CIRCUMCISION (A sensible discussion)

Badmoonrising - AIDS in the U.S. is a greater problem than in Europe, for instance, largely because many gay guys today don't use protection when they do anal sex. IV drugs and bad needles also contribute to the problem here. The incidence of heterosexual AIDS transmission is low in the U.S., but that does not mean that it should not be guarded against, which means only have sex with a condom, unless both parties are sure they are clean of disease and pregnancy is not an issue.

As a circumcised guy (at birth) I have no regret that my parents decided to have this done. And with a "loose cut" circumcision I have all the supposed advantages of being uncut (same masturbation techniques, etc.) except that I may have lost some sensitivity in my glans, but the sex has always been so good without this extra sensitivity that I can't imagine how it could get any better. The frictioning of the coronal ridge of my glans inside the vagina on the inthrust and outtrust has always been very enjoyable for both me and my partners. And I have never had the problem of cleaning the smegma off the area just behind the glans - it just dries and drops off. I have never even noticed it.

And that extra sensitivity may be one of the leading causes of premature ejaculation in uncut guys. I have always been able to last a long time before I cum, which makes the sex better for the woman, and more pleasurable for me, as the buildup to cumming has always been the best part of sex, not the 10 seconds or so of orgasm.

Regarding the custom of circumcision, in some cultures (certain African tribes, Indonesia, the Philippines) the circumcision of males is done as a rite of puberty, and is regarded as a coming of age ritual, meaning that the boys are now ready to have sex. They look forward to having the circumcision done, because it is an important stage in growing up.

Perhaps you are right in that the circumcision should wait until the boy is ready to make an informed choice, or until it is clear that there is a continuing problem with infection under the foreskin or a problem with phimosis. My nephew's two boys were home birthed, and my nephew (who is cut) and his wife decided to wait until later to have it done, or perhaps not do it at all if no problem develops. No big deal as far as I am concerned. And the boys should have their say.

One problem, however with waiting until after puberty to have it done is that the boy will get spontaneous erections at night and at other times which may make the healing process more difficult. So I would think that a wise choice would be to have it done before the boy reaches puberty. Today an anesthesia is used so there is no pain during the operation, and painkillers can reduce any residual pain during the healing process.

 

I was cut for medical reasons at the age of 7 and it has affected my life more than it probably should have. Growing up in England finding another cut guy is a rarity and so throughout highschool I was bullied because of it. Resulting in me growing up with zero self esteem.

However I dont hold a negative view of circumcision just because it had a negative impact on myself, I havent had any problems with my penis since having it cut so I dont have any experience of any medical reasons to be against it. However I do think that it is more of a social trend to be cut or uncut than any actual reason for it. I mean in Britian you would be hard pushed to find a woman who has been with a cut my were as in America you would find it harder to find the oposite simply because of the social norms.

I disagree with cutting at birth simply because at this day and age we should be beyond impressing our beliefs on out children. This is a relativly big decision and should be made by the party it concerns.

On my part I had no choice but if it wasnt for the medical reasons I would not have had it donesimply becuase it it not an issue that is brought up in England I mean before being told I would have to have it done I had never heard of it.

 

Cutted- Can't disagree with your point of view. In fact I agree with most of what you have said. You are bold and brave man to admit there is some sensitivity lose. Your shlong works for you and that's a good thing.

I can't comment on other peoples sexual experience with their equipment. As a hetro-sexual middle aged man I can say I have never had any problems. I don't have smegma. It just doesn't happen. I guess I just clean enough without even thinking about it or even noticing. I did have it as a child. It was never a problem then.

To start with my penis usually has a drying end. Not always but most often. When erect the glans is only half covered. During intercourse my foreskin stays back. And on thrusts there is a slight stretch to the foreskin. I'm am convinced the foreskin must have nerve receptors for this as that is very pleasurable. It is a very intimate experience to have the inner lining of the foreskin in contact with the walls of the vagina. I think it's suppose to be like that.

Often upon penatration, I some times just let the women's labia push back my foreskin. It's something like injecting myself in her. It's a rush for both of us. It's like "this is for you baby". Know one else gets to touch or see me like this. It's difficult for me to explain beyond that.

Sex for me is like music. We don't always listen to the same type of music. Personally I like to go down on a women and make her climax before intercourse. I usually do cum before her during intercourse. But that is round one (1) after a rest round two (2) will often have us cumming at, or close to the same time. I don't think this needs to be a goal but it's nice when it happens. At age 52 I don't know if there would be a round 2 without the sensitivity I enjoy.

Other times I prefer the women to lay on top of me, coupled deeply together. I love that dream like state when almost asleep and yet awake. In these cases, we have little or almost no motion. There is no thrusting. Just deep contact. Some women are very good at this. In this state when we cum it is usually together often after she has multi orgas first. For me it is the ultimate sex. Actually come to think of it. This is a situation were the women is in charge of the pace. A sexual female who understands this is a very good thing. I don't know, but I think that may not be possible if I was cut.

