Someone asked me how it is to be uncut and/or unpierced in my family.
Well, first, let's talk about why would a guy in my community be uncut and/or unpierced.
As you know, men in my family are not very good at conceiving daughters but we do have two in my very extend family. So I guess them marrying a guy who's uncut and/or unpierced (ie "not clean") could be one reason a dude like this would enter the family. Even more so than men, women, whether from my social circle or not, simply tend to prefer cut guys and these two are no different. Blowing an uncut penis is just not that fun so, in their case and for having talked about it with them, I think it would be improbable for them to settle down with an intact guy. In France, most guys are intact though so they told me that they always went for muslim of jewish guys, occasionally for uncut guys but never sucked them or even fucked without a condom. One of them two got married with a guy who was intact when they met but after a year together he agreed to get cut and pierced. He got it done all at the same time at the age of 26. He went for the less invasive stuff which is a high and lose cut and a very small PA that's basically just here for him to say he's pierced. She said she presented it more as a kink on her part than a "tradition" and he just wanted to get blowjobs. Apparently they're very happy with their decision but he did not embrace any other part of the lifestyle like nudism or our general outlook on sexuality.
The other woman is also one of my dad's cousins' daughter. Her household is a little bit more strict so she was taught to remain a virgin until marriage (girl-on-girl action excepted) and she really believed in that commitment. In this situation it was difficult for her to even know whether the guys she was dating were cut or not, let alone pierced. Thankfully, she ended up finding a guy who had an already very laidback approach on sex and nudity so taking a dip in the pool naked with his girlfriend's brothers and dad was not a problem. Apparently he actually really liked it since his family was also pretty much nudist. So the first time he saw one of his girlfriend's bothers wandering about the house naked he was not shocked at all. He was fully intact though and normally intact guys are not supposed to be naked in our community but his soon-to-be father in law decided to handle the matter differently and introduced him to the (strange to some) culture of our family. He also invited his family, since they were also nudists and sort of "converted" them gradually. By the time the young couple decided to get married, both the groom, his dad and his brother were pierced and cut. They chose the heavy stuff on top of that, like the low and tight cut and the bar through the head. Yet, technically, one could say that there were a whole bunch of intact adult guys in the family for a couple of years.
Now another reason a guy would be unpierced and/or uncut in our circle would be that he is too young. Some fathers, like mine, decide to have their son cut and pierced as infants to spare them the pain and trouble later, some others decide to only get them cut, some decide to only get them a little symbolic PA and some others decided not to get anything done. The ones who decide not to get anything done do it for either one of these two reasons :
- Either because they're very traditional so they want it to remain a rite of passage. In this case they might get their son cut as an infant but pierced only around 15 or 18. They might also have them cut and pierced at 15 or 18.
- Or because them or their wife think it's up to the boy to chose wether he wants it or not. 99.9% chose to get cut and pierced. They my chose a little symbolic PA and a high and lose cut but they all can't wait for it to happen.
Anyways, before 15, and sometimes 18 depending on who's talking, you're not even considered a man in my family so wether you're clean or not doesn't matter since you're not supposed to be naked. So no one knows and actually no one cares.
There is definitely a generational gap between both options. My grandpa and my dad's generation were all left intact and then cut and pierced at 15. I guess they were pretty traumatised by it so my generation tends to have a higher prevalence of guys who got everything done when they were too young to remember.My generation however, made a different choice. My big brother, for instance, originally wanted to leave his son the choice to get cut and pierced of not (hoping he would, of course). So his wife and him agreed that he would remain uncut and get a little symbolic PA as an infant (a little PA is basically nothing and the hole can close back as soon as you take off the ring). He just wanted to spare him the pain as an adult. Then, if the boy wants to get another (heavier) type of piercing later that would be his choice. The boy was born without a foreskin which is not surprising given that my dad and my big brother were both born without a foreskin. Then they had another boy but this one was born with a foreskin so they decided to get him cut so he would not feel different from his dad and older brother, he also got a little tiny PA and that was it. The little PA option has become a very common option. My grandpa says that it's the beginning of the disappearance of our tradition but I don't think so. He doesn't know how it feels to be a high school kid with a pierced dick in the middle of a locker room filled with only intact guys. That piece of jewerly becomes a part of yourself when you grow up with it so not only I don't think they will take it off but I also think that they will pass it on as well.
I've been asked what I would decide if I ever have kids.
I think I'm going to get them cut but not too harshly, high and loose will do, and get them a small PA.
