Thunder's Place

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

Considering getting the frenulum removed and possibly becoming cut

Originally Posted by mizguy12
There are a lot of choices that parents make for their children in order to give them the best experience possible later in life.

Yeah, some parents decide to beat their kids, or neglect them, or fill their heads with hateful religious and/or racist extremism. That doesn’t make it right.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
The difference between infant and adult circumcision is huge. Did you know there is scientific research demonstrating that the nerves lost from the foreskin redistribute in an infant? That does not occur in an adult, so waiting until they are old enough to make a choice is way worse.

Or you could just, you know, leave it there in the first place. On the basis that like nearly all our body parts, it’s there for a good evolutionary reason.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
You didn’t read the study either. It’s funny that all of you anti-circumcision pushers a) only spout the same old propaganda you can find with a simple Google search and b) misquote the actual research done (probably because you never bother to read the actual primary source). The study was done in Denmark, where 95% of men are uncircumcised. So this so called “conditioning” had nothing to do with circumcised men getting more action. In fact one could argue the opposite ;)

I have no intention whatsoever of reading a study published on a website calling itself a “Male circumcision guide for Doctors, Parents, Adults and Teens”. Is it not blatantly obvious that this might be just a tiiiny bit biased? Like the way people involved in a billion-dollar industry tend to be in favour of promoting that industry?

Originally Posted by mizguy12
Female and male genitals are completely different. There is no comparison. If female genitals produced smegma and weren’t self cleaning organs, we could compare.

Oh you have got to be kidding me, haven’t you? I don’t believe anyone posting on a forum dedicated to sexual health can be that ignorant. The male and female genitalia are EXTREMELY similar. They’re made of the same tissues, for a start. They’re also structurally very similar. The clitoris and clitoral hood are exactly homologous to the glans and foreskin - in fact the hood and foreskin are known medically as the “prepuce” in both sexes. And yes, women can get smegma, or a substance entirely analogous at any rate.

But that’s neither here nor there. The “hygiene” argument is ludicrous because it ignores the fact that penises are extremely easy to keep clean simply by washing every day. I’m uncircumcised, as you may have guessed, and I’ve never had a problem with smegma because, like all mentally competent adults, I’m capable of washing myself properly. It’s not rocket science. Cutting off foreskins because a small minority of people are either mentally incapable of washing regularly or choose not to bother is like saying we should cut people’s arms off at the shoulder because a few people have bad underarm odour.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
You probably aren’t from America, because here circumcision has very little to do with religion and more to do with medicine. Perhaps the body hatred is your own? Why else would you care so much about protecting people from something that 99% aren’t bothered by and maybe even prefer?

It has nothing to do with medicine or science. And now I hate my own body? Because I’m glad an important part of it wasn’t cut off for no good reason when I was a baby? Come on mate, you’re clutching at straws. The are no good arguments for circumcision. And the millions of men who are undergoing foreskin restoration or have joined an anti-circumcision pressure group - “intactivists”, perhaps you’ve heard of them - rather destroys the idea that no-one is bothered by it. Dickerschwanz in this very thread has described in some detail the harm that circumcision has done to his sex life. The only difference with infant circumcision is that men affected it this way don’t know what they’re missing because they’ve never had sex with an intact penis.

From somebody who had their frenulum removed just about 2 weeks ago.. I had a tight foreskin and very tight frenulum which only meant I could only retract when flaccid which was horrible and meant I could never gain much pleasure from the head during oral/intercourse. I had a failed frenuloplasty around 18 years ago and imo with chances only 50/50 I would advise to just get the damn thing removed!!
I’m still healing but after light intercourse I can already feel a massive difference with less soreness from tugging. I had scar tissue there too and it can only of been described as having half a toothpick lodged in there when erect.

Circumcision on the other hand.. Nooooo way dude!

Originally Posted by AverageG
From somebody who had their frenulum removed just about 2 weeks ago.. I had a tight foreskin and very tight frenulum which only meant I could only retract when flaccid which was horrible and meant I could never gain much pleasure from the head during oral/intercourse. I had a failed frenuloplasty around 18 years ago and imo with chances only 50/50 I would advise to just get the damn thing removed!!
I’m still healing but after light intercourse I can already feel a massive difference with less soreness from tugging. I had scar tissue there too and it can only of been described as having half a toothpick lodged in there when erect.

Great to hear it man, glad things have improved for you.

Wibble,

Whenever someone is ignorant enough to compare circumcision to a list of some of the worst things imaginable, I know there is no reasoning with them. You are acting like an anti-circumcision troll, I didn’t post the study in question, dickerschwanz did. But you didn’t come to this thread to discuss anything, you came to spew the same hateful crap that bigots preach like the bible.

