Started by #446346 [Ignore] 16,May,15 23:44
 | If you have a cut cock,
- Are you pleased being cut or not? - Did you choose to be cut? I was cut as a teenager due to great peer pressure. My girlfriend at that tine really pressured me (as well as her sorority girlfriends). And here's the damnedest thing: We never got to fuck afterwards because she moved across the country! I wish I never had done it. |
New Comment Rating: 0
Similar topics: 1.wanking uncock cock compared to cut cock 2.Cock C-O-N-T-E-ST 3.Cock photo contest ! 4.Big Cock and fondling it 5.cock to cock tributes
Comments:
Lots of information and nice community of fellow restorers
The anti-circumcision crowd, however, can be a tad extreme and start throwing around words like "butcher", "barbaric", "mutilate" and so forth. You were right up on the edge when you called the doctor a "quack". But you have moderated your tone and I appreciate that.
As for doctors promoting circumcision to make money, I seriously doubt this is the case. After all, the fee for doing this surgery is so small it is almost trivial, at least when it is done on a newborn. There are cultural factors as well, such as the patient's penis matching those of his peers as well as custom. And there is the very small but measurable advantage in STD transmission.
BrotherK on YouTube is an 'insctivist' in USA who is a bit forward but also a kind man who gives reasons for leaving babies intact and tours the country promoting it, I know he's toured SF so you may have seen him around.
Just two more questions please before I finish off, what age in your opinion is ideal to be circumcised? And do you agree that the argument that the **** should be circumcised to look like dad is a valid reason? I'm all for valid reasons for the snip but never quite understood the latter, it seems more cosmetic surgery than anything compared to phimosis or other relating conditions.
As to the best age for this surgery, there is no doubt that it's during infancy. It's a quick and easy operation then with minimal risk of complications, which is not the case when it's done later in life. When I was in my twenties I had an encounter with a man, also in his twenties, who had had a circumcision done in adulthood. (He was a casual hook-up and I do not know the reason, but I suspect it was cosmetic. He just liked cut dicks better and that's what he wanted for himself.) In any event he told me that the recovery period was somewhat lengthy and he had to refrain from sex. For what it's worth, I was his first post surgery sexual contact, and needless to say he was raring to go.
Ironically, this gives the anti-circumcision camp their strongest argument. An infant only days old can hardly give informed consent. My only reply to that is that it's his parents who are making that decision on his behalf and they are doing what they sincerely believe is best.
Moving on to having a penis that matches one's peers. This very well might be the strongest argument for (or against!) circumcision.
First of all other family members. My father was born in 1912, he was born at home (as were most babies then) and he was not circumcised. By the time I was born in 1942, most babies were born in a hospital, and most male babies were circumcised. I have no b-rothers, so I never could compare with them. I did notice that my penis did not match my father's, but he an I were not close, so that really wasn't an issue.
Circumcision was an issue when I entered high school. Mine was a large (nearly 3000 students) big city high school with a very cosmopolitan student body. There were students from well off (even well to do) families and students from impoverished families and everything in between. It was while showering after gym class that I first saw a lot of other penises. Most were circumcised. I could not help but notice that by and large it was the students from the lower socioeconomic class who were not. And I'm not the only one who noticed. There was a certain amount of scorn directed toward the uncut boys. In addition to their shabby clothes, their foreskins were another mark of their poor state.
A few paragraphs ago I mentioned that matching one's peers might also be an argument against circumcision. I don't know if you're familiar with porn actor and producer Michael Lucas, but he's a Russian American Jew. And he is NOT circumcised. In his native Russia there was a large amount of anti Semitism so his parents did not have him circumcised because that was a mark that he was Jewish.
--------------------------------------- added after 29 minutes
Whoops! I accidently clicked on "Submit" and I've got a bit more. I hope I'm not boring you.
So you can see, matching one's peers can be important, especially for adolescent boys. At that age, I'm sure you can appreciate how important it can be to fit in. So going with local custom (which here in the USA is circumcision) has value.
