I have no problem with an adult person having ANY part of their body altered by their own choice......If a man really wants to be rid of his foreskin that it entirely his own business.
What I personally find unacceptable about this subject is twofold......Firstly,the idea of mutilating a tiny baby boy by the very persons who should be looking after him, and regardless of whether he would want that mutilation in adult life.....What right does ANY person on this planet have to do that to another developing human being?
Secondly, I am constantly irritated by this inability/disinclination to see the foreskin as anything other than a piece of completely useless and redundant skin that serves absolutely no purpose or function.
Of course a circ.ed man can have an orgasm and reproduce and make love. However, he has also been mutilated and has lost part of his sensuality.....two thirds of the unique voluptus producing nerve ends have been removed from him....the function of his penis and the way his sensuality works has been changd for ever into something different to his natural state. Who has the moral right to inflict this on another human being against their future will?
It's useful to ask ourselves WHY did human beings desire to purposely remove and reduce the sensuality from male ****?....to remove the forskin is to remove as much sensuality and voluptus as possible without actually taking away the ability to mate and reproduce.
Religion has always been terrified by sex and sensuality becasue it offers ordinary people the sublime experience that religion can only dream of,...and it offers it in a regular and accessible way that all normal adults can enjoy. Of course religions have looked to rempoving mens sensuality as much as possible, it makes perfect sense for them to do so.
Teh foreskin has a quite different set of feelings and sensations to the rest of the penis.......it also has most of the unique 'sex pleasure' nerve ends....it has it's own **** supply (so NOT just a piece of redundant skin)...and it has it's own function before and during sexual intercourse.........
........HOW can it be right to routinely remove the foreskin from males without their consent???????
"cumming" is not the only point in having good sex...
By #118690 at 20,Apr,13 08:38
Its all about the brain, not the forsekin, yes that video was a bit of propaganda, as sex is all in the brain. I mean, the guys are trying to restore skin and hope that the same nerves will grow back, when he states that they don't. So all the guys have done is cover the head. I think it's all subjective in this case
it's not a bit propaganda, it's a bit of information. to maybe let people think about why it's NOT a good idea to circumcise a boy for no reason.
if guys try to restore foreskin, doesn't that say something about how frustrated they are about the decision that was made for them?
if you think it's all in the brain, not the foreskin, i thing you are wrong. sex is also in our sex-organs. and why take away from the pleasure for no reason?
By #303133 at 20,Apr,13 17:40
Two problems with your argument:
1. Not every circumcised guy wants to restore his foreskin. Hell, some guys slice their pecker down the middle or voluntarily castrate themselves. What sort of frustration are they expressing?
2. When you make the "take away from the pleasure" argument, you make it sound as if circumcised men experience no pleasure during sex. That is untrue. Sex feels mighty fine.
I think that much of the anti-circ rhetoric stems from body-image issues on the part of the uncut guy. Somewhere along the line, a guy/girl looked at their foreskin and said: "hey, that looks funny! And...what is that horrible smell?", and they have been fighting to make that trauma vanish by demanding that every other guy must look like them.
1. I never said ALL clipped guys want to restore their foreskin! Don't put words in my mouth! Some do... Some don't.
I don't know why some men "modify" or do whatever to their dick and cut it up, but hey, that's their ADULT decision! Fine if that is their own, adult decision about their OWN penis!
2. I never said, and I don't make it sound "as if circumcised men experience no pleasure during sex". I'm not out of reality! I know the equipment still works after taking away the foreskin. I just think every boy has to decide for himself!
3. You might think being cut is normal, 3/4 of the men in this world are NOT circumcised. No-one ever, in my country and the rest of Europe looked at an uncut cock and thought something funny about it! Except for some jews and moslims, and some for medical reasons, everybody is UNclipped!
4. "That horrible smell"... Please, could we get over that? That saying makes it sound like under every foreskin there is a biological weapon! Let me assure you, that's NOT the case! And circumcission is no garantuee that a guy takes a shower everyday, and washes his armpits, asshole hand and feet, and brushes his teeth also.
5. "anti-circ rhetoric"... Sure! And everyone who shares my standpoint is part of the "anti-circ-brigade". (A brigade is a major tactical military formation that is... according to Wikipedia)
"We" of the anti-circ brigade, only argument and discuss, that circumcising babyboys takes something away from them: their own voice in the matter! We, as the anti-circ-brigade, are harmless, we ONLY talk, argument, as much as it takes! The circ-brigade has a baby-boys penis in one hand and a knife in the other!
