the primary study that has been conducted on AIDS relating to circumcision was done in Africa with a population so riddled with AIDS to begin that the findings have been highly scrutinized. The World Health Organization does not recognize this as a significant truth, neither does the American Academy of Pediatrics. In fact, so many reputable medical organizations have changed their stance on circumcision that most insurance companies are not covering it anymore. It is considered elective cosmetic surgery. It is no longer being taught or treated as routine preventative care because there is no evidence to support that stance. As for the loss or sensitivity, the foreskin alone holds thousands of nerve endings, more in fact than the head or the penis alone, so there is no doubt that the removal of it causes a lack in the natural sensations. This is not a strike at anyone's manhood, just simple medical fact. When you cut off thousands of nerve endings, you cut off a lot of pleasure with it. But I guess you can't miss what you never had.

I've really not heard any circumsized male complain about having been circumcized or that circumcision resulted in long lasting emotional trauma.

"Female circumcision" is mutilation-- is unquestionably harmful, provides no health benefits, and should be opposed-- however it is not analogous to the removal of the male foreskin which does provide some health benefits, and does not disable the function of the organ in question