Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Circumcision vs Non circumcision?

Status
Not open for further replies.
InquisitivePsyche said:
Hold on - I never said that I had to pull it back and clean it. When I was talking about cleaning him I was talking about changing his diaper in general, but I noticed that there was the foreskin on him which I didn't touch because I wasn't certain about. Then I asked about it and I was told that down the road when he was older, it would be different keeping it clean verses a non circumsized one. Many little boys who aren't showed how to clean the foreskin develop hygiene issues because it can get infected much easier. Especially if it isn't cleaned.

So it was a complete non-issue then? One wonders why you bothered to bring it up then? Your previous post seemed to imply that you encountered issues.

Somehow mankind managed to survive for millions of years living in caves and in the rain forest and in the savannah with foreskins, without any special attention.

At birth the foreskin is adhered to the glans kind of like the way your fingernails adhere to the skin of your fingertips. It doesn't retract, and forcing retraction would be painful. At this stage of development, no maintenance is required. By the time it becomes retractable (and this varies from child to child), the boy will be potty trained and will be cleaning himself. And of course boys have curious hands and the penis is conveniently located right at arm's length.
 
jh1 said:
I didn't read any of this...

But this thread has been posted so many times...

My personal conclusion is that yes it is a very very very very very silly thing to do to something that there is nothing wrong with from the get go, it's natural -it's healthy, etc.. and it's based on goofy relgious bullshit...

That's being said... sex, social status, acceptance, etc are very important in real life. If I had a son, I would circumsize him simply because I wouldn't want him to be in a situation where he is ridiculed or shuned by some girl because his dick was considered 'odd'...

How awefull... but it's reality.
You would cut yout sons penis because of what some girl might think? You are a low son of a.
 
Circumcision is BRUTALLY DEFACING a child, what have we come to? Plastic surgery art 1 months old just so girls who are immature and watched a porn can see the same dinky they seen on t.v? it's wrong, there is no other side to it, IN NORTH AMERICA, in sudan, where sand gets stuck in there, go for it, here, fuck right off
 
youngguns said:
Circumcision is BRUTALLY DEFACING a child, what have we come to? Plastic surgery art 1 months old just so girls who are immature and watched a porn can see the same dinky they seen on t.v? it's wrong, there is no other side to it, IN NORTH AMERICA, in sudan, where sand gets stuck in there, go for it, here, fuck right off
let it go man, im circumsized and lovin it
 
To me, Jesus was a jew

It's far from certain if he was in fact a member of the tribe that practiced the traditions that todays Jews do but simple messages are easier to convey.

like having your kids sensitive bits cut with a scalpel, it's all about conforming the facts to fit with your own personal reality.

Americas love affair with the scalpel has its roots in Victorian prudery and the repression of 'imoral urges' in kids back in the early 1900's, the idea was that snipping would prevent masturbation which would in turn prevent unGodliness. Along with acid on the genitals of girls, and Cornflake enemas (sadly those two didnt stand the test of time, as a clean cooch and bum are just as important imo as a pee-pee passing muster)

Time passes and thing become socially accepted and really that's all that matters.. the hows and whys of the issue aren't that important.
 
Mr. dB said:
So it was a complete non-issue then? One wonders why you bothered to bring it up then? Your previous post seemed to imply that you encountered issues.

Somehow mankind managed to survive for millions of years living in caves and in the rain forest and in the savannah with foreskins, without any special attention.

At birth the foreskin is adhered to the glans kind of like the way your fingernails adhere to the skin of your fingertips. It doesn't retract, and forcing retraction would be painful. At this stage of development, no maintenance is required. By the time it becomes retractable (and this varies from child to child), the boy will be potty trained and will be cleaning himself. And of course boys have curious hands and the penis is conveniently located right at arm's length.
You know as well as I that MANY children have issues with hygeine and don't always clean themselves. This is one reason why I believe (from what I've read) that circumcision is benefitial because bacterial infections are much more common with children who are non circumsized than children who are. Also, I was bringing up the previous post because of what I noticed and therefore then what I had asked and what I was told (about circumcision/non circumcision).