You may feel that it is your God-given right to do so, so may people in Africa think about cutting up girls. And how do we stop that? NO KNIFE! NEVER!!
By #303133 at 21,Apr,13 01:01
I am NOT putting words into your mouth. I was responding to the words you used.
1. You said this yourself: "sex is also in our sex-organs. and why take away from the pleasure for no reason?". The implication is that WITHOUT a foreskin, sex is not pleasurable. Every ant-circ statement made includes something similar to that. Again, sex is mighty fine without a foreskin. That statement has NOTHING to do with a boy deciding, it is about lack of sexual pleasure, to which I responded.
2. You also said this: "if guys try to restore foreskin, doesn't that say something about how frustrated they are about the decision that was made for them?" Your argument is that ADULT men are doing things to their penis because of "frustration" they feel. My point is that there are ADULT guys who do all sorts of things to their penis. Should we eliminate every possible aspect of childhood that would make a guy want to pierce his cock?
3. If "Except for some jews and moslims, and some for medical reasons, everybody is UNclipped!", then what's the big deal? Worry about your own dick, and leave ours alone.
4. I'll stop talking about "the horrible smell" when you can prove that EVERY uncut penis smells like a bed of roses. Truth is, many uncut guys DO NOT observe proper hygiene (check out all the dick cheese posts in this very forum if you don't believe me). Remove the foreskin; remove the cheese.
5. Those Jews and Muslims believe that circumcision is a covenant with their God. Do you wish to outlaw all religious practices? Issues with baptism, perhaps?
6. I know what a "brigade" is, smart guy. Don't get snooty with me. That was YOUR word, not MINE (so who is putting words into someone's mouth?) I used the word "rhetoric" (which is: "Language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or being less than meaningful.")because you tend to beat the same drum, but the music you make isn't worth dancing to.
7. Quit comparing female circumcision to male circumcision. They are two totally different things, and you do a grave injustice to any woman who has ever had her clitoris ritually sliced off. That is similar to removing the glans of the penis, not just a piece of skin.
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 01:37
I don't want to get involved with your argument with bigone, I just want to ask you one question. Do you think it is right/okay to circumcise a baby?
By #303133 at 21,Apr,13 02:39
Honestly, dolphin, I don't really have a problem with it. Every guy I know is circumcised. None of them has ever complained about a lack of sensitivity or loss of pleasure during sex because of it. Where I grew up, a circumcised dick looks "normal" I am glad that mine was done when I was a baby.I don't remember the pain...
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 02:42
I just have problem with cutting bits of skin of baby boys penis' obviously without their consent. I don't really see the reason for doing it.
By #303133 at 21,Apr,13 02:47
As I have said before, it's not like they are doing a lobotomy.
(I have nothing against uncut guys or their dicks.)
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 04:13
So as long as it does not have a major affect on the persons life you can snip anything you want off your baby son...
(I have nothing against cut guys or there dick just the practice of performing a cosmetic operation on those who cannot give consent)
If you ask the majority of men in the US they would probably be happy or just fine with their cut status.
But if you asked them instead would you choose to have bits of skin on their penis removed with no anaesthetic and with no medical benefits to them, I think they would say no.
I guess i just dont think its that big of a deal....like i said i had it done when i was older and was awake the whole time....i was there when my new born son was circumcised he cried a bit but it really wasnt all that major....
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 05:36
Its just, i have nothing wrong with you deciding to get yourself circumcised; I don't think its a decision you should be making for your ****. Just my opinion.
Im sure there is alot of decisions i will be makeing for my son u will not agree with but the fact is...he is my son and its my job to make decisions for him and do what i think is right....ya know what i mean?
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 05:51
Well off coarse some decisions should obviously be made by the parent when a ch.ild is so young that it is questionable that they even understand anything that is happening around them. But some decisions i would not feel right making for my ****, circumcision is one of them but out of some of the decisions you could make for your ch.ild it is far from the worst.
So what is it that offends u so much about it then? Its a fact that its cleaner and there is no difference in sensation....so y not??
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 06:59
Its exactly the same if you actually wash properly> Also some people say its exactly the same and some say it a world of difference but the sensation is not the point I'm making. I think that it is a cosmetic operation that should not be performed on un-consenting ch.ildren.
Its not the same it doesnt stay as clean as long thats a FACT and that alone makes it more than just a cosmetic surgery.....what people say it makes the world of difference??.....do u know these people or just heard of them??
