrooms and scars" a traumatized dude who got his dick called ugly trying to cope by lashing out and doing it "back". Sad.
If a normal fellow objects, you say "why do you even care that we disfigure babies?"
You don't care, you're lying to cover up your embarrassing true motives. I know this for a fact because you people don't engage on the merits. You won't even consider that circumcision has been done for generations thanks to medical benefits, superior hygiene, and protection from STDs.
But no, none of you want to consider why circumcision is NOT considered to be mutilation by the vast majority of people. Why? Because you aren't motivated by the merits, you're motivated by the psychological trauma of getting your dick called ugly.
This is like a fat guy being told by a guy with a sixpack "lose some weight fatso", and replying "hey, don't be jelly, women LOVE dadbods. Are you afraid that I'm gonna steal your girl?"
Projection. In your example, I'm the ripped Chad and you're the fatso. How many studies do I need to link you showing that women prefer cut dicks by large majorities? So it's my cut dick that represents the sixpack, and your uncut one representing the fatso. And you're lashing out with "hey, your 6 pack is mutilated by gross gym equipment and you abuse your body! You should go cry and feel bad and regret doing that to yourself!!!" That's you.
lol, this is not even true
I linked you studies proving that it is. You haven't provided any rebuttal evidence, as expected, because this is an exploration of emotional trauma for you.
Or trooning them. Oh wait, you draw the line on mutilation somewhere, which is just as well, but it's a shame that this (like Russia) is one of your blind spots.
If trooning kids provided tons of benefits and no drawbacks like circumcision, things would be very different. But we know the opposite is true. We know John money trooned a kid and that kid and his brother ended up killing themselves. We know trooning kids is bad, and we know kids get trooned not for their own benefit, but instead for their parents to exhibit a libtard virtue signal. It's child abuse.
By contrast, a parent getting their son circumcised is doing the responsible and correct thing.
I seriously despise how circumcision is considered "normal". Outside of medical necessity, it shouldn't be done at all. It should be in the same category as any other cosmetic mutilation.
Imagine mutilating yourself because your girl wants you to. This guy is not only a complete moron but he has some psychological issues as well if he craves affection so much that he did that. And of course she left him, no woman wants to be with a faggot that doesn't stand up for himself.
If you're going to permanently mutilate yourself, at least do something cool like carve SLAYER in your forearm. Cutting off your foreskin over a bitch just makes you a simp.
Shouldnt do it for a wife either. It's sometimes necessary to make sacrifices for your family, but a good wife doesnt ask you for body modification surgery.
As the resident degenerate, if you're looking through porntags, voluntarily getting body-modded for your would-be lover is commonly associated with the tags "humiliation", "moral degradation", "Mindbreak", and "NTR".
It's a weird moral compass, but it can provide solid context to actions, if you think "what would this action be classified as?". Notably, you will NEVER find "wholesome" as a tag alongside "body modification".
The only example that comes to mind is if a couple got tattooed wedding rings because the husband worked with heavy machinery where a physical ring would be a safety hazard.
BFF is a mechanic, and that's exactly what he did. Constantly snagging a ring in tight places, or getting fluids trapped under it meant he was Constantly forgetting his ring at work.
When your go-to is mangled hands and industrial accidents, you know it's a long stretch. But yeah, that is a use.
Imagine snipping part of your dick off in a jewish humiliation ritual just to please a woman. Lmao.
LMAO. I could maybe see it as a possibility if your GF was Jewish and his dad was the CEO of Blackrock or something.
UPDATE2: I just wanted to update you guys. A lot of people in the comments kept asking for her picture, so here it is. I know she might not be everyone's cup of tea, but she was beautiful to me.
UPDATE3: I forgot to mention it, but she actually made a big deal about the doctor giving her my severed foreskin. I asked her what she did with it, and she said she ate it. I thought she was joking at the time but now idk.
Isn't that the woman that crypto guy was in cahoots with?
Haha yeah
The Mathweasel.
lol yes
she definitely looks jewish
If your girlfriend is jewish you have bigger issues
amazing that scores of people who will object to clipping a dogs tail or ears raise no objections to altering a guys junk, even looking at you weird if you draw a comparison.