Now, about doing it for cosmetic reasons, what's wrong with that? When we consider the enormous amount of cosmetic surgery that is done these days (nose jobs, face lifts, breast enlargement and what have you) what's wrong with adding circumcision to that list? I personally think that cut dicks just plain look nicer. I realize that this is very subjective and others feel differently. And for what it's worth, I've seen an awful lot of intact dicks that I find very attractive.
Finally, I want to again visit the question of health. As I mentioned several notes ago, there is a small but measurable decrease in HIV transmission with circumcised men. But there are other benefits. The incidence of penile cancer is lower with circumcised men and the incidence of cervical cancer in the wives and female sex partners of circumcised men is lower. In both of these cases the difference is very small, but it is measurable. So there are at least three very real health benefits.
Do these small benefits justify wholesale infant circumcision? My guess is not, but I will leave it to others with greater knowledge than mine to make that call.
Cosmetic circumcision is fine IMO for a consenting adult, just not on a baby, but if parents want to give their **** the snip for health benefits then that's their choice and a respectable one.
Thanks again for airing your views, I have just watched an Australian documentary on circumcision and it started like this which I believe sums up the topic well:
"It's been going on for thousands of years, but it's still controversial, the topic is male circumcision. For some parents, it's a very important decision, while for others, it's a complete waste of time, in different parts of the world rates of circumcision are both rising and falling. One thing is for certain, the topic is guaranteed to raise heckles."
What's wrong with Michelangelo's statue of David?
He's uncircumcised!
The historic and Biblical person David was a Jew. As a Jew, he would have been ritually circumcised as an infant. Surely in Renaissance Italy where Michelangelo lived and worked there were Jews about and he should have known this. He might even have had intimate contact with one or more of them as it is widely believed that he was gay.
And here's another little amusing story. Darwin's Theory of Evolution has proven to be mostly correct, but there is one thing he got wrong. He thought that characteristics acquired in the life of a creature would be passed along to offspring. For example a giraffe stretching ever higher to feed would lengthen its neck and pass along this characteristic. Not true.
To test this, the tails were cut off laboratory rats and then these rats were bred. They went thru more than forty generations of rats, but the newborn still had tails. They finally concluded that Darwin was wrong on this point.
How does this relate to circumcision? Well, after the experiment was done they realized that Jewish boy babies have been ritually circumcised since antiquity (far more than forty generations), but Jewish infants are still born with foreskins.
No, I'm not Jewish, even though I am cut.
In closing please let me say that this has been a very rewarding exchange of thoughts and ideas. This is what the Forum is all about. Or it should be. You might want to pull up my Forum post "A Request for Civilized Conduct on the Forum".
Cheers.
I had never even heard of Lamarck or Lamarckism until I read your post so I had a quick look on the internet. Sure enough, it was he, and not Charles Darwin, who proposed the theory that acquired characteristics could be inherited. He even used the example of a giraffe stretching its neck to feed. We learn something every day.
I thank you for pointing this out to me. I have often said that one of the most rewarding things about this site is the things we members learn from each other. I think it is telling that when I sign on I click on the Forum before I click on Recent Posts. I came for the dicks, but I stay for the exchange of thoughts and ideas here on the Forum.
Warmest regards.
The extremely minor health benefits afforded by circumcision don't even manifest until adulthood anyway. Transmission of STDs is prevented FAR more effectively with sex education, condoms, and routine testing than by circumcision. Penile cancer is insanely rare in the USA (1 in 100,000 men); prostate cancer affects 1 in 7 American men but you don't see routine prostate removal at birth. Penile cancer kills about 300 men in the US every year; complications from infant circumcision kill about 100.
As for cosmetic reasons: cosmetics change. 30 years ago the ideal "hunk" had a moustache and a thick rug of chest hair. 60 years ago the ideal woman had curves. 115 years ago corsets were still the rage. Also keep in mind that boys don't really see each others' cocks the way they did when you were school-aged. Anyone born after about 1980 probably never stripped naked in front of another guy unless he played sports. And if we get to a point where 1/3 or 1/2 of guys are uncut, they won't really be in a tiny minority worth making fun of, would they?
New Comment Go to top