By #323005 at 21,Apr,13 07:22
dude i own a uncut penis (i know you d did), i keep it clean. The only times when i have though "damn it would be horrible to suck my dick right now" is when i have been camping and have had not access to shower or after a long cramped plane journey.
Also I am sorry if I do not take your personal experience that there is no difference and therefore conclude that there is no difference in sensation between uncut and cut dicks. I need more than one persons testimony for something to be a "FACT"
P.s. for the record saying "FACT" does not instantly make what you just said true.
Do some research i did b4 i circumcised myself and my son....i found that there r more than just cosmetic reasons to have it done.....thats all im saying.....then make YOUR own decision and try not to judge others for makeing a different one....
By #90761 at 21,Apr,13 18:22
johnP agreed, but you know what, its all about missing something, i mean MISSING SOMETHING and when people think they are missing something they want it back,,are they though missing anything
Ya but how many guys that r actually circumcised feel that way? Non that i personally know.....thats not to say they arnt out there but im guessing is a very small %.......
I am a moderator on a foreskin restoration forum site. We have almost 10,000 members. and every last one of them wish that they had NOT been circumcised. the % of circumcised men that resent this being done against their will( infant circumcision) and those who had it done as a adult and now regret it is very high....
it is more that "just a piece of skin" the foreskin has over 20,000 special nerve endings that aid in sexual pleasure. an average adult foreskin can cover a 3X 5 index card....
plus the things that can go wrong... skin bridges, infection, gangrene, accidental amputation of the penis....death
I think if it was my son I would just leave him alone.
By #301038 at 21,Apr,13 04:48
I personally think that it should be up to the individual to modify their body, when they can make a decision. I'm carrying a boy and my task it to keep his body intact and healthy, so when he grows up he can still have everything there, including his foreskin, appendix, all of his limbs, fingers and other body parts... when he is 18 and can make a decision for himself what he wants to do with his body, I will do my best to inform him about positives and negatives of his decisions, so he can make his own informed choices.
Regarding the horrible smell... Most cocks that I had, including in my mouth, were uncut, and if the cock still smells horrible after a proper shower, there is something wrong with the cock and it should be left alone and referred to the doctor. Washing an uncut cock once a day and immediately before having sex will ensure that you always have a clean cock to suck... trust me, both of my husbands were uncut, and I have a very sensitive sense of smell... Cut cock will smell just as bad if proper hygiene is not observed, don't you think? Women would smell too, if they don't bathe, so what now? Do we chop off all the folds, creases and leave a clean field, so the poor thing don't have to shower? Armpits smell too, but they won't if you put botex and block the sweat production... but that's not good for the body... and no one died yet from taking shower once or twice a day.
In the old times, when people rarely bathed, removing the foreskin might have been the only way to prevent the cheese from forming, but since we all got running water and internet, this should not be an issue.
What bugs me, is that parents make the choice for the little guy, and he's got no say in it and can't make it grow back just the way it was.
There are 4 types of female circumcision, not all of them remove the clitoris. First type just nicks the clit to drew some **** "to purify" the female, second type cleans up the labia minora and clitoral hood, leaving the clit intact, third type chops off the clit and labia minora, fourth type cuts off everything, leaving a pee hole and a small hole for blоod to pass... in the case of the fourth type, woman needs to be cut open by her husband for intercourse and have a episiotomy when having a ****... it all depends on the region, culture and tribe it's performed.... I think it should be banned around the world, and punishable by law... but in some tribes it goes 5000 years back, and they won't let an outsider dictate what to do with their bodies. How do you explain someone, who believes that having clitoris will kill a woman during childbirth, cause it's going to shoot into her head, and then her whole family will die because of that... it's people's beliefs and until the new belief will replace the old one, any kind of argument is pointless...
Well, what's there to say? Peach sums it up perfectly! And, along the line reviews all aspects on boy-circumcision. Thanks for your helicopter-view Peach!
@JustWill: You are, again, putting words in my mouth.
1. I didn't say that being cut makes sex NOT pleasurable. STOP saying that I said that, because I did NOT. I DID say that a foreskin has a function and is a source of pleasure in all kinds of ways to the guy who has it and the sexpartner.
2. In this aspect I am talking about guys that try to reverse the decision that was made for them. A reconstruction of the foreskin, I think, is mostly tried to get back what is taken away.
I know someguys do crazy stuff to their penis, and if you think my PA is in that categorie, you're welcome to think so. But it was MY decision as an ADULT! I was NOT pierced by my parents at age zero! And if I were: I could take the piercing out and go live "unpierced"!
