I can't believe you took that even semi seriously...

"who noticed that guys without a foreskin" YEAH cause there was this bunch of guys who just happened to not have a foreskin, mostly during the great onionring shortage of 1504BC, and then there was this OTHER bunch of guys who just happened to be looking at dicks... mostly during the great brothel shortage of 1504BC, yep, all sounds like a totally legitimate argument to me. Nate was definately making a serious point there.

:rolleyes:

I really don't think I have to explain myself! Actually it's pretty late (early), I wasn't really sure what he said, but I saw infection in there somewhere, so I thought I might throw something on the table.

Are circumcised penises meant to look better? Nope. Unless you want it to look disproportionate, that is.

"Why is it that I only ever hear this kind of thing from homosexuals, crackpot "scientific discoveries" in womens magazine articles and saggy-breasted hairy-legged womens rights activists?"

No no no no, its because we all like ladies cos they're nice to look at!...apart from, y'know, fat ugly ones and stuff...I'm stop this right here...before some girls come beat me up...

Oh you guys do realise we're talking about how good different cocks look, right? Shouldnt we...y'know...just not? :-P

'Why is it that I only ever hear this kind of thing from homosexuals, crackpot "scientific discoveries" in womens magazine articles and saggy-breasted hairy-legged womens rights activists?'

Because we're evolved enough to know *Tuts* Silly Muffy.

'However, I have heard that it can lead to increased chances of premature ejaculation...'

That would explain a lot. When they complained i was "too fast" i always thought they were just jealous of my running capabilities...*Sigh*

Erm, your pinky toe is the useless toe. It's the big toe which balances. Which is why I referred to the pinky toe, because I thought everyone was smart enough to realise that when I refer to pinky, I do not mean 'big'.

There's no point to it. Still, if you want to, it's your decision. But I don't know why you'd sacrifice all that pleasure. As for the look of circumcised and uncircumcised penises, I don't really see much difference. It's a penis. Not your face.

Alcar...

Or... is it? :p

The whole concept of female circumcision makes me queasy. Although, comparing it to male circumcision, it is certainly... comparable. In some ways at least. I think this thread has made me opinionated. I'm now personally against circumcision at birth. If an adult is adamant enough to want to mutilate his or her own genitals, they can go right ahead. Otherwise, things should be left the way they are.

I was quite disappointed with my vagueness of my previous post in this thread, so I checked some stuff so I could re-assert my position, this time sans the aforementioned vagueness. Some of this may be, "Well, no duh," but I'm writing it all down just in case.

Moving right along.

All males are born with, basically, a flap of skin over the head of the penis; a natural sleave made of skin for your nether region, so to speak. And that's all it is...loose skin. It serves no desernable purpose. It's like the appendix; Maybe it served some long-forgotton purpose in the womb, but now that you're alive and one your own, it's utterly useless. Circumcision is simply cutting off this natural, "sleave." It doesn't reduce size or potency or any crap like that.

Now, there are a few, small benefits to being circumcised. Obviously, there are very few (Believe me...if there were a lot, EVERYONE would be getting circumcised). To start with, there are the previously mentioned diseases, but those are so rare, that it's not a big risk at all. It's really a matter of convienience, really. There is one thing that sleave excells at...collecting bacteria and gunk from the surrounding evironment. Now, if that's your thing, whatever. But for those of us whose hobbies to not include cultivating a colony of bacteria in our genital area, we've got to clean it out...that is, those of us who are not circumcised. If you are, those things just come off in the shower like everything else. If you're not...well, you've got some cleaning to do, haven't you?

On top of this, I've heard that there is a sensitivity thing to. This flap isupposedly makes sex somewhat less comfortable, and removing it is supposed to make it less painful, and more...pleasureable. I say supposedly, because I myself have no experience or personal knowledge for comparision. Maybe the doctors are wrong. I dont' know.

That's the value of circumcision (Sans all religious significance). Now, as all of you can plainly see...that's not a whole lot. Well, that's why it's optional then, isn't it. But I will tell you this: It's better to be circumcised as an infant, on the 8th day of being alive. Why? Circumcision...it's supposed to be a dreadfully painful experience. Not only that, but it takes weeks to recover, as some of my dad's old navy buddies would testify to. HOWEVER, on the 8th day of being born, doctors have discovered an interesting phenomenon. For that day, and that day alone, the vitamin K in your blood spikes; raises sky high! Vitamin K is what's responsible for blood clotting, mind you. All doctors would confirm that that is the best possible day to get circumcised, if you don't want to be sore for weeks afterwards, that is.

