Thunder's Place

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

Seriously why is circumcision still done today

Thread Closed

Originally Posted by MDC
Are you serious? There aren’t that many cut guys in porn these days from what I’ve seen, and I’ve seen plenty. You almost never see them flaccid though, so I wouldn’t be surprised that you don’t see the difference. The scar is quite obvious on most cut guys, so look for that when watching porn.

I was watching porn twenty years ago when a vast majority of the actors were cut, and the difference today is striking.

Yes, I am serious. Perhaps we are watching different porns. I just know what I have seen more in porn and what I have heard from women (as a strait man, I don’t see penises too often).

I personally don’t understand (what appears to be) a lot of arrogance and anger from the people that are arguing (both sides of) this issue. Personally, I would never want to be uncut. But thats just me. This is really becoming a silly, circular argument.

Originally Posted by marinera
Razarei and Acid Jazz, calm down you both, ok?

Marinera,

Thanks for posting. I’ll chill for sure. However, I do not appreciate being called an idiot,…by anyone, let alone someone who does not know me, and is on an anonymous forum.

@Razarei,

Keep in mind who started “attacking” whom. At my age, I have enough experience to know a little something about the things I talk about. You’ve been a member here long enough to know to attack the issue, not the poster. Just keep that in mind as you post your opinions.

Finally, I have not been basing my “answers”, (they are responses, as I am not being questioned here), on opinion. Parts of my previous post have basis in fact.

I do agree however, that this becomes a circular argument.

As I said before, I really don’t care about other men’s penises. (cut or uncut) I just get a little irritated when it is intimated that I was somehow mutilated, (and any other cut guys), through circumcision, even though I don’t feel that way.

There are cultures around the world that put do all sorts of things to their bodies that we don’t do in Western cultures. (some are absolutely unbelievable, and terrible to many of us) But, are we supposed to impose our beliefs on them? I think not.

We can agree to disagree, and move on, right? Let’s do that.


Paraphrased: It is not the critic who counts: The credit belongs to the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, who, at the best, knows the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

Originally Posted by Acid Jazz
I really don’t care about other men’s penises. (cut or uncut) I just get a little irritated when it is intimated that I was somehow mutilated, (and any other cut guys), through circumcision, even though I don’t feel that way.

You were exactly as mutilated as a woman whose clitoral hood and labia minora were amputated. Those homologous parts and the foreskin start out from the same tissue until three months’ gestation, when hormones cause half of babies to become male. Google Prader Scale.

I don’t think there’s any point to calling cut-at-birth adults mutilated amputees except for these two reasons:

1) They may find out about foreskin restoration and undertake a simple painless regimen to improve their sexual experience (and their partner’s).

2) People need to know that circumcision takes away half a man’s pleasure-receptive sensual nerve endings, the slinky frictionless rolling/gliding mode of stimulatioin, and about 15 square inches of adult sexual interface so they’re more likely to leave such a weighty cosmetic choice for the only stakeholder - the owner of the penis - to make when he’s old enough to weigh pros and cons.

Originally Posted by TLCTugger
You were exactly as mutilated as a woman whose clitoral hood and labia minora were amputated. Those homologous parts and the foreskin start out from the same tissue until three months’ gestation, when hormones cause half of babies to become male.

I was not MUTILATED!! “Amputated”? Get real. It sure sounds like you think we cut guys are inferior. I am happy with what I have, God!!

If I had anymore sexual response in and around the “homologous parts and the foreskin”, I would be cumming in my pants, and I would be a two pump chump.

Leave it alone. Your “un mutilated” dick is no better, or worse than mine. Get over it.


Paraphrased: It is not the critic who counts: The credit belongs to the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, who, at the best, knows the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

I seriously doubt it removes half a man’s nerve endings.

Well, something there is missing, AJ, ‘amputed’ means just ‘cut’, or not?

If it makes a big difference, this is debatable.

Originally Posted by marinera
Well, something there is missing, AJ, ‘amputed’ means just ‘cut’, or not?

If it makes a big difference, this is debatable.