3. The "big" deal is: I think the circumcision of baby-boys -for no reason- is a bad thing. I think it has to stop. Some people have strong views about this or that, vaccination of a ****, abortion, global heating, capitalism, or fuel prices. Well, I have (also) a strong view on cutting up babyboys.
4. I never could, and don't think I should in this discussion, "prove that EVERY uncut penis smells like a bed of roses". Neither does every armpit, mouth, hands and feet, asshole and CUT cock! Personal hygiene is up to a person, most of us can shower if we want to!
5. Even if Jews or Muslims believe that circumcision is a convenant with their God, I am against it! I think the physical integrety of the **** is more important than the believes of the parents. Maybe the **** wants to NOT have a convenant with any God when he is 18 or older! It's a ritual! It's NOT a mind-changer!
6. You are right! You didn't use the word "anti-circ-brigade", because I thought I had it coming. I've heard that a lot. But if you don't want me to get "snooty" with you, don't try that same thing with me, because what I argument is is sincere and, in my view, meaningfull.
7. I don't quit about that! I don't say it's the same thing, but there are parallel lines! And it is: the parents claiming the right to exercise alternation of their childrens genitals, for whatever reason they can think of, and do so in a culture that approves of that or doesn't stand up to it!
If I, making some noise about this, save ONE foreskin for a young man, make ONE parent think about the "standard-procedure", and hopefully in the future do change some minds to bring change of mind to more parents, I am happy with that!
If I don't, I did what I thought I had to do: informing that cutting up baby-boys is NOT what they asked for!
I was circumcised in my teens. I have had sex with and without foreskin for me there was absolutely no difference. The sensations i felt in my dickk did not change on bit....sex is as good after as before and there is a diffrence in how clean i can keep it....i choose to do it because felt "different" from other guys and @ the time didnt like the way it looked...
I had my foreskin removed when I was just hours old. I had NO say in the matter. and later when I asked why it had been done I was told that my parents were never asked, it was just done. Yes I had sex and yes it seemed to me that everything was working fine. I had ALWAYS resented the fact that it was removed. I discovered foreskin restoration and looked into this and decided to try it.
everyone who is circumcised say's there is no difference in feeling between circumcised and uncircumcised... well for ME this is a bunch of bullshit. for me the difference is like night and day,from black and white to full living color. I can say that there is a huge difference in sensitivity and you just don't notice this as an exposed Glans is all you have known.
Im confused didnt u say u had your foreskin removed when u were only hrs old? So they were able to attach new foreskin that actually has feeling in it??
do a google search for foreskin restoration. my foreskin has lots of feeling in it. do some research thousands of men have been restoring their foreskins for hundreds of years
Wow didnt know medican has come that far i will chk it out.....if that is true then y is everyone crying?? He can always have it restored if he doesnt like it right??
If I were a doctor that lied his way through The Hippocratic Oath, I could see a great business model in that way of thinking!!
Cut of some foreskin, get paid, and if 20 years later the patient is unhappy, help to restore the foreskin, and get paid again!
That's a financial perpetuum mobile!! Briljant!
By #360973 at 22,Apr,13 16:25
Cuckoo cuckoo cuckoo... --------------------------------------- added after 8 minutes
Could've put that comment anywhere but skipped to the end coz of boredom - repetition/alarmist comment/hysteria, repetition/alarmist comment/hysteria,...
that's the group of people that are personally responsible for baby-boys being chopped! being: holding the knife and using it, to facilitating to circumsission, or offer their son for circumsission, to promoting circumsission.
replace DOT by a dot: . --------------------------------------- added after 8 minutes
from this website:
Take this quiz, and find out whether you believe the myths that far too many doctors believe, or whether you are an informed layperson or a foreskin-friendly physician who knows and understands the scientific facts about circumcision.
1. As regards pain, circumcision:
A. does not hurt.
B. Is excruciating for an infant as well as an adult. Tightening the circumcision clamp puts crushing pressure on a large area of sensitive skin.
2. The foreskin is:
A. a useless piece of skin
B. an integral part of the male sexual organ, containing most of the nerve endings of sexual pleasure.
3. During circumcision, the infant:
A. goes to ****.
B. withdraws into a state of neurogenic shock (coma), due to sudden massive pain.
4. With respect to functions, the foreskin:
A. has no function. It is “just a piece of skin.”
B. has at least three major functions:
1. protection of the glans penis, an internal organ.
2. coverage of the shaft of the elongated, erect penis.