Finally, I'd like to finish with the roots of circumcision, which have nothing to do with masterbation (Sorry Mojoman. Less sensitivity means it's less uncomfortable, like I stated earlier). As far as I can see, a historical figure known only as Abraham was suppossedly told my God, that if he put his absolute faith and trust in him, that he would grant him desendants far too numerous to count (For those of you who think Abraham was a goober for this, it would serve to note that he is technically the forefather of every Arab and Hebrew on the face of the Earth). For those of us who read the Bible, Abraham made a covenant with God; that he, and every male member of his family (No mention of female members, though) would be circumcised (It also says that all infants should preferably be circumcised on the 8th day...hmmm). The Hebrews, and I would think the Arabs, still do it to this day. As do Christians, I suppose keeping in with their heritage or something, and other people, for the various reasons I listed earlier.

That's it, I think.

I didn't know that you were homosexual, drakan.

Why should that be a problem for a gay guy such as yourself?

Don't patronise me Alcar, I knew exactly what you meant by "pinky toe", the clue was when I said "smallest toe", since "pinky toe" sounds rediculous. It's not "useless", it has a purpose. If it was useless, then it would be almost evolved out of us by now. However, it's still there, the same size it's always been.

Nepharski... I don't mean to sound rude but in this instance... you really obviously don't know what you're talking about.

The foreskin actually makes sex more pleasureable, and in some cases is the only thing that triggers an orgasm. Without it, these particular people are unable to achieve an orgasm, and therefore never ejaculate. To that end, it is vital to the continuation of the human race.

Now, with that in mind, try telling me that it's useless. ;)

Also, the appendix is believed by most physicians to've been where cellulose was digested in the evolutionary predecessor to the modern human.

Really? I don't mean to be crude, but I have been circumcised, and have no trouble ejaculating whatsoever. My father was circumcised, and still fathered two children. I'm afraid it's rather obvious that it is you who is in the dark...unless I am a figment of my own imagination.

...You where saying? ;)

EDIT: As for the appendix, I said it did serve some purpose in the past...but it is no longer vital or important now.

So, just because it serves no purpose, we should all go out and get it removed? Like I said earlier, why stop at that? Why not remove our pinky toes as well? Or our appendix?

I have to ask, Nepharski, are you circumcised? Because you don't sound like you know what you're talking about. Bacteria / etc basically only cultivates on the penis with the buildup of smegma and other grime. However, it is basically only prevalent in pre-pubescent males where the foreskin has not detached from the glans-penis. When the foreskin has detached, I can honestly say that being non-circumcised, I did not have a problem with any 'build-up'. And I'm talking way back in the day when my showers were weeks in-between. Though, that was probably because masturbating somewhat causes you to clean up. And if I remember, you're a strict Christian... So perhaps you do have a problem there with it building up.

The foreskin does nothing of the sort. It makes it more comfortable, not to mention all that extra sensitivity. Removing the foreskin does reduce sensitivity, go look it up, it is well documented.

Finally, I'd just like to mention that I cannot honestly see how men masturbate without a foreskin. I know they do the same thing, but, it's the foreskin which provides the pleasure. Not to mention the friction would be worse :|

Alcar...

I personally do not see how removing the foreskin could increase chances of ejaculation. From a logical standpoint, it seems that the foreskin acts as a form of making ejaculation easier. But then again, as I am uncircumcised, I guess I have no say in the matter, unless I go out and circumcise my self and root the nearest object in sight.

But I'm not that desperate... ;)

There. We can all sp33k like adults. Luckily Stingbee isn't here, or he'd go "PEN15! lol".

*Sigh.*

Wow...what were the odds of this happening...again.

Alcar, I can garuntee 100% that I have been circumcised (Warning! Before and after illustrations of process.).* I highly doubt that my father, doctors, internet information pages, and my text book would simultaneously lie to me. I have no problem ejaculating, and there is no, "friction." Removing it does not increase or decrease chances of ejaculation.

Also, you seem to be suggesting that I support the emidiate circumcision of everyone. Not so! I was simply stating that there is more to it than just some old Jewish custom. You don't have to emediately remove it, or even remove it at all. But if you wanted to, there certainly are other reasons.

And yes, I do know that it decreases sensitivity...but I'm not quite sure if it's in the way you seem to mean.

As far as grime goes, I've heard mixed reports in both directions.

I wasn't saying you weren't circumcised or not. I said I wasn't sure. But it's good to know. I don't believe you'd have any problems ejaculating either, I never mentioned that. But I did mention friction, as I just can't see how friction would not occur. While the penis can self-lubricate itself, it is a lot harder without it being trapped in the foreskin.

No, I do not think you support the immediate removal of foreskin. That's absurd.

