Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nantoz
I find it somewhat amusing that you first curse your "Victorian" mindset and then arrive at precisely the same faulty conclusion as the people of the Victorian times did - namely that the foreskin is a requirement for masturbation. That very sentiment was much of the reason for the increase in male circumsision in Victorian Britain.
As I can testify to, masturbation without a foreskin is quite doable.
A survey of 1410 men in the United States in 1992 actually ound that circumcised men were more likely to report masturbating at least once a month.
http://www.circs.org/library/laumann/index.html
http://www.circinfo.net/#cultures has some interesting remarks about the historical reasons and practices of circumsision.
But why people perform subincisions or genital bisections - that is quite beyone me. Ask Vampy... |
whether it is successful or not is of no interest to me.
I was only curious as to why such a seemingly odd mutilation of the human body came into being all those milenia ago