[Tyberius]

Originally Posted by TheIckyMan ↗

Oh well, ad hominem attacks will always be the sign of a weak argument.

You don't have arguments hahahha. You see this is where your ignorance shows itself the most.

You make statements that you can't back up with any real proof.
You are not qualified to call FGM equal as male circumcision. You're neither a doctor, or a scientist.
You're just another guy who think he is smart and his opinion matters.
Back up any of your previous statements with studies made by respectable universities, doctors, professors, organizations; and then your "arguments" will carry some weight.
Until then you are what i just called you, a trailer trash troll hahahha.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by TheIckyMan ↗

Ah yes, petty emotional outbursts in lieu of an objective, logical argument. Thanks for providing pictures that basically resemble ritual male circumcision.

What is hard to understand? he/she put their point across in laymans terms so your average retard could understand it, that was obviously lost on you.

[Rfneimad]

I never really thought about male circumcission that much until now, but seeing this crap made me realize its all child molestation in one way or another.
PSA #1: Don't touch children's junk for any reason other than life saving stuff.
PSA #2: Shoot the people who keep insisting on it because they are too fixated on childrens genitals.

[Shelbeano ^-^]

Originally Posted by TheIckyMan ↗

You said female circumcision provides no benefits where the male equivalent does (re: hygiene). Barring the fact that the AAP says "there is little evidence to affirm the association between circumcision status and optimal penile hygiene," why would one sex be affected and not the other?

I never said one sex would be affected with more or less uncleanliness in their areas, simply stating that's why we circumcise males in the US. I am not denying that some women's lady bits are dirtier than others, but they are easier to clean because we don't have a foreskin in the way.

[TheIckyMan]

Originally Posted by tyberius ↗

You don't have arguments hahahha. You see this is where your ignorance shows itself the most.

You make statements that you can't back up with any real proof.
You are not qualified to call FGM equal as male circumcision. You're neither a doctor, or a scientist.
You're just another guy who think he is smart and his opinion matters.
Back up any of your previous statements with studies made by respectable universities, doctors, professors, organizations; and then your "arguments" will carry some weight.
Until then you are what i just called you, a trailer trash troll hahahha.

I never called them equal. Please read more carefully. These were my claims:

- FGM is mostly done for the same reasons as circumcision. I provided a graph from PATH and cited WHO's and UNICEF's reports.

- About 15% of FGM includes infibulation. This number can be easily verified by any source you look at (e.g. Guttermacher Institute) via search.

- I disputed Shelbeano's comment regarding hygiene, citing AAP's position on the subject. She went on to explain herself, and I commend her for her articulate response.

[TheIckyMan]

Originally Posted by Shelbeano ^-^ ↗

I never said one sex would be affected with more or less uncleanliness in their areas, simply stating that's why we circumcise males in the US. I am not denying that some women's lady bits are dirtier than others, but they are easier to clean because we don't have a foreskin in the way.

Then it appears I misunderstood you. However, a vulva has roughly 2-3 times the volume of a male prepuce, so I still dispute your claim.

[Shelbeano ^-^]

Originally Posted by TheIckyMan ↗

Then it appears I misunderstood you. However, a vulva has roughly 2-3 times the volume of a male prepuce, so I still dispute your claim.

That's fine, I encourage it. If you can provide information to help me out, I appreciate it.