Run To Win [Not Done]

12345678900987654321234567890987654321234567890+09876543234567899876545679987654567i765434567543456543234567654567865456787654567876545678765456785445678955678945678o

theres fuck

Heres

What circumcision takes away
The foreskin is at the heart of male sexuality. Circumcision almost always results in a diminution of sexual sensitivity; largely because removing the foreskin cuts away the most nerve-rich part of the peni.s (up to 80% of the peni.s’s nerve endings reside in the foreskin) [1]. The following is amputated with circumcision:

-The Taylor “ridged band” the primary erogenous zone of the male body. This unique, highly specialized and exquisitely sensitive structure is equipped with soft ridges designed by nature to stimulate the female’s inner labia and G.-.spot during intercours.e
-The frenulum, the highly erogenous V-shaped tethering structure on the underside of the head of the peni.s
-20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings of several types, which can feel slight variations in pressure and stretching, subtle changes in temperature, and fine gradations in texture
-Thousands of coiled fine-touch receptors called Meissner’s corpuscles, also found in fingertips.

Not only is a staggering amount of nerve tissue lost in circumcision, even further loss of sensation occurs in the glans after circumcision. Since circumcision deprives the glans of its protective mucous membrane, the glans dries out and is left unprotected against external abrasion. To shield itself from the pain and discomfort of abrasion, it keratinizes, forming a tough, harder outer surface that buries the nerve endings of the glans deeper under the surface and renders them less sensitive to touch. Studies now show, [2] as does the empirical evidence of men who undergo circumcision as adults, a reduction of sexual sensitivity in circumcised men, compared to their intact equivalents.

Most importantly, circumcision renders a peni.s dysfunctional. Circumcision removes 30 – 50% of the skin of the peni.s including the complex double layer of the foreskin, most of the nerve-endings (found on the foreskin), the mucosal inner lining of the foreskin, and part of, or even in some cases the entirety of, the frenulum. As one might expect after such a significant amputation, a peni.s subject to such interference cannot function normally ever again. Many adolescents circumcised at birth experience painfully tight skin upon erection, simply because there is not enough skin left after circumcision to allow proper expansion to occur. Furthermore, many circumcised men find their level of sexual sensitivity diminishes drastically as they age. Isn’t the foreskin a useless flap of skin? Not only is the foreskin integral to natural penile form and function, it is the primary sensory tissue of the peni.s that is half skin, half mucosal tissue, and all of the male G-.spot.

If circumcision is so terrible, then why do many doctors still perform or recommend circumcision?
It has to do with systemic ignorance with the human foreskin. Anatomy books throughout the 20th century described the foreskin in one sentence: "the prepuce covers the glans," in spite of groundbreaking research in the 1990s that undeniably demonstrates the highly erogenous qualities of HuFo. Urology books devote many pages to obscure infections, but circumcision is often granted only a paragraph or two, meaning the most popular surgery in the United States is granted only 4 sentences! (11) That is because circumcision is not medicine, it started as a blood sacrifice and continues to this day through misinformation, ignorance, subjective beauty standards, tradition and fear.

Even the very premise of this question is flawed. Not only would most doctors in the world never perform an involuntary circumcision, they are righteously appalled that a so-called "civilized" nation would perform this on their young. There is, however, a vocal minority of doctors in the US who vehemently defend and promote circumcision. The cultural biases of these doctors and their incessant need to justify their own circumcisions are painfully obvious to the objective observer and formally documented by an extensive panel of multi-national physicians. (12)

Some of the widespread myths that are used to justify circumcision:
It’s cleaner. It’s a useless piece of skin, It's aesthetically nicer, It's painless and quickly forgotten, Everyone does it, It reduces risk of cancer, It decreases the risk of STDs and HIV, It’s an important tool in the fight against AIDS, It is enlightening to realize that many of these myths are not similar, but identical to the justifications used to rationalize the excision of sexual tissue from females in parts of Africa.
HuFo puts to rest these ever-changing justifications for this millennia-old blood ritual, originally serving as a sacrificial rite, then later a deliberate and outspoken campaign to blunt male sexuality and deter masturbation. (1) (2)

The good news:
Some circumcised men can recover up to 80% of what they lost through foreskin restoration depending on the severity of their circumcision. The term "foreskin restoration" can refer to any method of recreating a facsimile of a foreskin (prepuce) to cover the head of the peni.s(the glans), for men who have lost their original foreskin due to circumcision. This can be done by surgical means, or non-surgically by gradual stretching (tissue expansion). Most resources on the Internet are focused on non-surgical restoration.