Alcar...

Meh...oh well. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that nether side is disadvantaged. Circumcised people aren't sexually disadvantaged or anything, is my real point. At least I got to clear up the origin, and Dino's apparent confusion. Nice discussion anyway, Alcar. :)

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a fanfic to write.

"I didn't know that you were homosexual, drakan."

When I said we, I was refering to guys,
And you dont know anything about me anyway ':-I

Circumcised penis' are more pleasant to look at, HOWEVER, the removal of the foreskin does reduce sensitivity. There's a new procedure in Brazil to stop premature ejaculation, part of that procedure is to cut some nerve endings, but the other part is to circumcise the male.

Also, in '89 the Cameron study was published and reported an 8.2 times higher risk of HIV infection among uncircumcised men.

On the downside for my Muffy cohorts, however, is that circumcised penis' have problems with female "dryness" (lovely(!)) Oh well.

That's nothing a little K-Y can't fix. ;)

*Ahem*...

Anyway, as for the earlier discussed comparison of percentages of circumcision in the U.S. to other countries, I read that 55% of American males are. So it's about half and half over here. I feel silly for never giving thought to how it could such a difference in other developed countries.

The males foreskin also acts much like how a condom does... I'll let you think about that one. We've already gone over a number of the other benefits, so I'm not going to be a broken record.

Once again, that is what showering is for, and as we all know, it's not difficult to get a male to rub his penis in the shower...

That is absolutely correct! You don't know. This little flap actually makes sex more pleasurable to the male and to the female. Women unexperienced with the intact organ find it to be nasty. This is much like a child who has never tasted ice cream before, people are afraid of new things. In fact, most women who have had the experience, say that sex is much better with an uncircumcised penis. How do I know this? There have been many forum discussions and statistics that say the exact same thing. Because of the greater sensitivity the guy doesn't have to push so hard in the act, and overall it is just much more comfortable. Now when you remove it, it can be more painful depending on the amount of skin removed. Sometimes this is negligible, but sometimes it can ruin your sex life. Viagra anyone??

No, sorry to say you're wrong. I'll bring forth more facts later, but I'm done for now.

Here's a site with more informationhttp://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/

MojoMan220, I'm afraid Alcar and I have already settled this, although your ferver is welcome. Personally, I've seen sources going in all directions on this issue, so I'm pulling out to stratch my head and whatnot.

Except that you're a high and mighty whiney hypocrite?

You seemed to think that you knew an awful lot about me in the Overrated thread. You were making all kinds of statements about how I feel, what I believe, and what I think. All of them incorrect.

I am not in the dark, Nepharski, you simply misread what I said. SOME people, not ALL people. Although it is definately evident that the foreskin is not always a requirement for ejaculation, there are a considerable number of cases where it has been recorded that it is a requirement. Since the male orgasm and ejaculation are intrinsically linked, it follows that if you cannot achieve an orgasm, then you cannot ejaculate. It's well known that the removal of the foreskin has the effect of desensitising the penis, and it is also well known that the glans (or "bellend" :p) is in the majority of cases the part most responsible for triggering the orgasm. Since the foreskin covers and rubs against this area during sexual intercourse, it follows that after circumcision the ability to achieve an orgasm is not only diminished, but in some cases entirely removed.

Now, after talking frankly and in detail about penises and ejaculation, I shall retire to the kitchen to make myself some lunch. :D

"Cut off the tip of your dick" - just what any 2000BC shepherd wanted to hear. :D

I have no idea whether you're being sarcastic to me or to MojoMan so I'll just say that I was indeed being serious.

Without wanting to get too crude [metaphor] you put tinsel all around the christmas tree rather than just focusing on the angel at the top.[/metaphor]

And finally, in case anyone is interested, Neph got it pretty much right about the Abraham thing. In fact the circumcision ceremony is still called the Brit which means covenant, the implication being that Jewish people are members on a covenant instituted between God and Abraham.

"you put tinsel all around the christmas tree rather than just focusing on the angel at the top"
Hahaha, thats classic.
I do agree with Alcar about the friction thing though...

o_O

OK ... I think... I'm just going to stay out of this one.

This conversation makes me feel uncomfortable.

Not nearly as uncomfortable as you would feel if...

WHACK.

Ow!

Good lord it's still moving!

WHACK.

You missed again you stupid.. OH GOD THE BLOOD!!

Enjoy your meal, and sleep well. :D

I hope it's making us all uncomfortable, or else we've got a lot of pervs on these forums...

Hey, why just leave it to the men? I'm sure that if its right to amputate to most sensitive member of a guy its okay to do it to girls. Cliterectomies for all!