That's.. Something to think about. Not that many people talk about that from what I've see.
I don't see why I'd want to be circumcised honestly. I don't see a reason to do it, plus people look better uncircumcised. So.. Yea, that's that.
I have one, and am...As an adult, and a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, I consider it to be the first time I was sexually assaulted.
My two boys are not.
No and like Beth, my boys are not.
I have a penis and am uncircumcised and do not want to be. I have a son and he is. At the time I was ignorant and defaulted to what the ex wanted (he was cut; knew nothing about being uncut, all of my family and his family is also cut). If I were to have another son he would not be cut.
Jay
I call my fleshy bits a penis and it's intact...that's what I would want for myself and my kids.
Not much reason to do it. For all the stated health concerns, neither myself or my son have ever had issues with infections etc. Plus circumcision does reduce your sensitivity and I can't see where that would be a good thing. I am certainly glad to be uncircumcised now that I am looking at SRS. Every extra bit of skin has got to help!
So I am so against circumcision. It makes me mad. but I'll try to not get mad here, lol.
Firstly, it totally violates the child's rights. It all stemmed from religious reasons. but now doctors who do it will lie about health benefits, otherwise they'd be out of a job, because really only Jews still have religious reasons for it.
I just think it's horrible. it takes away their right. there are lies about the benefits. and the original reason that circumcision came from is horrible.
The original Christian reason was not only to make a promise to God by cutting it off, but also it was to desensitize the penis to discourage masturbation, which in Christianity is considered wrong.
I just think that society should be a lot smarter than to circumcise for these kinds of reasons.
I wouldn't want to be circumcised and its not on my surgical to do list. I do think being cut looks better and I also generally imagine penises as being cut.
Just to add to my interesting problems, I had (so I'm told) a massive infection of the penis in side the skin bit. I was almost operated on, but they didn't they just circumcised me.
I really don't are what it looks like.
Cindy
There is some evidence to suggest that circumcision does reduce the risk of STD transmission slightly by making the skin less permeable.
Also the tighter skin makes it easier to perform oral in my experience. >:-)
Naughty Karen.
Not wishing to suggest anything but if I far far far like giving blow to a circumcised guy. In fact
I'm sort of turned off by none cut guys, as they don't seem to wash themselves properly, sorry for being gross.
Cindy
Good question. I think, if I had been born with the proper parts, I'd want to be uncircumcised.
Though, after T, I have debated whether or not I'd want to be, for the sake of releasing what I do grow. It's something I figure I'll put more though into when I get there.
circumcised penis looks better :o and more friccion when ::)
>:-) >:-) >:-) >:-) >:-) >:-) >:-) >:-) >:-)
Eww no they're ugly. >.<
Quote from: ~RoadToTrista~ on August 10, 2011, 05:35:27 AM
Eww no they're ugly. >.<
I was strapped down and circumcised :'( :'( :'( :'( i agree more ugly and you cant run in certain fabrics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! never get circumcised !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D :D :D
Uncut.
Still have mine, was circ'd, would have preferred not. Per the American Cancer Society it does not cause Cervical Cancer, health concerns though are...
For Infants, Toddlers and Elderly foreskin needs to be retracted and cleaned regularly. If not, the balanta/smickma/dick-cheese, will act as a glue and fuse the foreskin to the shaft. Disastasterous on the kiddo's, and a sign of Neglect in the Elderly, extremely painful!
As to Christianity, it became a major issue in the early Church (Acts of the Apostles), and the Apostle Paul believed it was no longer relevant to believers (yes, he did circ Timothy but more for
"politik").
Interesting link to an article from Fathermag site on this, good read.
http://www.fathermag.com/health/circ/acs/ (http://www.fathermag.com/health/circ/acs/)
P.S. I'm in Healthcare, see this all the time, no one talks about it...especially in Children! A crime!
Actually still have one and the answer is....: "Nooooooooooooo, way José!"
Just saying dudes,
Axelle
I have one of them things...it is intact.
More donor material. :)
There is no reason other than being Jewish to circumcise. If it isn't a religous reason the reason is not a good one.
