Darth Misogynus
Not a story the feminists would tell you
★★★
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2024
- Posts
- 243
I would say circumcision is a gorillion times crueler. It does nothing to your sex drive, but instead destroys 70-80% (depending on how tight the cut is) of your sexual nerves and sensitivity. It leaves you with an itch you can never scratch (and restoration doesn't bring back all of the sensitivity, out of 10, at best, you can go from a 2 or 3 to a 6), visibly scarred genitalia, and a life of trauma. The only "benefit" (unless you are a devoted follower of the shit Talmud or pædo Koran) is saving a few seconds in the shower,
Meanwhile, castration gives you a much better voice, and the castrati had a virtually guaranteed life of fortune and fame. Castrated before puberty (so their voices never changed), they never developed a sexuality, so instead of having an itch they could never scratch, they didn't even feel they were missing out on anything. Think back to when you were in kindergarten and had no sexual desire. Did you feel you were missing out on anything? That's how they were their entire lives, and they had great voices from it. Far less cruel than circumcision.
Meanwhile, castration gives you a much better voice, and the castrati had a virtually guaranteed life of fortune and fame. Castrated before puberty (so their voices never changed), they never developed a sexuality, so instead of having an itch they could never scratch, they didn't even feel they were missing out on anything. Think back to when you were in kindergarten and had no sexual desire. Did you feel you were missing out on anything? That's how they were their entire lives, and they had great voices from it. Far less cruel than circumcision.