Circumsized or uncircumsized?

My bf want to get circumsized! And I just can not understand why! He's 22, I'm trying yo convince him not to do it, but still... I'd like to understand his point of view. Anyone here has experianced the same thing?

 

I'm cut. Why do people who are not cut even give a fuck? That one guy spoke of a parent being cut so doing so on his child and how they push their beliefs blah blah etc and so on. Yet they are uncircumsized how do you know your child doesn't want to be cut....

I wouldn't have it any other way, I spoke with a girl once who said her ex wasn't cut and she wouldn't sleep with him because it freaked her out. haha

 

Uncircumsized, I'm glad the top of my dick wasn't chopped off.

 

I am circumsized. I have heard that uncircumsized is better for guys, but I wouldn't know from experience. My parents didn't give me a choice. I see no advantage to being cut.

 

yas, ask any kid do you want part of your genitals cut off for no reason..... I'm pretty sure kids are against it

there are people freaked out by things, she has been taught that it's better, some people want to remain ignorant.

because people don't want to face reality, why learn about something like this if you are cut, by that point they only have one option, so they HAVE to believe what was done to them is right. It's a mental self defense system, that's why guys that are cut will continue any rumor they hear about intact guys no matter how little they know about intact penises

I've been in a few discussions and heard some really strange things, one guys think intact guys have to wipe like a girl, some guys think you can't have sex if uncircumcised and other completely off the wall nonsense

 

Well considering that most guys that are circumcised dont really care and you, who are not, seem to be all activist against and defensive, I would have to assume you have deep underlying issues from being different and having the stigma of the majority of women not liking uncircumcised dicks. And being as how your too chickenshit to actually go through with it, you raise up arms against the practice. Which makes a lot of sense to explain your ranting.

The fact is that it really doesn't matter if you are or not. Unless your Jewish. I'm not but I am circumcised, my dad had it done on the 8th day, which is the least painful time to do it. Every woman I ever met loved my dick, and Im less sensitive down there so I last longer. I dont have to worry about head cheese and precum getting in between the foreskin, which is probably why so many girls find it disgusting.

I wonder if any of you actually know what a circumcision is. They remove a small section of skin that goes around the head. Without it we would have to take extra time cleaning under it, pull it back when we pee, and generally have a turtle looking dick. Its really not a big deal, like removing a freaking mole. Its not barbaric, it was one of the first practices by the most civilized people of the time, the Jews. And the only reason I can think of that people have recently become so against it is the growing antisemitism in Europe.

Anyways the reason I posted this long ass reply is because Im tired of your bitching and you need a reality check.

 

I'll grant you that there is a tendency for men to "clam up" on the subject, and that men have a tendency to become the equivalent of "stepford wives" whenever the subject of circumcision is brought up, but IMO there shouldn't be any "majority rule" in matters which pertain to the human rights of non-consenting subjects. Think about it. If the majority of rape victims were indifferent about rape, rape would still be wrong, and the consensus of women who've been raped would have absolutely NO bearing on the right of a woman NOT to be raped.

http://www.circumstitions.com/Notjustaflap.html#inflated
"Not 'just a flap of skin': a non-erotic animation of how a foreskin works. A more stylised animation to demonstrate its size. A remarkable illustration of its actual size."

 

The aversion that you speak of, that women have for the intact genitals, is virtually unheard of in cultures where circumcision isn't practiced, e.g. such as in places like Norway and Sweden and Denmark. In other words, this aversion is primarily a learned behavior in a culture where the majority of men are genitally mutilated and where the women just don't know any better.

You aren't speaking from personal experience when you make disparaging remarks about the intact genital anatomy, so why do it ? It's reminds me of the story of the fox and the sour grapes. The other message posters are intact, so they know first-hand what it's like to be intact, but apparently they don't have an aversion to their own bodies !

If you've ever been naked inside a locker room where both "styles" are evident, then you must know that there's a very big difference between the two "styles" of penii, and this is definitely by design because when "brit periah" was created by the rabbis, it was their intention to create a style of penis that was radically different from the normal penis that was so highly valued among the ancient Greeks and Romans.

"Brit periah" is the familiar exposed-glans mutilation, in which the penis is totally stripped of all skin from the frenar band all the way down to the base of the glans.

 

Try to imagine a place where babies are strapped down and their noses are forcibly amputated with clamping devices. The doctor and the parents are missing their noses, everybody's walking around with a big gaping hole right smack in the middle of their face, but if you ask them for their opinion about the practice, they will tell you that it doesn't really matter one way or another. BUT IT DOES MATTER. It's a matter of human beings losing touch with their sanity and fully embracing lunacy ... which is very much like society as we know it.

