No actually evolutionary speaking things don't just come out of no where. That is actually NOT how it works. Our evolution didn't happen where males had an appendage (later to be the penis) and THEN the penis head evolved underneath a layer of skin. It evolved as it was needed, so the foreskin evolved with the rest of the penis because it served a purpose. Also the whole foreskin ripping thing, if you were having sex with no lube at all it would hurt a HELL of a lot more if you didn't have foreskin because then your bare head would be the thing supposedly getting ripped/torn (which isn't how foreskin works to begin with) and that would definitely be worse. And how can you say "Also you cant just "adapt" to the sensitivity you experience, it doesnt work that way" then follow with "Everyone does get use to the sensations and gets better at holding it back". Literally that is exactly what I said. And do not bring social opinions into a discussion about which is logically better. (For the record, it is only the United States and Israel where a majority of men are circumcised. In Europe, being circumcised is a minority.) "I dont need or even want it to feel better" Lol, great argument. "So I and most likely everyone else who is circumcised cannot see the point of giving more pleasure, its almost impossible to fathom" LOL, sorry but this is just a terrible argument. Please, don't defend circumcision just because you are circumcised yourself and don't want to feel bad. I'm sorry you will never get to experience sex that is roughly 30% more pleasurable (studies have measured this through brainwaves and amount of serotonin). Just because you have never heard of something doesn't give you reason to ignore it. Just because you haven't heard of people without foreskin being less fit and having less children therefore those with foreskin prevailed doesn't mean it isn't true. (Also, it doesn't necessarily mean it IS true, but I haven;t used evolution as my primary argument because that is hard to specifically study.)