I think the anti-circumcision people really do their side some negative things when they say "mutilation", I don't find it offensive or anything but it is kind of excessive hyperbole, and it's exactly why circumcised males usually do take them seriously. The thought process beings "Oh man I'm not mutilated, these people are nuts who don't have a clue what they're talking about." Even worse and what actually IS offensive is the comparison to the actual mutilation of girls that happens in some places in Africa and the Middle East (not that I've seen that here, but I have in other places, implying the two are even remotely comparable is quite disgusting.)
It's better to just focus on the consent issue than scream "OMG BABIES ARE BEING MUTILATED!"
It's still mutilation, but I will admit it's not as bad as what is done to those girls. Female circumcision ruins sex for them, while male circumcision just makes it less pleasurable.
Is their any evidence for this in the form of a man that was circumcised in adulthood, and can therefore compare before and after?
Poll
