This is why I hate the US. We like keeping minorities as second class citizens, and cutting up baby cocks for no fucking reason. Cant wait till that shit is illegal! Boys deserve better.
Sociology Class in College- Prof asked about Circumsized Males
- Thread starter brockli
- Start date
Agreed! I think it should be an individual's choice! And for those men that have lots of foreskin may decide to get some it of it cut off. While on the other hand, men with cocks like me (the foreskin stays retracted most of the time) would probably elect to get their natural skin and have a better sex life!
I can relate w/ brockli. I remember in middle school a kid being bullied in the locker room because other kids saw that he was uncut. Fucking idiots.
The professor in my Anthropology class was talking about female circumcision in Africa and the ME. Everyone was aghast. He then asked "how many of you men are circumcised?". Before anyone could answer, he went on about male circumcision and how it is accepted and how it has no real value either. No one said anything.
Actually, this just shows the huge social pressures that exist to "conform". When I was younger and uncut, I really resented Dr Spock telling parents to have their sons cut so they wouldn't be "different".
At the end of the day, he was right. And they gets worse when even teachers start to make fun of uncircumcised and you are a very small minority in classroom and are forced to hide the fact that you are uncut.
I grew up in minority of uncut, but it was closer to perhaps 60/40 or 55/45, not 95/5 as was the case in USA. So teachers wouldn't poke fun at uncuts. I do remember at sex ed that the teacher mentioned that if you were ncut you could easily get (list of ailments) if you did not wash frequently. But it was said more in a factual way than in a way to poke fun at us.
It would be socially inept for a teacher to poke fun at uncuts and then ask for a show of hands of who is cut and uncut.
In an adult setting, it is perhaps more acceptable t have cut/uncut banter and make jokes, but not in a teacher/student situation especially not with kids/teenagers who might be uncut and already feeling in extreme minority in USA.
(I realise that "extreme" is no longer the case is soe regions of the USA, but it used to be just about everywhere).
- RSMH,
Exactly, these are COLLEGE/UNIVERSITY classes not 3rd grade, such questions and discussions are totally appropriate for adult education in a UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE setting just as they are appropriate here on this site/forum for adults (LPSG).
My only issue with the cut/versus uncut debates is when uncut advocates act like being cut as a male takes all the pleasure away from sex etc. or even truly lessens it. Because in my many, many experiences (lol), this is just not the case at all. BOTH cut and uncut men seem to get amazing joy fully from what is done to their cocks; any more pleasure and no one would ever do any other work except play with or have pleasurable things done to their cocks all day, lol (again I find this largely true for both cut & uncut guys with very little difference).
Here's what may be breaking news in 2013 but was once know and accepted widely, MALES & females are truly very different in some ways especially when it comes to sex! Cutting off a female's clit so that a woman might perhaps be better controlled by the males in her tribe to only have sex for their pleasure & therefore be less tempted to perhaps cheat on their sometimes brutal arraigned marriage husbands who in many parts of the world can still even legally rape them as part of their wifely duties etc. is NOT the same as a guy being circumcised AT ALL.
Most/the vast, overwhelming majority of cut guys love sex like all males love sex and have about as much pleasure as possible from amazing things done to their cocks the right way, (again any more pleasure and no one would ever do any other work except play with or have pleasurable things done to their cocks all day, lol; AND AGAIN THIS SEEMS TO BE TRUE FOR BOTH MOST CUT AND UNCUT COCKS, with little real differences in real world sex practices/experiences, versus all the theories and perhaps over active advocacy bullshit by some about uncut being so much better, IMHO.). Most cut cock guys have amazing super/{equally pleasurable sex/} enjoyment from their cocks too!
So really in my experiences it's not a big deal, nor should be either way and it is NOT at all the same as so-called female circumcision. Apples & oranges as they say; they may both be called fruits but they are most definitely NOT the same thing!
Last edited:
So cutting off what part of a female's junk is equivalent to circumcising a male? If you find the comparison too disparate, what would bring it closer to balance? (And I submit that neither you nor I have any real knowledge why female circumcision is carried out, except for the fact that it is almost exclusively female-on-female and not something men do to women. I am completely over westerners exclaiming, "it's done to destroy pleasure!" "for chastity!" "to make childbirth impossible!"). I have worked with intersex, FGC and MGC issues for decades, and I never cease to be amazed by the reasons that Americans insist FGC is done.
Or is your argument that guys are just born with useless, expendable sex parts and females are not?
The point of the ethics discussion taking place about circumcision in several countries is not primarily about who enjoys sex more. It is about whether a human being has the inherent right to know and enjoy his or her complete sex organs in particular, and body in general. It's not your place or mine to say to someone else that half the skin of his penis is not worth knowing or enjoying. [Infant circumcision removes on average 51% of the skin system of the penis, British Journal of Urology 1996.] There is also an appearance issue; some males deeply resent having their glans permanently "revealed" without a medical reason, and are ashamed or disappointed to have a scar on their penis. This can inhibit sexual relations or undressing/showering around others. Some uncut guys are self-conscious too, but (a) their bodies are anatomically correct and their beef is with Mother Nature and (b) they can easily do something about it, like retract or get cut. These same inhibitions can lead people to demur when asked by friends or a professor about their circumcision status.
FFS, why do so many people go straight to the "I like it so it must be OK" argument?
Or is your argument that guys are just born with useless, expendable sex parts and females are not?
