After all, that is the cultural punishment here and doesn’t kill them.
Trivial measures won’t change a thing.
Especially while the media is taking tax revenue to oppose you.
And other forces opposed to your life increase national debt.
The leeches become ever more bloated, but I guess don’t look at them?
And circumcision has always been barbaric. The prepuce has an evolved function, in both sexes, where is Dawkins when you need him?
Especially barbaric in light of the 60s, impairing a future adult’s pleasure should be a sue-able offense. The religions admit this is the reason for it. The purpose is to reduce sexual function. If they did that with any other organ, they’d be arrested.
And sexual satisfaction studies are very clearly that both men and women prefer the body the way Nature intended.
Sexual activity can be good for the body, that doesn’t justify rape.
The inept American lover, blindly and angrily “banging” things, is globally mocked due to lack of sensitivity.
Yes, you are less of a man, literally. Anonymous women and gay men don’t lie about this.
Could it be a major cause of American divorce?
Could you track patriotism and circumcision rates? Stranger connections exist.
“I’ve never had any complaints” say the worst lovers. Nobody bothers! They just don’t want you long-term. They throw him back into the single pond. These men have no idea how women actually work.
Women manage to keep everything clean.
Soap is cheaper than impotence, ED and paraphilias. Paraphilias in particular can be very costly, why, you can even break out in handcuffs.
There is no such thing as an “uncircumcised man” either, America, there is a normal, natural man.
The linguistic benchmark is the control group. We don’t reference tooth decay with unfillinged person!
Mutilated men are often (read, sarcasm: always) dry, too deep (cervix slammers) and “need” lubricant to account for their disability. The lack of natural slip actually increases infection rates on ALL counts, contrary to propaganda. Imagine fucking sandpaper.
Castration would also prevent the “spread of HIV” better than circumcision, if you want to be pedantic.
Arguments aren’t one-way streets. One disease is not any more or less important than the rest or overall health. First, HARM NONE.
What’s one percentage of flesh to another? Loki’s Wager.
The foreskin is a component of the structure called penis, so to remove the whole thing is no more evil.
If you allowed circumcision done on condition the adult child could sue their parents, that would be fine.
If any other adult harmed them, they could sue. Why are parents exempt?
Circumcision is correlated with plenty of mental issues later on and this was known way back in the Victorian era (Freud was sex-obsessed for a reason). The 20th century has taken a physical approach to what is psychologically scarring.
And totally ignored issues of consent, the right to physical integrity and sexual pleasure, not to mention a child’s freedom FROM religious imposition. The fact it matches their parents shouldn’t matter. It cannot be undone once they’re 18.
Christians don’t do it for a reason. It scars you for life. Literally.
What’s next, branding?
Ironically, (anecdotal, I know), Jewish men are so neurotic about their perceived impotence, they are almost always prolific adulterers, to feel better psychologically. The stoning punishment was also Biblical but eerily, they don’t want to enforce that… Naturally, they’d want to impose this limit on ALL men to 1. feel better personally and 2. make the prospect of another option impossible.
You see the same thing in ugly women trying to kill anything good, beautiful or pure in other women.
Judaism expressly warns the men not to allow their women anywhere near the intact. The stuff’s that good. Irresistible.
For those who objected to the title –
Is castration more barbaric than rape?
We already pay for castration on the NHS. I didn’t see any opposition with the procedure.
The worst rapists make their way to an area of easy pickings.
The European system essentially pays them to rape.
The purpose of welfare was a bribe to stop all crime.
Please, hold your sides.
They are in violation of their terms and hence, it should be stopped too.
What is the incentive?
There are two components – 1. welfare from a system none of their ancestors died for (you didn’t build that) and 2. no deterrent from the worst of crimes. This is better than the systems of their home countries (death). It’s a sound compromise. If they don’t like it, they are free to go somewhere else, we have a stringent culture of penal codes that made Vlad Tepes look like a kiddy with a bundle of twigs. We have a right to that strict culture (it’s our culture!) for defending those who harm the innocent. It’s the essence of liberalism.
Removing the eyelids would entail many of the same medical risks as these and we’re horrified by that.