Women, could you be with an uncircumcised man?

[oaks]

5 minutes of googling later and I have half a dozen New Testament passages to look up next time I'm bored.

[Irishlove]

I'm all for circ. I had my son cut as well. I just like the way it feels

[Art_Critic]

The question isn't if YOU are happy with your decision. The question will be if you SON is happy. Taking such a personal and important decision away from him is dead wrong.

 

Mutilating a baby in a way they cannot reverse is not raising him. I imagine people would get pretty upset if someone decided to cut off a baby's pinky finger or something else they decided looked good. Saying its "good parenting" is the biggest cop out of all.

 

You have to be kidding..

You are telling me how to parent ?.. hahahahaha

[elaina]

Closest I can think of is ear piercings in infants (which I happen to think is unnecessary and inappropriate).

 

I understand completely that human infants and puppies are on a different level, but most vets will say it's good for puppies to have their dewclaws removed on a specific day... I think 2 days old -5 days old? I protested this until I was told that the dewclaws could get stuck on something here in our humancentric (my word) world, and could end up causing more damage than if the dewclaw was not removed.

 

So, when my darling Yorkie had puppies, I did allow them to de dew claw her puppies on the 3rd day. They were ok. I don't think they remember it, though they protested when it happened and bled a tiny bit , but their mom comforted them. One thing I refused however was the cutting off of their tails. Many dogs have their tails cut off when they're puppies (my darling Sheila had her tail cut off... I wasn't there to rescue it.) but they are ok... dogs without their tails are happy and good dogs too, just the same as dogs with their tails.

 

Again, I know that dogs are different than humans, but basically, my point is when young, it is considered to be less painful and traumatic for a little part of the body to be removed. I've heard the older one gets, the more painful and traumatic something like this is?

[Stung]

I have to admit I prefer a circumcised penis; it's nicer to put in my mouth. I realize that circumcision means a loss of sensitivity for the man, and there can be other complications, etc... while I oppose the circumcision of small boys who aren't able to make their own decision, I nevertheless prefer an adult male who is circumcised. I guess that's something of a contradiction, but there you go.

 

haha, its funny, but I totally know what you mean.

I always think that if I ever had a son, I wouldn't put him through a circumcision because it would be cruel to mutilate him, and especially to do something like that when he didn't even have a say in it.

 

But then I think, well seems like a lot of women like cut vs. uncut, so maybe I should do it, so that he doesn't have to worry about that kinda thing when he's older...

 

Its confusing trying to figure out what's best.

But luckily I don't even have to cross that bridge - yet, if ever.

 

 

I have been with both cut and uncut men, in America and living abroad. I have a preference for cut, aesthetically, but I know perfectly well that's just because it's what I'm most used to. I do have girlfriends and gay friends who swear by the uncut dick, but I didn't notice any strong practical pros or cons to either state in my years of experimentation, other than how the male himself felt about his own penis.

 

My husband is cut, and he's fine with that and I like what he's packing, but our son is intact. My husband was leaning towards circumcising him at first, mostly just so they'd be a matching set; we did a lot of research because I felt pretty strongly that I was going to FREAK OUT if somebody came at my baby boy's penis with a scalpel . We ultimately decided the hygiene and health benefits of circumcision were mostly illusory, and the likelihood of any complications were certainly no greater than the likelihood of complications arising from an unnecessary genital cut, and so we decided together just to leave him the way nature made him.

 

Circumcision rates are dropping, btw, and at least in my area many hospitals advise against it instead of doing it as a matter-of-course the way they used to when my husband was born. Among little boys and babies in our area, uncut is just as common and normal as cut, so when they're all grown up the girls shouldn't be as taken aback as women in my generation were the first time they saw a dick in a turtleneck.

[TuffCookieX]

Definitely prefer circumsized. Not to say I haven't been with someone uncircumsized, but having it cut is what I am mostly familiar with and in this culture (caucasian American) that is what we are used to.

 

I wouldn't consider foreskin to be a dealbreaker, but circumsizion is a definite big bonus. Mostly for oral reasons.

[elaina]

We ultimately decided the hygiene and health benefits of circumcision were mostly illusory, and the likelihood of any complications were certainly no greater than the likelihood of complications arising from an unnecessary genital cut, and so we decided together just to leave him the way nature made him.

 

Circumcision rates are dropping, btw, and at least in my area many hospitals advise against it instead of doing it as a matter-of-course the way they used to when my husband was born. Among little boys and babies in our area, uncut is just as common and normal as cut, so when they're all grown up the girls shouldn't be as taken aback as women in my generation were the first time they saw a dick in a turtleneck.

