I wish I never read this thread... I am now looking at my penis longingly, thinking what could be.
I'm glad I read this on the other hand. When I have a child I'll be sure not to circumcise him/her, barring the mother isn't a total tard. However, if it's true that we are attracted to women like our own mothers...well, let's just say I'm not in luck.
Nothing bad meant to anyone who actually does believe circumcision is best. All preference I guess.
On September 09 2011 07:50 SpearWrit wrote: You fail to mention that uncircumcised babies also run the risk of Phimosis, where the foreskin cannot be retracted, blocking the urethra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phimosis
You also fail to mention that Smegma also grows under foreskins over time, even for uncircumcised men who regularly wash under the foreskin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smegma
Having a foreskin doesn't stop a man from having a "dick that isn't calloused and scarred." Circumcised penises grow used to contact with the outside and clothes that allow the skin to toughen and adapt and desensitize in a way that uncircumcised males cannot because they have a layer of skin over the sensitive area.
As such, circumcised men have longer stamina during sex BECAUSE their sex organ is less sensitive.
Women expect circumcised penises most of the time. I know girls that freaked out the first time they saw one that wasn't. And the guy above me has a good point. Personally I could care less about my sexual satisfaction. I more preoccupied that she gets what she wants .
TLDR 1)Look better 2)May null your satisfaction, but if that's what it takes to make the ladies happy so be it. And personally I who am circumcised feel confident. 3)Easier to clean. If we were in the desert you would die first from infection
I don't want to legitimate this statistics because I don't know the conditions of the real study but looking at the results won't hurt when you actually don't know the answers But it seems that women tends to find the sexual act more painful
Yeah i wouldn't trust the OPs "stats" Anyone can make a graph on Excel. And how exactly wou it make it "painful", or "less satisfactory"?
If you note the OPs sources their all from 1 site. I could buy a domain right now, put up a ton of crap and publish it. Doesn't make it true. I could make up fake stats or even just test a few people. I could even ask leading questions in order to produce biased answers.
Furthermore, those 'statistics' were gathered in Denmark, where ~5% of men are circumcised. This could be why females don't feel satisfied by a cut dick. Their man isn't 'normal' to them. In the US, conversely, we see some female bias against uncut dicks.
Ultimately I feel it is fair for parents to be able to make this decision for their kid as long as there is no ill intent and sufficient relevant evidence that the harms outweigh the benefits has not manifested itself.
My justification is that it is a parental right to make decisions concerning the well-being of their child barring exceptional circumstances
You sir should become a reporter for fox news because you bias reporting is perfect there. Many of the things u said about circumcision are completely wrong 1) inferiority complex what??? 2)callousses and irritation part completely wrong
this thread was meant to get rid of myths about circumcision but instead it just spread more myths
On September 09 2011 09:35 Zzoram wrote: Women only expect circumcised penises in America. Most other countries don't do it except for rare medical conditions.
Truth.
As far as the issue of pleasing the other gender goes.. how can you say an uncut dude has a harder time pleasing his woman or making her orgasm several times? (or vice versa for that matter) Have you never had sex or something?
Different women have different requirements for reaching sexual climax - hell, I've figured out my wife and can make her orgasm about 3 times in 5 minutes just by hitting the right angle and tempo, and I certainly dont have any issues lasting 5x as much if necessary. Its not a damn linear scale that goes something like.. 5 minutes of pounding=1 orgasm.
What I don't understand is this: what is the big deal? It's not like circumcised people are trying to mandate it or anything, it's the so-called intactivists who are trying to ban it for reasons which are flimsy at best just because they've decided to make it their personal crusade. This whole issue is absolutely ridiculous; the foreskin is about as worthwhile as the appendix.
gee, you would think there would be more complaints about mutilating genital parts. must be a big deal... it just took a couple thousand years for anyone to notice. They say so in the op.
On September 09 2011 09:28 GinDo wrote: Women expect circumcised penises most of the time.
Totally depends where you are from. This may be true in the states but I believe that there are fewer circumcised men UK than uncircumcised.
Almost all of Europe, Asia and South-America is uncircumcised.
Circumcision is only common in parts of Africa, the US, Indonesia, the middle-east and, for some reason, South-Korea.
