POll: Did you circumcise your son, if he was born in the past 5 years?

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
That's great, I have no problem with circumcision. I have a problem with mutilating innocent children without giving them a choice.

I see zealotry is alive and well. Circumcision has irrefutable health benefits (and the evidence just gets stronger), except that it would rarely be done if given the choice, purely for emotional reasons.

I was circumcised as an infant but there is no way I would let anyone approach me Johnson with a knife once I reached the age of consent, unless I actually had some acute/recurring medical problem for which circumcision is indicated or would treat (e.g. foreskin cancer, phimosis, chronic infections, et. al.). Again, purely for emotional reasons.

I'm sorry that all the other kids teased you about your funny looking penis. Kids get teased about a lot of things they have no control over, but they don't grow up to be crusading zealots.

Sorry to break it to you, but circumcision is NOT common in my country and I've certainly never been teased about the appearance of my 3.5 inches of blue steel.

If it's blue you might want to stop wearing those rings around it...

 

[Anubis]

not myself but my sister had a son ~8 months ago and he is uncut like his father

 

[purewater09]

I come from the Uk where it isn't done and so I am not circumcised myself (nor would I want to be). But I do know a lot about the subject because I looked into it when I found to my disbelief that more than half of Americans were done.

It turns out that non-religious circumcision was uncommon until the Victorian era when doctors with limited knowledge began to use circumcision as a means of stopping boys from masturbating (thinking that masturbation cased insanity and nervous disorders such as epilepsy). It never really took hold in the Uk and fewer than 30% were ever circumcised. It was stoped completely when the National health service (NHS) decided not to fund it, largely thanks to this study:
http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/

Here is a good site on history:

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/

Also it does impact on sex. For starters, masturbation is harder. With a natural penis you just move the skin up and down. The inside of the foreskin is very sensitive and as you move it up and down it is pleasurable. This page gives a good idea for those who don't know how an intact penis works:
http://geocities.com/painfulqu...oning/naturalresources (contains penis pic)

Circed guys have no foreskin and so they either rub it (which can cause redness and chafing) or they have to actually use an artificial lubricant. Maybe this is why the USA describes masturbating as "rubbing one off" whereas we call it "wanking"?

Also when you remove the foreskin it means that the glans underneath dries out. Not only that but it comes into contact with clothing and this seems to make the skin harder:
http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm (contains penis pic)

It also has an effect on sexual intercourse , not only for the man but for the woman. This site gives a good explanation:
http://xrl.us/foreskinfunctions (contains penis pic)

Also in terms of care in infancy, leaving the boy intact is also a lot easier. There is nothing to do. No cleaning is required as the foreskin is unretractable in infancy. Unfortunately some doctors in the USA have limited knowledge of this fact. They pull the foreskin back causing damage and creating scar tissue which could lead to problems retracting the foreskin down the line.
http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/
This is probably the main reason you hear of it being done later. Misdiagnosis of phimosis (unretractable foreskin). Also, true phimosis (as opposed to it being physiological) caused by scar tissue due to incorrect care in infancy.

Some studies show some medical benefit but others don't and no medical association recommends non-therapeutic infant circumcision. Most boys will not benefit health-wise from circumcision. Here are some good summaries:
http://cirp.org/library/disease/
http://pediatrics.aappublicati...tters/119/5/1006#23937
http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP-ana.html
http://www.nature.com/nrurol/j...2/full/ncpuro1292.html

Also there are very few medical indications for circumcision nowadays. Problems can usually be solved without surgery.

Ultimately though , it is the fact that you are removing a part of the boy's penis which has protective and sexual functions without his consent, which is why I am opposed to it.

The other reason is that I get angry and feel immensely sorry for those who have had severely botched circumcisions:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Complic.html
http://www.catholicsagainstcir.../cac_complications.htm

 

[z1ggy]

Originally posted by: coreyb
Go research why there is an international movement to promote circumcision. Lower rates of HIV infection, HPV, etc. No incidents of penal cancer which there is in uncircumcised males.

also, girls do prefer it 9/10 and it tends to smell if you don't take care of it.

not to mention all the fore skin tearing problems uncircumcised males have which end up forcing them to get it cut off anyway.