3. provision of most of the nerves for sexual response
(the ridged bands on the inner lining of the foreskin).
5. With respect to cancer of the penis, circumcision:
A. prevents it.
B. has nothing to do with penile cancer.(American Cancer Society, 1989)
6. With respect to ethics, a doctor who performs a circumcision:
A. is practicing reasonable medicine.
B. violates all seven Principles of the AMA Code of Ethics; violates a primary tenet of health care, First, Do No Harm; and violates the Golden Rule.
7. With respect to human rights, a doctor who performs a circumcision:
A. is within his rights.
B. violates a basic human right, the right to an intact body. The infant has the right not to have normal body parts removed without his express consent. The doctor has failed to obtain the informed consent of the mutilee. The doctor is violating the Nuremberg Code of Ethics, which regulates experimentation on humans.
8. With respect to safety, circumcision is:
A. safe
B. kills an unknown number of U.S. infants every year.
9. With respect to complications, circumcision has:
A. very few complications
B. a 100% complication rate – in every instance the loss of a useful organ. In addition, there are many unrecorded complications, including deaths. Health costs of circumcised boys 5x those of intact boys!
10. The loss of foreskin:
A. has no effect on later life.
B. contributes to inferior sexual relations, which leads to increased divorce rates, increased ****, increased exposure to sexually transmitted diseases, and contributes to impotence, especially after age 40.
If you answered A to every question, you believe in myths. If you answered B, you are informed with the latest scientific information on this harmful procedure.
The reason that doctors accept these myths, when they usually are eager to accept the scientific evidence on most topics, is that circumcisers are almost always victims of the procedure. An important body part has been stolen from them and they have great difficulty dealing with that loss. If they are women practitioners, they have either agreed to having their sons’ foreskins amputated, or they did a number of circumcisions without thinking, then lacked the courage to acknowledge the harm they had caused.
The purpose of this brief questionnaire is to help people better understand how doctors can be so misled, and so misleading.
George C. Denniston MD, MPH
President --------------------------------------- added after 13 minutes
3A **** = s l e e p
10B **** = v i o l e n c e
By #360973 at 22,Apr,13 08:12
Hyper-morality, political correctness,... gone mad!
you forgot to mention hysteria, too much time on their hands, left wing fucking liberals, and forgot to ask the question: what would be the next thing? that I can't slap my k i d around anymore???
By #360973 at 22,Apr,13 16:35
You're developing - you don't sound like an extremist everytime you open your mouth --------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
When are you going to start suggesting that every circumsized male should get litigious with their parents, doctor and hospital? Are you going to go out and rally against abortion doctors and clinics so fervently (oh wait, that doesn't have any personal resonance with you - so, no)
What I personally find unacceptable about this subject is twofold......Firstly,the idea of mutilating a tiny baby boy by the very persons who should be looking after him, and regardless of whether he would want that mutilation in adult life.....What right does ANY person on this planet have to do that to another developing human being?
Secondly, I am constantly irritated by this inability/disinclination to see the foreskin as anything other than a piece of completely useless and redundant skin that serves absolutely no purpose or function.
Of course a circ.ed man can have an orgasm and reproduce and make love. However, he has also been mutilated and has lost part of his sensuality.....two thirds of the unique voluptus producing nerve ends have been removed from him....the function of his penis and the way his sensuality works has been changd for ever into something different to his natural state. Who has the moral right to inflict this on another human being against their future will?
It's useful to ask ourselves WHY did human beings desire to purposely remove and reduce the sensuality from male ****?....to remove the forskin is to remove as much sensuality and voluptus as possible without actually taking away the ability to mate and reproduce.
Religion has always been terrified by sex and sensuality becasue it offers ordinary people the sublime experience that religion can only dream of,...and it offers it in a regular and accessible way that all normal adults can enjoy. Of course religions have looked to rempoving mens sensuality as much as possible, it makes perfect sense for them to do so.
Teh foreskin has a quite different set of feelings and sensations to the rest of the penis.......it also has most of the unique 'sex pleasure' nerve ends....it has it's own **** supply (so NOT just a piece of redundant skin)...and it has it's own function before and during sexual intercourse.........
........HOW can it be right to routinely remove the foreskin from males without their consent???????
arguments like this won't do:
"Just a piece of skin."
"It does not hurt."
"Circumcision is not an important issue."
"It is necessary for hygienic purposes."
"Necessary to prevent cancer of penis."
"It's important that he looks like his father."
"He may not be comfortable looking different."
