Sex and Circumcised POLL

Do you enjoy sex?

  • The feeling I get from sex is GREAT.

    Votes: 160 88.9%
  • The feeling I get from sex seems inadequate.

    Votes: 20 11.1%

  • Total voters
    180

JTalbain

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
1,786
Media
0
Likes
14
Points
258
Age
34
I'm not wanting, willing or able to turn this into a circumcised versus uncircumcised discussion. I asked a simple enough question and I got people to answer the poll. Obviously there are people out there who can read and obviously enjoy sex with their circumcised penis.

You guys are always looking for a gripe or for a reason someone should not like their penis. Get over yourselves.

I find it hilarious how many of you flocked to this thread to voice your displeasure. This isnt a debate guys. Its a poll. A simple poll with simple questions that can be checked or not checked. If the majority of people were checking that they hated sex you would not have a problem with this poll. Really...get over yourselves and stop trying to convince circumcised men that what they have is no good.
I'm sorry, perhaps I misunderstood, because you actually said...
I wanted to get some feedback on what circumcised men take away from having sex.
So when I said...
In my experience the skin when stretched is also much more prone to injury. I've experienced several small tears and abrasions on my penis over the years while masturbating (always on my circumcision scar, coincidence?) because I dislike the feeling of oily substances like Vaseline on my penis and am too cheap to buy a sex lubricant. Doesn't help matters that I produce almost no precum and my orgasms without anything sliding over the second half of my penis are almost nonexistent.
Was I not delivering exactly what you asked? Should I also have thrown in that most people are incapable of bringing me to orgasm? That I have had other people comment on how much more difficult it is to get me off then anyone else they've ever known? Or how when I have someone bobbing in my lap I am so unstimulated most of the time that I find myself looking at the clock thinking, "Dammit, it's been more than half an hour. Hurry up, I've got shit to do today." Would those have been a little bit more in keeping with your poll?
 

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
My reply was less about you and more about the thread being twisted into the same old argument again. Maybe I should have directed my comment at specific people.

As a note when I was uncut I had a very similar experience to what you are having with a cut penis but that was irrelevant to this discussion. Thanks for sharing.
 

D_Miranda_Wrights

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Posts
931
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
As a note when I was uncut I had a very similar experience to what you are having with a cut penis but that was irrelevant to this discussion. Thanks for sharing.

Assuming you changed your circumcision status because you thought it would increase your sexual satisfaction...wouldn't it have sucked to have had that choice taken from you somehow?
 

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Assuming you changed your circumcision status because you thought it would increase your sexual satisfaction...wouldn't it have sucked to have had that choice taken from you somehow?

1) Youre posing that question to the wrong person.

I personally would have preferred being circumcised when I was younger (under 10). My dad was and all the men on my dad's side of the family were circumcised (male cousins and seeing as my dad's father had all his son's circumcised).

I wasnt teased and I didnt develop a complex over it. In fact early on I was a huge anti-circ supporter.

2) I didnt change my status based on sexual satisfaction...I was pretty content with how sex felt. It was the irritation/soreness afterwards AND the random tearing that really convinced me there was a better way to live.
 

D_Miranda_Wrights

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Posts
931
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
1) Youre posing that question to the wrong person.

I personally would have preferred being circumcised when I was younger (under 10). My dad was and all the men on my dad's side of the family were circumcised (male cousins and seeing as my dad's father had all his son's circumcised).

I wasnt teased and I didnt develop a complex over it. In fact early on I was a huge anti-circ supporter.

2) I didnt change my status based on sexual satisfaction...I was pretty content with how sex felt. It was the irritation/soreness afterwards AND the random tearing that really convinced me there was a better way to live.

I don't see how I posed it to the wrong person. I think we might be talking past each other. I was asking you how you would feel had you been convinced there was a "better way to live" but have had the option taken off the table. I was basically asking whether the ability to change your status had any value to you.

...Might have been more obvious if this were the RIC thread, but it's not. I get confused having 50 simultaneous threads on the same topic :p.
 

