False comparison. Shaving pubic hair cannot compare to cutting part of someone's **** off. Female circumcision is more comparable.

Seeing as women don't actually have anything to be cut off, I'm afraid you're claiming there is no comparison. And seeing as you don't actually remember it if it was done as a child, wouldn't that be a reasonably accurate comparison? I'm not trying to be "insensitive," if that's how you're seeing it. I just sincerely do not understand why men are so unbelievably protective about this.

First off google "female circumcision" because you obviously do not know about it. Also, would be okay for me to cut off a baby's finger because they won't remember it? No. The "well he won't remember it" argument is retarded.

Also, you can't understand why guys get protective about cutting part of their penis off? What if I cut your clit off? Really now.

Oh my god! Chill the **** out! This is absolutely ridiculous, you're making an ass out of yourself by clearly trying to act as though you are superior to me. I'm sorry I'm not aware of all of the circumcisions available. I'm 15, you stupid piece of shit. I'm not all-knowing, but I'm not a complete idiot. God, I try to ask a question and I end up having some hot headed bastard attack me for it. I'm sorry if you were circumcised when you were a child and now you have some ridiculous notion that you were scarred by it. However, if you're just someone who strongly believes that circumcision is a bad idea, then you clearly have no actual reason for freaking out on me. Regardless of the basis of your opinions, you obviously had no interest in actually answering my question. All you wanted to do was say what you thought and then stubbornly refuse any "retarded" responses. You are such an unbelievable dick. And your belief that cosmetic surgery is similar to circumcision is just as retarded as my statement that at least young children won't remember it...and I can't help but wonder how many circumcised men think they were violated just after they were born.

One difference is that hair grows back if you shave it. If you realize that you don't like being bare there, it's not really a huge biggie to grow it out again. I think it's fine for people to do whatever makes them feel comfortable with regards to grooming *down there*... But it's a bit much to tell someone that they need to go cut off part of their dick. I would never ask that of a partner and I would NEVER stay with someone who insisted that I get a female circumcision (I don't want to go into detail but I cringe just thinking about it). I hope that answered your question at least a little bit. =)

you stupid guys are ridiculous! She asked a question she wanted answered she didnt want ya'll to complain about "your pride" If every guy was cut no guy would even know to complain so grow up and next time answer a question instead of just being a child and taking pity on yourself!

Plenty of reasons people can feel mutilated by it and be extremely "well founded". Foreskins keep the head of the penis from callusing causing a huge loss of sensitivity. Also the foreskin itself provides lubrication. Foreskins were removed in archaic times due to unfounded fears about "too much masturbation" etc. Female circumcision IS possible. By removing a section of the clitoral hood a woman experiences the same drop in sensitivity that men do with their penis from such a procedure (ie. they also have the same issues feeling pleasure men get that cause them to grow insensitive to contact). If you are unwilling to circumcise your daughters, I suggest you rethink doing it to your sons.

foreskin is gross, and so is having a big flappy ******

Wow, #166, you just showed everyone how ignorant you really are. A ****** is a hole, a tube of sorts, so it cannot be "floppy". What can be floppy are the LABIA, which make up the vulva... learn some anatomy! Besides, if you're never experienced a woman with beautifully formed large lips, YOU'RE MISSING OUT! Hhhmm, I'm getting wood just thinking of eating out some flabby lips.

"uh, circumcision is cosmetic surgery. theres no health benefit from it, any evidence otherwise is speculative." There's someone posting articles on here from the NY Times about how it does help. I'm not saying that's definitely the truth, but I don't think there's any reason to completely overlook the information posted in that article. "if you can see no difference between cutting off a part of your body and cutting your hair i am guessing you see no difference between getting your haircut at a salon and getting your face tattooed." I'm. Not. Saying. That. I get that there is a difference. You obviously can tell that I'm not mentally challenged in anyway, seeing as if I was, I assume that you wouldn't be such a bastard while trying to tear apart my posts. That would just be...well, I don't even know. I've never had the displeasure of talking to someone as terrible as that. The point is, I get that there is a difference. I'm not trying to say that there isn't, I'm trying to COMPARE the two of them based on their positives and negatives. I did not understand how they are any different in that respect with the exception of the fact that hair can be regrown. Circumcision can lead to problems, as can the shaving of pubic hair. That's all I'm saying. "you could have done your research, they couldnt, but THEYRE the stupid ones for not knowing something. lol" On a side note, HE could have found out my age if HE'd really been dying to do their research, not that I completely blame HIM for not doing so. You, however, seem to be under the impression that there was no way in hell my age could have been discovered...but you're wrong...look at my profile...and next time, do your research before saying something untrue immediately after calling someone retarded for doing that exact thing. Or at least learn that there's such thing as a profile. I'm going to guess that you were unaware of this, since you keep referring to the exact same person as "they" when they're obviously a man. Really, such a fail (and that's related to the attacking me hypocritically more so than just your general lack of research) . I would call you retarded, but I find that's an offensive term for people who actually have mental disabilities. So using it against me is only reasonably acceptable, simply because I clearly have no problems (with the exception of my apparently detrimental age). You, however...well, maybe I'll just call you "a hypocrite with clear anger management problems and possible underlying mental issues."

hey, umm, about your original question... I believe that it is simply a matter of taste. Some women preffer clean cut men, others like it whole. and I don´t think it is disgusting when a woman has pubic hair. As long as she keeps it clean and nicely trimmed it should be allright ^^

Regarding the NY Times, if you honestly are going to dismiss something that has the potential to prove you wrong, then that's not my problem. If you'd rather live in ignorance and refuse to believe that something that you don't like DOES have benefits, well, I can't say I particularly care. But if you go after me because of this, I am going to defend myself. "yes, i refer to people as 'they'...and your point? could have checked, didnt, how it makes this a fail is unclear. id like to actually counter this argument, but its so ridiculous i really dont know where to go with it." You and I both know that you failed in this case. I mean, come on. Are you not the exact same person who called me retarded because I "failed to do my research." You could have checked. But you didn't. I mean, most people have the common courtesy to find out the gender of the person you are talking to (as a side note, any intelligent high school graduate could tell you that using 'they' to refer to a single person is incorrect grammar. Just for future reference). You didn't find this point ridiculous, or at least that wasn't why you "refrained" from responding. You just didn't know how to counter it. "one has negative side effects, the other doesnt. unless you consider itching a major side effect in the same league as loss of sensitivity, possibility of complication and scarring." Disease. Yeast infections. Strongly advised against by gynos. Yet again, you fail to do your research. Leave me alone. I asked a question. I am not pro circumcision and it seems that the only way I managed to offend you was by loosely comparing circumcision and shaving. And the fact that you are so aggressively opposing me (yes, calling someone retarded is aggressive) is either humorous or annoying. Mostly just annoying. But as I said before, I'm going to defend myself.

I'm being completely sincere when I say this, you're boring the **** out of me. I think that my question was a legitimate one. You need to stop being a tool. You keep doing the exact same thing. "She says something and I adopt a high and mighty attitude about it and try to make whatever she says seem pointless." Of course, your response to that is going to be "because everything you say is pointless, retard." But I can't be bothered to care about what you think at this point. I still think that shaving and circumcision were reasonable to compare. Nothing you say will change that so why don't you just stop?

GDinNJ, if you are in fact 15, I'd like to compliment you on your well-above-average grasp of the English language and I encourage you to be a proud example of literacy among your peers -- to the extent you can pry them away from their silly fads and force their faces into books.