Something like 15-30% of men around the world are circumcised, and it's most prevalent among Americans and Muslims.. I think we've found common ground!
On September 09 2011 09:35 Zzoram wrote: Women only expect circumcised penises in America. Most other countries don't do it except for rare medical conditions.
Truth.
As far as the issue of pleasing the other gender goes.. how can you say an uncut dude has a harder time pleasing his woman or making her orgasm several times? (or vice versa for that matter) Have you never had sex or something?
Different women have different requirements for reaching sexual climax - hell, I've figured out my wife and can make her orgasm about 3 times in 5 minutes just by hitting the right angle and tempo, and I certainly dont have any issues lasting 5x as much if necessary. Its not a damn linear scale that goes something like.. 5 minutes of pounding=1 orgasm.
uncut btw
Damn if only I were uncut I'm sure I could please my woman AT LEAST that much. Sex for us cut people must be like weight training in a high gravity low oxygen environment
Edit: I read again and realized you probably didn't mean anything silly by adding you were uncut. Still though...
I belive I read male genital mutilation in the US is mainly to 1800-1900 belief that it would reduce masturbation, a horrible sin. If you want to, go ahead and do it when your 18+ and its your own chooice but don't do it on infants that have no chooice.
Abit of youtubing lead me to a bullshit episode ^^
After seeing this, so yeah, you have a $ 400M industry that realy want you to cut dicks so they can sell the leftover foreskin to be put to use in plastic surgery. wow, first you get them to pay you to get rid of it, then you sell it to others. Thats a pretty decent way to run a business.
I'm still going to have my child circumcised. I'm part Jewish and it just looks aesthetically better (in my opinion and my girlfriend's).
I just wish my father didn't take pictures of my circumcision. I didn't know what it was when I was a kid looking through these photos, but when I was told what it was, I took a deeper look.
God, I'm so traumatized by myself. No pictures of my younger brother, only of his first son...
On September 09 2011 09:28 GinDo wrote: Women expect circumcised penises most of the time.
Totally depends where you are from. This may be true in the states but I believe that there are fewer circumcised men UK than uncircumcised.
Almost all of Europe, Asia and South-America is uncircumcised.
Circumcision is only common in parts of Africa, the US, Indonesia, the middle-east and, for some reason, South-Korea.
Something like 15-30% of men around the world are circumcised, and it's most prevalent among Americans and Muslims.. I think we've found common ground!
"Stop killing each other, can't you see you have the same kinds of penises?"
On September 09 2011 09:54 gogogadgetflow wrote: Damn if only I were uncut I'm sure I could please my woman AT LEAST that much. Sex for us cut people must be like weight training in a high gravity low oxygen environment
...Seriously? Do I need to bold the part where I say ''or vice versa'' in regards to performance in bed in cut vs uncut?
I was responding to the continued claims that somehow, uncut men cant last as long in bed, or that they somehow cant please their women as well as cut males. My claim being that being circumcised or not has nothing to do with it.
Please read the entire post before your ego gets too hurt and you hit that reply button =/
On September 09 2011 09:51 Saraf wrote: What I don't understand is this: what is the big deal? It's not like circumcised people are trying to mandate it or anything, it's the so-called intactivists who are trying to ban it for reasons which are flimsy at best just because they've decided to make it their personal crusade. This whole issue is absolutely ridiculous; the foreskin is about as worthwhile as the appendix.
Except that many of them are forcing it on individuals? It's not like they're asking for their infant's consent before cutting his genitals.
On September 09 2011 07:50 SpearWrit wrote: You fail to mention that uncircumcised babies also run the risk of Phimosis, where the foreskin cannot be retracted, blocking the urethra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phimosis
You also fail to mention that Smegma also grows under foreskins over time, even for uncircumcised men who regularly wash under the foreskin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smegma
Having a foreskin doesn't stop a man from having a "dick that isn't calloused and scarred." Circumcised penises grow used to contact with the outside and clothes that allow the skin to toughen and adapt and desensitize in a way that uncircumcised males cannot because they have a layer of skin over the sensitive area.
As such, circumcised men have longer stamina during sex BECAUSE their sex organ is less sensitive.