So ignorant and backed with zero data or numbers. This is why its so stupid.

9/10? Really? I obv didn't read many of the posts here. I always knwo theres going to be the guys who are cut and think there was is the best; which there is no right way..but Nobody should act like uncut or cut is better for you. The fact is the medical benefits of cutting a one day old child with little to no pain killers isn't worth helping them "avoid aids or penile cancer". Jesus, wrap your friggin' tool and go to the doctor yearly, and I juuuuust might think your dick will be OK.

oh and btw, males just carry HPV...in fact 50% of the male population has it...but we just don't have/show symptoms of it. So0o..uncut or not..theres a very good chance you may have it.

 

[JJ650]

Originally posted by: IsLNdbOi

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
I see mutilation of innocent babies is still alive and well.

:roll:

I've lived through both ways. I way prefer circumcised.

Me too. I was uncircumcised until my mid teens. I prefer it circumcised. I like the way it looks and I always felt squeamish pulling the foreskin up to clean.

Wha?????????????????


Pansy. Get in there and clean. Holy fuk that's the lamest reason I have heard.

I see no valid point in it. Most of the reasons are flimsy at best. For the record I still have my sheath and it's never made me self concious.


**EDIT**

Ok so you had a medical issue. Don't worry. Pull it back. Do it often enough and it doesn't hurt. Have the wife/girlfriend (or BF if you swing that way) help for added fun?

 

[surfsatwerk]

Originally posted by: purewater09
I come from the Uk where it isn't done and so I am not circumcised myself (nor would I want to be). But I do know a lot about the subject because I looked into it when I found to my disbelief that more than half of Americans were done.

It turns out that non-religious circumcision was uncommon until the Victorian era when doctors with limited knowledge began to use circumcision as a means of stopping boys from masturbating (thinking that masturbation cased insanity and nervous disorders such as epilepsy). It never really took hold in the Uk and fewer than 30% were ever circumcised. It was stoped completely when the National health service (NHS) decided not to fund it, largely thanks to this study:
http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/

Here is a good site on history:

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/

Also it does impact on sex. For starters, masturbation is harder. With a natural penis you just move the skin up and down. The inside of the foreskin is very sensitive and as you move it up and down it is pleasurable. This page gives a good idea for those who don't know how an intact penis works:
http://geocities.com/painfulqu...oning/naturalresources (contains penis pic)

Circed guys have no foreskin and so they either rub it (which can cause redness and chafing) or they have to actually use an artificial lubricant. Maybe this is why the USA describes masturbating as "rubbing one off" whereas we call it "wanking"?

Also when you remove the foreskin it means that the glans underneath dries out. Not only that but it comes into contact with clothing and this seems to make the skin harder:
http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm (contains penis pic)

It also has an effect on sexual intercourse , not only for the man but for the woman. This site gives a good explanation:
http://xrl.us/foreskinfunctions (contains penis pic)

Also in terms of care in infancy, leaving the boy intact is also a lot easier. There is nothing to do. No cleaning is required as the foreskin is unretractable in infancy. Unfortunately some doctors in the USA have limited knowledge of this fact. They pull the foreskin back causing damage and creating scar tissue which could lead to problems retracting the foreskin down the line.
http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/
This is probably the main reason you hear of it being done later. Misdiagnosis of phimosis (unretractable foreskin). Also, true phimosis (as opposed to it being physiological) caused by scar tissue due to incorrect care in infancy.

Some studies show some medical benefit but others don't and no medical association recommends non-therapeutic infant circumcision. Most boys will not benefit health-wise from circumcision. Here are some good summaries:
http://cirp.org/library/disease/
http://pediatrics.aappublicati...tters/119/5/1006#23937
http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP-ana.html
http://www.nature.com/nrurol/j...2/full/ncpuro1292.html

Also there are very few medical indications for circumcision nowadays. Problems can usually be solved without surgery.

Ultimately though , it is the fact that you are removing a part of the boy's penis which has protective and sexual functions without his consent, which is why I am opposed to it.

