Thursday, September 19, 2013

My response to Jill on "How intactivists are ruining the debate on circumcision"

Jill in declares that intactivists are ruining the debate on circumcision - while acknowledging some important points about the fight for genital integrity of minors.

I appreciate that you admit that there should be a discussion over male circumcision. In fact, my belief is that there should be an integral debate on the issue of genital cutting of minors (males, females, intersex). Genital cutting is not a matter of gender, it's a matter of control, it's a children's issue.

Mark Joseph Stern says in the text you quoted: "None of intactivists’ cornerstone beliefs are based in reality or science". I'll give you facts that he can't deny:

* Circumcision damages or completely removes the frenulum. This is important because circumcised males who still retain their frenulum, and even intact males, consider it to be their "g spot". Those males who had it damaged or removed have lost their "g spot".

* Circumcision removes the ridged band. The ridged band was described by John Taylor, Canadian Pathologist, as a "intensely vascular" and "richly innervated" which "appears to be an important component of the overall sensory mechanism of the human penis".

* Circumcision restricts the skin mobility of the penis. This has been noted by circumcision promoters as well. This is important because the mobility serves a mechanical function, that is to allow the foreskin to glide over the glans during sex.

* Circumcision allows for gradual keratinization of the glans. This has been noted by circumcision promoters and opponents and is documented in encyclopedias. Whether the keratinization (hardening and drying) of the surface of the glans has an effect or not on sexuality is a different matter, but the phenomenon itself is objectively verifiable.

These are facts that are rarely discussed by circumcision promoters and apologists, such as Mark Joseph Stern, who appears to have a personal bias for circumcision. One clear demonstration is that you won't find the words "frenulum", "ridged band", "mobility", "keratinization", "Meissner" and not even the word "condom" in reference to HIV prevention, in the totality of the AAP's Technical Report on Circumcision.


  1. Foreskin feels REALLY good. Legal foreskin amputation alters sex dramatically. It is NOT true that clitoral hood nicking (illegal) always alters sex dramatically. It is NOT even true that rape (illegal) always alters sex dramatically.

    Why does this Jill have to insist that only her pet issue (already illegal on 94% of the planet) is important? What mental defect allows such lack of compassion?

  2. Speaking from my intact female experience, comparing intercourse with a circumcised male to intercourse with an intact male is like comparing an eight track tape to an iPod.