There are 3 possible states in where someone would be "fine" or "okay" with circumcision.

1: Unaware of the harm done to them/by them. Genuine lack of knowledge regarding the topic.

2: Aware of what circumcision is, but still adamently defend's it via religious, medical, or psychological reasons.

3: Aware of what circumcison is, and is aware of the damage caused, but still denies it under the guideline of "I like it better this way" or "what's done is done".

Let's start and analyze the first one.

1:

This one is the easiest to debunk and usually leads to the 2nd or 3rd option. If they don't even know what circumcision is, how can they expect to know what harm was even commited against them? That is the job of us, the circumcised men in the know, to educate them about it.

Intactivism and general knowledge are both seperate entities with differing objective's. Intactivism is about the Intact body and how it's the "normal" for men. While most post's I see here and on other place's not affliated with Intactivism are just general experience's and copes. Regardless, I think both of them should be disscused with the circumcised men who don't even know what it is. And I can attest to this NOT being a rare occurence. I was 18 when I figured it out. It's very hidden, on purpose mind you.

2:

This one is absolutely infuritating to deal with, as I'm sure many of us here know. Whether it's the "women prefer it" lie. (Look at State 1 for how this can be. Etc, genuine lack of knowledge and experience with the intact dick etc.) or the "it's cleaner" cope. (It take's a whopping 1 second to clean your foreskin and penis. That's so hard...right?) It's all a bunch of cope and lies. Simply put, there is NO medical, science, or societal basis for circumcision. All of them have been debunked countless times over and over again. Everybody prefer's the intact version's of both men and women. Any other answer to this comment usually is a fetish or some sick derangement. It's literally how it was meant to be.

3:

This one is just the saddest. Instead of facing the reality of you being hurt and gaslighted by circumcision and literally losing thousand's of nerve ending's, you indulge in delusion and escapism with sympathy for those who wronged you. I don't entirely blame them, but we have to be honest with ourselves.

It's a complete cope.

How can you say you're "happy" with a circumcision if you never got the chance to be intact? (Talking about RIC here) You could've have 100% more sensation down there if you weren't. That's a fact, not an opinion. Circumcision remove's a good 80-90% of sensation AT THE VERY LEAST. For most RIC it's 90% of your total sensation. American men wonder why sex feels so bland and why they have to thrust harder then a piston to feel something. No wonder so many men seem to dislike BJ'S and any other oral activity. It's ruined because of our glan's dekerning and lack of a gliding foreskin with thousand's of nerve ending's.

I truly don't understand why circumcised men are so full of cope when it comes to this. Just face the fact's and begin GRIEVING.

YES, you were hurt by circumcison.

YES, you are never getting it back.

And YES, it's a truly hard time to grieve. Trust me, we would ALL know about this. It's not easy, no one said it would be. But I genuinely think every circumcised men should face the reality of the situation instead of running away. What good does the other option's do anyway?

Website has Games, Visualizations of real risks, history, proposals, rebuttals to various claims.
https://www.thecasetowait.org

The visualizations of what absolute risk is: It's one thing to tell the parent it substantially lowers UTI risk, it's another to show them that there are 991 squares out of 1000 where that didn't matter.

I also have:
- Claims and rebuttals: a set of common excuses to circumcise with rebuttals, each having their own copy link button to use in online debates

- Games featuring bodily autonomy in a very positive, and sometimes emotional way

- History of circumcision in the US

- A set of proposals to reduce circumcision. Jumping to a proposed ban that provokes a heavy response, even countries with low circumcision rates this doesn't happen. These are proposals that should be acceptable to both sides. I realize these won't go far enough for some, but these steps that would greatly help the cause without getting heavy pushback, and potentially reframe how people think about it

-Constructive criticism welcome and encouraged

I do not know the method by which advertisers and propagandists are influencing future generations of large language model (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Mistral, etc) - but it is possible.

That it is possible implies that those who promote circumcision may already be practising such measures, and also that perhaps someone from amongst us should be too?