 

Human beings are essentially herd animals, sort of like the sheep and the buffalo. I'm guessing that your bf wants to have the best part of his genitals amputated so that he can "fit in" with the rest of the gang. Your bf has an absolute right to do whatever he wants, it's his own body, but most of the time this is something that's done to infants and children, and this is why so many people object to it.

 

you're probably wondering why I, a woman, am on this sub forum and chucking my 2 cents into this board, but its an important issue to me. I am against circumcision (I'm not trying to jams my opinions down anyone's throat but if I ever were to have a son I would never have it done). I think the human body should be as it was meant (no female or male mutilation). However, if you are interested in some reading, you could always visit http://www.norm.org/ and learn more about restoring your foreskin.

 

See, BigcityHillbilly, you're just another classic example of someone who is uncircumcised who feels that circumcision is horrible, despite the fact medical studies done into circumcision have shown no effects positive or negative to sexual feelings and that most people who are circumscised are rather happy with it

 

every cock is sovereign, dont mess with it

 

I'm cut,I like it fine,I don't know what it would be like the other way,

 

I'm cut,I like it fine,I don't know what it would be like the other way,I don't think it would be much different.

 

Never once did I mention a word about my genital status in my previous posts. I could be a partial sexual amputee for all you know, in which case it would mean that you're jumping to an erroneous conclusion.

I'd venture that there's a big difference between someone reporting that they're happy and the state of actual happiness. It's an important distinction that's never revealed in those medical studies. The facts, of course, have a way of speaking for themselves: Sexual mutilation destroys a bodily structure that was meant to enhance sexual pleasure, and was adopted during the Victorian Era for precisely this reason. Twenty-somethings who believe that everything's OK with their sexuality (in spite of the fact that they're missing all of those nerves and nerve endings) are in fact being fooled by raging hormones, which are playing tricks on their minds. As the twenty-somethings grow older, and as they transform into forty and fifty-somethings, they are going to arrive at a point where the hormones aren't raging so much anymore. It is at this point that they will come away with a better understanding of the issue, and they will learn to appreciate the harm that was done to them by sexual mutilation, and the reasons why nature intended for all men to have an intact penis. In the meantime, it is important to stop the practice of circumcision on the grounds that it traumatizes infants and that it has far-reaching adverse effects on future generations.

 

Alright where's your proof it traumatizes infants? Just about everyone who's circumcised is rather happy with it

Again, you rant on about how circumcised men are missing out because part of their penis was cut off and they're no longer whole, despite the fact all the research into it(most of which is based on men who get circumcised as adults after having sex both ways) shows there really is no difference to satisfaction and pleasure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_effects_of_circumcision#Summary_of_research_findings

 

http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/104/1/e13 PEDIATRICS Vol.
104 No. 1 July 1999, p. e13. Procedural Pain in Newborn Infants: The
Influence of Intensity and Development . "We had hypothesized that
circumcision would be at the most invasive end of the spectrum, and
this procedure did elicit the most vigorous physiologic and
behavioral reactions of those we studied. Similarly, clinicians rated
circumcision as the most painful of 12 clinical procedures.1 Thus,
there was convergence in a hypothetical gradient of pain, a survey-
based gradient of pain, and the infants' actual responses to one
procedure, circumcision."

Is that good enough ?

How do you know that everyone's happy with it ? It's far more likely that nobody's really happy with it, but they want to believe that they're happy with it, because nobody wants to be unhappy.

Well, it's an indisputable fact that the procedure involves the amputation of a large portion of skin from the penis.

Amputation, under most conditions, is usually a cause of unhappiness. OK, so the more body parts we amputate from ourselves, the happier we'll be ? If that's the case, then maybe we should chop off our feet, that way we'll achieve an even greater degree of "happiness."

OK ... but the only thing you were able to prove with that link is that the medical industry is constantly performing "damage control" in an effort to justify what it does.

The medical industry has a vested interest in denying that any harm is being caused when it undertakes medically contraindicated and invasive bodily amputations on non-consenting subjects. It's like asking the fox if any harm is being done to the chickens when he eats them for dinner.

 

It has been noticed in a medical study that circumcised infants experience more apparent pain during later vaccinations in childhood

also be careful with the sensitivity/pleasure tests, pleasure tests are done by asking the person, how would someone know what 100% of pleasure is if they can only experience 70%

sensitivity tests have often been done by only testing the parts that exist on both intact and cut penises, the sorrell's study which is the most in depth to date found a large difference and tested over 20 different points on both

 

I have one son that is circumsized, and one that isn't. Both of their penises are perfectly healthy. They are 4 and 3, and they both constantly have their hand in their diaper, so I suppose everything feels ok.

I do have an ex boyfriend that was uncut. He had to get circumsized at 26 because he was having so many problems. Infections, open sores, chaffing, etc.