Same people who object to clubbing a baby seal to death (rightly so), but favor abortion of fully viable infants in the third trimester.
Oh of course the rabbi does it with....his mouth?
except it is mutilation when it's about little children, other than that, no moral judgments. you would call removal of labia from little girls mutilation, why wouldn't you call it mutilation for little boys. are you paid off by the big mohel?
I agree with most of that... but what about circumcising little children?
Circumcision is an issue a lot like Gun Rights; I don’t see how somebody can still be on one side after doing any amount of research. The medical benefits of circumcising children are almost nonexistent outside of a few outlier conditions where the foreskin is improperly developed, and it can lead to ongoing loss of sensation and is unnecessarily traumatic for children.
If you’re in favor or neutral about Circumsision then just watch this : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FCuy163srRc
Eric Clopper is kind of crazy but I guarantee he’ll change your mind.
Whoa. It's two hours.
I've literally got into arguments about circumcision where the other person claimed I don't know how sex works because I mentioned the mechanical benefits of a foreskin despite me having a foreskin and them not. The thought of having been maimed at birth by your parents is not an easy pill to swallow.
They're good people who thought they were making the correct decision, and they were wrong.
Not that hard to come to terms with. By the time men start thinking about this, they should be capable of understanding that their parents are human beings, not infallible.
Well, look what you're offering, and look what you're asking.
As you said, the payment for agreeing with you is that they accept, basically out of the blue, that their parents "maimed them at birth."
What you're offering, the boon and reward, is that they can observe their dick, which they can literally look down upon, tug a bit, and say "Seems fine to me," is actually mutilated.
What's the incentive in this scenario?
That they won't maim their children- or if they already have children that they can advise them not to main their children.
Gotta say, that's not much of an incentive. Like I said, they can literally look down at their own dick, and think about their experiences with their dick, and it's going to be pretty hard to convince them that they're impaired and the people who raised them harmed them grievously. If they have children, they can think about their dick, and how that dick has basically one purpose, which is to produce children; then look back and forth between their dick and their children, then look at you, who's telling them their dick don't work because their parents are monsters, and...
Surely, you see at least a little why this argument ain't working.
Whatever, keep chopping baby dicks for all I care.
this. thousands of years ago, circumcision historically was done for a few reasons...
compared to today's circumstances, if you're not doing it for a serious medical issue, you shouldn't do it.
oh, and some guys get cut so tight, that it literally restricts how big you can get during an erection. assuming you have good blood pressure, and the internal tendon (or whatever it's called) isn't excessively short, your erection can be bigger when you're uncircumcised. i'm not a monster or anything, but a couple of girls have even commented on it... they didn't even realize i was uncircumcised until after i wasn't hard anymore.
It could be argued that it wasn't morally wrong because God asked it of them but could be morally wrong otherwise. Kind of like wiping out Canaanites; generally genocide is morally wrong, but if God tells you to it's morally wrong not to.
Agreed. Assuming that the Bible is a 100% accurate record of human events and God's interaction with those humans, circumcision was a commandment for a very specific tribe for a very specific period of time. It cannot be extrapolated to refer to the whole human race.
It could also have been morally correct in a time where it would improve quality of life and safety, wherein the progression of technology and knowledge has removed those from being the case rendering it simple mutilation with no benefit.
God ain't spoken to us in a long time, his teachings can in fact have become outdated by the passage of time. In fact, its even possible that he has sent people out to argue against it as his new messengers to remove the need for his direct intervention.
And I'm guessing the basic ass knowledge necessary to not die of horrible diseases and untold suffering wasn't considered "need to know." He'd give us all that in cryptic verses like "chop up your dick" and "eat fish, not pork" and we were supposed to just keep doing it cuz reasons after we managed to beat them on our own.
I was just making up arguments about new messengers and outdated to give you an out in which the two can be allowed to coexist. But you seem committed to mutilating children based on nothing but "yeah but my daddy said so, so give me your son!" so fuck you and your religion my guy.
