I need help for a debate

[drnmd1216]

This person in this mainstream site just posted info from these sites proving her side to be the true one. This debate is looney. She is saying that we intactivists were making up the sexual functions of the foreskin; pleasure is only derived from the glans you know. : I can't even begin to get into her "arguments" but one of her biggest is telling me that my son will have psychological damage from being made fun of. ANYWAYS, she posted the "truth" and "allegations we make" from this site, and I am wondering if anyone has any info on them so I can debunk them. She has copied a lot from the site, especially in the section "Setting the Record Straight", the Myths and the Lies.

Thanks for any help anyone has!

http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/index_home_new.html

[Revamp]

That tactic is easy but effort-consuming to defeat: you just run a point-by-point refutement of everything that these articles claim.

That takes a while and it can be pretty exhausting but the more thorough you are the more she has to defend the lies and misinformation herself, which (considering she C&Ped it rather than post her own words up) she is unlikely to be much good at.

[drnmd1216]

Well the thing is, I did. This is her way of refuting all my "lies". Its just exhausting to go through it all yet again, but hopefully I will get a second wind tomorrow!

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by drnmd1216

Well the thing is, I did. This is her way of refuting all my "lies". Its just exhausting to go through it all yet again, but hopefully I will get a second wind tomorrow!

Perhaps a good idea would be to divide efforts: she is trying to bog you down with pre-formulated misinformation so simply post up some Mother article extracts of your own to counter them, letting the lurker read both sets of information and see which they believe or refute them point by point using that wind then go on the offensive.

Acting constantly in the reaction is not a stance you really belong in: she is the one advocating slicing up genitals after all.

[Quirky]

Originally Posted by drnmd1216

This person in this mainstream site just posted info from these sites proving her side to be the true one. This debate is looney. She is saying that we intactivists were making up the sexual functions of the foreskin; pleasure is only derived from the glans you know. : I can't even begin to get into her "arguments" but one of her biggest is telling me that my son will have psychological damage from being made fun of. ANYWAYS, she posted the "truth" and "allegations we make" from this site, and I am wondering if anyone has any info on them so I can debunk them. She has copied a lot from the site, especially in the section "Setting the Record Straight", the Myths and the Lies.

Thanks for any help anyone has!

http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/index_home_new.html

Ask her where her peer-reviewed studies published in a legitimate scientific journal are.

Then post the Taylor articles from the British Journal of Urology. You can find them at www.cirp.org. They describe the structure/anatomy of the foreskin, including the ridged band. One of them states explicitly that the glans is no more sensitive than the heel of the foot in terms of its ability to distinguish fine touch.