Should you get your foreskin removed?

Answer 1

No, the frenulum has a lower chance of being torn if it is left intact after a circumcision if you think it can be torn regardless. The frenulum is the most erogenous zone of the male body, the removal of it is an abomination. If you remove the frenulum, you destroy the male's ability to have the amount of pleasure he would normally have.

Circumcision should be done only a as LAST RESORT. Circumcision in general reduces sensitivity and removes perfectly healthy tissue. If a male has phimosis, then other methods may be used, circumsision is not necessary. It violates human rights and mutilates the penis. It's just a no brainier: if you are pro-unnecessary circumcision, you are a psychopath.

Answer 2

there is no reason to have the foreskin removed. First of all there is no medical reason for it except under very rare circumstance's. The foreskin protect, improves and makes the penis a better unit from both a sexual and physical perspective. circumcision is a religious rite and has never been necessary for any practical or health purpose. Les the 20% of the worlds men have been subjected to this form of mutilation and most of these for religious or cultural reasons. It is interesting to note that the regions where this originated from also have millions of women with mutilated genitals.

Answer 3

sometimes, it all depends on how much damage the doctor decides to do

Answer 4

I would, because I would be afraid of the frenulum breaking and bleeding all over the place.