We also seem to agree that it is better to allow a person to make this important and highly individual choice. It is pretty shitty to have to go through this as an adult I'm sure. But what choice do we have? I think doing it at just before puberty is not a good choice. We are still not mature enough to make that decision. But I do see your rational.

Anyway, that's why I didn't do it to myself or my son. Hey if a system is working don't change it.

I'm glad yours works for you. I'm curious though. Is sex for you similar to my exp.?


Finally, I wonder about age. It is natural to have decreased sex drive as we age. Will women become reluctant to have sex with a partner if he has to beat the hell out of her in order to cum? Again, I don't have an answer to that. I just a thought.

All interesting points. I wonder if anyone is listening to this dialog? Makes me smile

 

^ your sex sounds great to me

 

Badmoonrising - You asked how sex is for me. With a "loose cut", I still have most of my foreskin - it just sits behind the glans all the time. When soft, I can pull my remaining foreskin entirely over the glans, and when erect, two-thirds over it. When I have intercourse, the foreskin slides back onto the shaft, except for a little extra skin on the underside near the "inverted v", which helps stretch the frenulum on the inthrust, increasing my pleasure. I prefer the missionary position with a pillow under her butt, which allows me to be in the "drivers seat", and increases the intimacy between us, as we are face to face and our bodies are touching everywhere and we are looking at each other. I never liked doggie style, as it seems detached, and find "woman on top" also good, especially for her. Mine curves upward, and is a little over 7 inches erect, so I can give her a little G Spot action in the missionary position if my upper body is vertical to her. Sex is great for me, and I have done it many thousands of times over the years.

You raise an interesting point - there are many different types of uncut penises - some have long foreskins which overhang the glans and have a little "nozzle" when soft. Others have foreskins that cover the glans entirely, but there is no surplus skin. And still others have foreskins that only cover the glans partially, and there is a portion of the glans visible through the opening when the penis is soft. From your description, this seems to be yours, as you say the tip of the glans is often "dry". So guys like you have portions of their glans exposed to the air and rubbing against their clothing - welcome to the world (partially) of "dried out, cracked penises" as the NOCIRCers describe it.

 

Cutted- you're not such a bad guy. But you didn't answer my question. You don't have to if you don't want too. Is my experience reflected in your sexual experience? Please be honest here. Can you climax without trusting? In my case the best sex with the woman on top is were she is in control. Some times it feels almost like her body is falling into mine. The first time I experienced this it sort of scared me. I think she may have experienced something similar. At orgasm our whole bodies go rigid. And it is more like a whole body orgasm. Women have told me before that orgasms for them are a whole body thing.

I don't mind telling you women in my view are generally superior to men in almost all aspects. It makes sense really. Nature would impart the best qualities on the gender that bares the offspring. As men we are expendable. Women endure more pain. They are mentally tougher too. Not to be confused with emotions. The list goes on and on. In the same breath. Women can be incredibly cruel to each other. More so than man to man. I don't know but maybe this is a herding thing. And I don't mean that in a condescending way at all. I'm not sure where I'm going with this...oh, ya, now I remember. As far as sexual drive and experience it therefore also makes sense that women have a stronger, albeit different, sex drive and therefore experience. Sorry I'm getting off topic.

As far as circumcision goes. You fortunately have been partially, or even mostly spared. Let me expand on this for you...two summers ago I rode a friends motorcycle through Italy. In Florence I went on one of those day tours to see Michalangelo's "David". Fortunately the tour guide turned out to be a true scholar regarding art and he had a passion for Michalangelo's work (don't we all). I learned a whole new appreciation for this sculpture. Anyway, the question came up as to why "David" was not circumcised? Good question! Was this not the biblical David? That goes into a whole different direction. But even if we assume this is the biblical David, was he not a Jew? This required some thought and investigation.

This is exactly why Michelangelo is considered such a master. Even after 500 years we still don't have an answer, nor will we. But consider this; perhaps the David is circumcised. I have learned that the old way for circumcision only cut part, of at least the end of the foreskin off. And if my hypothesis is correct this helped these early tribes to survive. But at the same time allowed protection from elements and at the same time preserved stimuli function. It was not until much later that the form of circumcision for males changed to the radical form seen now. It is my understanding (if true) this was adopted by Jews as they did not want to be confused with gentiles. The David bares this out. Is he circumcised, is he a Jew? What message is there here? Or was it simply a matter of aesthetics? To the Romans and the Greeks a circumcised penis was obscene. At least that's my understanding. I'm a gentile

My point is; routine circumcision is a bad bad thing. And I believe the radical form seen now is a true mutilation. There is no other way to view it. Especially when it is done without the consent of the person. If you had the more sever form of circumcision you my not have the luxury of sensation you currently enjoy. Other men are not so lucky.

