You lack personal experience of circumcised sex. Also, most likely you lack experience with older circumcised men. Have you actually had conversations on the topic in a manner that would not bias the results.
The way you state your reference to the Taylor study seems to imply it is a work of anti-circumcision sites (they are not propaganda sites). Dr John Taylor is a medical Doctor that was originally from the U.K. that moved to Canada. I don't know his circumcision status but he was motivated to perform his investigation because he was not sure whether to circumcise his own children or not. His study is an unbiased detailed investigation into anatomical function of the penis. His study is published in the British Journal of Urology, Volume 77, pages 291-295 Feb 1996. It is not propaganda.
Dr Taylor dissected penises from cadavers and studied the cellular make up. He discovered the foreskin was loaded with light touch receptors responsible for the erogenous nature of the foreskin. The glans on the other hand has mainly pain receptors and not very concentrated. The glans is not very sensitive. I can feel this when lightly touching my inner skin area compared to the shaft skin. I feel the movement of the inner skin on my glans during lovemaking - there is a synergistic interaction. Dr Taylor's findings can easily be verified by anyone (though my inner skin is more sensitive than pre-restoration because I keep it protected).
The study is purely scientific and there is no disputing his findings. They are accepted by the medical field. There are no "other studies just like it". All other studies on this subject are controversial because they are mainly based on interview results. (I include my own study - it was my study for me, I completely understand its flaws and limitations even though I tried to make it as accurate as possible. BTW I included my wife in the study --- she is intact and I have complete trust in her testimony.
In regards to reviewing only "like minded studies".... this is completely untrue. I spent a disproportionate amount of time looking for good reasons for circumcision. I desperately want to justify, validate my circumcision. Sadly, I finally came to the conclusion that I couldn't.
Obviously pro-circ "propaganda" sites would not refer to the legitimate Taylor study. Why shouldn't anti-circumcision sites refer to a legitimate study that supports and proves their claims.
Thank you
In regards to familiarity with countless middle aged circumcised men...
I am not surprised. Most circumcised men are unaware of the negative consequences of circumcision and most men are not willing to admit to or openly discuss negative qualities of their own sexual performance. In fact we are quite opposite, we tend to exaggerate our experiences.
In fact I am a very open minded person. As I mentioned, I have read many studies and tried to justify my circumcision. I have read the threads and have not yet seen a valid reason that could justify removal of healthy erogenous tissue from a person that has not provided his consent.
Even if, as you say, it is a "grey area", is it ethical to cut off healthy foreskins off non-consenting individuals knowing that it a grey area and there may be negative consequences? I am not morally bankrupt, so I say no it is not ethical and have to be firm in my stance.
Do you really believe that circumcision does not have negative consequences? If so, would you now get circumcised as an adult? If not, please provide an explanation why you would not proceed with your own circumcision.
Last edited:
I never knew you could jerk off without lube until I began learning how the natural penis functions. I was cut so tight that I never imagined the skin was supposed to move. Infant genital cutting is insidious for a number of reasons. One is because it makes you stupid about your own body.
The depth of feelings seems entirely understandable to me. There is a wide variation in the amount of information that various LPSG member have researched and/or processed, or declined to accept, and this differential fairly naturally leads to people in fact arguing the issue from radically different levels. In effect, they're not even arguing with each other, because they're coming at it with entirely different sets of facts and/or knowledge levels.
Circumcision is actually a complex, deeply complex, issue. On a social sciences level, it intersects sociology, anthropology, psychology, economics, history, and religion -- and that's not even an exhaustive list. Then there's the biological sciences consideration, much of which is still in its infancy with regard to circumcision.
When looked at solely as an adult decision, I don't view it much differently from getting a tattoo or elongating/spreading open the earlobes. Actually, it has more in common with amputating a toe. But from just the decision standpoint, hey, it's your body so do what you want with it.
I put little stock in the sensation/sensitivity arguments. That's a loser from the get-go. But I do look at circumcision from a scientific view, from what the body recognizes is happening to it. It's an iatrogenic injury. Circumcision directly and significantly impacts the bloodflow in the genital region; it's a highly vascular area. The body compensates in various satisfactory and not-so-satisfactory ways to the trauma of circumcision. Some guys notice and care; others not so much. Ditto the innervation, which is impressive and unique to the penis. Circumcision absolutely impacts this in a histologic and CNS sense, but again, whether one chooses to make a big deal or not is up to the individual.
I completely agree that not every discussion of circumcision should turn into a referendum on RIC. I personally reserve my strongest views on the practice for that, since infant circumcision has never been demonstrated to prevent disease or to improve penile development. It miserably fails every evidence-based medicine test. But this thread, for example, is about someone considering a cosmetic procedure. The OP may or may not be interested in learning how circumcision impacts the normal vascularity of the glans and shaft -- it sounds like he just wants a dickskin trim. Some folks here believe that even a trim removes significant veins and possibly part of an artery (in the frenulum) and short-circuits the lateral nerve endings, so they feel compelled to speak out about it. But frankly, unless the OP indicates he's interested in anything beyond the cosmetics, I'd say it's not appropriate to go beyond mentioning it. Certainly not arguing with him about it. It's his dick, after all.
