Circumcision

[DJP]

circumcision...that brings back lots of memories. i was so afraid back then. I often thought to myself that i should've been circumcised when i was a baby so i wouldn't have to experience this. but after that i felt really relieved... and dizzy. I was circumcised when i was about 12, summer vacation. it lasted about 20-30 mins. the next day it was swollen like a tomato :1orglaugh and i had to wear a freakin skirt because it would hurt if the fabric or anything touched the head (glans). after a week or two it returned to normal but still hurt slightly. it was completely healed just before i went back to school.

it's the norm in my country for adolescents to get circumcision. think of it as sort of a rite of passage into manhood .admittedly uncircumcised kids would often get teased a lot by other kids. being called uncircumcised in my native tongue is an insult... likebeing called wuss, gay, etc..

as for the circumcision, it's up to you. Adults say though that kids get cicumcised at that age (about 10-13) because it's neither too young nor too old due to higher pain tolerance as you get older, but if you get too old they say the foreskin gets harder and therefore more painful to cut. I dunno if it's entirely true though. Also if you get circumcised you won't get anymore smelly dick cheese (around the glans) hence cleaner and more hygienic. As for loss of sensitivity... i don't know... didn't start masturbating til i was about 14

 

[DreamSparrow]

A circumcision should only be done for medical reasons once you are grown up.

And I mean medical as in, you are having problems with it, not because you just think it seems healthier.

I had it done when I was in my young teens, it needed to be done because it was too tight or something, and there was a high risk of infection.

It was extremely painful. And it took YEARS to stop feeling sore and over sensitive.

God knows how painful it would be to a fully grown man.

Years? Something sounds wrong there. I had it done when I was around 8, and I remember that after the initial bandages and whatnot came off, I didn't have any problems with it. I didn't have pain/soreness for more than a month or two, let alone years. What did your doctor say about your problems with recovery?

I think it generally looks better, and when its come up in conversation, girls seem to agree. I can't really compare the loss of sensation stuff, but it means the most sensitive part is now exposed to contact with a pussy/tongue all the time during sex, instead of your own foreskin rubbing back and forth over it. Mentally, I prefer that image too.

 

[Bailey85]

I was circumcised when I was very young because of medical reasons and I'm not sure that it really affected anything, I experience plenty enough sensation to be going on with, thank you. And it may just be my biased opinion but I believe it does look better than an uncircumcised penis. Just my two cents

 

[D-rock]

I don't think I would want to add a piercing there. Just think about what would happen if it somehow snagged on something at the wrong time. :eek:

 

[dick van cock]

Anyone comparing male circumcision to female mutilation (that's what it is) should shut up!

 

[lazyfatboy]

think i'll keep my hood on my tadger, never understood why anyone would have their bairns foreskin cut off if it wasnt needed, as for women not liking the skin, well it does pull back and uncovers the top and apart from some wrinkled up skin behind the bellend its looks almost the same, i couldnt care less if it looks better on or off im not a poof that likes to look at other peoples wullies and i dont sit and admire my own either

 

[blakey]

Anyone comparing male circumcision to female mutilation (that's what it is) should shut up!

is that comment aimed at my good self ?

think i'll keep my hood on my tadger, never understood why anyone would have their bairns foreskin cut off if it wasnt needed, as for women not liking the skin, well it does pull back and uncovers the top and apart from some wrinkled up skin behind the bellend its looks almost the same, i couldnt care less if it looks better on or off im not a poof that likes to look at other peoples wullies and i dont sit and admire my own either

exactly :glugglug:

 

[dick van cock]

is that comment aimed at my good self ?

That comment is aimed at anyone not able to comprehend that cutting off a measly piece of foreskin is not comparable to a mutilation that leaves you disabled for the rest of your life (not being able to urinate without pain, not being possibly penetrated without *horrible* pain; possibly dying from the side effects from the mutilation itself, like infections caused by a rusty razor, blood loss, etc.)

Male circumcision is fun - female circumcision is TORTURE! It is comparable to cutting your entire dick off. You won't able to feel sexual pleasure for your whole life, because sexuality will be equal to pain from now on. Not only do these bastards cut off the outer labia, they "circumcise" the clitoris as well.

Many girls do not survive the procedure. Those who do, are suffering from it all their lives...

I call anyone comparing this to male circumcision an ignorant moron.