Face it, there are hundreds of millions of circumcised men. Even if a million had a problem, that’s one percent of everyone who has had it done. There are more people who think Obama is the muslim anti-christ. I’m not going to give you anymore science or medicine, because you don’t have the capability of seeing this with unbiased eyes. I’ll just say this, why the hell does anyone have to keep anything that requires such frequent cleaning, harbors disease, and gets infected to the point where surgery is necessary for proper functioning.

I hate to break it to you, but you don’t know how sex feels with a penis circumcised at birth. How do you know that the redistribution of nerves doesn’t make it more pleasurable for circumcised men? I don’t see a lot of men on here or anywhere else complaining that sex is not pleasurable.

As always, circumcision should be a choice for parents, and no one should be criticized for either choice, regardless of people like wibble.

Let’s calm this down a bit. Keep it on topic and try to drop the personal stuff.

The ad populum argument is an obvious fallacy. The number of people who think something is true or are in a particular situation has no bearing on the validity of it. Your own example works, if millions of people think Obama is the muslim anti-christ does it make it any more valid? I think you could fairly argue that circumcision (male or limited type I female) is fairly minor, certainly lesser than removing a thumb. You could also potentially argue that there are parts of our bodies that are non essential in our modern sterile world.

Why do you think that it should be a choice for parents though? Why not a choice for adult males?


Thunder's Place: increasing penis size one dick at a time.

I think there should be possiblitiy for ,even emotional, a discussion.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
Wibble,

Whenever someone is ignorant enough to compare circumcision to a list of some of the worst things imaginable, I know there is no reasoning with them. You are acting like an anti-circumcision troll, I didn’t post the study in question, dickerschwanz did. But you didn’t come to this thread to discuss anything, you came to spew the same hateful crap that bigots preach like the bible.

Face it, there are hundreds of millions of circumcised men. Even if a million had a problem, that’s one percent of everyone who has had it done. There are more people who think Obama is the muslim anti-christ. I’m not going to give you anymore science or medicine, because you don’t have the capability of seeing this with unbiased eyes. I’ll just say this, why the hell does anyone have to keep anything that requires such frequent cleaning, harbors disease, and gets infected to the point where surgery is necessary for proper functioning.

I hate to break it to you, but you don’t know how sex feels with a penis circumcised at birth. How do you know that the redistribution of nerves doesn’t make it more pleasurable for circumcised men? I don’t see a lot of men on here or anywhere else complaining that sex is not pleasurable.

1. You have to clean your teeth 3 times a day too and can get many problems. Many more documented then with uncirumcised men.
Why not use fake teeth right away? There is no problem cleaning your dick daily and you should do that circumcised or not lol.
Hundreds of millions of uncircumcised men are fine. Whole europe has no problem beeing largely uncircumcised.
By your fear propaganda they should all be diseased or at high risk.
Why do you ignore the facts? There is no need to circumcise cause hundreds of millions are totally fine with their intact penis.
2. “Redistribution of nerves”
You really believe that? If you cut away your taste buds, they will redistribute too?
3. You dont know how it feels to have sex with an uncirumcised Penis.
Ice cream tastes almost always good. Even from some shady ice man on the street.
But if you never taste some fine Ben & Jerrys you will never know that it can taste even better.

4. I read you are an unreligious person. But let me tell you at least christians are not cutting away foreskin by demand.
Its a tradition that stems from tribes to proove they are man. Adopted by Jews and Muslims demanding it from their followers.
Its an archaic tradition with apologists and fetishists finding new reasons to do it.

This is not to put down circumcised men, Im myself one. I jsut know with a foreskin its a totally different and mroe intense feeling.
And Im horrified about kids beeing mutilated.(cause thats what it is)
All negative aspects of a foreskin can easily be solved in our western world.


Last edited by dickerschwanz : 04-21-2015 at .

Cutting off part of a kid’s dick in the first days of life is just plain wrong. It’s right beside torture and genocide in the definition of just plain wrong.


Before 5.5" x 4.1" volume 7.3 ci ////// Now 7.4" x 4.9" volume 14.1 ci

Originally Posted by mizguy12
Face it, there are hundreds of millions of circumcised men. Even if a million had a problem, that’s one percent of everyone who has had it done.

Memento has already dealt with this, so I won’t really bother it. But to play you at your own game, even if an idea had merit in proportion to the number of people who support it, there are far more uncircumcised men than circumcised.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
I’ll just say this, why the hell does anyone have to keep anything that requires such frequent cleaning, harbors disease, and gets infected to the point where surgery is necessary for proper functioning.

Why the hell does everything think keeping an intact penis clean and healthy is so laborious? You don’t even have one, so who the hell are you to tell me my body is “high-maintenance” or inherently dirty or disgusting?

