what do you think of uncircumsicion? (ladies)
 

nuff said

--extra words

...Don't like it.

never had sex with an uncircumcised guy, but have seen them hard, doesnt look much different. i dont hink id care.

I've only had sex with an uncircumsized guy, so I dont have anything to compare it to.... I must admit, it did freak me out at first though, as I'd never seen a penis that wasn't circumsized before. Now we're best friends :p

I like them...a lot. Or at least I like my boyfriend's a lot. I have had both and think that an uncircumsiced penis might create a little more friction and in turn increase the pleasure. But, either way gets a thumbs up from me.

My hubby's is uncut and uncensored :P I LOVE it, it's very appealing to me . . .

So you posted this because........? Are you insecure about it? If you are . . . don't be . . . for every lady that doesn't like it . . . there is a lady Who LOVES it . . . :thumbsup: :D

It actually helps reduce friction, as well as somehow increasing pleasure (or so the sex shows tell me).

I think if a girl ever balks at your uncircumcized penis (not you specifically sugar ;) ), you should grab it and wave it her face and go "WOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

LOVE 'em and prefer 'em!! I'm sure a circumsized dick is great too but it hasn't got that string beneath the head which is nearly the best part of the dick. I love licking it and watch the guy almost faint from the sensation :)

I always found this amusing - I was born in a country where cutting off a part of your genitals for no good reason isn't the norm, and it's always funny to see the concept of not doing it brought up as some radical new idea, with all sorts of associated misgivings.

The US seems to be one of the few (if not the only) countries where circumcision is prevalant, but not for religious reasons - how did the idea that you are born with more penis than you need come about?

Excellent quetion! I've always wondered about that myself. Is there really a reason why you guys get circumcized for apparently no reason?

Originally it was thought to be more hygienic, but science has proven that it isn't any better or worse for that better to be uncircumsized. Now it's mainly a cultural thing.

At the time, I didn't really have much of a choice! :D
Most of the "procedures" are done at 3 days of age...
But I get your point, Nancy. It has to be a cultural thing left over from the belief that it was more hygienic than leaving it natural. Sometimes overcoming inertia takes time. :)

Me too, I find it weirder the other way round. I also agree with Nancy about the rim around the head being the best part. Uncircumcized all the way! :thumbsup:

^I see. Thanks for the info you guys! I suspected that it was a cultural thing only because if it did have another purpose surely all the men in Denmark would've been circumcized as well.

Overcoming inertia can indeed take a lot of time but hopefully some day you'll suceed in doing so as circumcision is such a rediculous thing to do when there's no need for it.

Rim? Is that what it's called in English? Thanks – I've got to remember that! :)

Speaking as a circumsized male, I wish that I wasn't. Its a silly cultural tradition left over from the 1950's, when scientistst in the US thought it was more hygenic.

From what I understand, it is possible that I lost a great deal of sensitive skin three days after my birth :(

hmm... it must feel weird to have a part of your body altered without your consent :hmm:

Hmm ditto. I didn't really have a say in the matter. I do know what uncircumsised ones look like....seen em in porno's n shit among other things...kind of a difference in appearence when flacid but don't see too much erect. It does look like the guys that aren't nipped get more pleasure from handjobs though cause the skin just slides up and down with ease and quickly allowing the girl to go really fast if she wants to. Part of me thinks I'm missing out on that. I hear that since it's covered all the time it's not as used to exposure and rubbing on things like clothing n such and therefore is way more sensitive and gets a lot more sensation from sexual favors because the slightest thing sends pleasure. But eh I don't think it really matters all that much in the end...I wonder if since it's more sensitive it's more prone to pre-mature ejaculation? :confused:

Asta!!

I'm circumsized myself. I haven't known anything different, so I don't really have an opinion. If I had a son in the future, and the choice to have the procedure done on him presented itself, it wouldn't be for religious reasons.

It can be more hygenic. The fact of the matter is, some people don't know that you can develop Smegma (Wikipedia English) if you aren't careful about your personal hygiene. I would use a slang term to describe this, but for those who know it, I think you know why I don't! :)

I've heard horror stories about men who simply have never washed that area, didn't know enough to, and have turned their partners off of oral sex completely because of one bad experience.