Amputation is the removal of a body extremity by trauma or surgery. As a surgical measure, it is used to control pain or a disease process in the …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amputated

amputate - remove surgically; “amputate limbs”
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

amputation - a condition of disability resulting from the loss of one or more limbs
amputation - a surgical removal of all or part of a limb
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

amputation - Surgical removal of any portion of the body.
www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3447200250.html

amputation - is when a body part is cut off.
simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_modification

amputate - to cut off a limb, as an arm or a leg, when too seriously wounded or infected to be saved
home.att.net/~steinert/united_states_army_general_medic2.htm

amputation - Removal of an appendage of the body, usually a limb. circular: Using a single flap and by making a circular cut at a 90 degree angle to the long axis of the appendage. primary: surgery done following the period of shock and before inflammation sets in. …
ehistory.osu.edu/uscw/features/medicine/cwsurgeon/commonterms.cfm

amputations - surgical removal of toes and/or feet or legs below the knee.
www.health.qld.gov.au/diabetes_chd_…glossary_a.html

amputations - Traumatic amputation is the loss of a body part (usually a finger, toe, arm, or leg) that occurs as the result of an accident or trauma. …
www.iveyandkadlec.com/glossary/

amputations - An amputation is the vascular surgeons’ operation of last resort and is done for two reasons:
www.injuryplus.com/help/glossary.aspx

amputation - removal of part or all of a body part enclosed by skin
www.patientlawyers.com/Glossary/A.htm

amputation - to remove by or as if by cutting; especially : to cut (as a limb) from the body Young at Heart 1X15 Leonard Betts 4X14
www.askdrscully.com/alpha_a.html

amputation - The intentional surgical removal of a limb or body part. It is performed to remove diseased tissue, irreperably damaged limbs and/or pain. Top of page
www.cwseriousinjury.co.uk/glossary

There are obviously many different spins on the word “amputate”. But as you can see, above, the most common definition involvles the removal of a limb or appendage. I think, in this debate, the word amputate, when you are talking about the removal of skin OVER or on the OUTSIDE of an appendage, is just a bit over the top.


Paraphrased: It is not the critic who counts: The credit belongs to the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, who, at the best, knows the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

Originally Posted by Acid Jazz
I was not MUTILATED!! “Amputated”? Get real. It sure sounds like you think we cut guys are inferior.

Leave it alone. Your “un mutilated” dick is no better, or worse than mine. Get over it.


You cut guys are inferior - deal with it! :chuckle:

Seriously, (that was a joke BTW :) ) it’s not a question of which is “better” - unless you’ve experienced both as an adult I’m not convinced you can really compare. And even then it’s hard to quantify how much sensation was actually saved by having the glans protected up until that time. It’s more a question of choice, or lack thereof. There can be no denying that sensation is lost after circumcision. For some men (and their partners) this may be desirable, but for others it equally may not. However, to take away that choice, would seem to be an inequity.

Most men on the planet are not circumcised. And it would seem that most of these don’t have any problems as a result of being left entire. Circumcision is a cultural/religious based form of body modification which, in the majority of cases, serves no medically efficacious purpose. Even the language we use to describe the penis stings of subtle cultural prejudice - circumcised vs uncircumcised - the inference being that circumcised is the desired state and uncircumcised is not - it has a more negative connotation (think - unloved, unkempt, unjust, unwanted, uninvited, undesirable).

Although it’s an inadequate analogy, circumcision is a little like having your baby son tattooed at birth. It saves him the pain and trouble of having it done later. But what if he never wanted a tattoo? Sure he could have it removed, but it will still leave a scar - it will never be the same. Similarly with circumcision - a foreskin can be “re-grown”, but it will never be the same - he will never know what it would have been like had he been left entire. The justification is often that what he has never known, he will never miss.

Which brings us to the question of whose choice should it be?

lil :lep:


BPEL (5") | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | *20cm* (8")

MTSL (5") | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | *25cm* (10") MTSL = Maximum Traction Stretched Length

"Pertinaciously pursuing a penis of preposterously prodigious proportions." What a mouthful!

Originally Posted by Pillars
I seriously doubt it removes half a man’s nerve endings.

I think I was damaged during my circumcision. Well, maybe. Either that, or my girl was too rough on me, resulting in a venous leak issue. I would never do this to my son. Never. Just another opinion, from someone who may have been/be on the wrong side of the fence.

It’s sad to say, but out of the numerous circumcisions that will be done this year alone, a certain few babies will be damaged. This formulated from a human % error possibility that is always an issue in surgery, no matter what the surgery. To know this number might be impossible, but it is certain one future man will have a messed up dick, all because his parents chose a circumcision.


