Thunder's Place

The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.

Circumcision-- What Is It... Really?

Okay, so you raise the question, in a way that I would agree with avocet8 is incendiary, do not really provide any source material to back up your position, say that it’s reversible and no big whoop, and, when queried say we can look it up for ourselves.

Why exactly would we want to join you in further friendly discussion?

If you raise a point, support it so we have a basis to talk about it. If not, what are we talking about exactly?


Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.

After: I\'d like to show you something I\'m very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.

God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:

Originally Posted by Dino9X7
Kong

Bro do yourself a favor when you post a fact give a link and you will hear less crap, if you don’t post a link people will think your just blowing smoke. You can do it anyway you want with or without I’m just trying to save you some grief:)

All right… I see where this is going. If you will all hold off until this evening, I will try to provide links for every “incendiary” statement I made. I really have to go to work right now, and what is being asked for is several hours of research.

Originally Posted by kong1971
All right… I see where this is going. If you will all hold off until this evening, I will try to provide links for every “incendiary” statement I made. I really have to go to work right now, and what is being asked for is several hours of research.

Yep sorry to say Bro when you make a statement and say it’s a fact your the one that needs to provide the links to back yourself up it’s not up to the reader of the post to prove your facts for you. If you don’t want to give links don’t quote your statements as facts or science. And just so you know I’m not saying your not right and I’m not saying your wrong I’m just giving you a heads up so you don’t get yourself into a pissing contest with anybody. Don’t feel like I’m asking for links because we don’t believe you if I posted something I would be called to post links also even Thunder would be so don’t thing it’s about you because it’s not.:)


I haven't failed, I've found 10,000 ways that don't work. Thomas Edison (1847-1931)

The article here is long. I only skimmed through, but it appears fairly comprehensive.

Originally Posted by kong1971
The topic of this thread was the genesis of circumcision and its history in the US and not one reply was to that effect.

Mine was.

Originally Posted by westla90069
…a “tight” circumcision as an infant… might limit the growth somewhat. What I don’t see is that circumcision in this country (the US) was promoted for that purpose.

Originally Posted by kong1971
Unfortunately, I do not understand why some men seem to get so worked up about this subject.

No one wants to admit that their very manhood is scarred for life, or diminished in any way.


"We have met the enemy, and he is us."

Here are a few interesting links. I am not trying to cause a shit storm of controversy. Circumcision, to me, is an interesting subject and not something that makes me overly upset because I know that it is basically reversible. Considering that this is a penis forum and probably 60% or more of us [myself included] are in fact circumcised, I don’t see why this subject should be so inflammatory. If you are happy being circumcised, that’s great. If you are happy being uncircumcised, that’s great. Why can’t we discuss it without getting upset?

The only reason I am reluctant to get into a bunch of links and references when posting what is basically just my personal understanding and opinions is that this is a tactic used to bring any meaningful debate to a halt. First, it’s post your sources. Then it’s, can you back up those sources with more proof? It proceeds from there to, You’re proof is biased. Can you present some unbiased proof? Ad infinitum. Everyone starts scrambling for links and references and no one really talks…

Truth is, this debate will never be settled. Yes, I have my own opinions and I have every right to speak them. However, I respect other opinions and ideas that are different than mine. I hope you can do the same.

My only motivation is to help others learn about this issue. I am no crusader. I only wish this information had been available when I was younger so that I could have begun restoration at an earlier age, and also so I would not have let my sons be circumcised. Real choice can only come from understanding, and understanding cannot even begin when there is no discussion at all. I circumcised my children, but it was not a real choice because I was ignorant. My mother circumcised me out of that same lack of knowledge.

I am only interested in a dialogue, not a crusade.

These links are from a two minute web search on google. I typed in “history of circumcision” and “kellogg and circumcision”. It’s not that hard to do.

http://www.cirp.org/library/history/

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/

http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/shorthis.htm

http://www.circumstitions.com/Kellogg.html

I don’t think people are upset with subject. Just your presentation of it.

It seems pretty clear that circumcision is unnecessary. If you consider it ‘mutilation’ and use that word, that is bound to raise some eyebrows. Who wants to be characterized as ‘mutilated’?

It seems that the articles agree that the uncircumcized penis cuts away the ridged band and that there is some loss of sensation as a result.
Just in terms of surface area that would seem to be true, whether or not the ridged band is especially sensitive, more so than the glans, seems hard to accurately determine or quantify.

What is much easier to accurately determine is this: whether or not a search is ‘not that hard to do’ it seems incumbent on the person raising the question and making the point to do the search; from a practical standpoint that facilitates discussion, and besides it’s just good manners.

Otherwise you have people who are annoyed with you and don’t want to talk to you, and who wants that?


Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.

After: I\'d like to show you something I\'m very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.

God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:

It’s my opinion that we need to get away from this semantic bickering as well. I realize that some take offense at being characterized as “mutilated”. You accept the point that circumcision is the unnecessary removal of the prepuce, and that there is undeniably some type of sensory loss. If we extend that to, say, the hand, and the unnecessary removal of a couple fingers, wouldn’t you describe that as “damage” and “mutilation”? The only reason the words raise an eyebrow with circumcision is that it concerns the penis.

