The Absurd Reason Why America Circumcises Baby Boys

[ShaunSA]

Fortunately my happiness is not dependent on the sensitivity of your penis!

So you say

Just out of interest, why did you decide to get circumcised 2 years ago?
Especially since you consider it mutilation with no positive reasons going for it...

Care to quote me on that? :erm:

Having said that it was a decision I made as an adult. I am totally against it being done on babies unless the reasons are medical.

Why did you have the snip again Shaun? I cant remember now. Were you tripping over it or something?

Damn, joelus beat me too it.

Various reasons Ocks and I have no regrets. I chose not to elaborate on MyBB because a thread would have ended up exactly like this one

 

[Alton Turner Blackwood]

Did you experience a loss of sensitivity?

No, everything afterwards were the same. Granted, I probably only did the nasty three or four times prior to that.

 

[Ockie]

Various reasons Ocks and I have no regrets. I chose not to elaborate on MyBB because a thread would have ended up exactly like this one

boring.

 

[mister]

boring.

I second this.

 

[Dubes]

Uncircumcised sounds so appealing...

" Once full penetration is achieved the action of the foreskin depends on its original length and how loose it is.
If the foreskin does not retract on, or before, penetration then it tends to stick to the walls of the vagina and the man virtually masturbates himself within his foreskin whilst giving no stimulus, and thus no sexual pleasure, to his partner."

" Natural oils are secreted by Tyson's Glands under the rim of the glans and from the inner surface of the foreskin. It is these oils alone which prevent the foreskin from sticking to the glans and allow it to retract freely. The oils are produced constantly and are thus replaced very quickly after washing.
Smegma consists of surplus and used oil, dead skin cells, stale urine, stale semen and miscellaneous dirt, all of which have collected under the foreskin. Smegma is a 'waste product' and serves no useful purpose. If not cleaned away regularly it becomes hard and smelly. It is also a breeding ground for bacteria, which can lead to balanitis."

http://www.circinfo.com/myths/myths_and_lies1.html

 

[Ockie]

Uncircumcised sounds so appealing...

" Once full penetration is achieved the action of the foreskin depends on its original length and how loose it is.
If the foreskin does not retract on, or before, penetration then it tends to stick to the walls of the vagina and the man virtually masturbates himself within his foreskin whilst giving no stimulus, and thus no sexual pleasure, to his partner."

" Natural oils are secreted by Tyson's Glands under the rim of the glans and from the inner surface of the foreskin. It is these oils alone which prevent the foreskin from sticking to the glans and allow it to retract freely. The oils are produced constantly and are thus replaced very quickly after washing.
Smegma consists of surplus and used oil, dead skin cells, stale urine, stale semen and miscellaneous dirt, all of which have collected under the foreskin. Smegma is a 'waste product' and serves no useful purpose. If not cleaned away regularly it becomes hard and smelly. It is also a breeding ground for bacteria, which can lead to balanitis."

http://www.circinfo.com/myths/myths_and_lies1.html

If your foreskin is that long that it does not retract on its own when you are hard, then retract it yourself. If you are too lazy to do that then you probably to lazy to pleasure your partner anyway, whether you have a cut or uncut dick. As for the second part, it is called washing and normally involves soap and water. If you have stale urine, stale semen or miscellaneous dirt on your dick, then you are clearly a hobo, that or your mother did a piss poor job raising you.

 

[Ancalagon]

Yes, you should totally get circumcized for hygienic reasons. I mean, penises are difficult to look after? When I take my monthly bath in the river, it takes some cleaning.

Why don't we reengineer our anuses so that we never have to wipe? Can we remove the labia from women - imagine what is growing in there! Yuck!

Lets remove our noses - we can still smell through our nostrils, but there will be no more snotty noses being wiped on sleeves.

It gets ridiculous. The argument that you should remove your foreskin for hygienic reasons basically presupposes that the average man is too lazy to clean himself properly. If he is too lazy to wash his penis, I guarantee that will be the last of his/your issues. He will probably not wipe his ass properly either. Sorry, but its true - keeping your privates clean is basic hygiene, and if the argument is that you cannot keep your penis clean, then why would anything else stay clean?

And about men with long foreskins basically masturbating during sex - complete rubbish and I would know! Once it retracts, penetrative action would never be able to draw it back over the glans.

 

[crackersa]

Must be a gay thing again then as I have never met a woman who expects my penis, on its own accord and without my express assistance, to providing exciting entertainment. It is there to serve a function. Women are, for the most part it seems, not visually stimulated, but the idea of excess, unnecessary skin seems to put some off. Whether this is due to appearance or hygiene perceptions we'll need to ask them. No doubt each has a different opinion too so some will some won't.

I'm fairly certain most women are too polite to tell a man to his face but get them in one of their gossip circles and they'll spill the beans.

^This

has the women on this forum been stating their opinions? I haven't seen any....

 

[Ockie]

^This

has the women on this forum been stating their opinions? I haven't seen any....

Not to be crude or rude, but if a woman thinks and tells a guy that she does not like his dick because it is natural and uncut, then he should be able to tell her that her tits are too small and her thighs too big. Or maybe she should have a piece of her vagina cut off, just a little piece, and see how she likes it. But hey, that is just me and my opinion. Luckily I am not the one that gets dictated to by a chick to have a piece of my dick cut off. While you are at it, why don't you just let her cut your balls off too.

@cracker. This post is not aimed at you. I am just quoting your post as it links to the other post with the idea that men should have their dicks mutilated because chicks dig it.