Quote from: Cindy James on August 10, 2011, 04:36:33 AM
Not wishing to suggest anything but if I far far far like giving blow to a circumcised guy. In fact
I'm sort of turned off by none cut guys, as they don't seem to wash themselves properly, sorry for being gross.
Cindy
Actually... I'm the same way there Cindy. Just to put in the two cents on the front... I mean in my experience most men that still have their lil bit of skin have no idea how to care for it. They just assume that a simple bath/shower cleans it or that it is spiffy after a whole day of work. When the fact is... it is far more bleck that way. So even if it is for -religious- reasons? Unless you can teach a large chunk of men to finally care for it... cut it just so they get a blow then maybe further down the road over ruining the partners desire...
So ya, two men next to each other both ready to go... only one guy would get his toes curled and it's the cut guy because I'm not playing the odds to have the mood ruined.
I was and so were all three of my boys. It was considered a required procedure at the times. But knowing what I know now, there is absolutely no reason for a non-Jewish male to be circumcised. NONE.
If you are Jewish or of that faith, it is a sign of your covenant with your God.
Quote from: SandraJane on August 10, 2011, 08:40:30 AM
Still have mine, was circ'd, would have preferred not. Per the American Cancer Society it does not cause Cervical Cancer, health concerns though are...
For Infants, Toddlers and Elderly foreskin needs to be retracted and cleaned regularly. If not, the balanta/smickma/dick-cheese, will act as a glue and fuse the foreskin to the shaft. Disastasterous on the kiddo's, and a sign of Neglect in the Elderly, extremely painful!
Um..in infants and toddlers the foreskin isn't able to retract and trying to retract it will hurt your child. Smegma actually acts as a lubricant and keeps the glans moist, not a glue.
Other things not related to my response to this post: There's a movement in Judaism against circumcision so religious reasons aren't very valid, either. For myself, I have a foreskin. I have smegma. Doesn't bother me nor anybody I hook up with.
Nygeel is right on this one.
:)
* Um..in infants and toddlers the foreskin isn't able to retract and trying to retract it will hurt your child. *
Sorry, not at all in my experience with my son. A babies skin is quite flexible and retracting the foreskin does not hurt at all. ONLY if done much, much later and was never retracted before.
I taught my wife and she knew then, and there was no issue at all.
For those folks with non-neo-vaginas actually the same applies regards the foreskin (clithood) of the clitoris.
There are plenty folks that have un-orgasmia because the head of their clit can not get exposed due to the same issue as phimosis in the male organ. It ALSO can collect smegma under the clithood, harden and causing all sorts of problems.
I think in our western culture there seems this big issue to touch a child's genitals for cleaning, and often when a child's vag or penis itches, a sign of what we are talking about. The child then may not even touch there either. Welcome to twisted morals.
My 2 cents,
Axelle
PS: If a guy doesn't know how to wash his dick, he can take a walk... and real fast at that. He most probably doesn't know how to brush his teeth either. Yeak!
I would be too happy to care.
Meaning?
personally i dont care but i wouldnt get my kids circumcised because look what happened to david reimer. if i was born male i would have been circumcised as my dad and brothers are circumcised.
Quote from: Axélle on August 10, 2011, 10:29:43 AM
* Um..in infants and toddlers the foreskin isn't able to retract and trying to retract it will hurt your child. *
Sorry, not at all in my experience with my son. A babies skin is quite flexible and retracting the foreskin does not hurt at all. ONLY if done much, much later and was never retracted before.
I taught my wife and she knew then, and there was no issue at all.
Link (http://www.nocirc.org/publish/pamphlet6.html)
Other Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forcible_retraction_of_the_foreskin)
Other Other Link (http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP-care.html)
Quote
For those folks with bio-vaginas actually the same applies regards the foreskin (clithood) of the clitoris.
There are plenty folks that have un-orgasmia because the head of their clit can not get exposed due to the same issue as phimosis in the male organ. It ALSO can collect smegma under the clithood, harden and causing all sorts of problems.
Please don't say "bio-vagina" ever again.
Quote
My 2 cents,
Axelle
PS: If a guy doesn't know how to wash his dick, he can take a walk... and real fast at that. He most probably doesn't know how to brush his teeth either. Yeak!