(from the doctorsopposingcircumcisionDOTorg website)
if guys try to restore foreskin, doesn't that say something about how frustrated they are about the decision that was made for them?
if you think it's all in the brain, not the foreskin, i thing you are wrong. sex is also in our sex-organs. and why take away from the pleasure for no reason?
1. Not every circumcised guy wants to restore his foreskin. Hell, some guys slice their pecker down the middle or voluntarily castrate themselves. What sort of frustration are they expressing?
2. When you make the "take away from the pleasure" argument, you make it sound as if circumcised men experience no pleasure during sex. That is untrue. Sex feels mighty fine.
I think that much of the anti-circ rhetoric stems from body-image issues on the part of the uncut guy. Somewhere along the line, a guy/girl looked at their foreskin and said: "hey, that looks funny! And...what is that horrible smell?", and they have been fighting to make that trauma vanish by demanding that every other guy must look like them.
I have MORE than 2 problems with your arguments!
1. I never said ALL clipped guys want to restore their foreskin! Don't put words in my mouth! Some do... Some don't.
I don't know why some men "modify" or do whatever to their dick and cut it up, but hey, that's their ADULT decision! Fine if that is their own, adult decision about their OWN penis!
2. I never said, and I don't make it sound "as if circumcised men experience no pleasure during sex". I'm not out of reality! I know the equipment still works after taking away the foreskin. I just think every boy has to decide for himself!
3. You might think being cut is normal, 3/4 of the men in this world are NOT circumcised. No-one ever, in my country and the rest of Europe looked at an uncut cock and thought something funny about it! Except for some jews and moslims, and some for medical reasons, everybody is UNclipped!
4. "That horrible smell"... Please, could we get over that? That saying makes it sound like under every foreskin there is a biological weapon! Let me assure you, that's NOT the case! And circumcission is no garantuee that a guy takes a shower everyday, and washes his armpits, asshole hand and feet, and brushes his teeth also.
5. "anti-circ rhetoric"... Sure! And everyone who shares my standpoint is part of the "anti-circ-brigade". (A brigade is a major tactical military formation that is... according to Wikipedia)
"We" of the anti-circ brigade, only argument and discuss, that circumcising babyboys takes something away from them: their own voice in the matter! We, as the anti-circ-brigade, are harmless, we ONLY talk, argument, as much as it takes! The circ-brigade has a baby-boys penis in one hand and a knife in the other!
You may feel that it is your God-given right to do so, so may people in Africa think about cutting up girls. And how do we stop that? NO KNIFE! NEVER!!
1. You said this yourself: "sex is also in our sex-organs. and why take away from the pleasure for no reason?". The implication is that WITHOUT a foreskin, sex is not pleasurable. Every ant-circ statement made includes something similar to that. Again, sex is mighty fine without a foreskin. That statement has NOTHING to do with a boy deciding, it is about lack of sexual pleasure, to which I responded.
2. You also said this: "if guys try to restore foreskin, doesn't that say something about how frustrated they are about the decision that was made for them?" Your argument is that ADULT men are doing things to their penis because of "frustration" they feel. My point is that there are ADULT guys who do all sorts of things to their penis. Should we eliminate every possible aspect of childhood that would make a guy want to pierce his cock?
3. If "Except for some jews and moslims, and some for medical reasons, everybody is UNclipped!", then what's the big deal? Worry about your own dick, and leave ours alone.
4. I'll stop talking about "the horrible smell" when you can prove that EVERY uncut penis smells like a bed of roses. Truth is, many uncut guys DO NOT observe proper hygiene (check out all the dick cheese posts in this very forum if you don't believe me). Remove the foreskin; remove the cheese.
5. Those Jews and Muslims believe that circumcision is a covenant with their God. Do you wish to outlaw all religious practices? Issues with baptism, perhaps?
6. I know what a "brigade" is, smart guy. Don't get snooty with me. That was YOUR word, not MINE (so who is putting words into someone's mouth?) I used the word "rhetoric" (which is: "Language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or being less than meaningful.")because you tend to beat the same drum, but the music you make isn't worth dancing to.
7. Quit comparing female circumcision to male circumcision. They are two totally different things, and you do a grave injustice to any woman who has ever had her clitoris ritually sliced off. That is similar to removing the glans of the penis, not just a piece of skin.
(I have nothing against uncut guys or their dicks.)
(I have nothing against cut guys or there dick just the practice of performing a cosmetic operation on those who cannot give consent)
But if you asked them instead would you choose to have bits of skin on their penis removed with no anaesthetic and with no medical benefits to them, I think they would say no.