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,801
Media
2
Likes
588
Points
148
Age
73
Location
Eastern town
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
...Might have been more obvious if this were the RIC thread, but it's not. I get confused having 50 simultaneous threads on the same topic .
They aren't all the same topic there are differences, many times very subtle differences but they are there. This 1 for example is aimed at men who are circumcised and only at them and asks how they feel when having sex.
 

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I don't see how I posed it to the wrong person. I think we might be talking past each other. I was asking you how you would feel had you been convinced there was a "better way to live" but have had the option taken off the table. I was basically asking whether the ability to change your status had any value to you.

...Might have been more obvious if this were the RIC thread, but it's not. I get confused having 50 simultaneous threads on the same topic :p.

The ability to change my status had no value to me. Absolutely zero. I don't have that hang up.

They aren't all the same topic there are differences, many times very subtle differences but they are there. This 1 for example is aimed at men who are circumcised and only at them and asks how they feel when having sex.

Correct.
Funny thing is when there is an uncut thread, rarely do you ever see circumcised guys going in there and disrupting the balance.
 

D_Miranda_Wrights

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Posts
931
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
The ability to change my status had no value to me. Absolutely zero. I don't have that hang up.

You didn't actually care whether you were able to make the choice you did or not, even though you made it? That doesn't really make much sense to me, but if it's an honest response, that's fair enough. I don't, however, understand how you consider attributing value to a negative liberty as inherently being a "hang-up." Do you feel that way about all negative liberties? I've just never met someone who attaches so much value to an externally intrusive positive liberty (e.g., parental proxy right), but cares nothing at all for negative liberties (e.g., bodily autonomy.) I'm trying to understand why you make that judgment and whether autonomy is important at all to you, and if not, why you seem to guard positive rights so zealously. For consistency's sake, it seems like not giving a damn about the former would naturally lead you to not giving a damn about the latter.

If you want to bring this thread back on-topic, and move this conversation to an RIC-related thread, I understand (and mea culpa there.) Or we could start a poll asking whether men find any value in bodily autonomy, and see whether your view of this being a "hang-up" is widely shared. Let me know.
 
Last edited:

Snozzle

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Posts
1,424
Media
6
Likes
318
Points
403
Location
South Pacific
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
In fact early on I was a huge anti-circ supporter.

2) I didnt change my status based on sexual satisfaction...I was pretty content with how sex felt. It was the irritation/soreness afterwards AND the random tearing that really convinced me there was a better way to live.
And you honestly can't imagine the alternative of being a huge anti-circ supporter, but one who was circumcised as a baby, and being pissed off about it? If the irritation/soreness and random tearing hadn't occured, wouldn't you still be a huge anti-circ supporter?
 

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You didn't actually care whether you were able to make the choice you did or not, even though you made it? That doesn't really make much sense to me, but if it's an honest response, that's fair enough. I don't, however, understand how you consider attributing value to a negative liberty as inherently being a "hang-up." Do you feel that way about all negative liberties? I've just never met someone who attaches so much value to an externally intrusive positive liberty (e.g., parental proxy right), but cares nothing at all for negative liberties (e.g., bodily autonomy.) I'm trying to understand why you make that judgment and whether autonomy is important at all to you, and if not, why you seem to guard positive rights so zealously. For consistency's sake, it seems like not giving a damn about the former would naturally lead you to not giving a damn about the latter.

If you want to bring this thread back on-topic, and move this conversation to an RIC-related thread, I understand (and mea culpa there.) Or we could start a poll asking whether men find any value in bodily autonomy, and see whether your view of this being a "hang-up" is widely shared. Let me know.


How hard is it for you to believe that whatever my parents decided for me I would have been fine with.

It really was no choice for me. Remember I had phimosis. I had to have it done just to live a comfortable sexual life. Sex was great with my uncut penis. I never had a problem with pleasure. I had a problem with discomfort after the pleasure.

The dichotomy of my thought process stems from AFTER being cut. AFTER being a stout anti-circ person and AFTER doing my extensive research on circumcision and AFTER having sex with circumcised penis and realizing all the BS BOTH sides of this argument go through. Realizing that millions of men out there dont even care about their circumcision status and all they do is bone chicks whenever they can.