 

I think the cleanliness and health benefits were a part of the reasons why circumcision is a part of an "ancient" belief system that is still alive and thriving today. For example, when Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac were circumcised, there wasn't nice hot water and plumbing and all the lovely medical and technological advancements we have today. Circumcision most definitely could have helped them stay cleaner and have less issues during that time period.

 

If people decide to be circumcised or circumcise their baby boys, that is their decision and they are to respected for it, even if people disagree. I would feel horribly bigoted if I told a Jewish or Christian or Muslim person for example that they cannot follow what they believe for their family, or if I insulted someone who for tradition or health reasons or any other reason was circumcised/circumcised their baby boy. (I consider female circumcision to be different.)

 

So, I agree that cleanliness and health concerns are different today than long time ago when male circumcision was first introduced into human practice.

 

I don't see how cut or uncut should be an issue of what future girlfriends think. Usually though most circumcised guys tend to desire like-minded girlfriends, and most Jewish people I know want to marry Jewish people. Most Muslim people I know want to marry Muslim people, and so on. I don't believe that's going to change all that much in the future. Many beliefs are tenacious... they don't go away easily. Even though many people have tried to genocide beliefs (Romans against Christians, Crusades, Inquisition, ...) beliefs can't be genocided.

 

If anyone has a moral issue with circumcision, it's best just to lay out the reasons why and let people make their own decisions. Circumcision does not cause physical or emotional or any other type of harm most of the time. The men who I assume or know are circumcised are just as intelligent, interesting, fun, and happy as men who aren't. Male circumcision doesn't take pleasure or intelligence or fun or anything else away. (Female circumcision does take pleasure away however.)

Edited April 15, 2011 by elaina

[anne1707]

Is it just me who thinks this? Surely if you are prepared to/want to have sex with a man then whether he is circumcised or not is not a factor. Or do some women ask that before they consent..... . Isn't that just as superficial as a man saying he will not have sex with a woman who is not shaved?

[Ruby Slippers]

Although I haven't been with many uncut men, I prefer uncut because circumcision seems totally unnecessary and even disturbing to me.

Yes. I think it's barbaric and completely unnecessary. There aren't any good reasons to do it anymore, outside of religious quackery or increased income for the hospital/doctor. But I'm not going to get into it. Men who are cut usually think cut is the best and want their sons to "look like them", which I think is pretty weird. And American women have some of the childish views expressed here because they're averse to anything different or outside the mainstream.

[elaina]

Is it just me who thinks this? Surely if you are prepared to/want to have sex with a man then whether he is circumcised or not is not a factor. Or do some women ask that before they consent..... . Isn't that just as superficial as a man saying he will not have sex with a woman who is not shaved?

 

 

Good point, though shaving one's pubic hair is a tad different.

 

Another thing about circumcision:

 

I personally have a big issue with female circumcision, but I don't have an issue with male circumcision. I consider female circumcision to be similar to cutting off the penis, whereas male circumcision is not castration. (I have an issue with castration, along with my issue with female circumcision.)

[elaina]

Yes. I think it's barbaric and completely unnecessary. There aren't any good reasons to do it anymore, outside of religious quackery

 

While I respect your right to not believe in any religion, it is very intolerant and disrespectful and discourteous to call what other people believe "quakery." If you have business with people of other beliefs, you will not go far if you insult them. Thankfully now in the USA and most Western countries, there is the ability to agree to disagree and co inhabit peacefully. If you don't believe something, that's fine, but please have the courtesy to not insult others who do, same as I'm sure you would not want someone to insult you for what you think.

[threebyfate]

This is one of the issues of "who cares" for me. Circumsized or not, as long as the plumbing works, it's moot to me.

[Jazzari]

You have to be kidding..

You are telling me how to parent ?.. hahahahaha

Parents don't have the right to abuse their children. Male circumcision is still legal in this country (though female circumcision is illegal) but I believe it will be outlawed in the future.

 

The Male Genital Mutilation Bill was submitted to Congress in January of 2011 to extend the ban on female circumcision to males, arguing that banning female circumcision but allowing male circumcision violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

 

Cosmetic circumcision for newborn males is currently banned in all Australian public hospitals. Other countries are not far behind and lawsuits have been won on behalf of children.

 

Out of curiousity, do you think I have to right to circumcise my daughter? (assuming it was legal)

[Velociraptor]

When you stroke him and he squirts dick cheese like he's a can of cheese whiz then this concern goes beyond superficiality. That's still a very rare occurrence and easily remedied by normal hygiene.

