female circumcision (NOT female genital mutilation)

Just to clarify, this is not a discussion on FGM. It is a given that removal of the clitoris, infibulation, or any other such involuntary mutilation is a horrid, despicable practice that needs to be stamped out.

Based off of a similar thread from the Impregnorium with a slightly different air. Apparently, there is elective female genital surgery beyond labiaplasty. There are procedures that remove the clitoral hood and outer labia to permanently expose the clitoris and inner labia, thus making them more exposed and accessible, in addition to the constant stimulation of them rubbing against undergarments.

What do people think about this? Personally, while the idea of a woman actually being like a hentai nymph-ready-for-sex-at-the-drop-of-a-hat is very erotic, the gradual desensitizing of the clitoris and labia are not worth it. [a woman I've spoken with has said that her constant arousal has necessitated the perpetual wearing of panty liners/Depends, and the soft texture is easy on her exposed erogenous flesh]

Discuss

say what? that's kind of weird... but i bet men would like it... i certainly don't... i don't want to get aroused just by wearing underwear...

I think that if the girl would like to be able to get aroused by just wearing underwear then it's her desicion. I personally don't care.

Weird, my fiend's telling me that it's when they remove the clitoris and sew the vaginal hole... o-o

Two completely different things.

Or is that mutilation?

I used to think so but these elective surgeries are redefining the term circumcision when applied to women. Female Genital Mutilation and infibulation still apply to the disgusting desecration that some Musilims and Africans still practice.

It's not worth it, for one reason - desensitivity. Well, that and the fact that it costs money to do that. That money could buy a lot of shoes and yaoi.

At least, that's this man's perspective.

I don't understand why women get their nipples and clits pierced for the same reason. It will feel great for a while, but then you'll lose feeling in the area, and you'll be worse off. Then again, no one could stop me from jerking off all the time, even though if I only did it once or twice a week, it'd feel much better.

WE HAVE A WINNER, FOLKS.

either this could be the downfall of the said procedure or it can be beneficial... to couples, yes, this could be of help building a good relationship but if this is just for personal satisfaction of a woman, she'll have a hard time moving around...
people just can get horny enough...

I lol'd and I don't see a need for such a thing.

Uhm, what the fuck

do not look a gift horse in the mouth.

this sound... awesome?

Precisely, yes.

Heh, may sound good in sexual theory, but oh the impracticalities in normal, ordinary life. <.<

I don't see this as good for the lady, though. It's just for arousal, so probably the innovator for "that" female circumcision thingie didn't account for human adaptation.

What I mean is that the woman will eventually, at one point in time, will be so used to having those parts (clit etc.) exposed and getting sexual stimulation from them that the feeling they'll get at some points will get less satisfying than the first. Sexually desensitized women - no thanks.

Clits for the female are designed that way - keep it in its natural state (not overexposed) so that the ladies enjoy sex each and every night. Exposing the clit may give the lady more thrills temporarily but eventually will defeat its own purpose.

We must test this issue. Hmmm. Volunteers?