It does seem that way, doesn't it?
Both the foreskin and the head of the penis have a lot of nerves in them. Removing the foreskin removes a lot of those nerves, reducing the pleasure a man can get from sex. However, there is enough left in the head that men can get on with their lives and enjoy sex plenty.
But it is true that removing the foreskin reduces sexual pleasure; in fact, that's why American Christians started having their children circumcised. The idea was that it would make the boys more "moral." It was sold as a hygenic improvement, but back then "hygenie" meant both moral as well as physical cleanliness.
It's the same reason cereals became popular breakfast foods. Doctors thought feeding children meats for breakfast (eggs and bacon and whatnot) would make them horny.
But it is true that removing the foreskin reduces sexual pleasure; in fact, that's why American Christians started having their children circumcised.Nonsense.
Do you have even one shred of empirical proof to back up such an outrageous and ridiculous claim?
Other than something from some fringe/wacko group or au natural advocacy organization?