Originally Posted by Acid Jazz

amputation - to remove by or as if by cutting;……

www.askdrscully.com/alpha_a.html

…..

amputation - removal of part or all of a body part enclosed by skin

www.patientlawyers.com/Glossary/A.htm

……….

There are obviously many different spins on the word “amputate”. But as you can see, above, the most common definition involvles the removal of a limb or appendage. I think, in this debate, the word amputate, when you are talking about the removal of skin OVER or on the OUTSIDE of an appendage, is just a bit over the top.

So circumcision is the amputation of foreskin. So, you have a penis amputed of foreskin.

Male circumcision is the removal of some or all of the foreskin (prepuce) from the penis.[1] The word “circumcision” comes from Latin circum (meaning “around”) and cædere (meaning “to cut”).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

;)

Originally Posted by lil12big1
Even the language we use to describe the penis stings of subtle cultural prejudice - circumcised vs uncircumcised - the inference being that circumcised is the desired state and uncircumcised is not - it has a more negative connotation (think - unloved, unkempt, unjust, unwanted, uninvited, undesirable).

Although it’s an inadequate analogy, circumcision is a little like having your baby son tattooed at birth. It saves him the pain and trouble of having it done later. But what if he never wanted a tattoo? Sure he could have it removed, but it will still leave a scar - it will never be the same. Similarly with circumcision - a foreskin can be “re-grown”, but it will never be the same - he will never know what it would have been like had he been left entire. The justification is often that what he has never known, he will never miss.

Which brings us to the question of whose choice should it be?

lil :lep:

Lil2 big and Marinera,

This type of discourse is appropriate, and I thank you both. I agree with, and understand portions of both current posts. I just don’t understand the visceral reaction from many who have not been cut, towards those of us who have. The fact that I LIKE my cut unit, and even PREFER it, does not somehow make me a bad person, ill informed, mutilated, abusive to my own boys, etc etc.

It is a choice that parents make for better or worse. Some parents choose not to vaccinate their kids because there is a small percentage of children who have terrible adverse affects from the different vaccines. (and yes, vaccination is a CHOICE the parents make) (Please, people, don’t take this as a “literal” comparison. Look at the idea I’m trying to get across) My boys cried, with about the same intensity when they got their “shots”, several times, as they did when they got circumcised. (the pain numbing shot was what hurt) Does that mean I mutilated them or abused them? I think not.

I welcome this tone from you guys, as it encourages MORE discussion, without the jabs and subtle, (or not so subtle), digs at the poster. Thanks.


Paraphrased: It is not the critic who counts: The credit belongs to the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, who, at the best, knows the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

Originally Posted by Acid Jazz

Lil2 big and Marinera,

This type of discourse is appropriate, and I thank you both. I agree with, and understand portions of both current posts. I just don’t understand the visceral reaction from many who have not been cut, towards those of us who have. The fact that I LIKE my cut unit, and even PREFER it, does not somehow make me a bad person, ill informed, mutilated, abusive to my own boys, etc etc.

..

Who has a visceral reaction against circumcised is intolerant. And the adverse.

I don’t have. :) Nor I sospect you have.

Amputated was meant as a neutral term, objective word. I don’t think it makes big difference. Maybe being cut or not should be matter of personal preferences.

I think parents should do choices about the body of their sons only when they are sure that there is an immediate necessity and the goodness of the choice is out of doubt.

So the choice should be left, in the case of circumcision, to the owner of the body himself.

I don’t think there is any prejudices or anger in this. :)

Anyway, I do believe a cut penis could look better to a woman.

Originally Posted by marinera
Anyway, I do believe a cut penis could look better to a woman.

This is how my wife feels. So, it works for both of us. ;)


Paraphrased: It is not the critic who counts: The credit belongs to the man in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, who, at the best, knows the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

Originally Posted by Pillars
I seriously doubt it removes half a man’s nerve endings.

I’d like to know how they remove the location of those nerve endings (the skin) without removing them.

The amount of skin ultimately removed (when the baby becomes adult) is greatly underestimated in my opinion. When I was 18, I had exactly 1” of skin between my glans and scrotum, while I had about 5.5” of penis there. If I were to assume, for this discussion that my scrotum would start at the base of my penis, there was at least 5” missing and 1” left. Where did over half of my nerve endings go? Wherever the missing skin is.

Fortunately, I’ve been able to grow quite a bit of skin there. But not one of the nerve endings have returned.

Top
Thread Closed

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:20 AM.