Originally Posted by pdx.mothernurture
I am so sick of this justification. "Well, my husband feels plenty and if he was anymore sensitive sex would be over in minutes." or, "<Giggle> Well, for women, a man being a little less sensitive isn't necessarily a bad thing."
The very first people I ever opened up to about my "dissatisfaction" at having been circed (I didn't reveal how badly it had really affected me) responded exactly like that. I could have taken it as their attempt to make me feel better except for the way they phrased things. It came across as very demeaning. It haunts me to this day. I didn't open up again to anyone about circumcision for at least a year after that.
The idea that someone ought to be allowed to permenantly deprive me of sexual pleasure for the sake of someone else's sexual pleasure is atrocious to me, and I get fumed at comments like those more than any others. At least the other arguments--while misguided--are more oriented toward benefits to the guy. But treating the guy's penis as nothing but an instrument for women's pleasure is extremely demeaning, belittling, and horrifying when taken to that extreme.
like the idea of the penis being an instrument of pleasure for women--don't get me wrong. But I hate it when it's treated like that's all
it is, and thus should be carved up to women's specifications.
I cannot even begin to describe how terrible and angry comments like that make me feel.
Having read through a bit more of the thread, and noticing ilovetiger's comments, I have a couple of things to say:
1) ilovetiger: My assumption is that most of the discussion going on here is less about intactivism, and more about discussing personal experiences and current research related to circumcision that is interesting and topical.
2) ilovetiger: If my assumption is wrong (which I doubt it is), I find some of this discussion at least a little distasteful simply because using women's pleasure as a real argument either for or against circumcision is--again--treating men's penises as tools for women, rather than as a body part that belongs to the owner. I have no problem with women's pleasure as a discussion point, but I do have trouble thinking of it as a point of argument for intactivism simply because the heart of it seems totally misplaced for such a purpose. It is for that reason that I assume this is just experience sharing and discussing current research that is interesting and related to circumcision. The women here--in my experience--are all very compassionate and recognize the heart of the issue, which is the rights of a person to their own body.