On Circumcision

[Vigaku]

I'm going to try being as calm as possible with this, since the issue is just enraging to me since 2009 when I started researching the subject. I understand ignorance regarding the manner was rampant back then, and I'm actually glad the vast majority (close to 80%) of Earth males are not victims of this barbaric act. It's far more rare with females, so this is just regarding male circumcision.

It's becoming more commonly known what're the effects of removing the foreskin (which is about 2/3 of your penile skin), not to mention removal of the frenulum, which is what holds the foreskin to the underside of the glans (penis head). Having the foreskin removed usually means having this removed as well. Some of these effects can be (and aren't limited to) drying out of the glans making it less sensitive over time since the foreskin's supposed to be covering it, bowing of the penis when erect due to lack of accommodating skin (one of the foreskin's purpose), "shafting" during intercourse (not having this amount of skin makes vaginal sex unnatural and somewhat dysfunctional, not to mention less desirable for the woman), painful erections if they get tight due to said lack of accommodating skin, and what I find to be the most depressing of all, the amount of sexual sensation lost. That foreskin reportedly has several times the sensitivity the glans has, and I originally thought the glans was the most sensitive part of all (the foreskin also works as a feel-good glider for vaginal sex and stroking purposes); the frenulum is also a highly sensitive area, and is actually the most pleasure-deriving part of the body. Nothing shames me more than those who support this practice for the sake of hygiene. I am a hygiene freak (it is even part of my OCD), yet I would NEVER support this due to the negative effects of it physically, and more importantly the possible worse mental/emotional/psychological effect of it. A person who's impotent is almost guaranteed a miserable life. The misery comes from the lack of sexual pleasure due to the impotence, and hardly because loliwant2reproduce. Now, considering circumcision eliminates well over 30% of the pleasure intended by nature, why the hell would people still recommend it now? Do people want us to be 30% depressed? Or intact humans, as opposed to mutilated at birth?

It's bad enough someone like me is pretty much permanently depressed due to other matters anyway. I'm victim to all these effects (I don't call them "side effects", since there's no benefit to being circumcised in the United States in 2012; this is not Africa or the Dark Ages), and I am not embarrassed to say that online, in person, to a doctor, whatever. I understand some may find this to be too much info. and so forth, but if it's a source of depression/displeasure, I don't see why I shouldn't bring it up. It's said that you should talk to someone about your problems when you're depressed, etc. and this issue's important. Every ad on the internet and their mothers talk about the importance of having a healthy sex life, so considering this is directly related to that, should this subject really be some kind of taboo? I don't think so.

The fact keeping an intact penis clean is as easy as pulling the foreskin back when urinating, or (if you want) thinking of arousing thoughts to make the glans come out just enough so that you don't soak your foreskin with your piss, and that you can simply wash it either way makes me want to cockslap someone hard enough that their head spins. You wash your entire body every morning. If you cannot wash an intact male organ, then you fail at failing. And STD's? Condoms, common sense, and clinical tests and you're good to go. Heck one of them is sufficient.

I hate people's stupidity and I hate those who blind-follow a religion without thinking even a little bit for themselves and doing their own research. Funnier is they believe their god commands that they cut off what he/she/it has been putting on creatures for the past 65 million years, lol. That god also commanded that we dismember limbs. After all, who needs them./sarcasm

 

[Cassin]

Eh. I dunno. I had a friend who got his snipped in his 30's and was happy he did it. Plus plenty of people are able to argue the sensitivity issue in the other direction.

 

[HughJass]

I too have read reearchers saying the effects are exclusively negative. Glad I never had it done. I think doing it to babies is just plain wrong. Leave them alone and let them decide if they want it later in life.


Deprivation of choice is a major infringement.

 

[Thom]

I don't think it's a big deal. Mine was done in the Jewish manner when I was a baby though so I don't know if I'm missing out on anything.

 

[Vigaku]

You (and I) are. Been researching it since 2009. The foreskin and frenulum (foreskin attacher to the glans) are what are lost with this process, and there's undeniable proof that these are the most sexually sensitive parts of the penis. As for those men who'd say it's the other way for them, their numbers are small, and know what else? It's because now their glans is exposed always. It's a sensitive part, and all the time before they had meaty skin to cover it. Had they been like that since birth, their glans would be far less sensitive and dried out, though like I said, they're the minority saying it got better, and usually they'll say that since they had it removed for medical problems anyway so the procedure was in their favor. Of course, then, they'll say that sex is better. They'll say that life overall for them is better.