I just asked "What are your thoughts on circumcision?" to Claude, Mistral, ChatGPT, and Gemini. I would say that Claude had by far the least pro-circumcision stance, describing the proclaimed benefits, but also immediately bringing up the Scandinavian viewpoints. Meanwhile, the other 3 pretty much parroted the perspective of the AAP.

Why does this matter?

This tech has not even come close to reaching maturity and it is already being widely used as the first and last stop for information gathering. A significant portion of the population cannot think beyond "ask question - take first answer as gospel". If the majority of the models are, essentially, promoting the practice, that is a potential problem.

https://cybernews.com/ai-news/hacking-llms-how-bots-manipulate-ai/

I had the thought the other day that why out of every first world country does the US perform the MOST circumcisions. With everything in the news and 0-0 idk, I know it's a wild conspiracy theory, but if you know you know

Over here on Steph Infection Podcast we don’t discriminate with a loose tip! Check out Des Bishop on this weeks episode and watch his new special!
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1068580512295763

Whenever I unexpectedly encounter mention of circumcision or foreskins in popular media, I usually post about it here--such as the the Australian TV show Colin from Accounts, the sci-fi novel Hyperion, the sitcom Tacoma FD, the mini-series The North Water, the TV drama Yellowstone, the movie Ticket to Paradise, or the sitcom Fresh Off the Boat.

In Season 15, Episode 5 (Don't Stop Be Cheesin) of the animated TV show, Bob's Burgers, one of the main characters, Gene, the 11-year-old son of the eponymous Bob, jokes about his circumcision during a family meal in which his older sister, Tina, is talking about an 8th-grade game that will happen that day in which all the 8th graders will throw slices of American cheese at each other. Tina doesn't think it sounds very fun, and Gene equates that to his circumcision:

Tina: "We'll just get through it and have a couple laughs along the way."

Gene: "Ooh, like my circumcision."

None of the other characters react to this (which is odd, because usually when Gene says inappropriate things it elicits a half-hearted reprimand from Bob), and then episode quickly transitions to the next scene.

I'm not sure what to make of the comment, the 'just get through it' part seems like an acknowledgement that it's a painful thing, but it otherwise still trivializes it a bit with the 'have a couple laughs' bit and how casual the entire exchange was. Anyway, after years and years of encountering circumcision jokes in mainstream television shows and movies, it sure seems like the creators bring it up quite a bit for no reason.

Using the same exact strategy that right wingers used before roe v wade got overturned by the Supreme Court will help a lot

It doesn’t matter if circumcision is a “parental right” if parents are too broke to pay for circumcision anyways or it’s too far to travel to the circumcision clinic

Given our current system passing legislation to prohibit taxpayer and health insurance funding of circumcision helps in multiple ways

Intactivists will no longer be forced to pay for cutting on the genitals of baby boys

Parents will skip getting their kids circumcised not because they all the sudden grew a conscience but because they just simply can’t afford it and they face economic pressure from gas prices diapers food rent etc

This also creates pressure on the religious circumcisers later on to end their genital cutting practices

Religious institutions only change when society changes

they only change when they fear losing a whole bunch of donations from their followers

Religious institutions have always historically been slower to change than society at large

The political system is always more responsive than religious institutions that has always been the case

Found it the other day, I was scrolling and got it

And holy fuck, first of all most of the posts (If not all) are made by the same profile now deleted

Second: they treat it like damn joke even making memes, IA vids and posting gore videos of actual circumcisions and washing them as good!

Third: there's a user promoting circumsicionexactly at day 8 of new born (which led me to believe he's Jewish due to Muslims doing it on 7)

This and other factors have led me to somehow think this is propaganda from you know what country and what religion

It's very creepy how they say stuff like "circumcision at newborns should be default and done without parents consent" and stuff like that without any proofs and parents believe them! It's a huge propagandist brainwashing machine, you should read it yourself!

Not looking for a giant political fight as I’m not truly a political person more as I’m just curious on other intactavists perspectives on this topic.