I've read that it sometimes hurts to pull back the foreskin, and thus one reason guys don't wash up down there enough. I have no personal experience though.

The reason that "string of skin" described earlier in the thread drives your men nuts is simply because they aren't used to the sensation that having the foreskin provides protection from the glans and corona of the penis being rubbed (for those of you who didn't know).

So, to guys who are uncut - Pulled Back Foreskin + Washed Genitals = GOOD ACTION FROM PARTNERS

Yes, the dreaded smegma... soap and water takes care of it everytime.

I too am circumcized and wish I wasn't now... of course when I was a kid I would have been mortified to uncut as everyone else was...

I am happy to say that I haven't continued this practice of multilation on my son. In fact hospitals here, as rule, do not perform circumcisions anymore. They are available on request but people are urged against it...

I just remembered that one of my friends had his son's circumsized because he thought it would be tramatic for them to not look like their father... I found this odd. I just explained it to my son and as far as I know he's just accepted it as one of those things in life...

Another stupid American "ideal" mainly done because here, it's weird when you aren't circumcised. The doctors say it's a cleanliness precaution too, but really it's just another few hundred dollars they can put on your hospital bill.

You didn't say anything... :confused:

Oh come on They are both wonderful to feel, specially very deep inside. At that time a guy is circumsized or not makes no difference.

I'm sure it does to the guy...

Yeah, that can happen if it hasn't been pulled back before or often (such as when one first starts getting erections and has to stretch it over a larger object ;) ), but the foreskin will stretch, and it gets used to it; especially when it's being pulled back and cleaned daily.

And smegma is GROSS. *shudders* When your parents tell you to wash under that foreskin, DO IT. EWWWWWWWWWWWWWW. I don't think there is a text size large enough to communicate the ickiness that has enveloped me.

I've read and been told that circumcision can lead to a loss of sensastion in the Penis. I could be mistaken.

Either way, Im not cut and I'd like to stay that way. A bit of cleaning everyday keeps the smegma away.

You've seen ALL of the penises in Denmark!? Wow, Nancy! You are a busy girl! :crazy:

You and the friend or you and the Penis? :p

Both, actually :D

Did you here in the news about the baby that was born without eyelids?

The doctors didn't know what to do so they called in a specialist. The specialist circumsized the baby and used the extra foreskin to fashion eyelids. The baby is now in recovery and doing better. They think he is going to recover nicely, although he might be a little cock-eyed.

I said "cock-eyed."

Is this thing on?

I'm embarrassed to say, that made me laugh out loud.

You can rest assured, the guy that told me that joke was punched very hard in the arm. Consider it from both of us.

Being an East Coaster, I think I am out of reach from the "long-arm of stonegrody."

Being cut myself, I've always wondered if there really is more sensation with all that extra skin. From what I've read, I'm missing out!

Mabye next life I'll get lucky.

As long as the guy keeps himself clean, I don't see what the difference is. I didn't get my son cut when he was born, I don't see any need for it since I'm not Jewish (don't Muslims get circ'd too?)

Haha funny joke

Asta!!

I'm almost positive that Muslims do not get circumcised.

EWWWWWWWWWWWWWW. I don't think there is a text size large enough to communicate the ickiness that has enveloped me.[/QUOTE]


once more with feeling, EWWWWW! And ick!

EXACTLY!!!!! This is why I would NEVER allow any of my hypothetical kids to be circumcized (if I ever have kids).
The rim that Little_Tippler speaks of is not the same as the "string" that you speak of, Nancy. I think Tippler is refering to the fact that the rim (at least for me) is THE most sensitive part of the penis, even moreso than the "string". The rim is just the edges around the back part of the head of the penis. The "back" of the head of the penis being the part that is closest to the man's body.

I dunno about other men, but I am not cut and I use that foreskin to aid in masturbation. I don't know how a guy can even jack off without it. Wasn't circumcision invented by the Jews or something? Some kind of ancient custom of Judaism? I've never heard this uttered anywhere else, but I think... now don't fling tomatoes at me if you don't agree with me, but I THINK that circumcision came about to try to prevent males from "sinning"... that is, to discourage masturbation. ::dodges a heapload of rotten tomatoes:: That's my theory, and I think it is plausible ::dodges a whole truckload of rotten tomatoes::

i used to think the uncircumsized penises when limp looked funny.. but after browsing the world wide web and seeing more and more of them im starting to desire to try one out

Thanks for the clarification!!