True. But for good reason the discussion is all about RIC because it is by far the most common surgical mod. It is still the most common surgery in the United States. Parents are presented with a false set of circumstances in the first few hours/days when they have a baby boy.
If you think you can girdle a penis with a scalpel without any physical consequences I just find terribly naive. Adults who are considering circumcision (in this case for a girlfriend of all things) I just think are tragically ill informed. But they are a very small minority of all circumcisions.
Genital cutting is so ingrained and dismissed in some cultures for such a variety of odd reasons that even adults have little or no honest information about it. Why would all these adult circumcisions be happening in Korea in the first place? Just speaking out about it can still make people think that there is something wrong with the intactivists rather than the circ culture or the circ perpetrators.
I just want the penis I was born with. Is that too much for an adult male to ask?
Last edited:
And thus, the crux of the matter. Most people here and elsewhere who have not studied circumcision at length (some would say overstudied) would argue you have the penis you were born with; you just don't like the haircut it got.
No need to tell you, but the strange thing about the OP's musings is that he regards his foreskin as a longish flap that can be shortened, like a hem. Of course, anatomically the reality is pretty different -- the foreskin is a folded-over sleeve full of veins and horizontally-running nerve endings, so there's no such thing as a simple trim. Even a "trim" results in the equivalent of a shirtsleeve missing a cylindrical section at the elbow... you have less sleeve, but the resulting parts are disconnected. And since the muscle tissue of the foreskin is concentrated near the tip, any cut at all changes how the foreskin operates, too. Yeah, the body is remarkable at reconstituting itself after injury (surgery) using capillaries and re-connecting nerves via different routing, but at some point you have to ask yourself, "Why?"
As others have noted, the cultural and language differences may make getting just the circumcision the OP seeks a little risky. For my money, the only doc I'd trust with a customized adult circ is in Atlanta.
Hmmm. As John Erickson famously said, it's not circumcision that needs to be studied, it's circumcisers.
Yes, as gymfresh says, that is the crux. That is how the vast majority of men come to be cut, duh.
None of us really cares about adult circ. It is relatively rare, first off. But we don't want adult men going into it badly informed or believing the usual superstitions and wives tales either. For example, the OP. Seems like he has got a case of bad judgment to me.
i am uncut and have a long foreskin , i am almost 8 inches long and my foreskin will cover my head even when hard, but its never been a problem for me. my wife think`s it looks cute
Are you friggin retarded? You major in some kind of Asian studies and you cannot assume that when he was referring to Korean men, it wasn't obvious to you that he was referring to South Korean? It's pretty much impossible to meet North Korean people anywhere you go in the world unless you actually go to North Korea....... Unless in your Asian studies they said that North Koreans are free to use internet to talk about sex in LPSG forum. I mean, come on now. Don't think that you are above others just because you have that education title and pick out the smallest, irrelevant things from other people's sentences that do not matter. I bet you thought South Koreans were mostly intact just like China/Japan. Or else you wouldn't have been so cocky in your way of asking about stupid statistics you can pull out of google in a few seconds.
So, things are over between us, and I still have my foreskin!
But I still do wear my foreskin retracted when at the spa, seeing as all Korean men are cut, I feel a bit less out of place with it pulled back(granted I will always be 25cm taller than the average Korean man, so I will always be out of place)
But I still do wear my foreskin retracted when at the spa, seeing as all Korean men are cut, I feel a bit less out of place with it pulled back(granted I will always be 25cm taller than the average Korean man, so I will always be out of place)
Last edited by a moderator:
TaigaStar
Expert Member
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2010
- Posts
- 1,706
- Media
- 8
- Likes
- 162
- Points
- 208
- Location
- Raleigh, NC, USA
- Sexuality
- 69% Gay, 31% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Harrylondon01
Expert Member
- chr2,
Hi man,
Firstly I have to say, its your decision - this is key.
As a guy cut as an adult (by my request, but also my wife liked the decision) I can tell you from first hand experience - if you get it done well, it really is a lot better!
I got done quite tight, for me this is better and certainly it works for me. 10 years after getting my cut, I have no regrets - except maybe to wish I had it done earlier.
Firstly I have to say, its your decision - this is key.
As a guy cut as an adult (by my request, but also my wife liked the decision) I can tell you from first hand experience - if you get it done well, it really is a lot better!
I got done quite tight, for me this is better and certainly it works for me. 10 years after getting my cut, I have no regrets - except maybe to wish I had it done earlier.
Fucking A. I hope so.
Another cut-as-adult cheerleader. As a RICed male, I think you are an idiot.
A Korean Medical Article indicates that just about all boys between 10 and 13 are circumcised. That means that the rate is 98% just as it is in the Philippines. Japan is on the way. And China is following. I wonder why? Some say it is horrible. The anticircs are following 19th century medical science just as Mitt follows the Mormons and their 19th century strange cult.
