I don't have a problem with the question. I think it is just an interesting intellectual exercise, helps us think about our reasons for our positions. Of course there is no "right" answer, it's just to make you think.
I would choose intact. At least FF babies are FED.
Here's another perspective I thought of: on the one hand, circ'd babies are actively assaulted and harmed outright so maybe that is worse than passively being denied the benefits of BF. BUT otoh, parents who circ for "health reasons" do so because they really believe it is for the child's best interest, while those who can't be bothered to breastfeed make that choice knowing they are NOT doing the best for the child. So when viewed by the end results you could say the permanent loss of a body part is worse than potentially worse health, but when viewed by the intent of the parents it is`worse to choose to do something you KNOW is not good for the child than to do something your trusted doctors and family told you is really good for the child.
I breastfeed because it is a child's birthright. I don't believe I do it for any selfish reasons. There are benefits I get such as convenience and reduced breast cancer risk (but unfortunately NOT weight loss like everyone said would happen
) but I view those as side benefits and not reasons to bf in the first place. I would still bf even if it were more inconvenient, costly, painful for me and harder than ff. Because the child deserves it whether or not it is easy or beneficial for me.
But I would cut off my own breasts (and find another way to feed the babe) before I would cut off part of my baby's body.