Just as a heads up...I would think that most or many trans guys don't know how to wash our dicks. I know I've been having trouble in figuring out how to clean myself down there. There's not enough info out there on how to take care of my bits...add to that not being too bendy and you've got a person who has physical problems preventing them from cleaning what they have.
Quote from: Nygeel on August 10, 2011, 10:05:52 AM
Um..in infants and toddlers the foreskin isn't able to retract and trying to retract it will hurt your child. Smegma actually acts as a lubricant and keeps the glans moist, not a glue.
I'm in healthcare and this is quite right. A baby's foreskin should not be forcefully retracted. Usually it will cause a lot of pain and possible scarring, interfering with retraction later in life.
I actually saw another nurse retract the foreskin of a 10-days-old baby. It was absolutely horrible to watch and I regret not speaking up, but there were 3 other nurses in the room (one of which I was absolutely terrified of--she constantly made me feel like crap) who were my seniors. The parents watched in horror and I could certainly understand why. Retraction isn't necessary to locate the urethra for catheter insertion. Nor is it needed to properly clean an infant's or young boy's penis.
On topic...I have a penis and I'm gratefully uncircumcised. I would not give circumcised were it ever offered to me.
OMG,
* Please don't say "bio-vagina" ever again. *
What's it with this now? So neo-vagina be just OK then, that will make it a non-neo-vagina?
I say... we ARE getting pretty entangled with all this PC stuff.
I shall correct it then.
Axelle
PS: never heard of pimosis due to non-retracted forskin in trans-guys after phalloplasty. Also I was talking in answer to the post that inferred preference to circumsized guys and lack of cleaning by guys with foreskin. Surely meaning non-phalloplasty penises.
Quote from: Axélle on August 10, 2011, 11:03:36 AM
OMG,
* Please don't say "bio-vagina" ever again. *
I what's it with this now? So neo-vagina be just OK then, that will make it a non-neo-vagina?
I say... we ARE getting pretty entangled with all this PC stuff.
I shall correct it then.
Axelle
:|
It's not now, it's something that always has been with me. AFAB works...'cause, ya know...you're not talking about a vagina, and having a vagina or being born with a vagina is not part of what you're discussing. Plus there are a lot of "non-vagina bearers" who are assigned female at birth and have external genitals that closely resemble a clitoris, vulva, etc.
It's not about being "PC" it's about realizing that what you're saying is offensive to people.
Please educate me some more if you will.
You are saying that the word vagina in any form or fashion is banned on the FtM thread. Like it does not, or may not exist? Is that what you're implying?
I really try to get this right.
Axelle
Quote from: Axélle on August 10, 2011, 11:26:55 AM
Please educate me some more if you will.
You are saying that the word vagina in any form or fashion is banned on the FtM thread. Like it does not, or may not exist? Is that what you're implying?
I really try to get this right.
Axelle
No, I'm not. I'm saying that for the purpose of this discussion "vagina" is completely inaccurate to use. The phrase "assigned female at birth" works a lot better in this situation and in most situations because as I had said a lot of people that you might identify as having "bio-vaginas" might not actually have that. On top of that, there's a whole lot of screwy stuff with identifying something as bio(logical) since all of us are biological...heck, I could argue that I'm biologically male because I have a mostly testosterone body and since I'm biological and testosterone is biological...
Nygeel,
OK, "assigned female at birth" genital it then is. I'll try to remember.
Maybe for your own insight, we are sharing, yes?
Neo-vagina is a completely exceptable, practically ONLY term for what is between our (MtF) legs after SRS.
To call is just vagina is as much OK for us, and nobody would really insist on the neo- bit of it.
Knowing this, and talking about an "assigned female at birth genital" is 5 words to get around the one I simply would have thought made it quite clear, - that we not talking about a neo-vagina, but the "assigned female at birth genital".
Somethings do come easier then others, eh.
Axelle
Quote from: Axélle on August 10, 2011, 11:54:17 AM
Nygeel,
OK, "assigned female at birth" genital it then is. I'll try to remember.
Maybe for your own insight, we are sharing, yes?
Neo-vagina is a completely exceptable, practically ONLY term for what is between our (MtF) legs after SRS.
To call is just vagina is as much OK for us, and nobody would really insist on the neo- bit of it.