Look, let me give you two facts:

1) A penis with a foreskin is very, very easy to keep clean and functioning properly.
2) A penis with a foreskin that is kept clean is not going to spontaneously develop some terrible disease that could endanger its owner or his partner.

You have a fear-fantasy in your head of the DISGUSTING, GERM-RIDDEN INTACT PENIS because of an inherited pseudoscientific prejudice that the grossly commercialized medical establishment in your country perpetuates because it makes many hundreds of millions of dollars a year out of it.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
I hate to break it to you, but you don’t know how sex feels with a penis circumcised at birth. How do you know that the redistribution of nerves doesn’t make it more pleasurable for circumcised men?

Haha, yeah. And maybe women who’ve had their clitoris hacked off as children have sex lives that their intact sisters could only dream of. And maybe people with only one functioning eye have much better sight than people with two, for some magical reason.

Originally Posted by mizguy12
As always, circumcision should be a choice for parents, and no one should be criticized for either choice, regardless of people like wibble.

Because parents always know, in their infinite wisdom, what’s best for their kids. No parent in all of history has ever made a decision that’s been detrimental to their children’s wellbeing.

Finally, I object to being called a troll. Trolls take the piss, which I do sometimes, but not here. I mean every word I’ve said.

Originally Posted by BeardedDragon
Cutting off part of a kid’s dick in the first days of life is just plain wrong. It’s right beside torture and genocide in the definition of just plain wrong.

This statement is truly disgusting. I bet every victim of genocide would trade everything they have to switch circumcision with what they have suffered. I used to have respect for you, but not any longer.

Sure if the choice were between death and circumcision, people would choose circumcision. But why not make the choice between cake or death, then the poor little babe can have something nice to eat, rather than having part of his penis removed.


Thunder's Place: increasing penis size one dick at a time.

Well I still have respect for myself and stand by my statement. Can I have some of your respect back if I rank neonatal circumcision as better than genocide, but worse than torture? It’s hyperbole. Recognize that you’re deeply emotional about this, and there is a reason for it. The topic is inherently and deeply fucked up.

Can’t you see the injustice in cutting off part of a infant’s genitalia? What about hundreds of millions of infants’ genitalia? Don’t you feel the least bit upset that your first days and weeks of life were spent recovering from having part of your penis cut off of you?

In the name of what? Ancient religious health practices. That doesn’t change how fucked up it is.


Before 5.5" x 4.1" volume 7.3 ci ////// Now 7.4" x 4.9" volume 14.1 ci

@ memento - I completely agree that the comparison between genocide and circumcision is probably the most insane comparison I’ve seen yet. Just on this page it has morphed into an eye, teeth, and a clitoris, but these pale in comparison.

@ wibble - I’ve been thinking about your statements to me, and I think I have a better understanding now of where you come from. Being circumcised, I never really thought about circumcised or uncircumcised before I came to this site. Almost every penis you see in porn is circumcised, same in the locker room in the US. However, I have had more than one woman say she does not sleep with uncircumcised men because they think that it is gross (which struck me as odd, I don’t really think it’s any more gross than a dick in general). It must be really tough in the Internet era to have an intact penis when the picture painted on the Internet is of a circumcised penis. To add to that, the reason that makes you different also makes your penis inherently dirtier, either in perception or in actuality (it doesn’t matter). I can see why you and other intact members react with such vitriol to people who support circumcision.

@dickerschwanz and wibble - here is a study from the journal of sexual medicine from 2013 which reviewed studies covering 20,000 circumcised AND uncircumcised men

(http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/…enticated=false)

I will let the authors speak directly for themselves:

“studies uniformly found that circumcision had no overall adverse effect on penile sensitivity, sexual arousal, sexual sensation, erectile function, premature ejaculation, ejaculatory latency, orgasm difficulties, sexual satisfaction, pleasure, or pain during penetration.”

I get why you want to grasp onto circumcision reduces sexual pleasure, but I think it’s pretty clear it doesn’t for the most part. On top of that, I don’t really want my dick anymore sensitive, sex already feels good enough I have to concentrate to keep from finishing before I want.

I think I have said all that I need to say regarding circumcision. If anyone is taking infant circumcision advice from me on a penis enlargement website they are probably a bit off anyway haha. So anyone crazy enough to still be reading this, go ask your pediatrician or your urologist what they think.

Thanks for that thoughtful reply, mizguy - it’s late here but I’ll reply properly when I get a chance.

Hey mizguy, I said I’d respond properly and I like to think I’m a man of my word.

