Circumsized or uncircumsized?

It's healthier to be circumcised. Plus you don't like so much of a freak. <--kidding

 

Yeahh, it makes it look, hungry, crule, and mighty. i just love mine when it is angered hahahahaha. Guess women loves it too when breathing fire and heat.

Yeahhh i like mine very much, actually can make a picture of it and use it as a signature. hahahahaha

 

me: cut


my 2 boys: uncut

 

That's my name....

 

NY Times just headlined that "HIV Risk Halved by Circumcision U.S.Agency Finds".

George Bush guarantees that he is not going to "cut and run".

 

not cut , the only people that I know who get circumcised are jews or muslims or it seems americans .
nobody in my family as far as I know as ever been circumcised I dont personally know anyone who as had problems with their foreskin , Im sure there are people but chopping something off before you have a problem with it seems a bit crazy .

and good for you shane99x wise move

 

Jonny -80% of American males are circumcised, and perhaps 40% of guys in the Commonwealth counntries - Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Also 100% of males in South Korea and the Philippines, as well as many Indian tribes in the US, Canada, and South America. 60% of African males are already circumcised, and the rest will be soon. It is becoming increasingly popular in Mexico.

In Britain, Prince Charles and many other members of the Royal Family have had it done, and I heard his sons had it done recently. And I bet many upper class Brits are cut.

The major areas where foreskins remain are China, Southeast Asia (nonMuslim), India, most of Europe, and South America. Many Brits over 50 are circumcised, before National Health decided to no longer pay for it in the early 1950s.

In all, perhaps 25% of the world's population is cut, and almost all of us have no complaints and like it that way, as do our women.

Cutted

 

well if you were cut as a baby you wouldnt know any different , from personal experience the foreskin has more feeling that the rest of the penis its there for a purpose it works as a seal during intercourse .

As I remember princess diana was against her children being circumcised or that was the rumour and there is no evidence that they have been circumcised, although there have been rumours that charles may have had them done but hes a bit of a fuckwit so I wouldnt be suprised .


http://www.twbookmark.com/books/70/0446678805/chapter_excerpt15690.html

so far you havent given me any reason to think circumcision is other than pointless , they have groups for men who wish to stretch whats left of the foreskin and for groups of guys who are unhappy about being circumcised as kids ....when we had discussions about circ online a few years ago we had some guys saying they were not happy about being circumcised on this board .

Now you dont get any of this with guys who havent been circumcised , and if they are unhappy and want to cut off part of their penis they can do it as adults

As I say I dont mind people doing whatever they like with their own bodys what annoys me is people doing something like this to people who dont have the chance to say no .

Lets say your parents had chopped your external parts of your ears off in case of possible edge of ear cancer, would you be happy about that , you would still be able to hear and it would have prevented you from getting edge of the ear cancer so would it be a good thing to do.

Wouldnt you have prefered being asked so you could make the choice yourself .

Your argument claiming that circumcision prevents stds would only help people if true when they are sexually active, a baby or child is unlikely to have sex or catch a std , so there is no reason why you couldnt wait till the kid is a adult and say look I think this will stop you from getting a std these are my proofs,
and then that person can make up their own mind .

Im a adult Im not impressed enough by this report to have a circumcision, see thats someone looking at the evidence and making up their own mind about their own body ..........simple isnt it

 

Waiting until when? At what point are we as kids going to say "go ahead and take the knife to my penis"? Cut em' early!

 

Waiting till you can make your own decision Id say simular to the time you can make other decisions in my country the uk you cant have a tattoo until 16 , so I think that would be a ok age well between 16 and 18 .

Also how would you feel about a group of people who cut off the external parts of their childrens ears , surely they would have the same defence for their action as you if they claimed it prevented edge of ear cancer .

If its ok for parents to cut off parts of their childrens penis why not let them cut off parts of their ears , or give them lots of tattoos or fork their tounges or scar up their faces , personally the word child abuse springs to mind

 

You can't compare something that has thousands of years of cultural acceptence to randomly cutting off parts of ears, it's asinine. No parent circumsizes their kid to be cruel or to mutilate their kid.

 

Slavery had thousands of years of acceptance too so that is no argument .

And these ear choppers are not doing it to be cruel either they are doing it to save their babys from the evils of edge of ear cancer

 

Jonny - Circumcising when a baby is better - the baby may have pain, but it is nothing compared with childbirth a few days earlier. and a mild local anaesthetic mutes most of the pain on the penis.

I had a "loose" circumcision at childbirth, which means that the doctor only cut off the tip of the foreskin, and the rest sits behind the glans. I can pull the remaining foreskin up over the glans when both soft and hard, and this is the most common method today. We have the best of both worlds - no infection or STD entrapment or smegma (it drys and drops off) under the foreskin, but the use of that foreskin when it is needed.

And I believe sex is better without the foreskin covering the glans. If the foreskin cannot be retracted (perhaps 20% of uncut men), sex is like shaking hands with a glove on. If it can be retracted, for most men, during intercourse on the outthrust the foreskin rides back up over the glans, masking the most sensitive part, the coronal ridge at the back of the glans, from contact with the vaginal walls. And having the remaining foreskin behind the glans, as I do, on the inthrust, the loose skin stretches the frenulum, the stringy thing underneath the glans, and further arouses its owner.

In Africa, circumcision is done in a rite of passage puberty ceremony, marking the emergence of the boy as a man. It is a source of pride in the boy to be circumcised, because he is now ready for sexual activity. This is also an element of circumcision in some Muslim and Indian societies, where it is done with great ceremony.

I heard that Charles's boys asked to be cut as young men.

Cutted

 

As I pointed out earlier your evidence that circumcision prevents stds doesn’t impress me as I live in a country with 3 times lower rates of HIV than America and most brits are not circumcised.
That would suggest to me that circumcision makes it more likely that you will get a sexually transmitted disease
Circumcision has a history of great claims which don’t pan out , it used to be that the people trying to get people circumcised used to say it stopped masturbation.
Its also been claimed to cure and prevent malnutrition, paralysis, bed-wetting, hip-joint disease, headache, alcoholism, criminality, club-foot, and heart disease.
you may believe that sex is better but you cant really say as you didn’t have sex with your foreskin , most of the feeling in the penis isn’t in the glands its in the foreskin , the foreskin protects the glands keeps them from getting desensitised the foreskin acts as a seal .

 

LOL. ^^ not going to respond to this dribble.

 

You are basing your argument on crap. The fact that you have an HIV rate 3 times lower than the US has nothing to do with circumcision. Maybe it's just the fact that the average American woman would run, screaming in horror at the sight of your schlong.

 

your not responding because you cant think of a logical argument

and your saying that we have a lower hiv rate because we dont have sex with american women that seems pretty insulting to american women

 

I am not going to respond to your illogical argument w/ anything. Why debate someone who is basing their belief on an illogical statement?

The fact that you have an HIV rate 3 times lower than the US has nothing to do with circumcision.

 

I am just wondering, how would you know if you didn't want it any other way?

 

I'm half circumcised, the doctor screwed up on the circumcision but oh well i like it either way. But when i get older and have boys of my own i'm going to leave them uncircumcised and they can decide when they get older.