Originally Posted by kong1971
If we extend that to, say, the hand, and the unnecessary removal of a couple fingers, wouldn’t you describe that as “damage” and “mutilation”? The only reason the words raise an eyebrow with circumcision is that it concerns the penis.


Uh, no.

I don’t think your example is remotely comparable.

Removing fingers would seriously change the functionality of the hand. The difference, in terms of function, is nowhere near as great. Some would argue that it is marginal at worst, obviously you feel that it is more serious.

It’s not that it’s the penis that raises the eyebrows - it’s the extent to which we believe, both culturally and individually, how severe the change is.

We all agree there is a difference, but unless one has lived part of their adult life with, and then without the foreskin, one will never have a clear picture of what that difference is. I’m sure it would vary between individuals, and also the extent of the actual clipping involved.


Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.

After: I\'d like to show you something I\'m very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.

God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:

You’re right, to a degree. I see your point about functionality. So, should we define “mutilation” merely by its effect on functionality or do we extend the term to include cosmetic appearance and sensory quality? I think it would be best to agree to disagree on this. I think it’s mutilation — not necessarily because there is loss of functionality but because there is a cosmetic change and a diminishment of sensory quality. You can pick whatever description you choose, and I promise to respect it— but only if you promise to respect my beliefs.

See my point about semantics? :)

Actually, this is an awesome little discussion right here… what is mutilation and what is just different? What value do you place on sensation, the protection of the glans, and loss of the ridged band— things that circumcision alter on a male. It’s almost impossible to place a value on that on a personal level if you were circumcised as a child and thus have no memory of their existence.

Originally Posted by Kong
What value do you place on sensation, the protection of the glans, and loss of the ridged band— things that circumcision alter on a male.

The first of these — the purported loss of sensation due to loss of foreskin — seems to be the crux of many anti-circumcision arguments.

In my opinion, the only people who can empirically address the issue of sensation at all substantively are men who undergo circumcision as an adult. And even then, it doesn’t really answer the question about infant circumcision. (Incidentally, some men who have undergone adult circ have chimed in in other threads here, and some have reported no overall change in sensation, others positive change, others negative change, if I recall correctly.)

The inferential problem arises from neural plasticity — the brain’s extraordinary ability to rewire itself, especially during our earliest years.

Take the case of an amputee. Sometimes, after having an arm of leg cut off, a patient will report phantom sensations in the missing limb arising from stimulation of other body parts. Rubbing an amputee’s face, for example, might elicit sensations that seem to map onto his or her missing limb. What’s going on here, most likely, is remapping of the primary somatosensory cortex, a part of the brain that receives sensory input from the body. When input from a particular part of the body is lost, the bit of cortex no longer “occupied” will often be “taken over” by input from another body part. To take a completely unrelated example, there is growing evidence that blind individuals’ occipital cortex — often called the “visual cortex,” since in ordinary individuals it is devoted almost solely to vision — is activated during Braille reading. The brain has an incredible way of reorganizing itself in response to environmental variation.

Okay, hopefully that explanation was reasonably clear. My point is that there’s no theoretical, anatomically based reason to assume that the loss of the foreskin — especially at a very young age — would lead to any chronic loss of sexual sensations. Sensation occurs in the brain, not in the penis. I’d suspect that the remaining penis, post-circumcision, would gradually “remap” onto whatever neurons no longer received input from the missing foreskin (since those parts of cortex are anatomically adjacent), and sensation would remain quite similar in the long run.

None of this is to argue in favor of circumcision. Due to some persuasive posts in other threads at Thunder’s Place, I have changed my mind on the topic and don’t think babies should be circumcised. But I think we should be cautious in making any assumptions about the sensory experiences of circumcised and uncircumcised men. No one has experienced two lives, one in which he was circumcised as an infant, one in which he was not; and only such a man could definitively answer the question of sensation.

That’s a really thought-provoking post. I have heard the “re-mapping” theories before, but my experience with restoration has been that, when the skin gliding began to kick in, my first thought was, Ahhh, there it is! It actually seemed to connect in my brain as something that was missing and then rediscovered. Same when I recovered some of the sensation of my frenelum. It just seemed to re-connect. I don’t know how to describe it better than that. I wonder if a blind person who gained sight in adulthood would feel the same, Ahhhh, there it is!

If the brain is re-mapping due to circumcision, what part of the body is it remapping itself to? As pro-circ theories go, it seems like kind of a sugar pill. Don’t worry about that silly frenelum… it’s just going to remap to your little toe! I doubt very much the brain would remap, say, the elbow to the lost ridged band for instance. “Honey, why do you keep rubbing your elbows. Are you cold?” :)

What he said. Para-Goomba, I mean.

I would also assume that it would vary on a case by case basis - like nipple piercing, and such. Nothing like science. Para, man. :worthy:

Besides ‘mutilation’ is such an ugly word. It is from this that your ‘semantic’ debate arises; and things like this:

Originally Posted by kong1971
You accept the point that circumcision is the unnecessary removal of the prepuce


I don’t ‘accept’ this point, I agree with it. There is a difference. Hence the need for differentiating semantics.

Well.

This has been fun. Aire Liquide where are you…?


Before: I'd like to show you something I'm very proud of, but you'll have to move real close.

After: I\'d like to show you something I\'m very proud of, but you guys in the front row will have to stand back.

God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time. - Robin Williams (:

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:29 AM.