I haven't ever seen an uncircumsized one but I kinda think that if we were supposed to be circumsized we would be born that way.

Yes they do. Mohammed was circumcised so they continue the tradition.

And once again my ignorance is displayed for the world. :D

There are select men that do have some problems with "natural" peni. Sometimes they feel discomfort with the stretching of the skin.

I'm cut, when I have the choice for me son.. I'm not sure.

I am uncut and like it. My forskin was tight, not phimosis but differcult to pull down far enough to expose the full head. All it took was a little information about how to stretch the skin effectivly and everything was fine in a few weeks.

God made a covenant to Abraham that if he circumised himself and his children and their succession, God would bestow upon his Family land and fortune. Its outlined in the old testament.

I wish! :crazy: I don't have to see every penis in Denmark to know that they're all uncut. It's just not done here :)

Ooohhhh. I see. Thanks for clearing that up for me :icare:

string it is then.

I like my guys cut.

To me it is the sexiest and cleanest way to go.

The "string' is called a frenulum. It's fun :thumbsup:

My fiances foreskin recently revolted and had to be circumcised. He was NOT happy, and it's actually a pretty traumatic procedure on adults. One week off of work, and two months of no sex.

He still doesn't want to circumcize his children, if that opportunity ever comes up.

...revolted?

eiiii that brought a really weird image to mind of foreskin rearing up and punching someone in the face...

as for foreskin, mine's all there. my only problem with it is i think it may have resulted in my being VERY sensitive to contact. i can stretch it back with a little bit of trouble (not too much) but from there, contact becomes almost unbearable. dunno what to do about it, other than use lube, as seems to be the universal solution to a lot of problems...

Really, really, REALLY not appealing.....
From experience, it's an aesthetic ewwwww

http://hem.bredband.net/niknyk/pics/smeg.jpg

This is nasty!

And why would it be? I wash my dick and balls every day in the shower even though it's circumcised. Doubt I'd do it any different if I was uncircumcised. It's just good practice to keep it clean, for health purposes.

I did absolutely not need to see that picture.
You could've posted a link to it warning the content...
Oh well
*goes off to wash his eyes with acid*

I love the poetic effort to your reply! Just like the old mars bar advert
"a mars a day helps you work, rest and play"

and it fits the same way - no longer is a mars bar good for you than having your foreskin removed. I was born in england where it generally is a religious reason for having it done at birth. My grandma is jewish, and wanted it done to me and my brother - however my mum thought different! I thought it would be my dad (owing to the fact that he owns an uncircumcised penis himself) but she decided - weird but i haven't ever questioned it...

all i know is my best friend is circumcised, i am not. he feels no different when he has sex or masturbates, but obviously knows no difference. same here - how would i know what it feels like with no skin? I have come to the conclusion that, as this is THE MOST SENSITIVE part of my penis (under the foreskin) that he cannot imagine how good it is to feel how it is in the natural state.... lets decide for ourselves - we were created WITH the foreskin, so why remove it... I know from a personal view that masturbation for example is much easier, cuz when i'm ready theres no need for any lube - the skin just rolls up and down and provides its own sensual rubbing on "the glans" or my helmet/bell end as I like to call it!

although i've never seen him wank, or want to - all i can think is: Dry hand, dry cock, you're gonna need some lube to sort yourself out. All i need however is my thoughts (wank bank) and my trusty right hand (or left if i want some variation)

p.s. i am not a serial wanker I live with my girlfriend. (just for the record)

I'd assume it's because our medical system was founded by a bunch of fucking idiots. It continues for non-religious reasons because nobody among the half of our population that opposes it thinks that infant genital mutilation is a serious enough problem to speak up about.

Don't mind me, I'm still pissed about having no choice regarding whether or not someone cut off a chunk of my wang shortly after birth.

In response to an above comment, yes, it does feel somewhat strange having my body altered before I was cognizent (sp?) of the options.