Pages like these nail it. I don't even have the time to read through it all obviously but I read enough, especially the studies and statistics area: http://www.circumstitions.com/Sexuality.html (if you want you can just look at the 2 diagrams (circ'd and uncirc'd) highlighting sensitive parts via colors)

As one person on another link put it, "most circumcised men are ignorant of the sexual sensations of which they've been deprived; sex still feels good to them, but they have no concept of how it is really supposed to feel with a foreskin, the way that nature intended."

It makes complete sense. Everywhere this is argued for the female organ, and it's even a crime to do to female in the States; yet the lack of sexual sensation for males isn't being completely realized and it is "ok" to do it in the U.S. Eff this.

Whatever. Thinking of doing foreskin restoration. Not that this gives back exactly what was lost as far as pleasure capacity, but still better than my current (mutilated) manhood. Oh and as for religion, it can screw itself. This bs practice entered Christianity (which is currently the most open-minded religion about this, then it's Judaism, then worst of all Islam, and this is coming from a former Muslim) and Islam via Jewish practices, among others like stoning for adultery and beards for men/head-coverings for women, none of which can be found in the Quran which the same God calls "a confirmation source of EVERY SCRIPTURE he sent before" (note the Quran is not exactly Islam; mainstream Islam follows tons of other stuff that are complete rubbish they let override the Quran and let "define" it even). Not one person in his/her right mind would believe God endorses the horribly painful removal of something God's been putting on creatures of our species for thousands of years. It's not a birth defect and it comes with EVERY baby boy.

 

[virtuality]

I am circumcised and as far as I am aware it's never caused me a problem. I couldn't comment on how it feels with the foreskin but I'm very much fine without it..

IMO, it's one of those minor things, and I don't believe neither the pros nor the cons outweigh each other. In the past circumcision was probably a necessity, the hygiene standards were very very poor and that was the major advantage of circumcision. These days we have all the resources and it may not be necessary anymore.

On the subject of should it be done to the newly borns on religious grounds?? That I'm really not sure about, let the parents decide.

 

[HughJass]

Some medicos just wrote a pro-circumcision piece on a website run by Australian academics. They got pwned in the comments. Good read.


https://theconversation.edu.au/male-circumcision-policy-ignores-research-showing-benefits-8395

 

[Cassin]

A lot of girls I have spoken to about this don't like it.
*shrugs*

 

[virtuality]

A lot of girls I have spoken to about this don't like it.
*shrugs*

Do you mean they dont like circumcised men?

I've never had any problems with it in the past, and my sample pool isn't exactly small.

Some medicos just wrote a pro-circumcision piece on a website run by Australian academics. They got pwned in the comments. Good read.


https://theconversation.edu.au/male-circumcision-policy-ignores-research-showing-benefits-8395

As an atheist, I'll play the devils advocate... I do concede that with the current medical treatments there is no need for circumcision, I've already said that in my previous post. On the other hand, I can see where circumcision comes from. In the past, we didn't have the same hygiene standards and it was somewhat a necessity, thus it became part of religion/culture, ie there was a clear advantage.

 

[HughJass]

A lot of girls I have spoken to about this don't like it.
*shrugs*

don't like circumcision or no-circumcision?

 

[HairGuru22]

i am circumcised at an fairly young age and i have not any problems that you mentioned

 

[Vigaku]

"Let the parents decide."

Since we all know the parents have actually done their research regarding infant circumcision a.k.a. routine genital mutilation (they did not, as the vast majority don't) and since it's their genitals. Oh wait.


"I have no problem/I'm ok/etc."

Oh, I'm afraid you have a problem. You just aren't aware of it, just like I haven't for the first 20 years of my life.