I consider cosmetic mutilation wrong. Nothing else needs to be said. That's all there is to it.
Actually the circumcision that was practiced in Biblical times was significantly different from the form of circumcision that is practiced today. In Biblical times, circumcision just referred to cutting off the part of the foreskin that overhangs off the glans, leaving the glans largely covered. This preserves most of the functions of the foreskin.
The Rabinical leadership changed circumcision to be more radical, removing more tissue roughly around the year 140 A.D. This was changed because Jewish men were stretching their foreskin remnants to totally cover their glanses, in order to assimilate with the dominant Greek society. Greek culture embraced nudity, but saw the exposed glans as indicating an erection, and therefor obscene to show in public.
Here's an illustration of the difference between the forms of circumcision
The only thing I find weirder than couples who date each other for years without getting married are the couples who get married despite never wanting kids. Especially when neither person is religious.
I know some couples like this, and it doesn't make any sense to me at all.
maybe legal reasons like hospital visitation and property assignments or they are still serious about the formality of being committed to the relationship
Yes but then marriage becomes something more akin to a business partnership with negotiated costs and benefits. You gain hospital visitation, tax benefits, etc... You risk unfavorable disposition of communal assets if there is a divorce.
And I doubt any of these couples sat down with a lawyer and/or accountant to do the due diligence one normally would for a comparable business partnership.
Imagine seeing two people happily cohabitating, for an extended period of time, with no contactually obligation to one another, and then thinking “that’s weird”.
I'm with my girlfriend (3 year relationship now) because she's amazing and we complement each other in so many ways. We're considering children but it seems like it's not a must for either of us right now. I don't know man, she's incredible and that's why I want to be with her. Everything else is a bonus.
That's the problem of turning a religious ceremony into a government label and romantic gesture.
It hollows it out into something people do without any real thought about why they do it, beyond bureaucratic benefits.
Even if you remove the religious aspect from consideration, it ignores the primary benefit for monogamy: to provide a more stable environment for procreation and rearing of young.
Otherwise why not just do what Leo does: catch at 18, release at 25?
Well the religious aspect is what turned it from "serial monogamy" into "committed." From simply being together until it no longer benefits, into a sealed deal until death.
Because if it was only for raising young, there would be little point at remaining together past 55~ when nearly all possible children are fully grown.
good, because male genital mutilation is worse.
The OP in this fictional story is a garden variety simp, and he got what he deserved, as all simps should. No man should do anything for a woman that he would regret if they broke up. This is 100x more true when the girl is the more assertive one.
Maybe your intention isn't, but the screenshotted post is 100% a fake story and anti-circumcision propaganda. You should always assume 100% of TIFU stories are fake, anyway, that whole sub is a creative writing LARP.
I don't know why some men are so fucking obsessed with opposing circumcision, but they are. It's a really weird phenomenon. Personally, I think it's because they feel deeply insecure about the fact that women see uncut dicks as less aesthetically appealing, and when it comes to men and feeling insecure about their dicks, it's practically a psychosis.
Going online and ranting about how circumcision is evil is their cope.
There's literally no good reason to support it. Every purported benefit has better alternatives.
Nah bruh, it's literally to save their future children harm. I do not care otherwise; more foreskin for me.
Yes, that is retarded, as is the identitarianism. But they're right about this truly sick practice.
Absolutely, 'circumcision' is a really weird phenomenon how you Muricans slice off parts from the genitals of babies. Cause no adult would actually agree with it, as you see here.
No wonder that country is so comfortable with "children's hospitals" slicing off the breasts of 13-year-old girls and even castrating minors.
Not women in normal parts of the world. I can't account for the nose-ringed, purple-haired landwhales in America - who aren't used to anything better.
You think circumcision is an American thing? We are only average in the world for circumcision rates. Europe is lower, but the jews and muslims and south korea are all higher.
Men were satisfied overall with the procedure (mean satisfaction score, 8.4 out of 10), and nearly all men (96%) and women (94%) stated they would recommend VMMC to others.