Hindsight is 20/20. Youre asking me now after I have been circumcised if I am happy I got the choice. However, if I was RICed then I would have never had the phimosis episodes and I would just be another cut dick on LPSG and I more than likely would never venture into these topics.

And you honestly can't imagine the alternative of being a huge anti-circ supporter, but one who was circumcised as a baby, and being pissed off about it? If the irritation/soreness and random tearing hadn't occured, wouldn't you still be a huge anti-circ supporter?

I would be and that would be a tragedy. My outlook has changed. I dont consider myself anti-circ or pro-circ from an argument level. I think whatever a guy has he has and I'm sure 9/10 are happy. I think guys are more concerned with how big it is than how much skin is on it. Most of my posts may be slanted towards pro-circ but it's mainly to counter anti-circ bullying.

I dont have a problem with RIC just like I dont have a problem with abortion. Would I ever abort a child of my own? No, but if someone wants to abort their child then go right ahead. Would I ever circumcise a son of mine? Yes. Would I ever recommend to another friend to circumcise his son? No, not my place to. If a friend asks me if he should circumcise his son? I would tell him do what he thinks is best.

What I try to do is separate my personal actions from my argumentative thoughts. It keeps me sane and I sleep well at night.
 

D_Miranda_Wrights

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Posts
931
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
OK, let's move this toward a meaningful conclusion. This shouldn't just be a rhetorical battle, and this is threatening to regress into repetitive re-explanations of beliefs. Let's fix that:


With the positive/negative rights stuff, I was meaning to delve deeper than before. I understand what your position on RIC is; I just don't think it's philosophically compelling. I'm asking a more fundamental question than is answered by re-stating your personal history with circumcision. Unless your entire philosophical framework on autonomy boils down to your position on circumcision (which I doubt), it's a much more generalized question, and you're fusing in contextual specifics that don't really apply to most situations -- even when it comes to circumcision.

So, I don't want to come across as a bully (I'm not), but I want to be direct. I'm going to ask a few questions and then explain to you, in formal philosophical terms, why I think your position is not evil or sadistic but very, very wrong. I want to explain why I'm not willing to accept this "to each parent his own" as a moral excuse for RIC.

First, I want to rephrase the crux of your argument (suspending debates over empirics.) Let me know if it's in any way inaccurate or incomplete. Here it is:

You don't think circumcision is inherently superior, or inferior, but do think parents have the right to exercise their parents on their children -- even if it results in a reduction of autonomy -- and personally feel that you will. This belief is based on the assumption that there is no objective disadvantage to circumcision, and that personal preferences have no intrinsic value. This is how you define an irrational preference.

Those who have personal preferences, and assert a negative right that impedes the positive right of enforcing one's own preference on their kid via medical proxy, should be treated as psychologically disordered, because they want something they can't have that isn't objectively superior (i.e., their preference is irrational.) Increasing the number of "disordered" people is not a valid reason to avoid RIC, because the preferences of the "disordered" should be ignored as irrational. You reject the utilitarian argument that you should minimize the number of people affected by "irrational' preferences, because you take that as an invalid assertion of a negative right based on an irrational preference.

Accordingly, there is no objectively right answer to RIC, and you reject any impediment (even questioning) of a parents' choice on circumcision, but you plan to use your positive rights by preemptively circumcising your son.


Tell me what you think. The only other thing I need to explain my fundamental objections is an answer to this question: What would make something so objectively harmful as to make exercise of parental rights harmful? Please be as explicit on the requirements as possible; examples might result in us talking past each other. (You're alluded to popularity, tradition, mutilation, etc., but we don't have a specific standard.)

Once I've pinned down where you're at on the fundamentals, I can explain where I'm at, and demonstrate why even though it is a fairly marginal bioethical issue, I find RIC to be a completely indefensible practice.
 

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I had a long reply all written up and even posted but in the end I dont want to digress on this subject.

