Ask Me Help Desk - For the ladies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xrayman

Honey,
was the "Doctor" pro-circumcision? was the doctor uncircumcised?
If we were to all go by the cleanliness debate-then we should circumcise girls as well using your argument-this is utterly ludicrious.

It matters to me when you state things that are incorrect, misinformed and wrong. A question was posed. I try to answer all questions as correctly as possible, I believe that you should do the same.

Please take your time to digest what I have stated, then perhaps you may understand that I am trying to provide good, honest and informed information.

P.S. I am not smart talk to you.

cheers

I Agree. Being a nurse and also pregnant with a boy I have recently been reading a lot about the reasons for circumsision... Boys are only circumcised for cosmetic reasons... it was once thought that it was for hygiene purposes, but that has been proven wrong.

Circumsized guys are less likely to get AIDs as well. Proven fact.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferzine

Been with both & enjoyed both but in my experience (and other women I know) un-circed men are NOT nearly as clean! Can be pretty nasty actually. I prefer the circed look as well.

Comments on this post
Xrayman disagrees: Once again. Please TRY to obtain the correct information-or sleep with cleaner types.

Excuse me but I gave my opinion with my experience as well as close women friends. It is not incorrect information, men can be unclean just as women can. Have you gone down on an uncirced guy??

I'm a huge supporter of circumcision, if for nothing else, asthetics. I doubt the validity of the studies saying intact foreskin makes the sexual experience more pleasurable. The ones I've read have focused on men who were cut in adulthood, which can't be generalized to men who were cut in infancy. Also, there is a slightly lowered rate of STI transmission and penile cancer in circumcised men (like I said, very slight, but still there).

I simply believe that circumcision's pros outweigh its cons. A lot of people disagree with me, which is cool, but if I have male children, that foreskin is out of there!

To answer the original post: I think there is a noticeable difference... especially when giving head! I MUCH prefer cut.

I'm cut and can say I manage to have an extreme amount of pleasure from sex.

Let a circumcised man talk for a sec. Listen to the ladies... is it cleaner, healthier, blah blah blah. What if your parents made the decision when you were born to remove your clitoris? That's basically what it is for men. All the joys from clitoral stimulation... circumcised men miss out on that extra "flap" of skin and what that stimulation could have felt like. Stop being so selfish and treat your man to a little extra pleasure for the lack of foreskin that was taken away at such a young age.

Sorry... I am bitter that I never got the chance to speak up for the right to bear foreskin!

Quote:

Originally Posted by MummaCrash

Sorry but, circumcising a penis for merely fashionable reasons is just immoral and pathetic.
*Rolls eyes*

There are Doctors out there that have performed a circumcision on a newborn where they have actually cut deeper then the foreskin.
There are Doctors out there that are performing circumcision unlicensed.
Don't believe EVERYTHING a Doctor tells you.
You have every right to enlighten yourself with information.
The best thing you can do for your child is research.
Circumcising is removal of a natural part of a boys manhood.
We don't remove our little girls clitoris, (note: I do realise in some countries this does take place).
BUT- We don't remove our ears at birth just because we can't be bothered keeping them clean or simply educating our children of proper hygeine.
We don't castrate our boys at birth, why should we remove their foreskin?

Circumcision

wreckingboy: Mutilation Nation

If I hear one more, "Oh circumcising cures cancer", or "oh circumcising is cleaner". Or "oh circumcising is more fashionable".

I'm going to vomit all up in here.
Those are lies and it's just an excuse for a parent to not bathe their child properly.

Correct-
Take warm bath water + soap + boy = cleaned.
Take warm bath water + soap + girl = cleaned.

Incorrect-
Take warm bath water + scrub brush + uncirced/circed boy= clean

Yaddaa yadda yadda..
*sigh*
I'm honestly beginning to think parents are circing their baby boys just for an excuse.

This poster had the best reply to the post. Informed and logical. I would appreciate all those who love circumcision to view the links above and then see if they want to mutilate their newborn boys.

Also to the circed guy above-thanks for your input!

I'm circumcised and I'm more than OK with it. I honestly don't believe that foreskin has that much to offer. The studies (that I have read) done that suggest it enhances pleasure were done as a before-after comparison of men who had the procedure as adults. As humans grow older, their ability to replace nuerons slows so significantly that most neural damage in adults is irreversible. However, infants and young children are able to replace neurons.

I'm saying that intact foreskin is definitely not better than having it removed, I'm just saying that the studies are less than conclusive.

The original poster posed the question does it feel any different and just about NO ONE has said that it definitely FEELS better or worse-because you can't tell-It seems it is only for ashetics-a poor reply to the original post.

I think the correct answer is "NO it FEELS NO DIFFERENT". But good luck in trying to prove me wrong.

This whole discussion is really irrelevant and neither side can say which is better. I will not reply any further to this nonsense.

I just followed the link "wreckingboy: Mutilation Nation". While I agree that it is possible that leaving the foreskin intact may enhance pleasure, I hardly think we can assert that this is the case. I think the research has been misrepresented. With the technology we have, I don't think we can really study this.

I also want to point out that the author of that site claimed that it is ridiculous to suggest that removing the foreskin doesn't dull sensation because circumcised men never had the sensation to begin with. The same is true for the uncut guys out there. They don't know what it's like to be cut. This is what I mean when I say we don't know and probably won't any time soon. I don't think it appropriate to use this argument in this debate.

I think I said circumcised is better for me. Nothing against uncut guys, but I (personally) don't like it.