You ever consider the logistics of fighting a naked person? There's a lot to keep track of.
I don't care how much of a tough guy you are - when another man's junk grazing against your face is a real possibility, you're gonna be nervous, and nervousness leads to mistakes. Nobody wants to be the home invader who got knocked out by a naked homeowner who then took a selfie pressing his dick down your forehead like a medieval helmet.
When you have the mental edge that being naked provides, you don't need superpowers. This is basic sports psychology.
But when you have the physical edge that your opponent being naked provides, you don't need sports psychology, you can just bite where it hurts.
I think the issue is going to be whether or not you go to the ground and have to grapple. If you can keep keep him at bay, then his nakedness doesn't matter much but if he's got BJJ or wrestling experience, you're in for some balls in the face.
Vulnerability to biting aside, being naked prevents one from being easily grabbed (clothes, etc) and allows for full range of motion so it's somewhat more advantageous. Plus the clothed, inhibited fighter will likely not bite because that's bordering on foreplay.
Honestly, if the naked brawler is a purist then your best bet is to scatter some broken glass around, but if his style is less strict and he's wearing shoes, then you're doomed if you can't knock him out in a single punch.
you're in for some balls in the face
Assuming nude combatant has balls...
Vulnerability to biting aside
? So is he going to put his balls in your face, without being bitten, while he bites your balls in his face?
being naked prevents one from being easily grabbed (clothes, etc)
hair? shaving, or lubing oneself, is work, and not necessary for nude combat. Also, one can use slicker closer-fitting clothes (arguably less prone to being grabbed, especially if made of the proper material, and well-lubed)
being naked ... allows for full range of motion
There are clothes which allow this, too.
scatter some broken glass around, but if ... he's wearing shoes, then you're doomed
Or, knock him to the ground.
OP said another man's junk, so the opponent has balls. But words aren't going to settle this, I'm stripping.
In this thread: >>6 blatantly assumes that each man has balls, despite strong evidence to the contrary. (I guess he's gay, or an incel.)
This reads like a reddit post.