In my limited experience with these kinds of internet discussion boards, it seems like this topic comes up with unexpected frequency. There is a vocal, determined, but tiny group of individuals who believe that this is a big deal -- even going so far as to advocate "foreskin restoration"
for those who have undergone this procedure. A2K has certainly not been immune: this topic has been dealt with at length at least once in the past (click here
I'm not sure what motivates people whose sole interest seems to be debating the merits of infant male circumcision (in the previous thread, it was keviesmum
who joined A2K for the single purpose of registering opposition to circumcision), but I have a theory: they are either (1) men who have a sexual or even fetishistic interest in foreskins; or (2) women who have an obsessive concern over saving babies from everything
. Granted, those are gross generalizations based upon a limited sampling, but I haven't seen anything to dissuade me from those conclusions, and that includes what I've seen so far on this thread.
It has also been my limited experience (purely from second-hand reports) that men who have been circumcized later in life, after having been sexually active, report little difference in the quality of feeling or sexual performance. As for the health or esthetic aspects of the issue, I remain largely agnostic. Indeed, the only thing that I find at all interesting in this discussion are the motivations of those who participate.