In my case my shlong as with most men. Constantly changes depending where I am mentally. The foreskin sometimes completely cover the glans and more if I'm cold or have anxiety. Sometime the very end is exposed. What ever, the end is protected. With underwear on the fabric holds the tissue around the end I'm sure. Ironically this may be similar to the female genitalia. I am so glad that females are not altered in anyway in our culture. The gentle folds of the labia that protect and cover the females most intimate parts are so wonderful to explore. I even enjoy their scent. Perhaps this is the way European women feel about their natural un-mutilated male lovers.

Some women actually have surgery to reduce the size of their labia. They seem convinced that they are ugly. For me at least and many men, I wish they would not do this. I love them as they are. But it is their choice as adult women if they choose to do this. Unquestionable it must be painful for them just like adult male circumcision.

Google Labia.com it is very enlightening. I sometimes go their to reassure women that they are beautiful in their natural state. And I mean that honestly.

My view, is my view. It is not the only view. I respect the opinions of others. But one thing I do feel strongly about. You do not cut healthy natural tissue off of babies or children. Male or female. If you do you are either ignorant or a mutilator. Unfortunately some people who were mutilated become mutilators. A disturbing human trait. Those emotionally abused as children often pass this on to the next generation. It takes people who can see clear of this to make change happen.

Take care

When is comes to sex and nudity the Europeans are way, way ahead of North Americans.

 

Badmoon rising - "Can i climax without trusting"? Not sure what that means. Do you mean can I have sex without fear of disease or pregnancy? The answer is yes - the women i have had have been free of disease, and they have made sure that they cannot get pregnant. I have been fortunate that I can go in bareback - no condom needed, so it is skin on skin. That raises another question - when an uncut guy is wearing a condom, the whole thing about the foreskin slipping back over the glans on the outthrust becomes irrelevant - it is trapped inside the condom in whatever shape it is in when the condom is rolled over - usually fully retracted. So there should be no difference between a cut and uncut guy when they are wearing a condom and inside a woman. The sensitivity issue goes away, as there is another membrane between that membrane and the membrane of the vagina.

Regarding Michaelangelo's David, he is clearly not circumcised, but you can see the coronal ridge under his thin foreskin, but you don't know this unless you look closely and see the small "nozzle" at the tip of his penis. Michaelangelo probably did this because he was conforming to the customs of the day, which depicted men with uncut penises, usually small boy-like "needledicks". He was revolutionary in that he depicted the penis as it really looks like.

Most Americans who are circumcised today have "loose cuts" like I have, with much of the foreskin left sitting behind the glans when the organ is soft. So the radical circumcision you discussed no longer is popular, if it ever was. The only difference between our penises and yours is that the foreskin we have sits behind the glans, and does not cover it when soft (although I can do this if I want to).

 

Cutted-thank you, you have answered all my questions. Knowingly or not.

 

Cutted, you just keep showing how little you know, that is complete garbage, the way a intact (or restored) person puts a condom on is to pull skin back, roll condom on, pull skin forward, finish unrolling, this allows for the gliding motion even with a condom, I can tell you this because I have done so, the gliding foreskin works exactly the same, the sensitivity issue becomes even more relevant as now every sensation has to be felt through a condom, and what is the major complaint about condoms - no sensation, if we look at european condom use comapred to american condom use we see a large difference, american men will not use condoms as much, could this be due to the loss of sensation where as intact men have some sensation to spare?

that and the intact men have parts 4 times more sensitive then cut men
http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/bju_6685.pdf

tight circumcisions still happen, from talking on the restoration boards it is much more often then you make it sound. while an infant may be cut "loose" if the skin is always behind the glans it will only stretch the skin when erect, where as an intact penis will stretch it when flaccid. cut men often report tight erections during puberty

 

I would still like to see cutted's proof that he is a real sex therapist. Last time I asked to see it my post was deleted.

 

Sarahrei, Cloud7- Don't go there. He's Postal. Like a passive/aggressive dog, just walk around him slowly but keep you eyes on him at all times. He's really pissed at something and I think we know what it is.

 

Cutted. you now have become a comedian! Hey everyone, let's all go tell our dads that we have to see their package in order to have a close relationship. What kind of sick reasoning is that? Are you into little kids also, Cutted? I could not have a closer relationship with dad if I had prayed for it. Matter of fact, he sees all of your comments, asked who you were a long time ago, and is really concerned about your "therapist" status, what with your 'free' advice being so one sided and biased. The problem is two-fold as he sees it: !.) You obviously function apart from society, not realizing your own bias and not able to argue coherently. 2) There are so many points which you have conveniently forgotten to take up in answer to my posts, we think you are bluffing. These facts along with California's lax credentialling rules for 'amateur' psychological counsellors leave us shaking out heads. Thanks for moving away from New England and settling way far away. By the way, Cutted, I was amazed that you did not know that boys are able and do get erections way before puberty (your 'training' didn't cover prepubescent physiology/psychology?) Something is missing!