First off, about the study you linked in your last post - I’ll say upfront that I haven’t read it and I’m not going to read it. The reason is not simply because it might say some things that contradict what I’ve written in this thread but just because I think any kind of study on something like this, that depends so strongly on self-reported results and completely subjective criteria like “how good sex feels” has to be taken with an enormous pinch of salt. Bear in mind that “studies have shown” that the G-spot doesn’t exist and that non-surgical penis enlargement is impossible. Now I know from personal experience that both those assertions are untrue - as do many if not most if not nearly all of the other members on TP, I should imagine - but nonetheless, some teams of trained and no doubt highly dedicated researchers couldn’t find any evidence for the G-spot or for manual PE in a strict clinical setting.

Now I’m not saying this because I distrust science: far from it, my own academic background is in physics, in which if a hypothesis is in principle testable, it’s usually possible to design an experiment that will produce results fairly unambiguously in favour of or against that hypothesis. In the life sciences, and particularly in anything involving human beings and their subjective experiences, that’s not necessarily the case. I believe you when you say the damage is much greater when an adult man, already used to sex with an intact penis, gets circumcised for whatever reason, but just because a study couldn’t find any difference in ejaculatory latency between intact men and men cut as babies, that doesn’t mean there’s no subjective difference in how sex feels to each group of men. To continue with the teeth analogy, of course it would be far worse to remove all of an adult’s teeth than for someone never to have developed teeth in the first place - but then, how much store would you set by someone who’s never had any teeth saying “Well I get along just fine eating smoothies, porridge and liquidized soups”? You can’t miss something you’ve never had, can you? If that guy could then somehow grow teeth as an adult and see for himself what it’s like to bite into an apple or a steak or a slice of pizza, he might feel differently about it. Which is analogous to men who’ve never had foreskins as adults manually restoring them and reporting greatly increased pleasure from sex.

But really, even if you’re right and there is literally no difference at all in how good sex and masturbation feel for men cut in infancy and intact men, that still isn’t really a good enough reason to do it, I’m afraid. It’s such a drastic thing to do to someone that the benefits would have be both substantial and objectively provable beyond all doubt. “As far as we can tell, studies in a clinical setting can’t find a statistically significant effect” isn’t really good enough.

Mizguy started out and argumented with some nebolous recommendations of the WHO which recommend circumcision in the context of the most diseased aids regions in the world.
Which cant be applied to developed functioning countrys and societies with normal living standards.

We in Europe, New Zealand, Australia, Kanada, the UK, Korea, Japan have no reason to cirumcise / cut working flesh of our small babys. Its commonly accepted throughout society and mediacal proffessions in these countries that there is no need to do it at all. And many see it as a violation to the health of a small child.
these are some of the worlds most developed countries in the world and they are in large parts uncircumcised since a long time without any major problems AT ALL.
They are perfectly fine with what they were born naturaly and there isnt even one percent of consideration for almost all parents to circumcise their kids in these developed countries. We think its arachaic, unnecesessary , cruel and criminal.

Developed countrys and their societies are viewing the act of circumcision much different!

2014 SWEDISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

Quote
The Sweden Medical Association, which counts 85% of the country’s physicians as members, recommended setting twelve as the minimum age for the procedure and requiring a boy’s consent in a resolution which was unanimously passed by the ethics council, reported the Svenska Dagbladet.

2010 ROYAL AUSTRALASIAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS

Quote
Ethical and human rights concerns have been raised regarding elective infant male circumcision because it is recognized that the foreskin has a functional role, the operation is non-therapeutic and the infant is unable to consent. After reviewing the currently available evidence, the RACP believes that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision do not warrant routine infant circumcision in Australia and New Zealand.”
“The foreskin has two main functions. Firstly it exists to protect the glans penis. Secondly the foreskin is a primary sensory part of the penis, containing some of the most sensitive areas of the penis.”

2006 BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

Quote
“The BMA does not believe that parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his own view. Parental preference must be weighed in terms of the child’s interests… . The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefit from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it… . Some doctors may wish to not perform circumcisions for reasons of conscience. Doctors are under no obligation to comply with a request to circumcise a child.”

2002 CANADIAN PAEDIATRIC SOCIETY (REAFFIRMED 1996 POSITION)

Quote
“Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.”

Of course countries who have religious / political interest in circumcision will argument differently. So do religious groups in various countrys.
Religious and preventive circumcision without immediate medical reason was about to be forbidden for children in germany before religious groups influenced politics and they crumbled down while all polls where favouring a ban.

So I stand by my point that circumcision of children(mal and female) is a crime on humans.

Its rather obvious that circumcision is wrong. And the most developed countries and their medical associations follow these thoughts.
The US is catching up on this too. Many circumcise just because their dad, husband was also circumcised.

These are the facts in the modern world and not some hell hole reasons where you are sleeping in your own shit.

How one after looking at the facts can still believe that circumcision in our modern society makes no sense.
I assume that it then can only be cultural or religious reasons to do allow and promote it to happpen to every child.

Top

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:14 AM.