The other reason is that I get angry and feel immensely sorry for those who have had severely botched circumcisions:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Complic.html
http://www.catholicsagainstcir.../cac_complications.htm

I read through that and find it hard to believe most of it. I mean how can I have this magic dick that's suffered none of the problems it claim men who are cut are going to have. Also I still hold out hope of a career in pron and I'm glad I wouldn't be forced to do fetish stuff because my wang looks funky.

Seems like fanatical propaganda by men who are self conscious about not getting cut.

 

[meltdown75]

wow... i knew ATOT was obsessed with cock & knob, but not to this extent.

 

[Sea Moose]

isnt this how they make calamari rings?

 

[KMFJD]

barbaric practice

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

well, at least explain where you get this ridiculous "80% of the world" figure.

you're either saying:

1: 80% of the world prefers uncut
2: 80% of the world is gay males.

I was referring to the fact that the vast majority of the males on this planet are uncut and they're obviously procreating without issue.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: purewater09
It turns out that non-religious circumcision was uncommon until the Victorian era when doctors with limited knowledge began to use circumcision as a means of stopping boys from masturbating (thinking that masturbation cased insanity and nervous disorders such as epilepsy). It never really took hold in the Uk and fewer than 30% were ever circumcised. It was stoped completely when the National health service (NHS) decided not to fund it, largely thanks to this study:
http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/

Some of your links refute your own argument. As can be seen from the link above, circumcision as a common practice predates its introduction into Roman Europe and in fact predates Christianity itself.

Lower socioeconomic classes with less education are ALWAYS more religious no matter what country or culture and ALWAYS have been. So why would well-educated and affluent classes circumcise their children FAR MORE than less educated and poor, if the primary impetus for circumcision was religious belief or rite? Doesn't compute. You should expect to find the opposite.

There is NO evidence that circumcision to prevent or treat masturbation was ever practiced or accepted to any meaningful degree. The crown prince of advocating circumcision to prevent or treat masturbation - Dr. John Harvey Kellogg - himself wrote that circumcision in the West (as it is among Jews) was done largely for reasons of health and hygiene. i.e. he admits his views that circumcision be done to prevent or treat masturbation were NOT mainstream. There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Kellogg managed to muster any significant number of supporters.

 

[z1ggy]

Way back then though..people didn't bathe as much so yes hygiene was a large issue. I can't say now a days though doing that to a child is a good enough cause to say " oh well this will make it cleaner".

 

[jonks]

Uncut pricks are weird to me, and i'm fine with mine as it is. I completely understand the other side of the argument though I think it should remain a family decision. However it's not like female circumcision where they cut out the clitoris and remove the possibility of sexual pleasure.

 

[DAGTA]

So much ignorance in this thread.

There is no valid reason to cut. In fact, from what I hear from women I've talked to, many uncut guys last longer than cut guys. I would guess that might have something to do with having full nerve sensation and a non-hardened / calloused head. Cut guys aren't feeling the same range of sensation so perhaps often go from "0 to 60" in a minute or two.

 

[meltdown75]

Originally posted by: DAGTA
So much ignorance in this thread.

There is no valid reason to cut. In fact, from what I hear from women I've talked to, many uncut guys last longer than cut guys. I would guess that might have something to do with having full nerve sensation and a non-hardened / calloused head. Cut guys aren't feeling the same range of sensation so perhaps often go from "0 to 60" in a minute or two.

yes, all cut guys are two-pump chumps. lol

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: krylon

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: Safeway
I am glad I was circumcised. I will have my boys circumcised, too.

As for the appearance, most women prefer circumcised penises.

How would you know?

How many uncircumcised dildos do you see for sale? :laugh:

You do realize that the foreskin pulls back during intercourse, so both circumcized and non-circumsized guys have their heads exposed during the act?

nitpick, but this isn't always true.

ps, LOL at this thread popping up yet again with the same exact results.