 

It is amazing how you guys reveal that you are the ones who are "postal", passive/aggressive", and "pissed at something" when you attack my attempts to add rational thought to the discussion. NOCIRC is well known as an aggressive attack dog against circumcision.

I am pissed at nothing and happy with what I've got. Remember there are people out there listening to this discussion. Hopefully they will learn something helpful before they make a decision as to whether or not to circumcise, but your diatribes add nothing.

I have to admit that I have not seen an uncut guy roll a condom over his penis, but it seems to me that the way it is done is to retract the foreskin back and then roll the condom over the penis, and that the tightness of the condom holds the retracted foreskin back during intercourse. If the man wears a loose condom, he might be able to fold it back over the glans after rolling it down, but it seems there is a danger of the condom slipping off during intercourse if it is that loose.

I am a lay sex thereapist, trained by experience and feedback from persons I have helped, and there are many.

 

In that close relationship you had with your father, didn't he show you how. Didn't answer my remark (as usual) about young boys erections? Where I come from (New England) 'trained by experience' don't mean shit. So was every crackpot in history. We get credentialing from others to keep us away from crackpottiness! Guess you didn't. Case closed!

 

Trained by experience doesn't mean anything though. I know how to fill my car with gas, change the oil, and change all the lights...I'm not a mechanic.

This makes me very unsettled to know that you lie in your profile saying that your a sex therapist and your giving young men advise.

So then, whats your day job? Cause the advise you give could be found by anyone that has $5 and a lift to chapters.

In all seriousness though. You are in no position to be preaching about circumcision, you are no more qualified to discuss it then anyone else. If you had gone to the Kinsey instiute and had a few letters after your name, that would be a different story.

Just because you apparently have alot of sex, doesn't make you a sex therapist.

 

you just got caught in the discussion making stuff up, you proved to us you have no understanding of how a foreskin works since you thought gliding was impossible in a condom, but you still claim to be an expert, NOCIRC presents their point of view and back it up to the medical studies that have been done, wanting to protect infants from unnecessary amputation is a good thing, whether or not you believe the benefits of circ there is not one justifiable reason to do it before they can decide on their own.

you are happy because that's all you know, you have no idea what you are missing but you are too afraid to face that possibility because you would have to realize that your penis is inferior to an intact penis, not trying to beat you down, I admit mine is as well, although I am a bit closer to restoring, but you are in self defense mode trying to justify what was done to you

in fact it stays on better, circumcised sex creates long stroke of the skin, while intact sex the skin stays in more of the same place and the shaft moves meaning there is less friction between the condom and vagina, I know you won't ever believe it but a condom is completely compatible with everything a foreskin does

 

Cutted- Stop. Just stop. I think you should extract yourself from this and other forums like this where the issue of circumcision comes up. I can tell you are truly upset and I apologize if I have contributed to this. My last post was a bit juvenile, but if you read back to your post you will see that it is you who made personal and derogatory statements.

You may also reflect on the fact that I have agreed with a number of points you made. For example the issue of circumcision in Africa and how this may be beneficial in the fight against AIDS. I even gave my opinion as to the origins of circumcision and that there may have been some benefit in some early tribal situations. And how this becomes indoctrinated into religion and society.

However I have been very consistent and adamant that you do not under normal circumstances FUCKING cut parts off babies and children. Do you remember agreeing with me on that issue?

I even went into a somewhat eclectic discussion regarding Michelangelo's statue of David. To which you most arrogantly answered.

Sir you haven't a clue. In fact I will go so far as to say you are a dangerous and disturbed man. For a person to proclaim they are a "lay sex therapist" scares the living shit out of me.

Please be gone.

 

I will not respond to any more of the posts of you, Fastswitch, Sarahrei and Cloud 7. You are rude, nasty people who use personal attacks in place of logic, and if you are representative of the people who run NOCIRC, you are contemptible. There is no point to try to engage in a rational debate with you, as your response is a personal attack, even accusing me of being a child molester. You all should get a life.

 

Think what you want, but WE seem to have a more realistic few then the man who LIES about being a sex therapist on the internet to make himself feel important.

 

I am a very outspoken intactivist and just had to add that the US has the highest rates of circumcision as well the highest rates of HIV. So the whole circumcision as an STD preventative is bs. I know this is being spouted a lot of places but there's also a lot of info to completely debunk this theory.

I'm going into law just to be able to fight for the genital integrity of all infant males and females. My son is a beautifully intact baby boy.