Further, I did NOT need to see the above picture.

I will not have this done to my son, if I ever have one.

It really baffles me that any woman would prefer an altered dick to the natural/original one. To me that's sorta the same thing as saying that you prefer breast implants to the real thing.

Why is a cut dick the cleanest way to go? Are you saying that if an uncut and a cut man wash their dicks the cut one will be the cleanest one? :hmm:

:lol: Classic response!

And Irish: JESUS CHRIST PLEASE MAKE A LINK AND WARN PEOPLE. I'm not that strong-stomached. Bile... rising... in throat...

Shock and Awe baby, shock and awe!

Sorry guys, probly shoulda done that...

And also, Suave, every muslim gets circumcised, it's against their religion if they don't. I know this for a fact.

I've been with both "cut" and "uncut" men.

1. Cleanliness/odor - my men kept themselves clean, so no big problem. The uncut men had a more distinctive scent, not unpleasant at all. All men should be washing before and after sex anyway (and if they aren't, you should be insisting that they do). Also, most uncut men would wash, or wipe with a damp cloth, after urinating, which also helped. No problems in this area.

2. Appearance - didn't matter. Each was different, unique. I thought the uncut men to be more intriguing because of the anticipation to see what was hidden beneath the "tommy hat". ;)

3. Reaction/response - uncut men, hands down. The uncut men were quicker to respond to any kind of stimulation, had more to work with, it was exciting to manipulate their foreskins, the natural lubrication was an absolute bonus! Just my experience, but the uncut men were more sensitive, and more vocal, during sex. I didn't see a major difference in staying power neither. Nancy is right about the "string". :)

BTW: Irish Sean, poor hygiene runs across the board, so does poor taste.

I'm always open to test out another...
 

...because the first I had the guy's hygiene wasn't up to par. Rank as hell! No sex happened there of course... :hmm:

Years ago in college, I had a teacher who was circumcised in his 30's. Apparently, he had been having troubles with infections under the foreskin. Until then, I had wondered if I had lost something by being clipped, but after that I've always felt that the advantages seem to outweight the disadvantages. Anyway, it's easier to keep clean when circumsized. I don't know what difference it makes besides that.

The practice seems to have come from God's sign of the covenant. All males who were of the covenant were to be circumsized as a sign of their covenant with God. You can call that cultural if you'd like, but I think the majority of Americans still want to be part of that covenant thing.

As far as the difference in pleasure goes...I think that is somewhat of an urban legend. I do remember reading this from a credible source a while back, although I don't remember where. The initial sensation for uncircumsized men may be greater (or maybe just more of a shock) but I'm fairly certain the orgasm is just the same in the end. I'm sure there are plenty of guys out there that would testify that they haven't lost any sensitivity over the years from plain masturbating. I doubt having the glans exposed to some fabric makes much of a difference.

Doesn\'t matter to me. Some are beautiful and some are ugly, whether they are circumsized or not.

I've never experienced an uncircumsized penis.

...so then why didn't you go back and edit it? :rolleyes:










....................................................

on-topic -

I'm fine with either way.
uncut - more sensitive/fun to play with
cut - perhaps aesthetically better (not because I'm culturally brainwashed. I'm just a neat freak.)
I don't like 'smegma'. - clean is clean, cut or not.

I assume you're circumsized, because I'm pretty sure any uncircumsized guy who's had fabric rub against the glans without foreskin over it can attest that it is NOT something they could live with constantly, and it would have to numb itself eventually. That's how it is in my case at least.

Um, no offense, but I seriously doubt you would think cut penis' would be better looking if there were no cultural "brainwashing"..

I mean, that would be like me saying that people would look better if their fingernails were surgically cut off, because it would be more neat that way. (and cleaner!)

I've had both and I prefer cut

You took the words right out of my mouth, man.

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet, but I heard it about a month ago on Jay Leno. He was doing an interview with Dustin Hoffman, and they were talking about... whate else... circumcision.

Anyway, someone said something to the extent of "it's hard to clean under your fingernails, but that doesn't mean we should rip them out."

I'm pretty sure I'm recalling the proper source, but I may be wrong. The quote is still neat.