Well, first, let's talk about why would a guy in my community be uncut and/or unpierced.
As you know, men in my family are not very good at conceiving daughters but we do have two in my very extend family. So I guess them marrying a guy who's uncut and/or unpierced (ie "not clean") could be one reason a dude like this would enter the family. Even more so than men, women, whether from my social circle or not, simply tend to prefer cut guys and these two are no different. Blowing an uncut penis is just not that fun so, in their case and for having talked about it with them, I think it would be improbable for them to settle down with an intact guy. In France, most guys are intact though so they told me that they always went for muslim of jewish guys, occasionally for uncut guys but never sucked them or even fucked without a condom. One of them two got married with a guy who was intact when they met but after a year together he agreed to get cut and pierced. He got it done all at the same time at the age of 26. He went for the less invasive stuff which is a high and lose cut and a very small PA that's basically just here for him to say he's pierced. She said she presented it more as a kink on her part than a "tradition" and he just wanted to get blowjobs. Apparently they're very happy with their decision but he did not embrace any other part of the lifestyle like nudism or our general outlook on sexuality.
The other woman is also one of my dad's cousins' daughter. Her household is a little bit more strict so she was taught to remain a virgin until marriage (girl-on-girl action excepted) and she really believed in that commitment. In this situation it was difficult for her to even know whether the guys she was dating were cut or not, let alone pierced. Thankfully, she ended up finding a guy who had an already very laidback approach on sex and nudity so taking a dip in the pool naked with his girlfriend's brothers and dad was not a problem. Apparently he actually really liked it since his family was also pretty much nudist. So the first time he saw one of his girlfriend's bothers wandering about the house naked he was not shocked at all. He was fully intact though and normally intact guys are not supposed to be naked in our community but his soon-to-be father in law decided to handle the matter differently and introduced him to the (strange to some) culture of our family. He also invited his family, since they were also nudists and sort of "converted" them gradually. By the time the young couple decided to get married, both the groom, his dad and his brother were pierced and cut. They chose the heavy stuff on top of that, like the low and tight cut and the bar through the head. Yet, technically, one could say that there were a whole bunch of intact adult guys in the family for a couple of years.
Now another reason a guy would be unpierced and/or uncut in our circle would be that he is too young. Some fathers, like mine, decide to have their son cut and pierced as infants to spare them the pain and trouble later, some others decide to only get them cut, some decide to only get them a little symbolic PA and some others decided not to get anything done. The ones who decide not to get anything done do it for either one of these two reasons :
- Either because they're very traditional so they want it to remain a rite of passage. In this case they might get their son cut as an infant but pierced only around 15 or 18. They might also have them cut and pierced at 15 or 18.
- Or because them or their wife think it's up to the boy to chose wether he wants it or not. 99.9% chose to get cut and pierced. They my chose a little symbolic PA and a high and lose cut but they all can't wait for it to happen.
Anyways, before 15, and sometimes 18 depending on who's talking, you're not even considered a man in my family so wether you're clean or not doesn't matter since you're not supposed to be naked. So no one knows and actually no one cares.
There is definitely a generational gap between both options. My grandpa and my dad's generation were all left intact and then cut and pierced at 15. I guess they were pretty traumatised by it so my generation tends to have a higher prevalence of guys who got everything done when they were too young to remember.My generation however, made a different choice. My big brother, for instance, originally wanted to leave his son the choice to get cut and pierced of not (hoping he would, of course). So his wife and him agreed that he would remain uncut and get a little symbolic PA as an infant (a little PA is basically nothing and the hole can close back as soon as you take off the ring). He just wanted to spare him the pain as an adult. Then, if the boy wants to get another (heavier) type of piercing later that would be his choice. The boy was born without a foreskin which is not surprising given that my dad and my big brother were both born without a foreskin. Then they had another boy but this one was born with a foreskin so they decided to get him cut so he would not feel different from his dad and older brother, he also got a little tiny PA and that was it. The little PA option has become a very common option. My grandpa says that it's the beginning of the disappearance of our tradition but I don't think so. He doesn't know how it feels to be a high school kid with a pierced dick in the middle of a locker room filled with only intact guys. That piece of jewerly becomes a part of yourself when you grow up with it so not only I don't think they will take it off but I also think that they will pass it on as well.
I've been asked what I would decide if I ever have kids.
I think I'm going to get them cut but not too harshly, high and loose will do, and get them a small PA.