And mankind has survived for millions of years without treatment for disease, infections, etc. What is the point? Many thought that circumcision was benefitial and to this day many still believe it and many favor it. Either way, who cares? It's what is preferred. I for one, will have my child circumsized.
 
In the UK, very few people are circumcized here so to think its disgusting visually appears to be a product of US culture.

Indeed, circumcized people are the subject of condescension and anti-semitic abuse (even if they're not jews, lol).

As for me, I'm not telling you!
 
Mr. dB said:
I bet the majority of AIDS victims in the US are circumcised.
Actually, from what I just looked up it says that being circumsized reduces the chance of retracting HIV. There are some studies that have been done. I'm not saying they are right, but that's what they claim. I'm also sure that are many studies that probably say this is wrong.
 
At Spurs (a Jewish soccer club) home games, thousands of opposition fans chant

"I've got a foreskin, how 'bout you?" amongst other things.

So I guess that shows you the norm in the UK.
 
InquisitivePsyche said:
You know as well as I that MANY children have issues with hygeine and don't always clean themselves. This is one reason why I believe (from what I've read) that circumcision is benefitial because bacterial infections are much more common with children who are non circumsized than children who are. Also, I was bringing up the previous post because of what I noticed and therefore then what I had asked and what I was told (about circumcision/non circumcision).

And mankind has survived for millions of years without treatment for disease, infections, etc. What is the point? Many thought that circumcision was benefitial and to this day many still believe it and many favor it. Either way, who cares? It's what is preferred. I for one, will have my child circumsized.
DONT TOUCH THAT BABY!
 
My perspective on this is a bit different. I was not circumcised as a baby. I had it done at the age of 26.

I can tell you one thing-having your foreskin cut off hurts a great deal!!!!! When you are cut as an adult, you can really empathise with the genital mutilation argument against circumcision. There are a great deal of nerves in that small piece of skin, and having experienced both conditions as and adult, I can say that I lost sensitivity. However, at the same time the skin could sheild the glans from direct stimilation and contact so that you could last longer.

When you get circumcised as an adult, you are going to be out of action for a while and nocturnal erections are painfull!!!!

Now to the topic of female circumcision. It is a missuse of the term "female circumcision" to say that female circumcision is anything other than removing the clitoral hood so that it is more exposed. The clitoral hood is the direct coresponding anatomical structure to the male foreskin.

"Surgical" removal of the clitoris would be a clitorectomy. However, as Heather Rae pointed out, the bizzare, brutal, oppresive and ritual cutting and disfiguring the female vulva is female genital mutilation.

Many women do not know this and many do not want to admit this but smegma is formed and retained under the clitoral hood and other areas of the vulva . So if a woman is not diligent with her personal hygeine it is very possible that you might see some small cottage chese like particles up in there and coming out of those locations.

Smegma, a transliteration of the Greek word ?????? for soap, is a combination of exfoliated (shed) epithelial cells, transudated skin oils, moisture, and bacteria that can accumulate under the foreskin of males and within the vulva of females. It has a characteristic strong odor and taste. Smegma is common to all mammals, male and female

If woman does not clean that area, it will look just like a dirty penis but on a smaller scale. This is gynocology 101 and a good medical text will confrim this to be the case. So to avoid various infections, women too have to use a consistent comprehensive hygeine routine, from an early age. As should uncircumcised boys. Cleaning around the clitoris and cleaning around the glans are very similar activites.

I had a woman tell me that she would not have sex with an uncut man, and I thought she was rather shallow. She cited hygeine issues and what society has told her. I thought to myslef to be fair - i should get to see you open up your vag and swab it down with a wet wipe so that I know that you are clean down there too before deciding to have sex. However, I did not say anything as she would have just got pist and defensive.

