Congrats on the penis. What a trouser truncheon! A long lighthouse. A dazzlingly dominant dick. An awesome appendage. A cromulent cock, an underpants serpent, a mammoth member, a giant joystick, a wondrous wang, perfect pocket rocket, dramatic dangler and a towering tool.
I didn’t make a claim either way. I just said the OP’s claim was unfounded, and it is unless and until they provide a study that backs it up.
You literally wrote that directly above
And top notch denial of axes to grind, positioning yourself as neutral whilst criticizing others.
You're fucking lying that you don't have a viewpoint when you're up and down this thread demanding scientific studies from people who are sharing the experiences of themselves and people they know, and all of your "innocently neutral requests for scientific studies" are on one side of the debate and not the other.
It's hypocritical, disingenuous, dismissive, dehumanizing and a logical fallacy that anyone with a different viewpoint to you has to have scientific studies backing up every point they make. It's a shitty and vacuous debating technique.
Maybe, just maybe, the people in this thread who remember having a foreskin and don't now (or whose friends have talked to them about that) have the most insight into what difference it makes to have a foreskin, and you could try respecting their opinion rather than demanding scientific proof that their experience is universal.
I dislike people who throw shade at others for not providing scientific studies whilst not providing any scientific evidence whatsoever to back up their own contrary view.
If I had boys, there's no way I would agree to them being circumcised at all, but you need to know that FGM is much, much worse than circumcision. Most circumcised men can perform happily sexually, but need lube to masturbate. Not so women who have endured FGM.
There are 4 main types of FGM:
type 1 (clitoridectomy) – removing part or all of the clitoris
This is the equivalent of removing the glans or dickhead. Its purpose is to remove pleasure from sex.
type 2 (excision) – removing part or all of the clitoris and the inner labia (the lips that surround the vagina), with or without removal of the labia majora (the larger outer lips)
Includes 1
type 3 (infibulation) – narrowing the vaginal opening by creating a seal, formed by cutting and repositioning the labia
This makes sex very painful. There isn't a deliberate equivalent for men, but men with severe phimosis also experience pain. Phimosis is usually treatable without surgery, and even after surgery (circumcision) sex is pleasurable. Paraphimosis is an urgent medical emergency where the foreskin is trapped behind the glans, cutting off blood supply, but no one is doing phimosis or paraphimosis to people deliberately.
other harmful procedures to the female genitals, including pricking, piercing, cutting, scraping or burning the area
I.e. botched, deliberately or accidentally.
So...
The normal outcome of circumcision, "I wish wanking were easier" isn't the same as the normal outcome of FGM, "I wish sex wasn't traumatisingly painful".
Pretending that circumcision is as bad as, or equivalent to FGM, or even that they're bad for the same reason, REALLY undermines your case to the point of making you look heartless or ill-informed.
You're right. I think it works better because it's more consistent and poetry benefits from an economy of words, elimination of waffle, distillation to the most concise expression, particularly with haiku. But more than anything, it benefits from being poetic, which your version does, thank you:
Alien spaceship,Eerie light and booming voice:“SHOW ME THAT BUTTHOLE.”
Credulously believing anything you see because somebody made it look pretty is not the same as learning or critical thinking.