Also I am sorry if I do not take your personal experience that there is no difference and therefore conclude that there is no difference in sensation between uncut and cut dicks. I need more than one persons testimony for something to be a "FACT"
P.s. for the record saying "FACT" does not instantly make what you just said true.
it is more that "just a piece of skin" the foreskin has over 20,000 special nerve endings that aid in sexual pleasure. an average adult foreskin can cover a 3X 5 index card....
plus the things that can go wrong... skin bridges, infection, gangrene, accidental amputation of the penis....death
I think if it was my son I would just leave him alone.
Regarding the horrible smell... Most cocks that I had, including in my mouth, were uncut, and if the cock still smells horrible after a proper shower, there is something wrong with the cock and it should be left alone and referred to the doctor. Washing an uncut cock once a day and immediately before having sex will ensure that you always have a clean cock to suck... trust me, both of my husbands were uncut, and I have a very sensitive sense of smell... Cut cock will smell just as bad if proper hygiene is not observed, don't you think? Women would smell too, if they don't bathe, so what now? Do we chop off all the folds, creases and leave a clean field, so the poor thing don't have to shower? Armpits smell too, but they won't if you put botex and block the sweat production... but that's not good for the body... and no one died yet from taking shower once or twice a day.
In the old times, when people rarely bathed, removing the foreskin might have been the only way to prevent the cheese from forming, but since we all got running water and internet, this should not be an issue.
What bugs me, is that parents make the choice for the little guy, and he's got no say in it and can't make it grow back just the way it was.
There are 4 types of female circumcision, not all of them remove the clitoris. First type just nicks the clit to drew some **** "to purify" the female, second type cleans up the labia minora and clitoral hood, leaving the clit intact, third type chops off the clit and labia minora, fourth type cuts off everything, leaving a pee hole and a small hole for blоod to pass... in the case of the fourth type, woman needs to be cut open by her husband for intercourse and have a episiotomy when having a ****... it all depends on the region, culture and tribe it's performed.... I think it should be banned around the world, and punishable by law... but in some tribes it goes 5000 years back, and they won't let an outsider dictate what to do with their bodies. How do you explain someone, who believes that having clitoris will kill a woman during childbirth, cause it's going to shoot into her head, and then her whole family will die because of that... it's people's beliefs and until the new belief will replace the old one, any kind of argument is pointless...
1. I didn't say that being cut makes sex NOT pleasurable. STOP saying that I said that, because I did NOT. I DID say that a foreskin has a function and is a source of pleasure in all kinds of ways to the guy who has it and the sexpartner.
2. In this aspect I am talking about guys that try to reverse the decision that was made for them. A reconstruction of the foreskin, I think, is mostly tried to get back what is taken away.
I know someguys do crazy stuff to their penis, and if you think my PA is in that categorie, you're welcome to think so. But it was MY decision as an ADULT! I was NOT pierced by my parents at age zero! And if I were: I could take the piercing out and go live "unpierced"!
3. The "big" deal is: I think the circumcision of baby-boys -for no reason- is a bad thing. I think it has to stop. Some people have strong views about this or that, vaccination of a ****, abortion, global heating, capitalism, or fuel prices. Well, I have (also) a strong view on cutting up babyboys.
4. I never could, and don't think I should in this discussion, "prove that EVERY uncut penis smells like a bed of roses". Neither does every armpit, mouth, hands and feet, asshole and CUT cock! Personal hygiene is up to a person, most of us can shower if we want to!
5. Even if Jews or Muslims believe that circumcision is a convenant with their God, I am against it! I think the physical integrety of the **** is more important than the believes of the parents. Maybe the **** wants to NOT have a convenant with any God when he is 18 or older! It's a ritual! It's NOT a mind-changer!
6. You are right! You didn't use the word "anti-circ-brigade", because I thought I had it coming. I've heard that a lot. But if you don't want me to get "snooty" with you, don't try that same thing with me, because what I argument is is sincere and, in my view, meaningfull.
7. I don't quit about that! I don't say it's the same thing, but there are parallel lines! And it is: the parents claiming the right to exercise alternation of their childrens genitals, for whatever reason they can think of, and do so in a culture that approves of that or doesn't stand up to it!
If I, making some noise about this, save ONE foreskin for a young man, make ONE parent think about the "standard-procedure", and hopefully in the future do change some minds to bring change of mind to more parents, I am happy with that!