1. You are an anti-circ bully.
2. You try to attack at the core of a person's psyche to make them change their mind. A less willed person this would affect.
3. You assume people care what your thoughts on circumcision may be. They are your beliefs and not mine.
4. My stance on RIC, abortion and life still remain as they did before your little rant.
5. What you read in books and experience with your own penis only supports half of this argument and it's the only half you believe in. You try to make it seem like your interested in something intelligent or philisophical but really you are only trying to make someone change their mind.
6. All of that and STILL there are no peer reviewed and bulletproof studies that emphatically support either side of this argument.
7. Your beliefs are yours. You live with them. Mine are mine. I will live with mine. If I cared what other people did in their life I wouldnt have time to live my own.

I was circumcised as an adult. In hindsight I wished I was RIC. I dont have problems with my penis and sex, masturbation, getting a hardon, using my fleshlight, my bare head rubbing in underwear all if it is a great experience

Fact: There is nothing wrong with being circumcised.
Attack me in another thread on a day I feel up to it, I would like for this one to get back on topic.

Here's where I stand and if you find this irrational then you have bigger problems:
I refuse to make or have questioned any type of life or parental decisions based on the notions or beliefs of people I met on the internet.
 
Last edited:

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I wanted to add one observation which I believe is at the crux of our disagreement.

The significance you place on having the choice to be circumcised differs vastly between us. I am more than willing to accept this difference. You are not. This I can't help you understand but you seem to want to not only understand it from me but also "help" change my mindset on this choice.

You believe my mindset is irrational based on you not understanding it. I understand it perfectly well as well as a good many people that surround me in my real life. I am sure you can say the same about your real life.
 

JTalbain

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
1,786
Media
0
Likes
14
Points
258
Age
34
I had a long reply all written up and even posted but in the end I dont want to digress on this subject.

1. You are an anti-circ bully.
2. You try to attack at the core of a person's psyche to make them change their mind. A less willed person this would affect.
3. You assume people care what your thoughts on circumcision may be. They are your beliefs and not mine.
4. My stance on RIC, abortion and life still remain as they did before your little rant.
5. What you read in books and experience with your own penis only supports half of this argument and it's the only half you believe in. You try to make it seem like your interested in something intelligent or philisophical but really you are only trying to make someone change their mind.
6. All of that and STILL there are no peer reviewed and bulletproof studies that emphatically support either side of this argument.
7. Your beliefs are yours. You live with them. Mine are mine. I will live with mine. If I cared what other people did in their life I wouldnt have time to live my own.

I was circumcised as an adult. In hindsight I wished I was RIC. I dont have problems with my penis and sex, masturbation, getting a hardon, using my fleshlight, my bare head rubbing in underwear all if it is a great experience

Fact: There is nothing wrong with being circumcised.
Attack me in another thread on a day I feel up to it, I would like for this one to get back on topic.

Here's where I stand and if you find this irrational then you have bigger problems:
I refuse to make or have questioned any type of life or parental decisions based on the notions or beliefs of people I met on the internet.
Wow, Young Native didn't bully you in the slightest. He simply backed you into a logical corner and you packed your stuff and went home, even when your stated purpose in these debates is to counter "anti-circ propaganda".

As for there being no bulletproof evidence, I'm still waiting for anyone to provide a real refutation for either the Sorrells or the Van Howe studies.
 

JTalbain

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
1,786
Media
0
Likes
14
Points
258
Age
34
I wanted to add one observation which I believe is at the crux of our disagreement.

The significance you place on having the choice to be circumcised differs vastly between us. I am more than willing to accept this difference. You are not. This I can't help you understand but you seem to want to not only understand it from me but also "help" change my mindset on this choice.

You believe my mindset is irrational based on you not understanding it. I understand it perfectly well as well as a good many people that surround me in my real life. I am sure you can say the same about your real life.
I'm very pragmatic, which is why I feel the choice is at the very heart of the intactivist argument as well. Only those who are cut without their consent and wish they weren't get screwed here. No one is hurt by the decision to not circumcise a child.
 