The majority of men who get circumcisions as adults, which is not the same as getting it as an infant, saw it as a positive improvement.
Not the same thing at all. Circumcision has been around since the beginning of humanity in prehistorical times. Tranny shit for kids only started to show up in the last few years.
You're clearly one of "them". I've seen many studies on the subject. The vast majority of women everywhere, including in europe, prefer cut dicks. They give superior aesthetics, hygiene, and STD protection as reasons.
"There was a strong vote for the circumcised penis as looking more attractive, even in populations in which MC is not the norm." & "Overall, most women expressed a preference for the circumcised penis. Such a preference was seen in most populations regardless of MC prevalence in that population. Reasons expressed for this preference included better appearance, improved hygiene, reduced risk of infection, and more pleasurable sexual activity."
Translation: no one except Americans, Jews and Muslims. Oh, and Korea, if they had a measurable birth rate. Basically, all the most violent places in the world. I wonder if the violence that Americans and Muslims engage in is the product of their childhood trauma.
I'm shocked, shocked that people who voluntarily choose something, are satisfied with it. If you ask most men who slice off their balls, they'll tell you the same thing.
Who said it was 'the same thing'? I didn't. I did say that there may be a reason why Muricans are so comfortable slicing off the genitals of kids, considering that they mutilate most of them to begin with.
LOL! Seriously dude. I get that you need to persuade yourself that it's great that others inflicted this on you, but Jesus Christ.
It's weird that you're accusing me of coping when I'm not. You're projecting your own coping onto me. You know how I know cut dudes don't cope? Because it isn't cut dudes coming online REEEEEing about circumcision and calling it mutilation, it's uncut dudes like you who - if you weren't coping - wouldn't care about it at all since it didn't happen to you. But since you do feel so strongly about it, the only explanation for that is that you're coping. I don't see you on here REEEEing about all the weird body modification shit they do in africa, because long necked dudes with lip plates aren't stealing yo gurl.
Benefits of circumcision:
superior aesthetics for women, this alone is enough to justify it
superior health outcomes, avoiding various foreskin related medical conditions and illnesses
superior hygiene as the foreskin traps bacteria and promotes infection
proven reduction in sexually transmitted diseases
literally everything involving children done for their own good is without their consent, including things like vaccination, education, and eating their vegetables.
You guys are very sensitive whenever the butchery inflicted on your body is criticized in even the mildest possible forms (only place where you still have sensitivity left). I think deep down you know that this is pretty gross and disturbing, but cognitive dissonance won't allow you to accept it.
Now, why do I care? Because I don't like disgusting and cruel practices inflicted on babies. What's more, I don't want to have to look at dried out mushrooms and scars.
The mushrooms have a nice kind of Catch-22. If a mutilated fellow objects, you say: "AHA, you're complaining about your stolen foreskin. lolz frustrated". If a normal fellow objects, you say "why do you even care that we disfigure babies?"
I'm REEEEEEing about people who have piercings, because it's just gross and disgusting. How much more would I REEEEEE if they were doing this to babies?
You're playing with me. No way this is real. This is like a fat guy being told by a guy with a sixpack "lose some weight fatso", and replying "hey, don't be jelly, women LOVE dadbods. Are you afraid that I'm gonna steal your girl?"
Be real.
lol, this is not even true, but thinking it makes you that guy from the Stonetoss cartoon sawing off his legs because he heard "women prefer shorter guys".
Or trooning them. Oh wait, you draw the line on mutilation somewhere, which is just as well, but it's a shame that this (like Russia) is one of your blind spots.
Not at all. I've engaged in these arguments many times on reddit, and it's always me alone vs like 20 lunatics calling it mutilation like you, even though they all profess, like you, to being uncircumcised.
Why do you care so much? Why do you feel so strongly about circumcision when it didn't happen to you, and the men who it did happen to, like me, think it's great and are glad it happened. You act like my positive attitude towards it is invalid, and you rail at me that I should feel traumatized and victimized. LOL
Honestly, my old explanation for this is that at some point in your life, someone called your dick ugly because you're uncircumcised, and that you became traumatized as a result, so your ego overcompensated by lashing out at circumcised men. "It's not ME who is inferior and defective, it's YOU!!!!!!" so you, and all these other guys who got your dicks trash talked and never recovered, need to do this to validate yourselves and cope with your feelings of insecurity and inferiority.
