I don't think that female and male circumcision equate.
I am not an anatomist but it seems that when a female is circumcised there is a much greater reduction in pleasure potential than when removing a foreskin. Isn't the primary way for a female to experience orgasm with the clitoris? I've heard of vaginal orgasms, but being gay, I know very little about female sexual function.
Circumcised males can still experience very powerful orgasms. Trust me on this.
Every woman that I have ever discussed this with prefers a circumcised partner, with a single exception, who said she was indifferent. And some of these women responded to the idea of an uncircumcised penis very negatively.
And when it comes right down to it, I think that uncircumsized penises in general are just downright ugly and/or stupid looking. If I had a son I wouldn't want him walking around with one. What other parts of the male outer body can switch from unexposed to exposed and return again to being unexposed? Kind of like a jack-in-the-box.
It seems to me that anti-circ people in general are a bunch of emotionally childish self-absorbed "wounded" whining cry babies who need to find something really important to be concerned about in their lives.
It's just another fringe issue for places and populations like San Francisco, which is truly an open mental ward.
It's not the penises with foreskins that are ugly in here.
It's your attitude, and the attitude of the women you talk with.
Are there any other body parts you have this kind of prejudice against?
Perhaps something really ugly, like an ear?
Some female circumcisions, a large percent, are removal of the clitoral hood, which is exactly like a male circumcision.
I think you could use some emotional maturity, myself.
A more secure person would be less defensive, and not indulge in name calling.
I think that half the skin on someone else's genital is an issue worth discussing. If it was a woman, you wouldn't be comparing the questioner with a mental patient. Or, would you?
The 3 billion men that have foreskins, and the mates who play with them, don't find them ugly, or stupid, or anything less than enjoyable.
If it wasn't for men with foreskins, you, RedDude, would not exist.
Circumcision has been around maybe 5,000 years. Men with foreskins around 4.7 million years.
You might want to reconsider some of that unfortunate stuff you let run through your head. It doesn't have much connection with the outside world.
I'd wager that most of the kids who died from their circumcisions, or were, unlike you, wounded for life with hidden penis, skin bridges, or meatal stenosis, would disagree with you.
I never once doubted a circumcised man could have a powerful orgasm. Thanks to this place, and a childhood friend, I've seen a couple.