 

[EMAM]

men should have their dicks mutilated because chicks dig it. [/QUOTE]


And this........with all due respect, I wish that people wouldn't refer to circumcision as mutilation ..... some do it for religious purposes, others for other purposes, end of story. Look up the word mutilation. A circumcised penis is a neat cut - far from mutilated. If you want to see mutilation, I can frikken show you what mutilation looks like by posting a picture of my chest!! And, Ockie, I am not directing this at you - this word has come up a few times in this thread so please don't take it personally...

 

[Ockie]

men should have their dicks mutilated because chicks dig it.


And this........with all due respect, I wish that people wouldn't refer to circumcision as mutilation ..... some do it for religious purposes, others for other purposes, end of story. Look up the word mutilation. A circumcised penis is a neat cut - far from mutilated. If you want to see mutilation, I can frikken show you what mutilation looks like by posting a picture of my chest!! And, Ockie, I am not directing this at you - this word has come up a few times in this thread so please don't take it personally...

Be it for religious or cultural reasons, my view point stands. Perhaps even more so.

Also, I just had a quick look, and when a girl gets circumcised, it is called mutilation, but for a boy it is ok to cut a piece of his penis off?

Female genital mutilation (FGM), also known as female genital cutting and female circumcision, is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "all ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation

I am sorry mrs. antman.....but I dont agree with you on that. Cutting a piece of a baby's penis off for religious, cultural or any other reason except for medical reasons in my view is mutilation. That baby or child had no say in it. I will change my view though on guys getting cut because the ladies apparently like it. That is not mutilation, just retarded.

 

[Ancalagon]

And this........with all due respect, I wish that people wouldn't refer to circumcision as mutilation ..... some do it for religious purposes, others for other purposes, end of story. Look up the word mutilation. A circumcised penis is a neat cut - far from mutilated. If you want to see mutilation, I can frikken show you what mutilation looks like by posting a picture of my chest!! And, Ockie, I am not directing this at you - this word has come up a few times in this thread so please don't take it personally...

I think if someone had removed a piece of my penis that resulted in permanently lower sensitivity and less feeling, without my consent, mutilation is the word I would use.

Just because it looks "neat" does not mean it is not mutilation. I would describe mutilation as destructive and unnecessary surgery - which is what circumcision is.

 

[HapticSimian]

And this........with all due respect, I wish that people wouldn't refer to circumcision as mutilation ..... some do it for religious purposes, others for other purposes, end of story. Look up the word mutilation. A circumcised penis is a neat cut - far from mutilated. If you want to see mutilation, I can frikken show you what mutilation looks like by posting a picture of my chest!! And, Ockie, I am not directing this at you - this word has come up a few times in this thread so please don't take it personally...

Your wish for sugar-coating is denied - unnecessary infant circumcision is mutilation, plain and simple. That it's done under the banner of religion and/or culture is moot.

 

[EMAM]

I really did not ask for, need or want sugar coating.........you all have your opinions on mutilation and I have mine........those that call it mutilation are probably uncut - if you were cut, your opinions would differ.

 

[DTBA]

Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, sometimes causing death.
Some ethnic groups practice ritual mutilation, e.g. circumcision, scarification, burning, flagellation, tattooing, or wheeling, as part of a rite of passage. In some cases, the term may apply to treatment of dead bodies, such as soldiers mutilated after they have been killed by an enemy.

Putting it out there

 

[Ockie]

I really did not ask for, need or want sugar coating.........you all have your opinions on mutilation and I have mine........those that call it mutilation are probably uncut - if you were cut, your opinions would differ.

What I do know is that as a man with his penis still fully intact as nature intended it, I as a adult would not have my penis cut. I have that choice. Babies that are cut do not.

 

[Ancalagon]

I really did not ask for, need or want sugar coating.........you all have your opinions on mutilation and I have mine........those that call it mutilation are probably uncut - if you were cut, your opinions would differ.

I know that some men who get cut get bitter about it because it was done without their consent. They resent not being given the choice, but there is nothing they can do.

Why is male genital mutilation acceptable?

People who do it for religious reasons are extra stupid. God made you perfect in every way, but he accidentally left a bit of extra skin on.

 

[EMAM]

mu·ti·late


verb (used with object), mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing.
1.
to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts

Did we injure our son? No.
Did we disfigure our son? No.
Did we make his penis imperfect? No.
Did we irrepareably damage his penis? No.

 

[Ockie]

mu·ti·late


verb (used with object), mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing.
1.
to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts

Did we injure our son? No.
Did we disfigure our son? No.
Did we make his penis imperfect? No.
Did we irrepareably damage his penis? No.

Why are all of those answered as no? Because it was done in the name of religion?

 

[Nick333]

Not to be crude or rude, but if a woman thinks and tells a guy that she does not like his dick because it is natural and uncut, then he should be able to tell her that her tits are too small and her thighs too big. Or maybe she should have a piece of her vagina cut off, just a little piece, and see how she likes it. But hey, that is just me and my opinion. Luckily I am not the one that gets dictated to by a chick to have a piece of my dick cut off. While you are at it, why don't you just let her cut your balls off too.

@cracker. This post is not aimed at you. I am just quoting your post as it links to the other post with the idea that men should have their dicks mutilated because chicks dig it.

Or, could you imagine someone suggesting baby girls should somehow be mutilated (yes I will use the word since I have a penis) so that they can be more appealing and pleasure men better as adults? Just another example of how we live in a society that bemoans the mistreatment of women in primitive cultures while condoning and even praising the mistreatment of boys and men.

I have my mom to thank for my intact penis - she wouldn't let it happen