The point of the ethics discussion taking place about circumcision in several countries is not primarily about who enjoys sex more. It is about whether a human being has the inherent right to know and enjoy his or her complete sex organs in particular, and body in general. It's not your place or mine to say to someone else that half the skin of his penis is not worth knowing or enjoying. [Infant circumcision removes on average 51% of the skin system of the penis, British Journal of Urology 1996.] There is also an appearance issue; some males deeply resent having their glans permanently "revealed" without a medical reason, and are ashamed or disappointed to have a scar on their penis. This can inhibit sexual relations or undressing/showering around others. Some uncut guys are self-conscious too, but (a) their bodies are anatomically correct and their beef is with Mother Nature and (b) they can easily do something about it, like retract or get cut. These same inhibitions can lead people to demur when asked by friends or a professor about their circumcision status.
FFS, why do so many people go straight to the "I like it so it must be OK" argument?
Last edited:
I still say this is something that would get a professor in a shitload of trouble. If I were in that class, I probably wouldn't have raised my hand (not a criticism of the OP) and then reported it to the department. Especially after they proceeded to talk about how "gross uncut cocks were."
i had a similar but almost opposite experience: I was reading through my lecture notes before a class one time and noticed they mentioned circumcision and was freaking out for the hour before the class on what to do if such a survey was done impromtu in class
I am cut in a mostly uncut society
I am cut in a mostly uncut society
Yes sir, the professor admitted that he was cut and said that he agreed with circumcision because of the cleanliness reasons and that he would have his male children circumcised. Next, he made a point about Jews and cultural norms, etc (certainly a relevant topic for sociology).
I am very proud of my uncut status, although I was definitely a minority in this classroom. I hope you all do not resent me for not standing up and sharing my status with everyone in the classroom. While I may share this information with sex partners, close friends, and people on this site. I had much less of a desire to share that info with my prof and my classmates of varied age, race, and gender. If the discussion had been more "open" perhaps I would have been more inclined to say that I was uncut. Unfortunately, the discussion quickly became very negatively focused towards men that were uncircumcised. To say the least, I think that those individuals in that room were very uninformed and closed-minded.
I am very proud of my uncut status, although I was definitely a minority in this classroom. I hope you all do not resent me for not standing up and sharing my status with everyone in the classroom. While I may share this information with sex partners, close friends, and people on this site. I had much less of a desire to share that info with my prof and my classmates of varied age, race, and gender. If the discussion had been more "open" perhaps I would have been more inclined to say that I was uncut. Unfortunately, the discussion quickly became very negatively focused towards men that were uncircumcised. To say the least, I think that those individuals in that room were very uninformed and closed-minded.
At the end of the day, Dr. Spock was not right when he said to have people cut so they would not look different. You don't surgically remove a normal, healthy body part so that others will accept you. Spock changed his mind on the subject, and towards the end of his life, truly regretted his earlier stance on circumcision.
Being uncircumcised in the US is not in the extreme minority. I'm in the US, and most of the men I know have their foreskins. It is getting close to 50/50, so at best, it is becoming a moot point whether having a foreskin looks different.
Should we start circumcising our dogs, so they fit in more with their owners?
I would say that the discussion quickly turned hostile, and represented the prejudicial beliefs of that out of bounds professor.
Something in your instincts told you that this "discussion" was not going to be a safe place.
It was a dumb thing for him to do. You should never have been put in such an uncomfortable position in the first place. Him asking everyone to drop trousers would have been widely acknowledged as deranged. This was the verbal equivalent. What he was trying to prove, is totally lost on me.
He should have known better, and was using the situation to grind his particular axe.
Amazing. How could a professor be so inappropriate?
Do they ask women about their breasts, and expect to stimulate discussion?
I agree. the only question that can be debated is if it's ok to choose to circumcise a child instead of letting him decide on his own later. but it seems to me that new generations are becoming more modern and will stop cutting their sons just so they aren't different ( by 0.001%, which is ~ the weight of the foreskin). Should people with blue eyes wear black lenses just so they would fit into dark eyed world?
I once spoke to a girl friend who is Muslim, and asked which religion would our child be, she said she'll do her best to convince him to her beliefs but he'd definitely have to be cut. and then we started debating and interviewing people, turns out the only reason is hygiene, which really is not an issue at all, just like you wash your ears or feet every day, you wash your cock, and its fine. I don't believe in doing something just because lots of others do it, they can be wrong, I prefer to think with my own head and let kids enjoy themselves, circumcision later if they want it. and even that after they turn 21, when they are adults, not that influenced by what others think or point finger at.
At.your.cervix
Superior Member
No it's not appropriate to ask if anyone is circumcised, a virgin, uses sex toys, etc., even in a college classroom. This would easily fall into sexual harrassment, as it is easily possible that this question could make somebody feel uncomfortable answering (or abstaining from answering), as the original poster noted. While it may be appropriate to discuss circumcision, or other sexuality oriented subjects, there is no reason to take a public poll where students would have to reveal their specific stauts to their classmates. The point that circumcision is prevelent in the US could be easily made by stating "statistics would indicate that X of the males in this classroom are circumcised." A little bit of thoughtful empathy really is called for when diuscussing issues like this. If the Prof really wanted to put a human face on the topic, he/she might ask if somebody in the class was willing to share the fact that they were circumcised, and wait for a volunteer. I'd be surprised if that professor wasn't asked to speak with the school's HR administrator after giving that lecture.
I too would have probably lied if I was uncircumcised. I know I felt shame and embarrassment the many years I was uncircumcised. And just like Ren69 I feel the same way. Read his post on page 2 of this thread.