 

That's because the man is a slob. Not because he is uncircumcised.

 

Women talk about uncircumcised men like we are grotesqely unhygienicly dirty and stink.

 

Seriously, we ain't retards We do know how to wash ourselves. And those who don't are slobs anyway.

[Ruby Slippers]

While I respect your right to not believe in any religion, it is very intolerant and disrespectful and discourteous to call what other people believe "quakery." If you have business with people of other beliefs, you will not go far if you insult them. Thankfully now in the USA and most Western countries, there is the ability to agree to disagree and co inhabit peacefully. If you don't believe something, that's fine, but please have the courtesy to not insult others who do, same as I'm sure you would not want someone to insult you for what you think.

I think that any belief that justifies cutting off part of a child's body for no good reason -- without anesthesia of any kind, mind you -- is pure quackery, and I won't apologize for that.

 

Would I say this at a business meeting during a discussion on circumcision? No. I would politely and non-offensively express my view, to protect my own self-interest.

 

But on this forum, I have the freedom to be 100% honest. Like everyone else. And thank goodness for that.

Edited April 16, 2011 by Ruby Slippers

[mortensorchid]

Actually, that's a practice that is popular in the US but in Europe men in general are not circumcised at birth. Unless there is some medical reason that the man has to get circumcised later in life, they say there is little to no reason that men should be. It never made any difference to me, it's not like it's a question you just ask someone, right? I've been with both, it never made any difference.

[elaina]

I think that any belief that justifies cutting off part of a child's body for no good reason -- without anesthesia of any kind, mind you -- is pure quackery, and I won't apologize for that.

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion, same as people who cut off the foreskin (a removable and not mandatory) part of the penis, are entitled to theirs. Do you consider a parent removing a child's tonsils, to be a quack?

 

However, your comment about religious quackery was very offensive and intolerant. Of course it is your right to be offensive and intolerant, but be prepared to be called out on it, same as anybody who is being offensive or intolerant to other people will more than likely get called out on it (think at the moment, Kobe Byrant) Bigots are not appreciated in many circles.

 

Would I say this at a business meeting during a discussion on circumcision? No. I would politely and non-offensively express my view, to protect my own self-interest.

 

Exactly, because you know very well that if you were like this in real life, you would have people who believe what they believe is true, to not desire to conduct business with you, but would rather wish to explore business interests with respectful and courteous people.

 

But on this forum, I have the freedom to be 100% honest. Like everyone else. And thank goodness for that.

 

Actually, I think there is a limit on this forum as to what words you can use, but I don't suppose "quackery" is over the limit here, though definitely it would be an issue both in the political and business world.

 

Regardless, I did not report the person who called people of a specific religious group "dumbass" and I will not report "quackery" but it amazes me how intolerant and discourteous some people are when they are anonymous. It would interest me to see who these people are in real life.

[elaina]

That's because the man is a slob. Not because he is uncircumcised.

 

Women talk about uncircumcised men like we are grotesqely unhygienicly dirty and stink.

 

Many women know that most uncircumcised men keep themselves clean... uncircumcised doesn't equal dirty. My exhusband and current boyfriend are uncircumcised, and both are very clean men.

 

Again, much of the circumcision issue has to do with belief, family, tradition, and/or health reasons. It's not bad either way.

 

Male circumcision is like getting your tonsils taken out (which isn't done as much now I don't think?) I had to get my tonsils taken out when I was little because I had tonsillitus and that helped. (I wasn't asked about it by the way... my parents didn't say "Honey, how would you like to get those tonsils removed?" Nah, they just made the decision they thought best for me. People though tend to leave tonsils in now, which is fine, and there's no tradition or belief that advocates tonsils either in or out of the body

Edited April 16, 2011 by elaina

[elaina]

Parents don't have the right to abuse their children.

 

Of course parents (or anybody) do not have the right to abuse children.

 

Male circumcision however is not considered abuse, neither are medical operations where knowledgeable doctors perform surgeries with the parents' permission.

Male circumcision is still legal in this country (though female circumcision is illegal) but I believe it will be outlawed in the future.

 

Yeah... ok you are entitled to your beliefs.

 

The Male Genital Mutilation Bill was submitted to Congress in January of 2011 to extend the ban on female circumcision to males, arguing that banning female circumcision but allowing male circumcision violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Female circumcision is similar to castration/mutilation of the penis. If females had a foreskin on the labias/clit/and/or vagina, than the removal of a female foreskin would be the equivalent to the removal of the male foreskin of the penis, but female circumcisions is different than male circumcision.