I had it done to me but I won't be passing the tradition on to my sons, should I be fortunate enough to have kids.

This is actually going to be a serious issue between myself and my b/f if we continue to get serious. I don't think he believes in the idea of circumcision, but I do. Yes this will most definately be a serious conversation between us seeing that we are both pig-headed and stubborn. :)

I always thought it cleaner, and also for religious reasons.

Wow, I'm amazed at the vehement reactions some of you have regarding this topic. The way I see it is as follows.

First, there are a variety of cultural, religious and medical reasons to do a lot of things. In many eastern bloc countries, children had their appendix' removed at or near birth because they were unnessecary and could cause problems later. In the US we don't practice this, and many consider it cruel, but it never hurt the kids.

Personally, I'm circumsized. I don't care. It doesn't feel weird having my body altered without my say. What if I were born with a defect that my parents had to decide whether or not to fix? Say... and extra finger. This is "socially unaccepted", but it was my "natural state". Does the same apply? Should they have let me decide later in life? Really think about it... it's no different. I'm not saying that foreskin is a defect, I'm only saying it in the concept of ones personal natural state and not having the ability to make a decision about a change.

As for:

That makes no sense at all... it doesn't HAVE to indicate "brainwashing". You know what? Despite the popular media trying to make all American men think humongous, giant breasts are attractive, I'm partial to smaller ones. Why? Because it's my own personal liking. If someone likes cut penises why does it reflect on society? There are tons of American women who prefer them uncut. Your argument makes no sense.

Overall, as for feeling and sensitivty... I'm cut, but I'm still vocal about sex. If you had uncut guys who were ALWAYS more vocal than the uncut guys you were with, could it maybe have also just been the guys? I'm not trying to sound like a prick (err, no pun intended) but there seems to be a lot of assumptions and speculation being made without any forethough.

My son is cut. If I have sons in the future I have no idea if they will be or not. Frankly, I doubt it makes a tremendous amount of difference in the long run.

If I remember correctly, I saw a study that showed women who had uncircumsized partners were at a higher risk for PID as well as cervical cancer.
I got the cut as an infant, as did my sons. The more I think about it, the less getting circumsized makes since to do to a child.

Uncut and proud.

I'm proud of my turtleneck, might as well be, cause that's the way it is.

I am very picky and finicky about personal hygiene... I do realize that some women may have a problem with uncircumcised penises so I always take extra time to really lather up my man-tool every time I take a shower so that it's squeaky clean (that is at least twice a day). Also, if I suspect I might get some oral sex I take the time to clean it first.

To this day I've had no complaints from anyone about my uncircumcised penis.

My brother is uncircumsized, and he was PISSED when my sister had her son cut.
I've heard that there are support groups out there for men who are angry about being cut, and some have even had skin added on, and they claim to get increased sensation. Could just be a placebo effect though...

I'm confused with people who say a circumcised penis is easier to clean. How diffulcult do you think it is for a foreskin to be pulled back?

A while back there was something on tv about guys who'd been circumsised and were using some aparatus to pull the skin left so that it grew/stretched and gave them their foreskin back. Took months and months. The guys were gay and were going on about the positive aesthetic and pleasurable gains made by doing this to themselves.

Gad, the things they put on tv ...

I'm cut and my dad and my brothers and my nephews and my 3 sons. If any of them want to change things back go ahead, just don't bring a camera crew into the scene.

i dont get why so many people (men especially) have such a fear of foreskin. the first guy i was with was uncut, he was way more sensitive than anyone since, and he kept it clean just fine. stiltzkin is right, it was originally a jewish thing, that, like many elements of judaism, got absorbed into christianity. it wasn't to prevent masturbation or sinning, though, it was to set apart the jews as a race/faith "marked" by god. the first man circumsized was abraham, i believe.

It's more difficult than if the skin isn't there at all, I guess...Then there's no pulling back required. :p
But, I agree, my bro never seemed to have any problems (we're a very open family), and neither do the millions (billions?) of uncut men around the world.

There isn't much difference between the two types, I'm sure. I think it's funny how defensive people get about it though.

