intact vs. cut for the guys

Muddyman said:
I'm cut but when I saw when babies go through to get that way, I decided to have my son left intact - mistake. When he turned 20 he had it done himself, with some encouragment from his girlfriend... it was a lot bigger deal at 20 than at birth.


atleast it was his own choice then not his parents.
 
TypicalDeviant said:
I've heard that circumcized guys smell much in the same way women smell... But I've no first hand experience, ah well.

LMAO!!!

Um, the only way a guy's penis - cut or uncut - is going to smell like a woman is if it was just inside her vagina!!
 
Muddyman said:
I'm cut but when I saw when babies go through to get that way, I decided to have my son left intact - mistake. When he turned 20 he had it done himself, with some encouragment from his girlfriend... it was a lot bigger deal at 20 than at birth.

I disagree, that leaving him intact was a mistake because he later decided to have himself circumcised. You did exactly the right thing morally and medically. The fact that when he was of legal age to make those decisions himself, and he made a different decision just helps illustrate why. You allowed him to choose, as Muskokan said. Below is a reference site on this issue.

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

Regards,

gregor
 
RationalRogue said:
Legalities say it's class A. (or class whatever the shit) genital mutilation and it still hasn't been outlawed yet. If I have kids they definitely aren't getting circumcised.

Good point, you don't see americans performing "female genital mutilation" but there are some tribes (somewhere, heck if I actually know where) that do it to girls of a certain age. I couldn't see a woman even being able to get such a procedure done if she wanted to, legally.
 
Muddyman said:
I'm cut but when I saw when babies go through to get that way, I decided to have my son left intact - mistake. When he turned 20 he had it done himself, with some encouragment from his girlfriend... it was a lot bigger deal at 20 than at birth.

I don't know if you'd discuss such things with your son...but if so, does he say anything about a difference in sensations during sex, handjobs, blowjobs, etc.? Does he think it feels better or worse? Was his decision based on aesthetics or some other reason?
 
muskokan said:
Good point, you don't see americans performing "female genital mutilation" but there are some tribes (somewhere, heck if I actually know where) that do it to girls of a certain age. I couldn't see a woman even being able to get such a procedure done if she wanted to, legally.


Wrong answer...

Unfortunately, it IS done in the US, Canada, Europe and other westernized countries. Just because it's not legal in most jurisdictions doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The World Health Organization, UNICEF, Amnesty International and to a lesser extent the Red Cross/Red Crescent have reported that as the cultures who have traditionally done this have immigrated to other countries, the practice has spread to those countries. I'm not talking about women who arrive in that state, I'm talking about the fact that there are doctors and midwives and sometimes religious entities who will do it. For some it's a question of money, others do it out of a misguided belief that the Koran prescribes FGM. (It doesn't by the way. The practice predates Islam and is believed to be one of the things that the religious leaders adopted as a way to control their women.)

Association of Women's Health said:
Background: FGM is a practice that dates from the 5th century BC. It is a cultural/religious ritual performed on women that relates to their acceptance for marriage and/or childbearing. In the regions where it is commonly practiced, the procedure is deeply rooted in tradition and religion. Also known as female circumcision, FGM is practiced in 28 sub-Saharan African countries, as well as in portions of the Middle East and Asia. Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States are noting an increase in prevalence of this practice, likely due to immigration.

While many Western nations, including the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Sweden, Switzerland, as well as African nations such as Egypt and the Sudan, have banned FGM, there is no mechanism to track or prosecute those who continue the practice, as it is mostly an unreported procedure. In addition, laws banning FGM can have the adverse effect of increasing the number of procedures performed in unsafe practice settings and preventing those who experience complications from seeking further medical attention.

World Health Organization said:
Prevalence and distribution of FGM

Most of the girls and women who have undergone genital mutilation live in 28 African countries, although some live in Asia and the Middle East. They are also increasingly found in Europe, Australia, Canada and the USA, primarily among immigrants from these countries.

Today, the number of girls and women who have been undergone female genital mutilation is estimated at between 100 and 140 million. It is estimated that each year, a further 2 million girls are at risk of undergoing FGM.

Here's a few links:

http://www.cirp.org/pages/female/

http://www.cirp.org/

WHO article cited above.

.awhonn article cited above

Part of the reason that FGM upsets me more than MGM is because unless someone botches the male version, (which happens often enough to give most people pause) a man can have a fulfilling sex life without his foreskin. What is generally done to these women and children makes it pretty much impossible for a woman to enjoy herself sexually and it also endangers her life. If the surgery itself doesn't kill her, she risks dying in childbirth because the vagina is sealed pretty tightly, and doesn't have the elasticity necessary to dilate to have a child. It's a pretty gruesome thing to do to anyone.