D_Miranda_Wrights

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Posts
931
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
darkbond007,

I don't understand what I've done that's "bullying." I am trying to use something philosophical to change your mind, because I think RIC (not circumcision) is philosophically wrong. I don't even know what "attacking the core of your psyche" is supposed to mean, but if it means attacking the root of your philosophical argument on RIC, sure I am. But that's not anything like bullying. That's how you convince good people that well-intentioned positions are wrong.

That said, you made this topic, and if you "refuse to be questioned" about your beliefs in it, that's within your rights and I'll respect it. I have moved the post to here for you to reply to. Because, yes, that's how I'm arguing to a good person that his well-intentioned position is wrong.
 
Last edited:

D_Miranda_Wrights

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Posts
931
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
103
Sexuality
No Response
I wanted to add one observation which I believe is at the crux of our disagreement.

The significance you place on having the choice to be circumcised differs vastly between us. I am more than willing to accept this difference. You are not. This I can't help you understand but you seem to want to not only understand it from me but also "help" change my mindset on this choice.

You believe my mindset is irrational based on you not understanding it. I understand it perfectly well as well as a good many people that surround me in my real life. I am sure you can say the same about your real life.

I'm now not clear on whether you want to move this or not.

No, I am not willing to accept our difference of opinion, because I think what you are arguing for is wrong and affects someone besides yourself. I think your argument is intellectually unsound, sets dangerous philosophical precedents, and unjustly violates some folks (even in a marginal way) by reducing autonomy. I'm a big proponent of "to each his own" when it does not wrong a third party, but here it does.

I was trying to understand your position, but you just now called me a bully and effectively terminated that conversation. Kind of makes it hard to understand your argument.

"Some people agree with me" is not any kind of logical defense. I'm not arguing that you're the only one in the world who believes this. I'm not arguing that you're insane. There are plenty of beliefs in history that have been held by more than one decent, sane person, but were nonetheless wrong. I am arguing that your belief is wrong.
 
Last edited:

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
darkbond007,

I don't understand what I've done that's "bullying." I am trying to use something philosophical to change your mind, because I think RIC (not circumcision) is philosophically wrong. I don't even know what "attacking the core of your psyche" is supposed to mean, but if it means attacking the root of your philosophical argument on RIC, sure I am. But that's not anything like bullying. That's how you convince good people that well-intentioned positions are wrong.

That said, you made this topic, and if you "refuse to be questioned" about your beliefs in it, that's within your rights and I'll respect it. I have moved the post to here for you to reply to. Because, yes, that's how I'm arguing to a good person that his well-intentioned position is wrong.

I have replied in the other thread.
 

darkbond007

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Posts
1,245
Media
54
Likes
118
Points
308
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I'm now not clear on whether you want to move this or not.

No, I am not willing to accept our difference of opinion, because I think what you are arguing for is wrong and affects someone besides yourself. I think your argument is intellectually unsound, sets dangerous philosophical precedents, and unjustly violates some folks (even in a marginal way) by reducing autonomy. I'm a big proponent of "to each his own" when it does not wrong a third party, but here it does.

What does it wrong? Again, we differ on what we perceive is wrong about circumcision. Parents make decisions for kids ALL the time. This is why they are the parents. This in itself to me is soooooo insignificant I could care less what a parent decides on with respect to circumcising their son.

I dont feel circumcision harms a kid. It didnt harm me and it didnt harm any of my cousins. It didnt harm my father.

I was trying to understand your position, but you just now called me a bully and effectively terminated that conversation. Kind of makes it hard to understand your argument.

I understand your argument of the main fact that it differs from mine and you know, that is fine. I havent demeaned your argument , what you have is yours.

"Some people agree with me" is not any kind of logical defense. I'm not arguing that you're the only one in the world who believes this. I'm not arguing that you're insane. There are plenty of beliefs in history that have been held by more than one decent, sane person, but were nonetheless wrong. I am arguing that your belief is wrong.

There are many beliefs that people said were wrong that just so happened to be that person's opinion. I believe your belief is your belief. I am arguing that you have no grounds to state my belief is wrong.