 

[blakey]

That comment is aimed at anyone not able to comprehend that cutting off a measly piece of foreskin is not comparable to a mutilation that leaves you disabled for the rest of your life (not being able to urinate without pain, not being possibly penetrated without *horrible* pain; possibly dying from the side effects from the mutilation itself, like infections caused by a rusty razor, blood loss, etc.)

Male circumcision is fun - female circumcision is TORTURE! It is comparable to cutting your entire dick off. You won't able to feel sexual pleasure for your whole life, because sexuality will be equal to pain from now on. Not only do these bastards cut off the outer labia, they "circumcise" the clitoris as well.

Many girls do not survive the procedure. Those who do, are suffering from it all their lives...

I call anyone comparing this to male circumcision an ignorant moron.

well, if your post was aimed in my direction then i think you might be the one being a bit moronic

my last post said

imo if it didn't have a religious background i think circumcision of boys at birth, for reasons other than health, would probably, in the 21st century, now be illegal

as is female circumcision - which, i know, is a far more severe procedure and clearly harms the women and inhibits their possibility of achieving sexual pleasure etc

see the phrase "which, i know, is a far more severe procedure"

when you say the two can't be compared that's like saying you can't compare a domestic cat with a tiger - while the two are clearly very different there is a similarity between the two

i recognise female circumsion as far more harmful than male circumcision

but
both procedures are non-essential surgery which "mutilates" the genitals into a different form from that which the person was born with

and they are also both long standing cultural practices

 

[jamrak]

The fact that some crazy stuff been somewhere for years, is not a reason to call it "cultural practice". Nothing personal to blakey, it is called like that everywhere, but just to my mind it ain't got nothing to be allied with the word 'culture' in any meanings. It is savage and barbarous remnant. I am shocked with what is called "female circumcision"... in Sudan 90% women are tortured like that. In Africa in a large amount of countires it is still widely distributed.. In european countries among african/eastern diaspora.. damned. just crazy shit.

 

[blakey]

The fact that some crazy stuff been somewhere for years, is not a reason to call it "cultural practice". Nothing personal to blakey, it is called like that everywhere, but just to my mind it ain't got nothing to be allied with the word 'culture' in any meanings. It is savage and barbarous remnant. I am shocked with what is called "female circumcision"... in Sudan 90% women are tortured like that. In Africa in a large amount of countires it is still widely distributed.. In european countries among african/eastern diaspora.. damned. just crazy shit.

nothing personal jamrak but you've obviously not got a clue what i mean by long standing cultural practice
- one which i'm not justifying it ( for the 20 millionth time )

but in your post you say
" I am shocked with what is called "female circumcision"... in Sudan 90% women are tortured like that"
and
"In Africa in a large amount of countires it is still widely distributed"

that to me sounds like, in the culture of certain african countries, female circumcision is a widespread and long standing practice
i.e. exactly what i'm talking about

i'll give you another example, for clarification of what i'm referring to, of a, thankfully now extinct, "long standing cultural practice"
aka custom or tradition
which was harmful to women - foot binding
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_binding

 

[theadmanmufc]

I'd hate to be circumcised. I'd hate to lose the sensitivity of the tip of my dick which would inevitably happen if my uncovered head was rubbing against boxers etc. all day long. Plus, it makes masturbation amongst other things a lot easier since I've no need for lube or anything like that.

As for health and cleanliness issues, there is no real issue if you clean it properly and have safe sex etc.

 

[nukie5325]

That comment is aimed at anyone not able to comprehend that cutting off a measly piece of foreskin is not comparable to a mutilation that leaves you disabled for the rest of your life (not being able to urinate without pain, not being possibly penetrated without *horrible* pain; possibly dying from the side effects from the mutilation itself, like infections caused by a rusty razor, blood loss, etc.)

Male circumcision is fun - female circumcision is TORTURE! It is comparable to cutting your entire dick off. You won't able to feel sexual pleasure for your whole life, because sexuality will be equal to pain from now on. Not only do these bastards cut off the outer labia, they "circumcise" the clitoris as well.

Many girls do not survive the procedure. Those who do, are suffering from it all their lives...

I call anyone comparing this to male circumcision an ignorant moron.

Van Dick your comments really bother me. Not so much because you're defending the way you've end up as much as you probably deciding to butcher your future sons in the same way.