I bet for the longest time you thought your genitals were in their original form...haven't you? I thought the same, and they're not. It's already documented just how much erogenous (pleasure-giving) nerves are in what's sacrificed due to circumcision, in the name of religion and/or ignorance. Nearly 20,000 nerves of it, and what you're left with for sexual pleasure is far, far less than what's cut off. Sex feel good? You bet. Knew the whole time that your pleasure wasn't even close to 50% of what NATURE intended for you to have? You should now. That's the whole nonsensical man-made (not God-made) religious motto: sex should be for copulation; not pleasure, and since it's a several million dollar industry it's being pushed as much as possible. Since knowledge of what exactly it is that's being lost (as opposed to "lol just a useless tube of skin that's disgusting") is SPREADING, however, the circumcision rate falls drastically. Check out the rate now in the U.S., far less than even a few years back. Thank goodness. The only people doing it now are the ones stupid enough to think that God commands this barbarity or tricked into believing the health benefits from the medical industry, so they keep their several-million-dollar industry going, which is beginning to fade.

Please do your research as far as circumcision's concerned, though I recommend otherwise if sexual pleasure (like to me) is one of the few best things in life, unless you're ok with spending the next couple of years restoring (avoid surgical, since it's very risky and expensive. Everyone opts for non-surgical techniques, and almost everyone's happy with the results; personally I'm going to try out the CAT II Q), which won't exactly increase your life quality to that of an "intact" you, but from testimonials, you get back around half of what's lost as far as pleasure.

These are accounts of circumcised men who've restored, so there's no anti-circumcision bs here. One can choose to accept and believe what they want, but the internet is out there; search engines are out there. Not that common sense doesn't already say that less penis tissue = less nerves and flesh to be pleased with, especially that which is laden with nerves and vessels.

 

[Quadzilla99]

Women hate uncircumcized penises. Learned this in a college sexual psychology class...whole class was like "ewww", one girl said they "look shady, as if they have something to hide, like a guy in a hooded sweatshirt...like the unabomber" I LOL'ed as did many others.

 

[Vigaku]

I've been reading that all the time the past couple weeks. It's that thing called ignorance, though go find out how many people on the net are speaking out against beliefs like that (of clueless American women and their circ'd penis fetish, and funny that they don't realize how much better a natural penis would feel in their vaginas). I bet she also didn't know that only about 1/5 of males worldwide are circumcised. I'm guessing you're in the States and this was a university in the States. It's the kind of penis they're used to, though while the idea of a woman preferring a circ'd penis is turning on to the circ'd man, him finding out that the majority of his pleasure-giving tissue is gone heavily outweighs that, especially if he's into masturbation. You'll see the opposite kind of reaction in a European university, or hell just about anywhere that isn't Muslim or Jewish. America's special though, since it's Israel's greatest ally and shelters the second largest Jewish population in the world. Through weaseling and deception (which Jews are well-known for) they managed to make it a norm in the U.S., though recently their barbaric stone-age belief has started to dwindle due to more light being shed on the issue.

Yay for genital mutilation. :/

 

[Quadzilla99]

Yeah, in the U.S. its pretty bizarre to see an uncircumcised penis

 

[Cassin]

don't like circumcision or no-circumcision?

Not circumcised.

 

[slipy]

i have been reading circumcision makes penis less sensitive.

my premature ejaculations prevent me from fully enjoying p**rn. :/

 

[Vigaku]

i have been reading circumcision makes penis less sensitive.

my premature ejaculations prevent me from fully enjoying p**rn. :/

That was its aim. Strange, a practice established to help prevent boys from masturbating (read on U.S.'s history) and be more chaste yet I can't count how many times I wanked (I'd estimate to a total of 2,100 times, and I'm 23) and watched p**rn, with my 100% circumcised-since-infancy penis (i.e. no remnant of foreskin or frenulum, which are needed for full penile function and pleasure). It's in Judaism for the same reason. Orthodox Jews and rabbi's will tell you that. It's viewed in the religious world as "sinful pleasure and enjoyment" and "unclean", and if you don't remove it then you have to place in the holy afterlife. Ha.

No.

If there was a god, that god would care for us (and wouldn't make errors in his design for us to correct), and would want men and women to experience great mutual sexual pleasure, even to the extreme. Oh wait...the foreskin does just that? Argument over. The Quran's version of God is this kind of god, not the arbitrary one in the (initially pure and now corrupted) Torah. "Islam's" god is even worse. I'd know since I studied this religion longer than I was a member here. Islam's so far off the Quran thanks to man-made Islamic sources which even contain much of the same falsehoods that corrupted Judaism, it's not funny.