That's my honest take. I'm not talking shit to make you feel bad, I honestly believe that's what motivates the dynamic at issue here of uncircumcised men railing against circumcision.
Scientific studies have shown that men who received adult circumcisions reported no loss of sensitivity and no sexual problems. So your belief that cut men have less sensitivity is invalid.
Please stop projecting. I think nothing of the kind, and if I have a male child, I will 100% have him circumcised. Any responsible parent would.
Bullshit. There is a ton of shit in the world that you don't complain about, and even with female genital mutilation, you don't get worked up like you do about this. Same with all the other guys just like you who insist circumcision is mutilation when it's not. It's no different than getting your tonsils removed, except even better.
The overwhelming majority of people find cut dicks to be more aesthetically pleasing. Maybe you're in the minority, or maybe you're traumatized because you ran into one or more persons from the majority who prefer cut, and he/she told you your dick is ugly.
I know men get whole ass complex whenever they feel insecure about their dicks. I'm super happy I've never been insecure about mine, and I have circumcision to thank in part for that.
You know the kind of person who would call circumcised dicks "dried out mushrooms and scars" a traumatized dude who got his dick called ugly trying to cope by lashing out and doing it "back". Sad.
You don't care, you're lying to cover up your embarrassing true motives. I know this for a fact because you people don't engage on the merits. You won't even consider that circumcision has been done for generations thanks to medical benefits, superior hygiene, and protection from STDs.
But no, none of you want to consider why circumcision is NOT considered to be mutilation by the vast majority of people. Why? Because you aren't motivated by the merits, you're motivated by the psychological trauma of getting your dick called ugly.
Projection. In your example, I'm the ripped Chad and you're the fatso. How many studies do I need to link you showing that women prefer cut dicks by large majorities? So it's my cut dick that represents the sixpack, and your uncut one representing the fatso. And you're lashing out with "hey, your 6 pack is mutilated by gross gym equipment and you abuse your body! You should go cry and feel bad and regret doing that to yourself!!!" That's you.
I linked you studies proving that it is. You haven't provided any rebuttal evidence, as expected, because this is an exploration of emotional trauma for you.
If trooning kids provided tons of benefits and no drawbacks like circumcision, things would be very different. But we know the opposite is true. We know John money trooned a kid and that kid and his brother ended up killing themselves. We know trooning kids is bad, and we know kids get trooned not for their own benefit, but instead for their parents to exhibit a libtard virtue signal. It's child abuse.
By contrast, a parent getting their son circumcised is doing the responsible and correct thing.
I seriously despise how circumcision is considered "normal". Outside of medical necessity, it shouldn't be done at all. It should be in the same category as any other cosmetic mutilation.
Wait, is this Imps origin story?
Nah, Imp is a chad. A paranoid sigma chad, but a chad nonetheless. This is the actions of a beta.
Nah. Imp would guard his foreskin with his life, and rightly so.
Bugger probably has it in a safety deposit box somewhere so Melinda gates can't vaccinate it or something
That might be the nicest thing you've ever said about him.
Surprised our resident mgtow expert hasn't commented on this yet.
Yeah, get your ass in here, Antonio.
Me? What do I have to do?
laugh at this simp.
harder.
Imagine being such a SIMP to think this would be OK to do even for a wife.
Imagine mutilating yourself because your girl wants you to. This guy is not only a complete moron but he has some psychological issues as well if he craves affection so much that he did that. And of course she left him, no woman wants to be with a faggot that doesn't stand up for himself.
Damn, her friends must be idiots if they don't know how to clean a dick
Bet she's the type who argues on bodily autonomy for women concerning the subject of abortion.
If you're going to permanently mutilate yourself, at least do something cool like carve SLAYER in your forearm. Cutting off your foreskin over a bitch just makes you a simp.