Cut or uncut

Cut or uncut

  • Cut

    Votes: 279 49.3%
  • Uncut

    Votes: 287 50.7%

  • Total voters
    566

matt121matt121

Cherished Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Posts
1,360
Media
16
Likes
294
Points
283
Location
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male

Why do you refer to yourself as snipped?.. I mean I guess were all welcome to use whatever term we like, just haven't been a fan of the term snipped.

uncut. Mine's small enough, imagine cutting a bit off. That would really have short changed me.

I don't know if this has ever been officially proven, but I have seen seen several dicks that looked as if they could have grown much more if they were uncut.

Uncut--and grateful for it...one of the many reasons why I'm an avid Intactivist. (Note my Signature, and please join the movement for the sake of coming generations.)

Thanks for your activism to prevent mutilation among future generations.


Why do you refer to yourself as clipped?.. I mean I guess were all welcome to use whatever term we like, just haven't been a fan of the term clipped.
 
S

SirConcis

Guest
Matt, while some may qualify circumcision as some horrid disfiguring and emasculating mutilatation, most see it as a simple cosmetic procedure that enhances the masculinity by making the penis more exposed/visible. As such, expressions such as "snipped" or "clipped" evoke the fact that it is a very simple cosmetic procedure that is not like what the anti circ folks make it out to be.
 

karldergrosse

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Posts
1,865
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
208
Location
Near the Great Smoky Mountains
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Matt, while some may qualify circumcision as some horrid disfiguring and emasculating mutilatation, most see it as a simple cosmetic procedure that enhances the masculinity by making the penis more exposed/visible. As such, expressions such as "snipped" or "clipped" evoke the fact that it is a very simple cosmetic procedure that is not like what the anti circ folks make it out to be.

You're quite right, SC, that attractiveness is indeed in the eye of the beholder. But seen objectively, it is a disfigurement of the natural penis that a man was born with. And according to medical terminology, it is mutilation. Why that "enhances the masculinity by making the penis [glans?] more exposed/visible" I don't understand. Masculinity doesn't really reside in the penis, but in the character and conscience of a man (in my opinion). And as far as sheer raunchy sexual excitement is concerned, for me (personal preference again) there's no greater pulse-pounding turn-on than seeing for the first time with a new partner the fresh sex-red head emerging from its concealing sheath. (Not unlike, in its way, I suppose, the concept behind strip-tease dancing.) That, to me, is genuinely enhanced sexual masculinity, or masculine sexuality. --But that said, I also have to add that not only can I thoroughly appreciate, and respond to, the erotic sexuality of a cut cock, but that I indeed have had just as many deep-down satisfying sessions with circumcised men as with intact ones. Ultimately, then, for me it is the man whom the cock is attached to...and his enthusiasm for the action.

You and I may agree to a great extent, then, SC--but you are completely, totally, entirely, egregiously wrong when you claim that surgically amputating an integral portion of the penis is "a very simple...procedure," a mere "clipping" or "snipping" of a bit of inert skin. It is indeed "like what the anticirc folks make it out to be," and much more--it is a serious, major invasive procedure (moreso for infants than for adults). There is so much mischief inherent in it, in fact, that no one could possibly cover it all, all of the details, in a single conversation or lecture. The harm, the ever-present danger, the disadvantages, and the counterindications are legion, but there is not one single advantage...other than the mere subjective, psychological satisfaction that some men find in it. But don't for a moment think that there are not untold numbers of men who are anything but satisfied with having been violated and deprived of much of their sexual satisfaction without their knowledge or consent.

Let's be clear, then, on Intactivists' mission. They feel it incumbent upon themselves to actively oppose only RIC (routine infant circumcision, a.k.a. Male Genital Mutilation). We do not object to adult men's choosing the operation for themselves, so long as they are fully informed in advance of the life-altering ramifications of that choice. Thus you and I may not be too far apart in our deeply held convictions, after all. Surely you will admonish, along with me, "All you fuckin' greedy sadopervert pedophile circfetishists: Keep your bloody hands and knives off of children's genitals!!!"
 
Last edited:

Mastur

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Posts
733
Media
421
Likes
2,673
Points
498
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
being circumcized reduces the changes of getting a sexualy transmited disease by 60%

My son, it matters not that you have no say in the mutilation of your own penis since I, in my finite wisdom, will bestow upon you a future of licentious sexual activities and a 60% freedom of STD worries!
Yes! You will be conditioned to appreciate your unnatural state of being for this thoughtful abuse of your human rights now will ensure that you can abuse your sexual rights tomorrow!
This will be our legacy. All hail Circumcision!