Knowing this, and talking about an "assigned female at birth genital" is 5 words to get around the one I simply would have thought made it quite clear, - that we not talking about a neo-vagina, but the "assigned female at birth genital".
Somethings do come easier then others, eh.
Axelle
"non-neo vagina" could mean a AMAB (assigned male at birth) bits, a neo-phallus, AFAB bits...could mean a lot of things. Again, we're not discussing vaginas. We're talking about a clitoris and vulva. And with what I said before, no all people who are AFAB or have bits that are considered a clitoris have vaginas.
Ways to phrase it: genitals of somebody AFAB.
Nygeel
* "non-neo-vagina" could mean a AMAB (assigned male at birth) bits *
No it wouldn't, because then a "non-neo-anything" would then just mean the same (AMAB), which it doesn't. That is FALSE in terms of logic.
Next, and we still sharing... for some reason most everyone and his uncle uses the term vagina and meaning more likely vagina, and vulva with clitoris. Why?
I guess it just so happened, gets too long to be specific. Actually who really cares, I ask?
Also it gets real long again because we do not (MtF) only get a neo-vagina after SRS but OF COURSE also a neo-vulva and neo-clitoris. But nobody ever uses those terms at all.
And to boot we also get a neo-clitoris and NOBODY uses that term either. So?
Then there's a bio-female, genetic-female also.
That would imply that bio-female be also an insult?? Really?
Again that be a new one for me.
We mostly refer to bio-female as GG = Genetic Girl and Trans-Female as TG Trans Girl.
Both terms are perfectly fine and I never heard this to be insulting either.
And so BTW trans man... at least on our side of the "fence".
So, is Bio-female OK?
If it is I still don't quite get your issue that started this dialogue.
See what you can tell,
Axelle
PS: Why not just call all that stuff what it is and not go through all these convolutions? If I be said to have a bio-penis right now by an (FtM), I guess that be true. And I REALLY have a hard time to feel offended. But then it could be that's just me --- I don't know.
Quote from: Adio on August 10, 2011, 10:59:06 AM
I'm in healthcare and this is quite right. A baby's foreskin should not be forcefully retracted. Usually it will cause a lot of pain and possible scarring, interfering with retraction later in life.
I actually saw another nurse retract the foreskin of a 10-days-old baby. It was absolutely horrible to watch and I regret not speaking up, but there were 3 other nurses in the room (one of which I was absolutely terrified of--she constantly made me feel like crap) who were my seniors. The parents watched in horror and I could certainly understand why. Retraction isn't necessary to locate the urethra for catheter insertion. Nor is it needed to properly clean an infant's or young boy's penis.
Exactly! My first experience was my first day in the Pedi-ER, had done only Adults for the prior 3 yrs, my preceptor never mentioned any precautions, later when I was on my on, went to my Manager about because it was eating at me, and she had no clue! Never, ever been brought up before! Nobody talks about it! I suspect that some of toddlers had never had the foreskin retracted before.
You say retraction isn't needed for cath insertion? PM me.
I haven't got the spoons for this argument.
Nygeel,
* I haven't got the spoons for this argument. *
Meaning?
I'm not familiar with this expression.
An Americanism?
Sorry to sound daft,
Axelle
Quote from: Axélle on August 10, 2011, 01:02:40 PM
Nygeel,
* I haven't got the spoons for this argument. *
Meaning?
I'm not familiar with this expression.
An Americanism?
Sorry to sound daft,
Axelle
Look up spoon theory.
Quote from: Korlee on August 10, 2011, 09:26:43 AMI mean in my experience most men that still have their lil bit of skin have no idea how to care for it. They just assume that a simple bath/shower cleans it or that it is spiffy after a whole day of work. When the fact is... it is far more bleck that way. So even if it is for -religious- reasons? Unless you can teach a large chunk of men to finally care for it... cut it just so they get a blow then maybe further down the road over ruining the partners desire...
well if there was no circumcision, then we would be teaching men/boy how to care for it. Just like how we teach kids how to properly wash their hands after they use the toilet, or how to brush their teeth. I mean, we wouldn't pull their teeth out just so they don't have to worry about cleaning them properly.
And so the only reason men don't know how to clean it properly (assuming that is true) is because they are circumcised. If they weren't, they would have been taught, and it would be a no-issue.