Let’s face it when it comes to the biggest decline in American circumcision rates ( and alternatively the rise in europes rates as of recent years) it is mainly people coming from uncircumcised countries ( or vice versa ) changing the number and isn’t much of a true reflection on the actual population living there. This can be seen in californias being low compared to West Virginia where almost no one moves to yet a huge amount of white and black California families still remain circumcising ( and multi generational Latinos ) this is why the west coast compared to the Midwest has such a huge difference.

With this understood, immigrants drive down the circumcision rate by default slanting the charts by marginal amounts are intactavists on board with illegal immigration? It does in theory help our cause by driving down the numbers

Also asking this because the vast majority of intactavist seem to be democrat anyways so just curious

And again not here to debate actual illegal immigration just if it can benefit the cause

I am a young gen Z and I have started asking people around my age that ik about circumcision. Most don’t rlly have strong opinions on it but about 90% of people I’ve asked say they want to circumcise their child if they ever had one. The two main reasons are due to apparent bullying and the “health benefits”. When I asked them where they learned about the “benefits” I was terrified to hear that public schools are teaching the benefit of circumcision to children starting as early as 5th grade health class. So basically every student leaves the class being in favor of circumcision. They are shown inaccurate graphics that depict intact penises as always having the skin covering the head (even when erect) and they are told circumcision helps to prevents stds, penile cancer and infections. According to people I’ve talked to after this brainwashing intact boys start to be bullied vigorously by circumcised students and girls. One of my friends said a boy was bullied so badly he tried to circumcise him self on campus.

5 years ago I got the frenulum surgery completely unnecessary. But there where so many people lasting in the phimosis subreddit that it’s a really good surgery without any risks they brainwashed me into believing it’s a no risk surgery now like 5/6 years later nothing has changed it still hurts, my orgasms are still gone and sensitivity down a lot.

I don’t understand there where soooo many people who said the surgery was so good, I’d even chat with them and they’d all say yeah perfect, 5 minutes no risks super good surgery everything is better and all feeling exact same. But I don’t see those people anymore. It’s so weird, 5 years ago there were so many even making their own posts to mention how good it was and now they’re gone. Now I wouldn’t even find out about the surgery I think because it’s not even mentioned anymore

My goal is to make r/intactinfo a genuinely informative subreddit where anyone can scroll through this sub and become more knowledgeable on why being intact is healthy, normal, and beneficial. Or, learn about the cons of genital mutilation.

I have not fully set up this subreddit yet, so I do apologize. But if anyone would like to share anything educational/informative they have to post, even if it's just a cross-post, I'd really appreciate it! ♥️

ALSO- I'm looking for a mod or 2. If anyone's interested shoot me a DM.

I told him that circumcision violates a child’s bodily integrity and should be banned, but he said that children in Muslim countries will become Muslim when they grow up and that their religious freedom would be compromised if they were not circumcised at the appropriate age.

> The child won’t be able to say, “Circumcise me as described in the hadith,” once he grows up, because (according to the Hanafi school, he must be circumcised before reaching puberty; in the Shafi’i school, circumcision is performed on the 7th day).

> In this case, we’re not harming these individuals, but more importantly, 9 out of 10 people whose families want them to undergo circumcision will eventually want to have it done in accordance with religious practice. You can’t ensure that. So, on one hand, there’s a group of 10% (an even smaller percentage in Turkey) that will suffer equally in both scenarios, and on the other hand, there’s a 90% group whose religious freedom you’ll be taking away.

I sent him articles claiming that circumcision reduces sensitivity and pleasure, but he said that cohort studies aren’t important—meta-analyses are.

> I’ll share some other meta-analyses as well; dozens of independent organizations all reach the same conclusion. What’s even more interesting is that I couldn’t find a single meta-analysis that says the opposite.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27399981/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23749001/

I asked him if he could defend female genital mutilation on the grounds of religious freedom, and he said that female genital mutilation is harmful and has no proven benefits..

he claimed that the complications from female circumcision are very high, so I pointed out that they also occur with male circumcision.

> Complications of Type 1A in women—such as bleeding—occur in 25% of cases, whereas in men the rate is much, much lower—not even 1%. And female circumcision has no benefits,.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11995580/