To deny that this practice exists in our own back yards is allow it to continue. Please be active in your local community to help curb this insanity. To state that "it (whatever it is) never happens here because I live in enlightened America, or France, or Europe." is egotistical and wrong, no matter where you live.
 
I'm not cut.

In my generation here in Australia, almost nobody is. I doubt I would ever have to discuss this issue with the mother of my child...this whole thing only seems to be a hangup for people in America. Almost no Australian men my age that I have discussed this with have been cut.

I'm not cut, I've had absolutely no problems with hygiene or anything and I see absolutely no reason, in this day and age, to chop off a kid's foreskin.
 
Very nicely put Tryptamine! Too bad the US has not become as enlightened. I recently read an interesting comparison that, for me, illustrates how odd the thinking in America is:

"...there is a noticeable inverse similarity between the strange, unique statuses given to both the female earlobe and the male foreskin.

Most people would react with shock and horror and outrage if either piercing a
child's genitals or amputating their earlobe were to be suggested.

Yet somehow, magically, it's neverthless okay to pierce the female earlobe, and
amputate the male foreskin.

Nothing more than custom justifies -- or rather, attempts but fails to justify --
either practice, and, again, very frequently, they're both examples of the abuse
of children's physical integrity for narcissistic self-gratification."


I should note that just for the record, this was in a discussion of piercing children's earlobes, and circumcising infants. Interesting to consider the comparison.
 
I'm uncut, here in England that's really common. Sometimes I imagine what it'd be like to be cut, but it's not really a big deal to me.
 
gregor2001us said:
Very nicely put Tryptamine! Too bad the US has not become as enlightened. I recently read an interesting comparison that, for me, illustrates how odd the thinking in America is:

"...there is a noticeable inverse similarity between the strange, unique statuses given to both the female earlobe and the male foreskin.

Most people would react with shock and horror and outrage if either piercing a
child's genitals or amputating their earlobe were to be suggested.

Yet somehow, magically, it's neverthless okay to pierce the female earlobe, and
amputate the male foreskin.

Nothing more than custom justifies -- or rather, attempts but fails to justify --
either practice, and, again, very frequently, they're both examples of the abuse
of children's physical integrity for narcissistic self-gratification."


I should note that just for the record, this was in a discussion of piercing children's earlobes, and circumcising infants. Interesting to consider the comparison.
Perhaps it's interesting to you, but the problem with making comparisons like this is that you run the risk of using a faulty reasoning practice known as a false analogy, or what some people refer to as "comparing apples and oranges." It's what happens when you assume that two similar objects are alike in every way because they have common qualities.

For example:

Treat kids like pets, with strict rules and feedings, and they'll be good.

or

This must be a great car, for, like the finest watches in the world, it was made in Switzerland.

FWIW, I would be interested to know if piercing a child's ears is a strictly American phenomenon.
 
In my generation, circumcision was a given. It is a useless, dangerous and sometimes psychologically damaging procedure. I'm not big on prohibitions but it is clear to me it should be outlawed for children who are incapable of 'consenting' to it.

Why does it continue (the bs arguments about the supposed 'benefits' aside)?
For the same reason it developed: as an indication of tribal affiliation, "I'm cut, therefore my son should be cut". Fortunately, my generation can take some credit for drifting away from authority and religion and taking steps to break this cycle. I'm heartened to see the fellow from Australia saying it just doesn't happen in his generation over there.

In Canada, I think we are close behind Australia in this and I'm glad to see it is getting some attention in the US.

As you can gather, I'm cut and would rather not be. My sons are not.
 
muskokan said:
Good point, you don't see americans performing "female genital mutilation" but there are some tribes (somewhere, heck if I actually know where) that do it to girls of a certain age. I couldn't see a woman even being able to get such a procedure done if she wanted to, legally.

Here is another perspective on this issue:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/story.jsp?story=698961

It seems it is all in the definition. At least these women consented though I think an argument could be made about the societal pressures that vitiate that supposed consent - and note the Dr.'s comments on the fact of both consent and pride that more conventional FGM survivors felt.
 
Last edited:
Eilan said:
Perhaps it's interesting to you, but the problem with making comparisons like this is that you run the risk of using a faulty reasoning practice known as a false analogy, or what some people refer to as "comparing apples and oranges." It's what happens when you assume that two similar objects are alike in every way because they have common qualities.

For example:

Treat kids like pets, with strict rules and feedings, and they'll be good.

or

This must be a great car, for, like the finest watches in the world, it was made in Switzerland.

FWIW, I would be interested to know if piercing a child's ears is a strictly American phenomenon.

Well, I guess I did word that last sentence ambiguosly. The comparison I was trying to make was in the way people feel and react about them, at least in my experience. Particularly when you focus on the piercing. Of course I am generalizing and looking at what I percieve as the majority. And certainly there are differences. That is part of the point. Just something to ponder. People can take it or leave it, as they see fit.
 
