I’m cut, and like it that way. But your position is flawed.
If you believe in evolution then you can agree that foreskin exists for a biological function, right? It’s not about hygiene, that’s dogma. It’s wild that it’s based in religion originally because if ‘god’ made you in his image it’s pretty fucked up to immediately alter a baby to be different.
It’s funny when people assign the term ‘negative’ to anything they don’t want to hear about.
You don’t have to read anything you don’t want to. Move on if you don’t have anything to contribute
So I actually have no dog in this fight but I read this
If you believe in evolution then you can agree that foreskin exists for a biological function, right?
Counterpoint: that was before “pants.”
Good question though, most of the animal world has retractable peni, why’d we lose that ability? Now I’m curious.
Also, shouldn’t the religious oppose it because it is fucking with “God’s creation?” Frankly them supporting it seems like flawed logic to me.
No, mutations are mutations, they have no purpose, some are beneficial and are prioritized by evolution.
So you’re saying we lost retractable penises “just because?”
Cause I looked into it, and it seems that since we walk upright there’s less of a chance at scraping it on the ground, so we can trade dicksheaths for extra room in our hips which would likely help moving around on two legs, which makes sense.
Let’s note here that evolution doesn’t care for “functions” or “utility” as much as it cares for “reasons”. We won’t be the first nor the last animal to get screwed in a shitty trade-off that natural selection deemed necessary. Humans are notorious for being born far more defenseless than most other mammals - evolution forced it upon us because otherwise our larger heads would kill far too many mothers.
It was originally the Jewish convent with God. Idk why I was sliced, but it became common in the U.S.
