Members Riobard Posted 18 hours ago Members Posted 18 hours ago 8 hours ago, unicorn said: Interestingly enough, I couldn't find a scientific study of gay men's preferences! However, this meta-analysis looked at studies of women's preferences, and there have apparently been quite a few of them, mostly including cultures in which male circumcision (MC) is NOT the norm. This meta-analysis put together the results of 29 studies: https://academic.oup.com/smoa/article/7/2/145/6956488 "... Cultural differences in preference were evident among some of the studies examined. Nevertheless, a preference for a circumcised penis was seen in most populations regardless of the frequency of MC in the study setting... Women’s preferences generally favor the circumcised penis for sexual activity, hygiene, and lower risk of infection. The findings add to the already well-established health benefits favoring MC and provide important sociosexual information on an issue of widespread interest...". A substantial proportion of uncircumcised MSM indicated a hypothetical willingness for circumcision uptake in the event that HIV transmission risk would be mitigated. The inquiry was posed given that noncircumcision is considered to inflate the relative odds of transmission. Circumcision willingness may depend on subsequently accessible protective factors but openness to trade off foreskin for personal and collective health is notable. Some may had also caught an eyeful of some of the daunting wellness-dismissive trolls, you know, those with the stated entitlement, troll-dolled up as preference, to compromise short- and longterm health for the sake of a developmentally immaturely constructed arousal boost. Cue the pathetic boos and hisses. Losers are as losers do. Otherwise, it is true that there are no data that depict any particular trend related to MSM partner selectivity based on circumcision status. Keithambrose and floridarob 2 Quote
PeterRS Posted 5 hours ago Author Posted 5 hours ago 14 hours ago, Riobard said: First a pool therapy club with gossamer water wings craning for a gander at the lifeguard they’ll never have, cut or not. Now a poorly packaged misogynistic circle jerk floating in its own incontinence. Idiotic comment! Ruthrieston 1 Quote
PeterRS Posted 5 hours ago Author Posted 5 hours ago 20 hours ago, unicorn said: (2) that those who are against circumcision stop promulgating factually false information. If there are, indeed, 3 billion uncircumcised men on this planet, then 300,000 young boys died for that reason, and tens of millions had serious childhood urinary tract infections as a result. I won't entertain cosmetic opinions in what, one would hope, would be an intelligent discussion. False Information? Tell that to all the non-American countries which have or are considering banning circumcision apart from for religious or cultural reasons. Their findings are based on false information? What nonsesne you spout! And clearly you do not read earlier posts. Yet again you state ridiculous "facts" which you state as fact. You have absolutely no idea how many boys died as a result of not being crcumcised - not one shred of evidence. You guess! You equally have not the faintest idea how many die during or as a result of the operation itself. Since you are a fan of statistics, one study estimates that 1.3% of male neonatal deaths in the USA from all causes occur as a result of botched circumcisions. In 2022 there were 1.88 million male births in the USA. That results in 24,400 deaths. Fact! Then look at the numbers in The Philippines where admittedly it is a cultural issue and boys are willing to be circumcised but only becauseof tradition and all their schoolfriends are. They do not want to be "different". Although not a cultural issue, the same was true in South Korea where boys at school felt 'different' if they were not circumcised because of the influence solely of American doctors. Without that American influence, circumcision is likely to have remained virtually unknown in that country. And the introduction of circumcision occurred in the immediate post war period long before many of the official studies quoted earlier were conducted. Lastly, the rate of circumcision is declining in the USA largely as a result of mass immigration of peoples for whom circumcision is not practised- those from Chinese speaking, South and East Asian, Spanish and other nations - who make up 15.8% of the US population. What are you doing to encourage these peoples to go against their natural traditions? As those immigrant boys mix with their American friends, more Americans will see that circumcision is not the universal truth they have been led to believe. Ruthrieston 1 Quote
floridarob Posted 4 hours ago Posted 4 hours ago 28 minutes ago, PeterRS said: , the rate of circumcision is declining in the USA largely as a result of mass immigration That will be a reversing trend 😏 PeterRS 1 Quote
Members unicorn Posted 4 hours ago Members Posted 4 hours ago 32 minutes ago, PeterRS said: ...Since you are a fan of statistics, one study estimates that 1.3% of male neonatal deaths in the USA from all causes occur as a result of botched circumcisions... What an outrageous, insane lie. What's the link to the study? More anti-circumcision BS, once again. Quote
PeterRS Posted 4 hours ago Author Posted 4 hours ago 12 minutes ago, unicorn said: What an outrageous, insane lie. What's the link to the study? More anti-circumcision BS, once again. I am giving up trying to reason with one who will not listen to reason. And no doubt you feel the same way - although you are almost totally wrong! 😵 Ruthrieston 1 Quote
Members unicorn Posted 45 minutes ago Members Posted 45 minutes ago 3 hours ago, PeterRS said: I am giving up trying to reason with one who will not listen to reason. And no doubt you feel the same way - although you are almost totally wrong! 😵 I provide actual scientific facts, with links to actual data, and you counter with a preposterous lie! Shameful! You should get in bed with @Moses. You two deserve each other. 🤮 Quote
