New Study -- Circumcision and Sensitivity
- Thread starter Grit
- Start date
Dave NoCal
Superior Member
B_thickjohnny
Loved Member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2007
- Posts
- 2,740
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 505
- Points
- 208
- Location
- Atlanta GA
- Sexuality
- 90% Gay, 10% Straight
- Gender
- Male
I'm living in the Czech Republic and get loads of attention from uncut guys who actually prefer cut cock. I've had conversations about sensitivity and one guy in particular, who got cut when he was about 30, told me he loves being cut and thinks it's so much more pleasurable for him now. He DID NOT get cut for medical reasons, he just wanted to be cut. He likes and prefers the look of cut cock too.
Personally, I can't say one way or another. My uncut boyfriend does not seem to have the same intense orgasms like me. Mine are very intense to the point of my entire body almost convulsing sometimes...and I'm 50 years old. The only problem I experience is that it takes me longer to get hard than it takes him... although he's 28 and a stiff wind makes him hard.
Personally, I can't say one way or another. My uncut boyfriend does not seem to have the same intense orgasms like me. Mine are very intense to the point of my entire body almost convulsing sometimes...and I'm 50 years old. The only problem I experience is that it takes me longer to get hard than it takes him... although he's 28 and a stiff wind makes him hard.
And thank you for your civil tone in response.
Circumcision worked for you, and you got to make that decision as an adult. I just hope that parents decide on the basis of medical knowledge; not fashion; not so they'll look like daddy; not so they won't look 'different' in the locker room.
We generally don't cut off other assorted body parts because they might be troublesome some day. I would suggest that the foreskin be treated the same way.
Sorry to hear about that Dane. What is it with some doctors anyway? Why are they messing with twelve year olds' dicks?
This article actually supports my position. Even after hearing all the evidence showing that circumcision provides a number of health
benefits--including, apparently, a meeting with Dr. Schoen himself--the author of the article chose not to have his sons circumcised. Why? Because he recognized that:
- While Dr. Schoen sees the foreskin only as a little bit of skin prone to infection (hence his inability to comprehend the anti-circumcision movement), to many men (possibly including his sons), the foreskin is much more than that.
- To gain the major benefits of circumcision (i.e., fewer cases of HIV, other STDs, and penile cancer) one need not be circumcised as an infant.
- Aesthetic factors and personal choice (the individual's, not the parents') should be factors in the decision whether or not to circumcise).
- Given the above, he believed that his sons should be able to choose for themselves whether or not to get a circumcision.
Unfortunately, there's nothing to advocate because there's no reason to cut normal healthy parts from newborn babies.
Because some people just cannot find peace until every last foreskin has been removed.
- Grit,
I am circd and I think I would be with you on this issue. I like being circd but if as an adult... I don't think I would do it unless there were an absolute medical reason.
B_Italian1
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
- Posts
- 1,661
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 14
- Points
- 183
- Location
- United Steaks
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Mutilation? Give me a break! A little skin is removed. All of a sudden it's politically correct to be uncut, not want anyone to get cut, and if you are cut, to try to restore it. It's just crazy. Circumcized guys do not get any less sensation.
I have been cut since day one, or day two or three, not sure when they did it, and I am fine. I am extremely sensitive and wouldn't want it any other way. It is much cleaner and easier to maintain. I've read so many of these links and all I'm reading is how many problems uncut guys have with odor, foreskin problems, infections, etc. I know guys who've been cut as adults and they say they have a lot more sensation, and there was a study that proved that.
If you're going to talk about mutilation why not talk about guys getting their dicks pierced? That's not a pleasant sight and not too hygenic to put additional holes in your penis other than the one you piss out of. That is a breeding ground for everything you can imagine.
B_ScaredLittleBoy
Experimental Member
When guys get their dicks pierced they CHOOSE too. Nobody's parents gets it done at birth. They know better.
And if you remove something, it isn't there anymore. Skin contains nerves. Nerves create sensation. The foreskin has a very high concentration of nerves. Less foreskin = less sensation.
Circumcision IS mutilation. It's just called circumcision. Female circumcision isn't called female circumcision. It's called Female Genital Mutilation. Are you going to argue that that isn't mutilation too? Since its only a bit of skin.
And if you remove something, it isn't there anymore. Skin contains nerves. Nerves create sensation. The foreskin has a very high concentration of nerves. Less foreskin = less sensation.
Circumcision IS mutilation. It's just called circumcision. Female circumcision isn't called female circumcision. It's called Female Genital Mutilation. Are you going to argue that that isn't mutilation too? Since its only a bit of skin.
Dave NoCal
Superior Member
It's interesting to me how adamant and irate people can get over the questioning of non-consensual cosmetic surgery on helpless infants. Another poster a while back tried to clarify and I will quote: "This is not about YOUR penis." It's about how we treat the most helpless and vulnerable among us. It's illegal to cut baby girls - even just a little bit - even if they won't remember - even if it will supposedly save them from bathing - even if there is religious justification - even if it happened to the mother - even if it's traditional in the family and culture. Why aren't baby boys similarly protected?
I'm glad you're happy with your circumcision but you don't really know how sensitive you'd have been if you hadn't been circumcised. I've known many many men who weren't circumcised and none of them had a problem with odour, foreskin problems or infections, like any body part a cock isn't hard to keep clean. If you search through this site you'll see that a lot of men are unhappy that they were circumcised, they feel that should have been their choice to make. The guys who have their dicks pierced made an informed choice to do that when they were adults.
No one is denying an adult male the opportunity to make his own choice on being circumcised, but many of the men who are circumcised seem to be insistent that it's the only way to go and that parents have the right to make that choice for their children. Unlike many choices parents make for their children circumcision is irreversible, it's unneccessary and applied to any other part of the body would be seen as abuse.
No one is denying an adult male the opportunity to make his own choice on being circumcised, but many of the men who are circumcised seem to be insistent that it's the only way to go and that parents have the right to make that choice for their children. Unlike many choices parents make for their children circumcision is irreversible, it's unneccessary and applied to any other part of the body would be seen as abuse.
Similar threads