All the "medical benefits" are hogwash, since most of them deal with contracting STD's (funny, America, which has a higher circumcision rate than the entirety of Europe has far higher rates of STD's than them, and Europe's circumcision rate is an abysmal 2%) and the issue of cleanliness. NO TISSUE on the body is "dirty" and we clean everywhere with soap and water. The foreskin's smegma even has anti-bacterial agents, something the money-greedy American medical industry won't tell you (they also know that people with sexual dysfunction are more likely to be circumcised than not, so the poor guys end up paying for medications to treat this, and the greedy get more money), though fortunately since almost every developed country besides America doesn't practice the procedure and hence has no incentive to lie, they publish the truth of this and continue to shake their heads at America's stupidity (good though that the rate, which was around 90% back in America's 60's, is now a very low 30% and decreasing...the 30% being parents who haven't done research and just follow trends). To say it should be cut off simply because it's a great source of pleasure is according to common sense evil. Why don't you teach him better control of himself instead of inflicting such barbarity, not that masturbation doesn't have pretty much just benefits unless you're a moron; I'm talking illegit sex. To argue that a boy won't know how to clean his penis, so we should painfully amputate 2/3 of its tissue is backwards as hell. What's to say he'll know how to clean his nostrils and ears?

I was born in a sheep-minded Muslim family, and in late 80's America...two things that you knew put me at a high-*** risk of this mutilation I'll never get over (since it's permanent for the rest of my life) after finding out the facts demystifying the so-called benefits of circumcision, and the shocking loss of sexual quality that is depressing. Circumcision is traumatic and unforgivable if done on babies who can't consent, and don't need it for any medical issues (which over 95% of newborns don't, like how I didn't).

If you think your problem is due to being mutilated like me, I'd advise restoring non-surgically (I would not advise surgical). The average account of a man who's been circumcised after experiencing sex with a foreskin, said for him sex/masturbation was a 3 when circumcised, and a 7 after restoring, while for him intact it was 10. I placed an order for my device online today and it's the "CAT II Q". Seems promising, and I like the product's materials. You could read the testimonials on that site and everyone was pleased during and after using it. I'm extremely depressed knowing I was deprived of well over half of the sexual pleasure I was intended to have by nature. This isn't bs. Anyone can spend days to look this up for themselves and after 100% unbiased research, will come to know plain irrefutable facts regarding circumcision.

This wouldn't even be an issue if foreskin regeneration was around, but unfortunately it won't be around for a long time. They haven't even yet accumulated enough money to do some testing.

 

[Vigaku]

I'd like to apologize for the way/tone I wrote my posts in. It's somewhat a phase for me, though pretty much all I said is from looking into the matter. Around 80% of the world's men are intact and America's circ. rate is fading (meaning American women preferring circ'd men will be of past generations; they'll be like their European female counterparts and among the 80% of women worldwide, and there's documented proof uncircumcised sex is less damaging and makes a woman reach orgasm faster and more often), so I doubt I'm odd for opposing circumcision. Even issues like phimosis don't necessitate it since creams and stretching are the best and recommended ways for that (phimosis). We don't severe any flesh, period (especially when their beneficial and purposeful functions are proven). It's barbaric. Circumcision's history shows it originated from barbaric and anti-sexual beliefs, though if you decide to opt for it later personally, that's your decision which you don't force on your baby, unless you'd like to risk him turning out like the tens of thousands out there like myself, discovering what they're missing out on and restoring as a result, and since awareness of these losses is increasing, your chance your son is figuring out later increases. The rate of this currently decreases among Jews even. Muslims I have no clue. From observation they're arguably the most hopeless people in the world. I'd imagine Jews are more rational/humane in general which would agree with circ. rates among the two, and I'm an Arab born into a Muslim family.

 

[RP3X]

I think girls would want to see the willys they see like on all the p**rn films, seeing anything else may get them scared...

I think this is the reason why a guy whos not circumcised also wants it done... almost the naturally thing to do in an odd way.

But then again one guy said think about this....

a circumcised guy will have his penis head rubbing 24/7 on his boxers all day and night long, think hes gonna be able to feel it after a few years ?

Mines still nice and sensitive and im not circumcised so ill stay put, but ive always been in 2 minds as to get it done or not...