 

Cosmetic circumcision for newborn males is currently banned in all Australian public hospitals. Other countries are not far behind and lawsuits have been won on behalf of children.

You have many Muslims in Australia correct? Do you have Jewish people there too? Have you ever wondered if they go out of the country or go to not "public" hospitals (maybe a St. John's or a Jewish or Muslim hospital)? That would be very interesting to see what they do.

 

If boys are harmed in the operation, then yes there should be lawsuits (most doctors are prepared for lawsuits because so many people are sue-happy, but yes there should be a price for any operation that isn't done right and brings harm to people.)

 

Out of curiousity, do you think I have to right to circumcise my daughter? (assuming it was legal)

No, because female circumcision is not cutting off a foreskin, but rather cutting off some/all of the labia and/or clit, which is like cutting off the penis. It is wonderful that many people are helping women who have endured this mutilation and also many people are being educated about how harmful this is for childbirth, normal body functions, and how painful it is for women when having sex. There is ample evidence of the physical harm female circumcision has on the individual, but there is not ample evidence of physical harm of male circumcision. There is ample evidence, however, of the physical harm of male castration/mutilation of the penis. Edited April 16, 2011 by elaina

[veggirl]

I've never been w/ an uncirced man! Unless I didn't know it, which I suppose is possible if there was no foreplay and he was already hard

 

I definitely would have NO problem with a man being uncut. I wouldn't circ a male child of mine if I were to have one, so I would be 100% fine w/ a man who was not cut

[Enchanted Girl]

True, but women do all of that to maximize their chances of getting a high quality mate. You'll see that many of the average guys are desperate enough to chase obese women. You think they care if women spend their weekends waxing their genitalia, or do you think they care if a woman spends 900 dollars on 'fashionable' clothes? Got a sense of humor, you do

 

So when a woman is spending all that time, money, and patience, on making herself more attractive than she already is, she ain't doing it for the guys who are looking at her, providing fee male attention, nor is she doing it because its for the man of her dreams(even if she doesn't have any yet).

 

She's doing it to compete with other women to get the man she wants, and she's doing it to feel more attractive than the women around them.

 

Many men have to go to the gym to get female attention. Women only have to work hard to get the man they want(the high quality guy, in whatever aspect he might be of high quality), and that usually demands effort.

 

Its funny how people assume that women suffer from having long hair. Or that women are made by men, to be beautiful lest they face a lifetime of celibacy.Long hair on a woman is a source of hedonism for them. It takes so MUCH time to wash that hair, and it doesn't stop there. The conditioners, the endless products women use on their hair to make it thicker, longer, or blonde, or dark.

 

How do we know its a source of pleasure for women?

 

In many places, water is rare and very expensive. But women spend so much water(which you need to stay alive) on hair?

 

Guys just cut it short and leave it the way it is. Why? Because to most men, hair is not a source of hedonism(gaming is).

 

Whenever a man or a woman complains that so much has to be done to please the opposite sex, tell that woman or that man that its all done to benefit oneself, the opposite gender is just playing the 2nd role of the act.

 

Give me a break. My young cousin is 8 years old, goes to a catholic school, and spends her days painting her nails ,having her hair done, her mother is always buying her expensive, cutey little cloths, and she's already worried about her weight.

 

What, don't tell me that there's an 8 year old Brad Pitt in a all-girls school?

 

Human beings are by nature hedonist creatures. How could they not be, when they created a religion which has as the center figure, a Godhead that is perfect, yet created Men(and Women) in his own image?

 

Yea, I'm sure you date girls with unshaved legs and hairy armpits all the time, right? And think they are just as hot as girls who actually shave their legs and armpits and things?

 

Or girls who run around wearing sweats with their hair sticking out in a variety of directions.

 

We don't groom ourselves for fun, we do it because men aren't as attracted to us without you. You just think you are because you don't run into girls every day who don't. We all conform.

 

And men only go to the gym to get any woman they want. They absolutely don't have to. My boyfriend never goes to the gym and I don't nag him about it because I don't care. Most men I've met don't go to the gym and it doesn't actually prevent them from having sex (most of them are having it) unless they are excessively overweight or something.

[Enchanted Girl]

BTW, I'm circumcised. i had to do have it done as a kid because I couldn't urinate right. I bled a little afterwards, but I healed up quickly and I didn't get a scar. Can't complain. Makes for making it clean much easier. Most of the guys I know had it done. My father for example, had it done(out of necessity) at the age of 20, and a friend of mine had it done at the age of 15. Both horrible experiences because of the age factor. Since I did it as a kid, I don't remember much of it.