I don't see why people have it done though...there really is no reason. The only reason it's cleaner is because there is less SKIN to clean. I mean...if we pulled off our fingernails everymonth I'm sure it would be a lot cleaner under them....don't you think?

But again, performance wise there isn't much difference.

There is the possibility of haveing BOTCHED circumcisions, however.

And preventing smegma is about as hard as preventing a dirty asscrack.

Like that Law and Order: SVU episode. *shudder*

Speaking as one in the "ladies" category, I'd have to say that although I'm opposed to circumcision in principle (why start chopping bits off a perfectly good baby boy), I'm so accustomed to it in men I have sex with that the prospect of a foreskin seems odd and a bit off-putting. When I see pictures of uncircumcised penises they look peculiar and like they have no head. It's just not what I'm used to. I've been with an uncircumcised guy once and for some reason the sex didn't really go all that well...that could have been due to other factors though, so I don't know.

the only invisible superheroes i believe in are the X-Men, not the kind that make me waste an hour of my sunday and chop off my turtleheads shell

I'm uncut, I've had girls look at it and not want to have sex, but I've also had girls who loved how "fun" it was to play with. It all depends on what a girl is used to. Alot of women shy away from uncut men, but its their loss. :)

[B]Agree with Pinkie...circumcision is done mostly to add a few bucks onto the hospital bill.

Uncut here and never had any problems with the ladies. No recoil, no "oh-my-god-what's-that" reactions. However, I still lack sensitivity in that area. Blowjobs and sex with condoms don't do much for me, so I avoid one-night stands, and get tested when I get a girlfriend (so does she), so we can start doing it rawhide as quickly as possible. I can sustain my erection indefinitely in that case and sex feels much better. A few girls I've been with say that they could actually feel the skin slightly pull back and forth (they couldn't when I had a condom on), which they claimed felt really good.

I know that unprotected sex is dangerous, that's why I've become an expert on "paperwork" and clinics! Gotta be cleared! :thumbsup:

I've never had any problems (also uncut). I see no need for circumcision outside of religious reasons. It's certainly not something I'll ever do to my children, assuming I ever have any.

I didn't realize just how many people are circumcized until recently, actually. I always thought it was specific to the Jewish faith.

I am circumsized and didn't care.
Now I am slighty pissed about it from reading this thread.

grrr...

I'm used to seeing guys that are cut. Uncut is a novelty in a way. I find it a little bothersome to give a blowjob to an uncut fellow though. I'm just not sure what to do with the looseness - it feels different. Sex - it doesn't make much different to me.
I know of a family member who is uncut. From what I've been told, he does keep himself quite clean. He is very clean otherwise so I don't doubt it. He has been more prone to some minor infections and irritation though because it apparently IS harder to clean. Also his wife has gotten more yeast infections and such because of the cleanliness issue. One might say he's not keeping himself clean enough but knowing him he tries quite hard to stay clean - the situation does not lend itself to being easy to clean apparently.

I don't have a son and probably never will. I'm not totally sure if I would have my son circumcised or not.

After seeing the picture Irishsean posted I'm terrified of foreskins. That's extreme.

I prefer cut.

For appearance and sensation.

I'm uncut and my brother was until he was 3. I was fortunate to be able to pull the foreskin (FS) back easily for cleaning but my bro had a small opening of the FS and pulling it back was difficult and painful for him so cleaning it was a difficult task for my mom. As she's a pediatrician, she decided it was best for his future sexual well being that he get circumsized.

Funny tho, I remember back when I was 5 mom taught me how to clean Mr Winky properly and constant reminders of pulling back the FS when I go pee. I have a 4 month old son, uncut and so far pretty easy to clean the 2 little guys...LMAO. I would circumsize him if he develops any problems pulling back the FS.

JM2C/E

personally i prefer uncut...theres something about the scent and the feeling..like it feels as if its rubbing on my clit when we have sex and i cum just from sex 9/10 times... http://www.cherrybomb.com/article.ph...=333&showAll=1

I've had sexual partners both cut and uncut. Having said that, I prefer uncut. It's smoother and feels better going in and out. Not to mention there's something about it that I find more arousing simply because it IS different from what society (namely the US) is used to.

Also, I've never run into issues of uncleanliness.