The point that is being overlooked is that both genders need to practice good hygeine or else they can transmit bacteria, yeast infections, HPV and retain smegma, and it is reasonable to expect your partner what ever the gender to keep their equipment reasonably clean before they expect sex.
 
Last edited:
5150guy said:
I had a woman tell me that she would not have sex with an uncut man(me), and I thought she was rather shallow. She cited hygeine issues and what society has told her. I thought to myslef to be fair - i should get to see you open up your vag and swab it down so that I know that she was clean down there too before deciding to have sex with her. However, I did not say anything as she would have just got pist and defensive.

Really good post. That same woman would've been celibate in the UK lol. Altho, I suspect perhaps, that she just didn't want to have sex with you.

What is your position on circumcision of a child?
 
Mr. dB said:
So if his dad lost a limb in the war, how weird would it be for a little boy to grow up with four intact limbs?

Having been the little boy whose peepee was different, it's no big deal. It's no weirder than when dad has hairy things between his legs and sonny doesn't. Or if dad has black hair and brown eyes and sonny has brown hair and blue eyes. Adults and children are different.

People will go to such great lengths to rationalize this stupid barbaric ritual.

Kinda the same situation with the people who go to great lengths to rationalize keeping the foreskin? it almost seems offensive on a personal level to you guys when someone states their opinion as to why they would choose to circumsize their child.

To add to the thread: i am circumsized and i would definitely have my son done, for whatever reasons. and to all you who say there is no medical risk, i think TT would beg to differ.
 
vaginas are not clean and dont smell good at the end of a normal day.
i have found and tasted all sorts of stuff inside the vag.
 
heavy_duty said:
vaginas are not clean and dont smell good at the end of a normal day.
i have found and tasted all sorts of stuff inside the vag.

maybe you should quit playing around with hookers and find a decent woman.

i've yet to find a vagina that doesn't smell good, even at the end of a sex it shouldn't smell like anchovies that have been sitting in the sun for weeks.
 
Mikus said:
Kinda the same situation with the people who go to great lengths to rationalize keeping the foreskin? it almost seems offensive on a personal level to you guys when someone states their opinion as to why they would choose to circumsize their child.

You don't have to rationalize an argument to leave a healthy human body intact. Where else do we cut off healthy, non-diseased living tissue from our bodies?
 
Mr. dB said:
You don't have to rationalize an argument to leave a healthy human body intact. Where else do we cut off healthy, non-diseased living tissue from our bodies?

Nails, hair
 
MAJNOON said:
In some religions, like Islam and Judaism, it's mandatory, u don't get a say in the matter. My baby son got cut a couple days after he was born, I think many doctors would tell u it's much healthier too.
cheers.


If they do, then they're very uneducated. It's not. In fact, studies have been shown that it's actually less healthy to be cut than uncut now.
 
Angel said:
1)Uncut looks disgusting.....
2) many men recieve infections later on in life for not becoming circumsized
3)I heard rumor that men hurt when they get hard being uncircumsized
4)more apt to get std being uncircumsized

I think circumsision is the best choice.

1. Erect it looks the same.
2. False. It has nothing to do with the lack of circumcision, everything to do with hygine.
3. I get hard all the time, I'm not circumsized. It doesn't hurt.
4. Exactly how? Care to back that up with science? Oh wait; you can't.
 
musclemom said:
My son's father was circumcised himself, whaddya think? How weird would it be for a little boy to grow up with a penis that isn't like his father's or any other male he sees? C'mon.

Look, dear, I've been personally involved with 9 penises in my lifetime (counting my son, hey, who do you think changed the diapers!) and I told you which one, and it was ONLY one, was untrimmed.

And I'm not Jewish, and only two of the men in question were Jewish.


Well, my son is circumcised, and I'm not, and yet.. it doesn't seem wierd to him.
 
sardonicone said:
You know better than that. Hair and nails are dead. Unless dead bodily tissue is the new definition of "healthy", this counter argument doesn't hold any water.

I was just being an asshole. I'm cut, I don't remember being cut. I was still tired from the move.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom