The HIV argument is another deception to compound all the
deceptions that went before. MGM appears to reduce per-intercourse F->M HIV transmission by about 60%. That’s it. 40% of the time it doesn’t work.
What is missing from this discussion, aside from the fact that the foreskin includes the primary erogenous zone of the male body
and was specifically designed to desensitize the penis by rabbinical
scholars and quack medical doctors?
And so can be expected to increase sexual promiscuity and help to spread HIV
Clearly what is missing from the HIV argument is MGM’s impact on
M->F transmission. There is compelling empirical and experimental
evidence that MGM increases M->F transmission rates by more than enough to have a net effect of increasing overall transmission
rates. This is due to increased vaginal abrasion, which compromises
the very effective HIV barrier presented by intact vaginal epithelium.
The USA has the highest divorce rate, the highest HIV rate and the
second-highest MGM rate in the industrialized world. Is this a
coincidence? I doubt it.
Furthermore, it turns out that FGM has a similar effect on female
receptivity to HIV as MGM has on male receptivity.
This is probably indicative of the similarity of the tissue-type
and extent of loss caused by both types of atrocities.
Finally it should be pointed out that our so-called professional
medical organizations have a long history of such deceptive
pronouncements wrt MGM, which has been promoted as a “remedy” for everything from masturbatory insanity to clubfoot to doctor-caused problems like forcible foreskin retraction leading to phimosis and UTI’s. As each of these bogus arguments has fallen a new one is found. This pattern can be readily seen to reflect their enormous fear of being exposed for the child abusers and marriage wreckers that they are.