What are the negative effects of male circumcision...

Implicit memory plays a huge role on how children react to stress and how adults deal with stress.
When your first "memory" is being taken away from your mother and having part of your genitals removed, it's sure to cause some sort of PTSD

>The reduced sensitivity thing is not from any credible source.

The muco-cutaneous junctional region of the foreskin has been shown to be the most sensitive part of the penis. Its removal inherently reduces sensitivity, because sensory tissue from the penis is permanently removed. Once sensory tissue is removed, you can no longer feel normal sensation in that tissue. The foreskin is not just a covering for the penis; it is an integral part of the penis with a highly specialized pattern of innervation.

See the videos I posted in as well as Sorrells et al's "Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis" (BJU International, Vol 99: pp 864-869, April 2007). Like Cold and Taylor's "The prepuce", it is available as a free pdf.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x/full

>The only actual study I know of found no difference between the two groups in terms of sensitivity by being able to feel various stimuluses on the penis.

Are you talking about Bossio et al's study from last year, "Examining penile sensitivity in neonatally circumcised and intact men using quantitative sensory testing" (Journal of Urology, Vol 195, Issue 6, pp. 1848–1853, June 2016)?

You can read their study here:

jurology.com/article/S0022-5347(15)05535-4/fulltext

Bossio et al's 2016 study was riddled with serious methodological flaws such as an underpowered sample size, a non-representative pool of subjects, the fact that they didn't test the prepuce's mucocutaneous junction, and the absurd assumption that penile pain was more important to sexual sensation than fine touch perception.

A thorough critique of that utter mess of a study was presented by Earp: "Infant circumcision and adult penile sensitivity: implications for sexual experience" (Trends in Urology & Men's Health, pp. 17-21, July/Aug 2016).

It is also available as a free pdf.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tre.531/epdf

You probably have a sexual disorder of some sort. Men who are and aren't circumcised have similar levels of sexual satisfaction.

The glans penis has a very low level of sensibility to all but coarse stimuli like extreme heat, scraping, and heavy pressure. Some think the glans is like a male clitoris, and although it is the embryological homologue of the glans clitoridis, in sensory terms they are not equatable.

The five most sensitive parts of the penis with respect to the perception of gentle stimuli are all parts ablated (or at the least mangled) by circumcision: The cutaneous tissue of the outer foreskin, the smooth mucosa of the inner foreskin, the frenulum area, the lips of the foreskin, and the ridged band.

I was circumcised as an adult for medical reasons and I can confirm there is definitely reduced sensitivity. You can still feel everything touching the glans but it is a less intense feeling. In some ways it is almost beneficial since before my circumcision certain rougher sex acts would be painful and now they are not. But in other ways I miss the intense feelings bordering on pain.

to add, inside of foreskin itself is quite sensitive so I do miss that sensation

That was the study and I was not aware of the flaws. Thanks for the info user I appreciate it.

It sands away a lot of your upper dick sensitivity. This naturally leads to myriad (potential) issues. We don't like confronting this topic in the United States since we may as well be Muslims with how deeply this practice is culturally rooted.

Circumcision reduces sensitivity in the same way cutting your finger off reduces the sensitivity of your hand. Removing a part of a whole, reduces its sensitivity. The foreskin further has many specialized nerve endings (similar to the lips), and allows certain mechanical aspects to be possible.

Put another way, I'm uncircumcised, and there are parts of my dick that feel a certain way when certain things are done to them. If those parts of my dick weren't there, they couldn't feel any way, and nothing could be done to them. Their sensations would be lost. I would not be able to feel it, and my sensitivity would be reduced. That's just how it is.

Circumcision literature is almost inherently non-credible. Talking through "studies" is unnecessary, people exist with foreskins. You can literally just ask.

I think you misunderstand. Most of the head of my dick was cut off. Well, skinned off that is. The last 1/3 of it is all scar tissue. All the way to the tip.

This brings to mind MKUltra Monarch programming, which was a derivative of the much older trauma based dissociation and compartmentalization training methods. Generally, the method requires trauma before the age of 3 to induce dissociative tendencies. Then in a formalized setting if an individual is being trained, they're repeatedly subjected to various traumas coupled with triggers until their personality begins to splinter apart, at which point they can be bonded to their handler and further architectural work can be done on how these separated states of consciousness will function.

Very interesting. I'd never made that connection. You look at how easily controlled the US is, perhaps that initial trauma is part of it. Have to think about it.

>There's literally nothing I can do about it
Find a good lawyer and sue your parents

You're welcome!

((( )))

Yeah, I was thinking just that. After getting all the new info, I started correlating lots of other things and circumcision was just one of them. Either by design or accident, it all adds up to major fuckery right down to the DNA level of the individual.