It's not as extreme as female circumcision but there's also 3 different levels of female circumcision. Level one is "just" the removal of the clitoral hood which is analogous to male circumcision. Level 2 and 3 are as you say, somewhat similar to removing your dick entirely.

BUT, a big crap load of the penis's nerve endings are in the foreskin. Cutting off the foreskin is like losing 60% of your sexual pleasure receptors. IT IS NOT

a measly piece of foreskin

!!! It is you who is ignorant on this subject. Go do some Googling and research.

In addition to yourself, your rough head is abrasive on the vaginal walls of your woman's vagina so she loses sensation there as well. The inside of your now lost foreskin was every bit as smooth the inner wall of a vagina or more so and it did a better job of gliding in a vagina than your cut penis can now. Your cut penis also does a sensational job at taking the vagina's natural lubrication out of the vagina. That is because your foreskin was designed to keep the lub inside and had your penis not been circumcised you wouldn't have to thrust like a jack hammer to experience sensation in the deep tissue nerve receptors in your penis. Those are all you have left.

ALL of the reasons used to justify FGM are used right now in the land of the 'free' to justify MGM. Namely

• Cleanliness
• Appearance
• Hygiene
• Disease immunity
• a stigma by society

MGM should be banned just as the other blood letting sacrifices of children were banned in South America.

 

[satyrsam]

Everything that is on your body is there for a reason.

 

[D-rock]

Everything that is on your body is there for a reason.

By that reasoning nobody should ever cut their hair or clip their fingernails. There are advantages to male circumcision, and while in the great scheme of things they aren't Earth shattering in importance and don't provide a enormous advantage over somebody that didn't have it done, I think it's benefits outweigh it's negatives which are almost nothing even considering the stuff nukie5325 blew ridiculously out of proportion. Yes it doesn't mean much if you live in a normal society and it's easy to clean yourself all the time. Then again who knows somebody some person might be thrown into a war zone where they have to sit in a foxhole in the jungle for three weeks strait. Always better to be prepared when it's a relatively simple thing to do.

 

[Roughneck]

By that reasoning nobody should ever cut their hair or clip their fingernails. There are advantages to male circumcision, and while in the great scheme of things they aren't Earth shattering in importance and don't provide a enormous advantage over somebody that didn't have it done, I think it's benefits outweigh it's negatives which are almost nothing even considering the stuff nukie5325 blew ridiculously out of proportion. Yes it doesn't mean much if you live in a normal society and it's easy to clean yourself all the time. Then again who knows somebody some person might be thrown into a war zone where they have to sit in a foxhole in the jungle for three weeks strait. Always better to be prepared when it's a relatively simple thing to do.

Absolute horse manure.

Example: the Chinese and the Indians, making about 2/3rds of humanity don't perform ritual circumcision other than were medically indicated.

And yet you don't see massive differences in health and disease rates for these populations.

Even taking into account that their countries are in general more unsanitary than the developed West.

Nukie didn't "blow" anything out of proportion - the United States it the ONLY Western nation today which practices ritual circumcision for non-religious purposes. The practice of circumcision in America rose sharply when the Puritans made a "come back" in American politics in the early half of 20th Century America.... back when "Prohibition" and other BS was heaped upon the American public. Circumcision was introduced to discourage masturbation - which was seen as sinful.

Up until then, nobody gave two shiny shits about it - save the Jews and certain Christian sects.

I'm not making this up.

My son is not circumcised - I won't subject my children to unnecessary (yes, it IS not medically necessary) surgical procedures.

Now that they are adults, they are old enough to decide for themselves.

cheers,

 

[Iamforever]

im cut and damn proud of it. i think uncut dicks look ridiculous. so does my wife.


and the myth that a cut dick loses sensation, is just that, a myth.

 

[Roughneck]

and the myth that a cut dick loses sensation, is just that, a myth.

And you know that because?

 

[Iamforever]

And you know that because?

im cut, and still pretty sensitive. if there is in fact a loss of sensitivity, it is minute.

 

[theadmanmufc]

So you're cut and your dick is still sensitive. Well I ask you, were you circumcised at birth? You probably were and therefore have never experienced sex with your penis being uncut so you don't know the difference. Just because you still consider your dick sensitive doesn't take away from the fact that circumcised penises lose sensitivity.

As for looking ridiculous, pull the foreskin back and voila...