Interesting take on the movie. I saw it more of a survival movie and the love of the two sisters.

Is is only coincidental that she's called Eva?
Surely it couldn't be coincidence that another main character's name is
Eli
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_(biblical_figure)
I'm still searching for someone named Stan in the Bible, unless Jean Hegland went too obvious with the
Stan/Satan
wordplay

This message has been deleted.

You behave like that ass that Buzz Aldrin punched in the mouth, because he was so drunk on the Apollo moon landing conspiracy BS that he got in Buzz's face and received an attitude adjustment he was begging for And that's one example of a conspiracy theory that has been cleanly debunked. Yet, no amount of evidence will persuade the loyal tin foil hat wearer.
There is a strong movement fighting against FGM, as there should be. They're making some progress. If you're serious about raising consciousness on what you believe to be true about male circumcision, you might garner more sympathy towards the cause by aligning forces with activists against FGM, instead of being insensitive of their suffering, and showing an us against them mentality.
Evidence is pretty clear that there were no WMD's. Evidence for the extreme assertion that you're making about the foreskin being the primary sense organ of the penis, and equating its removal to that of FGM, is weak. Studies on sensitivity comparing cut and uncut men are inconclusive and contradictory.
Perhaps those that were circumcised as infants don't generally report sexual dysfunction, because the plasticity of the developing brain compensates by rewiring the receptors of other areas like the glans, to do the work of whatever receptors may have been lost by the removal of the foreskin. I was doing a little reading on FGM last night, and one site claimed that over 80% of mutilated women were able to adapt and still enjoy sex and achieve orgasm. Good for them, but the practice of FGM is still abominable and should be stamped out.
I have my doubts about male circumcision as well, but I'm not convinced it's on an equal footing as FGM.
If you're really convinced you're right, perhaps you should focus your message board efforts somewhere more appropriate than one about movies. And if you really care about changing minds, then don't squander your credibility with all your inflammatory hate speech BS that most of your posts consist of. I don't think you really care about the circumcision issue as more than a device to use to troll people with, like your other posts. I suspect you're primarily interested in the "winning of a debate", than about changing minds and possibly sparing millions of baby boys from being robbed of their full sexual experience when they mature, if you're right.

This message has been deleted.

If I'm so sexually dysfunctional because of the removal of my foreskin, why is it that I report being fully functional? My penis seems pretty sensitive enough. I'm not having issues with my equipment failing to function. If anything, I wear my girl friends out because I want it all the time Obviously I can't compare to what it may have been like pre circumcision. But, I'm certainly not "sexually crippled".
In your casewe have one anecdotal case. I'm sure that your anti circ conspiracy tin foil hat wearing group has managed to scrape together a few more to make a video or two or write a book. Maybe all of that strikes a chord with you because you really do have some form of dysfunction. Can you be absolutely certain it's due to the circumcision though, and not some other cause? You mentioned you elected for the surgery to treat a medical condition.
Were you fully functional without complaints before you elected for circumcision? How much, if any, sexual experience with partners did you have before, and what about masturbation? On a scale of 1 to 10, where would you rate your sexual sensitivity after the procedure, assuming a 10 pre op (after fully healed of course)?

This message has been deleted.

You really expect anyone to take you seriously when you use names like "JewsFellateBabyBoys" and "RapeIsASocialConstruct"?
If the foreskin was as important to the sexual response of men as you claimwhy don't we have men that have the procedure done as adults nearly unanimously claiming a drastic loss in sensitivity afterwards? Instead there seems to be overall a slight decrease.

This message has been deleted.

I am not circ and I can assure you the sensitivity of that area being cut is "Extreme", I woun't even dare cut it.
Let's put this simple.. all people pro-cir that is still not circ.. just do it, for the sake of us. Instead of citing stupid studies about "unconclusive material" just cut the dam piece and try for yourself, see if "there is no difference".
DO SCIENCE A FAVOR. Studies are useless, use your brain and your common sense.
Alex Vojacek

This message has been deleted.