If I don't, I did what I thought I had to do: informing that cutting up baby-boys is NOT what they asked for!
everyone who is circumcised say's there is no difference in feeling between circumcised and uncircumcised... well for ME this is a bunch of bullshit. for me the difference is like night and day,from black and white to full living color. I can say that there is a huge difference in sensitivity and you just don't notice this as an exposed Glans is all you have known.
If I were a doctor that lied his way through The Hippocratic Oath, I could see a great business model in that way of thinking!!
Cut of some foreskin, get paid, and if 20 years later the patient is unhappy, help to restore the foreskin, and get paid again!
That's a financial perpetuum mobile!! Briljant!
--------------------------------------- added after 8 minutes
Could've put that comment anywhere but skipped to the end coz of boredom - repetition/alarmist comment/hysteria, repetition/alarmist comment/hysteria,...
Not again, bigone...i'm not going to even bother this time...
anti-circ is a bunch of fools... if millions of boys get cut-up at birth, we can't be wrong, can we?
well, maybe you are. you could think about it!
your son will have access to al the information on the internet, and may question your decision.
WHY did you do that to me dad, for no reason?? and your answer would be: because I wanted to and had the power to??
doctorsopposingcircumcisionDOTorg/DOC/statement12.html
replace DOT by a dot: .
--------------------------------------- added after 8 minutes
from this website:
Take this quiz, and find out whether you believe the myths that far too many doctors believe, or whether you are an informed layperson or a foreskin-friendly physician who knows and understands the scientific facts about circumcision.
1. As regards pain, circumcision:
A. does not hurt.
B. Is excruciating for an infant as well as an adult. Tightening the circumcision clamp puts crushing pressure on a large area of sensitive skin.
2. The foreskin is:
A. a useless piece of skin
B. an integral part of the male sexual organ, containing most of the nerve endings of sexual pleasure.
3. During circumcision, the infant:
A. goes to ****.
B. withdraws into a state of neurogenic shock (coma), due to sudden massive pain.
4. With respect to functions, the foreskin:
A. has no function. It is “just a piece of skin.”
B. has at least three major functions:
1. protection of the glans penis, an internal organ.
2. coverage of the shaft of the elongated, erect penis.
3. provision of most of the nerves for sexual response
(the ridged bands on the inner lining of the foreskin).
5. With respect to cancer of the penis, circumcision:
A. prevents it.
B. has nothing to do with penile cancer.(American Cancer Society, 1989)
6. With respect to ethics, a doctor who performs a circumcision:
A. is practicing reasonable medicine.
B. violates all seven Principles of the AMA Code of Ethics; violates a primary tenet of health care, First, Do No Harm; and violates the Golden Rule.
7. With respect to human rights, a doctor who performs a circumcision:
A. is within his rights.
B. violates a basic human right, the right to an intact body. The infant has the right not to have normal body parts removed without his express consent. The doctor has failed to obtain the informed consent of the mutilee. The doctor is violating the Nuremberg Code of Ethics, which regulates experimentation on humans.
8. With respect to safety, circumcision is:
A. safe
B. kills an unknown number of U.S. infants every year.
9. With respect to complications, circumcision has:
A. very few complications
B. a 100% complication rate – in every instance the loss of a useful organ. In addition, there are many unrecorded complications, including deaths. Health costs of circumcised boys 5x those of intact boys!
10. The loss of foreskin:
A. has no effect on later life.
B. contributes to inferior sexual relations, which leads to increased divorce rates, increased ****, increased exposure to sexually transmitted diseases, and contributes to impotence, especially after age 40.
If you answered A to every question, you believe in myths. If you answered B, you are informed with the latest scientific information on this harmful procedure.
The reason that doctors accept these myths, when they usually are eager to accept the scientific evidence on most topics, is that circumcisers are almost always victims of the procedure. An important body part has been stolen from them and they have great difficulty dealing with that loss. If they are women practitioners, they have either agreed to having their sons’ foreskins amputated, or they did a number of circumcisions without thinking, then lacked the courage to acknowledge the harm they had caused.
The purpose of this brief questionnaire is to help people better understand how doctors can be so misled, and so misleading.
George C. Denniston MD, MPH
President
--------------------------------------- added after 13 minutes
3A **** = s l e e p
10B **** = v i o l e n c e
--------------------------------------- added after 6 minutes
When are you going to start suggesting that every circumsized male should get litigious with their parents, doctor and hospital? Are you going to go out and rally against abortion doctors and clinics so fervently (oh wait, that doesn't have any personal resonance with you - so, no
Not again, bigone...i'm not going to even bother this time...