Women expect circumcised penises most of the time. I know girls that freaked out the first time they saw one that wasn't. And the guy above me has a good point. Personally I could care less about my sexual satisfaction. I more preoccupied that she gets what she wants .
TLDR 1)Look better 2)May null your satisfaction, but if that's what it takes to make the ladies happy so be it. And personally I who am circumcised feel confident. 3)Easier to clean. If we were in the desert you would die first from infection
I don't want to legitimate this statistics because I don't know the conditions of the real study but looking at the results won't hurt when you actually don't know the answers But it seems that women tends to find the sexual act more painful
Yeah i wouldn't trust the OPs "stats" Anyone can make a graph on Excel. And how exactly wou it make it "painful", or "less satisfactory"?
If you note the OPs sources their all from 1 site. I could buy a domain right now, put up a ton of crap and publish it. Doesn't make it true. I could make up fake stats or even just test a few people. I could even ask leading questions in order to produce biased answers.
Ultimately I feel it is fair for parents to be able to make this decision for their kid as long as there is no ill intent and sufficient relevant evidence that the harms outweigh the benefits has not manifested itself.
My justification is that it is a parental right to make decisions concerning the well-being of their child barring exceptional circumstances
And you dont think cutting off part of a guys penis is an exceptional circumstance? That just blows my mind.
On September 09 2011 07:50 SpearWrit wrote: You fail to mention that uncircumcised babies also run the risk of Phimosis, where the foreskin cannot be retracted, blocking the urethra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phimosis
You also fail to mention that Smegma also grows under foreskins over time, even for uncircumcised men who regularly wash under the foreskin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smegma
Having a foreskin doesn't stop a man from having a "dick that isn't calloused and scarred." Circumcised penises grow used to contact with the outside and clothes that allow the skin to toughen and adapt and desensitize in a way that uncircumcised males cannot because they have a layer of skin over the sensitive area.
As such, circumcised men have longer stamina during sex BECAUSE their sex organ is less sensitive.
TERRIBLE thread. What is this even doing on Team Liquid? Who says to themself: "Hmm I want to spread my anti-circumcision propaganda. Which website should I do it on? OH I know! Teamliquid.net, a starcraft website. Perfect."
Edit: Yes I realize that this is the general forum, however, I don't think that propaganda belongs here. I mean I guess there's no rules against it, but it just feels dirty.
On September 09 2011 10:00 MichaelDonovan wrote: TERRIBLE thread. What is this even doing on Team Liquid? Who says to themself: "Hmm I want to spread my anti-circumcision propaganda. Which website should I do it on? OH I know! Teamliquid.net, a starcraft website. Perfect."
On September 09 2011 09:33 Dalguno wrote: I thought this was going to be about an elephant being circumcised, oh boy.
Same, I kinda did that "wtf?" rage face @ the title.
Interesting thread made me think about something that is a part of me that I never have before. I'm circumcised and never really paid any attention to it. Since it seems to matter, I'm American too. No women I've been with even mentioned anything about it. It was done while I was a baby. Maybe it was painful, I dunno, not like I remember.
There have been times during sex when I simply could not finish the job and had to fake it. Then move onto something else quickly until the boner goes away. Wonder if the lower sensitivity is why. I chalked it up to the other person just being a boring lay. Though I wouldn't know how sensitive not being circumcised is in the first place. Learn something new every day.
On September 09 2011 09:18 zylog wrote: Is there a difference in friction and lubrication needed? I know that with a foreskin, it slides over and off the the glans. It feels good, as it provides a bit of a buffer for the revealed glans which can be super sensitive. How is it with circumcised men? The glans is fully exposed from the start, which I'd imagine would be potentially uncomfortable in certain situations unless heavily lubricated.
Gotta make sure the girl is wet and her giving a little oral first helps as well. But if she's set on starting sex right away without foreplay then a little lube is required. Up until reading the first post in this thread I thought all this was normal. So do you uncut dudes just plunge right in?
I don't see any obvious scarring. Though the skin tone is slightly different(more white) where it was cut I guess.
Whatevs
My parents are very right wing christian/religious. I'm sure it was done for that and for sanitary reasons. And although I despise Abrahamic religions I'm not using this as a way to talk smack about them.