Nothing wrong with Livescience.com or the other link I posted.

This message has been deleted.

a post form livescience?
really?
I know you can do better, get some reliable source please.
I really counting on you for debate purpose, i have seem the other rapeguy on different forum and although i agree with him in some post, i would like to see him beat from time to time.

This message has been deleted.

I joined IMDB to discuss a movie I enjoyed. My intention wasn't to get sucked into the downward spiral psycho vortex of a disturbed individual like yourself
If you'll read the information that I linked to in previous comments, you'll see that the issue of a loss of sensitivity from male circumcision is hardly cut and dried (pardon the pun)
I'm not "traumatized" by confronting the controversy over male circumcision at all. I was circumcised as an infant, and yet have enjoyed a very fulfilling sex life. It's impossible for me to know how my sexual response may have differed, had I not been circumcised. But, I can't say I've really had any complaints with ED or premature ejaculation, or inability to achieve orgasm or anything like that.
I think the issue demands further study. And, to be honest, if I was an expecting father whose wife or significant other had a bun in the oven about to be born a bouncing baby boy, I just might insist that we pass on the circumcision. With proper hygiene and the use of condoms and/or a monogamous life style, I think the risk of STD's would be minimized. Aesthetic objections to a non circumcised penis, don't seem to be worth the potential risks of the procedure.
However, I find your claim that the foreskin is the primary site of sensation for the male sexual response, and is akin to female genital mutilation where the clitoris is removed, to be extreme and unsubstantiated.
You claim that you elected to be circumcised in your teens. Why did you choose to do this? Was there a medical reason? Were you made fun of in the boy's locker room in gym class? Some girl say "ewww" when she saw your turtle neck and so lacking in self esteem, you went and had it lopped off, and now you're angry and looking to lash out at women for something you chose to do to yourself?

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

http://thecircumcisiondecision.com/20000-nerve-endings/
Yes, there are nerve endings in the foreskin. But there don't seem to be clear studies that show those nerve endings make a significant difference in sexual sensitivity. Some men claim a reduction in sensitivity that they attribute to circumcision, and there are some men who claim an increase in sexual sensitivity after circumcision.

http://www.livescience.com/27769-does-circumcision-reduce-sexual-pleasure.html

Absolute bull beep You've drunk the Kool Aid and you're foaming at the mouth! You dismiss peer review, yet you claim somehow these other studies are valid. Based on what? Based on your fear and contempt of women, and need to grasp at any straw to justify it. You'll be in prison one day, getting banged up the ass (without your consentor then againmaybe that's what you really want). Let's see how you feel about rape then
There are men that have elected to have circumcision as adults, and we don't see a massive outcry condemning the procedure as sexual mutilation. Your loss of sensation could be a symptom of some other underlying medical (or in your case profound psychological) issues.

This message has been deleted.

The foreskin is a flap of skin that glides over the glans of the penis. Your claim that "all the erogenous nerves are in the foreskin" is complete horse beep Male circumcision is an entirely different thing than female genital mutilation that involves the removal of the clitoris.
There are studies to support a reduction in transmission of STDs from male circumcision. And I can support that claim with links. Do you have a source to back up your claim about the foreskin?
I concede that male circumcision has risks and down sides to it, and I don't have a problem with those that choose not to elect to have their sons circumcised. Regardless of one's position on circumcision, it doesn't justify rape.
"A thing isn't good or bad, but thinking makes it so" - William Shakespeare. I'm an atheist, and don't believe in objective morality. There isn't a great law giver in the sky that proclaims what's right and wrong. But, try that argument in court when you get caught acting out your misogyny on some girl some dark night. You'll have plenty of time to catch up on your reading then (provided you don't get executed or shot dead in the act).
You're incredibly misinformed and tragically stupid.

This message has been deleted.