 

[rasczak]

If I ever have a boy (although the chances of that are slim to none at this point) I'm not sure what I would do. I'm cut, but I think i would like to let him make that decision on his own. However, the fact that as an infant he will not remember that pain as much as he would as a teen/adult does make it hard for me.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: DAGTA
There is no valid reason to cut. In fact, from what I hear from women I've talked to, many uncut guys last longer than cut guys. I would guess that might have something to do with having full nerve sensation and a non-hardened / calloused head. Cut guys aren't feeling the same range of sensation so perhaps often go from "0 to 60" in a minute or two.

I'm not following you.

You say "many uncut guys last longer than cut guys." Then you say that cut guys don't have a full nerve sensation like uncut guys do. Wouldn't someone with more nerve sensation be likely to pop quicker?

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: krylon

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
I wouldn't. Foreskins are too much fun during sex. 😀 Plus I think circumsized guys look weird.

Also, if you are uncircumcized you will be in demand in the gay community for space docking.

You know I'm female, right? Just checking. 🙂

Male until proven female (with :camera🙂

Everyone knows this

Yes, and everyone knows pics have already been supplied at prior times.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Originally posted by: DAGTA
So much ignorance in this thread.

There is no valid reason to cut. In fact, from what I hear from women I've talked to, many uncut guys last longer than cut guys. I would guess that might have something to do with having full nerve sensation and a non-hardened / calloused head. Cut guys aren't feeling the same range of sensation so perhaps often go from "0 to 60" in a minute or two.

This has the logical consistency of a gibbering monkey.

Because I am less sensitive, then I orgasm faster? Please refrain from posting until you can achieve basic logical consistency of your own thoughts.

 

[kalrith]

I have a 4-month-old who is circumcised. My wife and I went back and forth about it, and it seemed that it was almost a stalemate for the pros and cons of each way. We ultimately decided to circumcise for a few reasons. One is because if there's a time to do it it's when he's a baby and not a 15-year-old (or something like that). Another is preventing future complications if he didn't take care of himself well. The final one (which I'm sure many of you will lol at) is that God instituted circumcision for the nation of Israel. The last one is a contributing reason, because I'm very much a if-God-made-you-that-way-leave-it-alone sort of person. However, God not only made people that way but told his chosen people to change it (mutilate themselves as GodlessAstronomer would put it). So, with that in mind, we decided to go through with it.

 

[Safeway]

Originally posted by: Spartan Niner

Originally posted by: krylon

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
I wouldn't. Foreskins are too much fun during sex. 😀 Plus I think circumsized guys look weird.

Also, if you are uncircumcized you will be in demand in the gay community for space docking.

You know I'm female, right? Just checking. 🙂

Male until proven female (with :camera🙂

Everyone knows this

Yes, and everyone knows pics have already been supplied at prior times.

I don't have said pics.

 

[tw1164]

My son is 13 months old, and he is uncircumcised.

 

[DAGTA]

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: DAGTA
So much ignorance in this thread.

There is no valid reason to cut. In fact, from what I hear from women I've talked to, many uncut guys last longer than cut guys. I would guess that might have something to do with having full nerve sensation and a non-hardened / calloused head. Cut guys aren't feeling the same range of sensation so perhaps often go from "0 to 60" in a minute or two.

This has the logical consistency of a gibbering monkey.

Because I am less sensitive, then I orgasm faster? Please refrain from posting until you can achieve basic logical consistency of your own thoughts.

Have you ever experienced some nerve damage? Sometimes it becomes where you either feel nothing or have extreme sensation, but not much in between. That's the point I'm trying to highlight.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Originally posted by: DAGTA

Originally posted by: surfsatwerk

Originally posted by: DAGTA
So much ignorance in this thread.

There is no valid reason to cut. In fact, from what I hear from women I've talked to, many uncut guys last longer than cut guys. I would guess that might have something to do with having full nerve sensation and a non-hardened / calloused head. Cut guys aren't feeling the same range of sensation so perhaps often go from "0 to 60" in a minute or two.

This has the logical consistency of a gibbering monkey.

Because I am less sensitive, then I orgasm faster? Please refrain from posting until you can achieve basic logical consistency of your own thoughts.

Have you ever experienced some nerve damage? Sometimes it becomes where you either feel nothing or have extreme sensation, but not much in between. That's the point I'm trying to highlight.

Getting cut is not like a spinal injury.