Eilan said:
FWIW, I would be interested to know if piercing a child's ears is a strictly American phenomenon.

We do it in my culture...Eastern European. I was the only girl in my family who didn't have pierced ears; my dad refused because he thought it was a tacky thing for children, and encouraged people to see girls as sex objects. He got really mad at one of his sisters who was going to pierce them for me while he was at work...my mom stopped her because she knew my dad would have a huge fit.

Woohoo, was I excited when I finally turned 16 and was allowed to get my ears pierced! :)
 
LadyJeanne said:
We do it in my culture...Eastern European. I was the only girl in my family who didn't have pierced ears; my dad refused because he thought it was a tacky thing for children, and encouraged people to see girls as sex objects. He got really mad at one of his sisters who was going to pierce them for me while he was at work...my mom stopped her because she knew my dad would have a huge fit.

Woohoo, was I excited when I finally turned 16 and was allowed to get my ears pierced! :)


I never got my ears pierced until a couple months ago and wouldn't want/let my daughter (or son in the event he wants to) get anything pierced until he was old enough to be sure to take care of it (cleaning and such) and he showed me that he could (being clean in general)
 
I'm not cut and I echo the sentiments of others here - its genital mutilation and it should be made illegal asap. Unfortunalty the Jewish lobby would never agree to that......

I don't really understand why it is so prevelent in the US to be honest. As far as I am aware it isnt that wide spread in Europe, and tend to be centred on the Religious obligations of faiths like Judaism and Islam.

For a mainly Christian country like the US its a bit of a strange custom in the view of one of your Atlantic cousins :D .

Also from a health view as long as I wash it everyday when I shower there isnt a problem. If you wash infrequently then all sorts of parts start getting stinky (feet, arm pits,arse etc) your penis is no different!
 
My Bf is uncircumcised and I am glad ! I like natural men ! If I ever have a male child, he's staying uncut. Anyone who approaches any child of mine with a sharp object will have to deal with me.
 
muskokan said:
I've always wondered how real guys feel about the situation with their foreskin.

I've heard of groups of guys who are cut trying to regain their foreskin but I don't know ( m )any guys who are intact.

My sons father is cut but wanted our son intact which I also wanted and he is intact . My hubby is cut and just about freaked out when I told him that if our baby was a boy he'd be intact as well (luckily we had a girl)

do those of you with foreskins ever think about what it would be like without it or if a girl would like it better without it. are there any guys who have had theirs removed for cosmetic reasons only in their adult life

guys without have you ever wondered what it would be like with one or thought about trying to get it back?

I am uncircumsized and haven't had any problems with it growing up. I guess it depends on the parents, though I don't see any real benefit/need to have your son circumsized.



BTW, I love your sig pics Muskokan.
 
I restored my foreskin.

Yes it does become more sensitive... but not in a way that causes premature ejaculation if that makes sense. The penis gets way more sensitive but its a wonderful sensitivity that definately led to me being alot more gentle and slow when making love. My wife, who was with me when I started the restoration before we were married so she got the before and after.... said that she always enjoyed the sex, but that once I was down restoring it became a more gentle intimate thing and that it stimulated her better.

About the dekeratinization thing.... when I started restoring I didn't know what to expect, and figured since I was in my early 20's when I started that I wouldn't have alot of keratinization. Man was I wrong. Three times during the restoration process it was like the head of my penis and the remaining foreskin shed and entire layer of skin like snake. The last time it happened the skin was moist and soft pink just like the inside of a woman's vulva. It was so cool.

Oh and to address one more point... yes the foreskin produces a smell like a woman does, only its more of a musky smell. My wife noticed right away and said "Wow it smells like... hmmm a manly pussy!"
 
I have to put this out there, because it seems like a lot of people have a bit of a misunderstanding...

American boys DON'T ask for circumcision when they're born. Only recently have parents begun to question doctors on this matter.

So please, don't discriminate against us circumcized men for something we had no control over. ;)

Anyway, a few people have asked about why it is so prevelant in the U.S. Basically, you can thank the puritan mentality and Dr. John Kellogg. Yes, half of the cereal company.

Check this link out for some interesting info. If you don't like reading, skip to the 5th paragraph. http://www.rotten.com/library/sex/masturbation/kelloggs-cornflakes/
 
TypicalDeviant said:
American boys DON'T ask for circumcision when they're born. Only recently have parents begun to question doctors on this matter.

I think a lot of people in north america don't question doctors on anything in general. over the last who knows how many years doctors have seemed to develop god complexes (or atleast every doctor i've ever dealt with through 3 pregnancies and day to day life with kids) and expect you to do exactly what they say and take their word as law (because if they said there was no gravity we'd all float)

but thats a whole other thread
 
Back
Top