 

I've heard that it removes sensitivity. Its fine. I have more than enough of that. And I won't suffer from the possible complications of having a non-circumcised. penis.A friend of mine had to have it done at the age of 20 because he couldn't get erections. Had lots of problems from it,and it was a source of emotional distress. Better to have it done as a kid.

 

Having a vagina on the other hand, it takes a lot of work to even get you aroused and even when you really want it sometimes you can't finish.

 

 

What?! it takes about 1 minute(or less) to make a woman orgasm, from foreplay alone. And its pretty easy to see when she's reacting orgasmic-ally to the stimulation. If a woman takes that long to get aroused, she has arousal issues or the guy she's with is not attractive/doesn't know what he's doing.

 

A woman taking a long time to get aroused? A woman in her 20's or 30's? Impossible. Young women are the easiest to get aroused, many only need as far as kissing their elbows.

 

It takes the average woman 30 minutes of foreplay and sex to get from aroused to finishing.

 

And the average man 15 minutes.

 

If women finish in a minute for you, then they are all faking it. Even with a man, who are known to finish faster, finishing in a minute or less would be a sign of a sexual disorder.

[Jazzari]

Male circumcision however is not considered abuse, neither are medical

operations where knowledgeable doctors perform surgeries with the parents' permission.

Surgies that are required for the health of the child are not considered abuse. There is no medical reason for circumcision. You simply don't like the way the child looks, so you carve them up. I am more understanding of those who do it for religious beliefs though I don't agree.

 

Female circumcision is similar to castration/mutilation of the penis. If females had a foreskin on the labias/clit/and/or vagina, than the removal of a female foreskin would be the equivalent to the removal of the male foreskin of the penis, but female circumcisions is different than male circumcision.

Wrong. Females do have a foreskin of sorts (called a hood or prepuce) on the clit. From my previous post that you obviously didn't bother to read: Type Ia circumcision is the removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce only (which some view as analogous to male circumcision and thus more acceptable).

 

With that cleared up, do you think that this procedure is acceptable for girls?

 

 

If boys are harmed in the operation, then yes there should be lawsuits (most doctors are prepared for lawsuits because so many people are sue-happy, but yes there should be a price for any operation that isn't done right and brings harm to people.)

Cutting off a body part IS harm. I'm simply astounded people have a hard time understanding that. Is it ok to cut off a finger? Ear? Tip of the nose maybe? Where do you draw the line?

[bac]

Again it's not any harder to wash an uncirumcised penis than a vagina. You just simply pull the foreskin back and wash it, thats what I do.

 

I even think it's more difficult to wash a vagina than a unicrumcised penis, It seems that way anyway.

 

You can wash an uncut d....k but you should do it a few times per day and every day and also you should do it just a few minutes before sex if you want smell OK. It is a lot of work to do and most males can not handle so much work.

You do not do oral on yourself and your nose can not get close to your d....k. So, your understanding about the real smell is not the same as a female's understanding is.

 

Washing vagina is much more difficult than washing d...k but males have much higher sex drive so they are crazy for v.....a no matter what.

 

IRL, it does not really matter at all if you are cut or uncut, because there are many other parts of you that are more important for sex or relationships. For example, your sex drive, your sex skills, your erection, your size, your personality/social skills, your compatibility with a partner and other things.

[bac]

What? Nope, it doesn't take 30 minutes of foreplay. It takes minutes, if not seconds, if the guy knows what he's doing and if the woman is in her sexual prime. I can't believe that men are so bad in sex that now its believed women take 30 minutes of foreplay to be aroused enough, to have sex. Nah, from kissing alone I can make a woman lubricated, from foreplay, I can make her orgasm, and she orgasms plenty and often. One time, just with foreplay(and she was fully clothed), she had 3 orgasms.

 

Her body told me so and her clothes told me so. Those statistics must come from women with a poor diet, with poor self-esteem, or in their 40's or something. I can't comment on women older than 25 because I'm not interested in them, but by god, women aged 18-24 are quite capable of having an orgasm as fast as a man(and trust me, plenty of guys only last minutes).

 

Jesus Christ, no wonder so many women go to the shrink, with guys being so bad in bed, many of you are sexually frustrated to the hilt!

 

You are wrong about the majority of females. The foreplay should be long (30-min - a few hrs) especially if you are with a new partner. No male can know that a female had a real orgasm. It is just impossible. Women who are before 30 are typically at their lowest level of sexual feelings and many feel almost nothing except positive emotions of being desirable and some painful sensations in vagina that make them moan during sex.