Adult Circumcision - Cut or Uncut?

[Tobe]

I wonder who first came up with circumcision?
What crazy person thought that cutting off a piece of their dicks would be a good idea?

Anyway, if you balance the overall benefits vs. risks of the procedure, the situation is a wash at best. What's left is the cosmetic result and people are biased about this based on their culture, environment, and own circumcision status.

Being a Euro, to me it just seems like an archaic American, Jewish, Muslim, et al. custom.

[lupinIII]

Honestly I believe my theory has a small amount of credibility to it. The places where it originated were in the older Abrahamic traditions i.e. Judaism and Islam, not to mention it's practice in a lot of Central Australian Aboriginal tribes. The places where these people originated from were dry, extremely arid regions where sand was everywhere, an unavoidable reality for them.

The quality of the clothing was limited to animal skins and crudely woven materials, not very comfortable stuff, the heat justifies a lack of coverage of the skin to avoid overheating. So we have a whole lot of dudes with foreskins hanging out in the desert in not much clothing.

I'm thinking that anywhere you sleep you're going to wind up with some sand on your dick, some of that sand might somehow work its way up onto your glans and starts scratching the knob-chopping shit out of it and could start causing infections and the like.

Cleaning it out in that time and in that environment might be unfeasible because of the lack of water, necesitating the need for prevention of sand-in-dick rather than cure, after enough time it became ritualised into a rite of passage.

[MacShreach]

Naturally one has to be critical about all these studies out there. Personally, since I'm not an expert on the topic, I tend to put more weight on those instutions that have firm reputation in my eyes. In this case, it's easier for me to believe WHO and UNAIDS rather than getting degree on the subject and get to the bottom of it

The WHO study ONLY ADDRESSED UNPROTECTED VAGINAL SEX. The conclusion, effectively, was that the statistical correlation they had identified suggested there may be a slightly smaller risk of HIV transmission to men DURING UNPROTECTED VAGINAL SEX if they were circumcised.

There is a cultural problem in SA which leads a large percentage of men to avoid using condoms and this study was trying to find ways round this. This issue has nothing whatsoever to do with race; it is purely cultural.

The HIV situation there has reached catastrophic epidemic levels and ANYTHING that might help is being considered. The phrase "clutching at straws" is hard to avoid here.

There remains no question whatsoever that the most effective barrier against HIV infection is the proper use of a condom. There was never any intention to suggest that circumcision could replace protection, it was always a "next best thing" solution for men who simply will not use condoms. Also it is worth remembering that any marginal reduction in HIV transmission to circumcised men in these circumstances is ONE WAY ONLY--no protection whatsoever is afforded to the woman.

Furthermore the focus of the study was vaginal, not anal sex. The vagina is fully lubricated with fluids which may be a vector for HIV, but the anus is normally not, as we all know. The principal risk, by far, in anal sex is to the recipient, not the giver.

In any case, all the men here are intelligent enough not to go around sticking their uncovered willies anyone whose HIV status they are not entirely sure of (one presumes.)

As a reason for undergoing circumcision, the studies referred to are therefore completely specious.

[flabbybody]

Well, I hope you have a regular sex partner because after getting circumcised I found that I couldnt get "relief" from masturbation.
I became more promiscuous than ever because when I got horny I had to have penetrative sex...
Also I recommend keeping your frenulum if you can and be really clear on the difference between high & low. If you want to increase your staying power than low is better to be more sensitive high is better.
DO NOT masturbate for at least 2 months after the operation or you will fuck it up - (this rule is hard to stick to),


Good luck.

I was circumsized as an infant (Jewish boys don't get their choice) and my life experience is exactly the opposite. Penetrative sex never provides me with enough stimulation and I have to masturbate to achieve climax. This has been the case since I was 14. I'm convinced early age snipping reduced sensitivity in my case. On many occasions I've had to bullshit to partners about coming to avoid hurting her feelings.

[gamma aries]

Naturally one has to be critical about all these studies out there. Personally, since I'm not an expert on the topic, I tend to put more weight on those instutions that have firm reputation in my eyes. In this case, it's easier for me to believe WHO and UNAIDS rather than getting degree on the subject and get to the bottom of it

The WHO study ONLY ADDRESSED UNPROTECTED VAGINAL SEX. The conclusion, effectively, was that the statistical correlation they had identified suggested there may be a slightly smaller risk of HIV transmission to men DURING UNPROTECTED VAGINAL SEX if they were circumcised.

There is a cultural problem in SA which leads a large percentage of men to avoid using condoms and this study was trying to find ways round this. This issue has nothing whatsoever to do with race; it is purely cultural.

The HIV situation there has reached catastrophic epidemic levels and ANYTHING that might help is being considered. The phrase "clutching at straws" is hard to avoid here.

There remains no question whatsoever that the most effective barrier against HIV infection is the proper use of a condom. There was never any intention to suggest that circumcision could replace protection, it was always a "next best thing" solution for men who simply will not use condoms. Also it is worth remembering that any marginal reduction in HIV transmission to circumcised men in these circumstances is ONE WAY ONLY--no protection whatsoever is afforded to the woman.

Furthermore the focus of the study was vaginal, not anal sex. The vagina is fully lubricated with fluids which may be a vector for HIV, but the anus is normally not, as we all know. The principal risk, by far, in anal sex is to the recipient, not the giver.

In any case, all the men here are intelligent enough not to go around sticking their uncovered willies anyone whose HIV status they are not entirely sure of (one presumes.)

As a reason for undergoing circumcision, the studies referred to are therefore completely specious.

All valid points which I never contested nor did the WHO study(I presume).

[voy4her]

im glad there are some sane people out there, living in america a lot of girls are so rabidly obssessed with this idea that uncut = dirty, like soap doesnt work or something. The funny thing is, whats harder to keep clean, a cock or a vagina? you dont see men getting yeast infections all the time.

[ARMANIXXX]

yuck for some of you people.

[KO47]

Guy in the above pics needs to take a shower and use some fucking soap. Nasty.

I'm uncut and would never get mine done. I considered it once only for the looks, then the site I was reading said pull the foreskin back, put on your boxers, and try walking around and thats how it will feel for 2 months. I couldn't even make it down the stair case. Fuuuuuuck that.

Can't even imagine how much sensitivity cut guys lose.

Besides, a lot of the American girls aren't used to uncut and for them it's almost taboo like. Just got to teach them how to work it. From my experience anyway. I was born and raised in Europe so it was kind of a weird experience because the first time they are always surprised.

[Tobe]

I've heard the desert/sand theory before, but to me it seems counterintuitive. The foreskin seems like it would help prevent against irritation by providing protection.

People do lots of crazy things around the world: female genital mutilation, weird initiation rituals, etc.

For some reason this one (circumcision) has stuck in some parts of the world...

In terms of cosmesis, while erect, both cut and uncut penises look very similar as the foreskin tends to retract behind the head. The main diference is a circ scar vs. some extra skin behind the head.

The whole cleanliness argument is weird. It's akin to saying its easier to clean your scalp if you cut off all your hair; it's easier to clean behind your ears if you chop off your ears.

It takes like 1-2 minutes per day max to keep a penis clean.

[ARMANIXXX]

I don't care what you people say,

I believe the bible implied it should be done for a reason.


No smegma for me thanks.