Quote from: Axélle on August 10, 2011, 12:38:31 PM
Nygeel
* "non-neo-vagina" could mean a AMAB (assigned male at birth) bits *
No it wouldn't, because then a "non-neo-anything" would then just mean the same (AMAB), which it doesn't. That is FALSE in terms of logic.
Next, and we still sharing... for some reason most everyone and his uncle uses the term vagina and meaning more likely vagina, and vulva with clitoris. Why?
I guess it just so happened, gets too long to be specific. Actually who really cares, I ask?
Also it gets real long again because we do not (MtF) only get a neo-vagina after SRS but OF COURSE also a neo-vulva and neo-clitoris. But nobody ever uses those terms at all.
And to boot we also get a neo-clitoris and NOBODY uses that term either. So?
Then there's a bio-female, genetic-female also.
That would imply that bio-female be also an insult?? Really?
Again that be a new one for me.
We mostly refer to bio-female as GG = Genetic Girl and Trans-Female as TG Trans Girl.
Both terms are perfectly fine and I never heard this to be insulting either.
And so BTW trans man... at least on our side of the "fence".
So, is Bio-female OK?
If it is I still don't quite get your issue that started this dialogue.
See what you can tell,
Axelle
PS: Why not just call all that stuff what it is and not go through all these convolutions? If I be said to have a bio-penis right now by an (FtM), I guess that be true. And I REALLY have a hard time to feel offended. But then it could be that's just me --- I don't know.
I understand what you are trying to say but we're not talking about the vagina and most FTMs don't want to be reminded of it. Personally I don't really care but I think in this conversation it matters because it's about the clitoris. The clitoris and the shaft of the penis are made up of the same glans.
"The clitoris is formed from the same tissues that would have become the glans and upper shaft of a penis if the embryo had been exposed to "male" hormones"And many of us who are on testosterone now experience growth in it. With that, why would we want to call any part of that a vagina?
Also the term bio here will be argued too, it's phrased as cis instead. so cisgendered woman or ciswoman etc.
I actually don't remember if I was circumcised or not before my transition its now so long ago since I had my penis removed 26years ago, I don't think I was but strangely I don't have any memory of it ether way, never thought about.
But I do know my hubby is, he has no foreskin and is shape at the head like a big mushroom lol I think its better hygiene particular from my point of view as a woman's if he wants oral, he was circumcised when he was a child he tolded me.
Quote from: JohnAlex on August 10, 2011, 02:12:52 PM
well if there was no circumcision, then we would be teaching men/boy how to care for it. Just like how we teach kids how to properly wash their hands after they use the toilet, or how to brush their teeth. I mean, we wouldn't pull their teeth out just so they don't have to worry about cleaning them properly.
And so the only reason men don't know how to clean it properly (assuming that is true) is because they are circumcised. If they weren't, they would have been taught, and it would be a no-issue.
Well with how easy it is to find knowledge in this day and age there is really a lack of any good excuse not to know if they went the other route. Plus heck even my dad knew how 'n' such -I asked after my first mens locker room experience about differences.- and he came from a small town family in the middle of nowhere in Oklahoma. The knowledge on how to clean ones self is pretty basic as well for every parent -Clean every crevice on your body with soap.- and if you can't get the knowledge from that to clean under a flap of skin? Then they probably just don't care about being clean clean. Heck, I've read erotic fiction that even talked about cleaning under there for some reason.
The knowledge is wide spread and generally someone not clean just lacks a care in the first place. So still going with what I said because alot of men have proven the inability to clean there. Ya, I know and not from staring.
I have no religious reasons to be circumcised. Hell, even if I were part of a religion that had it as the norm, I'd keep my foreskin. I'm sure God doesn't care if I masturbate. After all, that whole "man in god's image" implies to me that God jerks off, too. But, not religious or even vaguely spiritual, so. XD
There's no reasons, really, so unless my doctor were to go, "OHMYGOD YOU'RE GONNA DIE OF X IF WE DON'T CUT IT." and it were serious, then I'd have no choice.
But personally, I think cut dicks look blucky, so I would keep it.
Don't FTM dicks (meto/clit enlargement) have foreskins? Can those be cut? o_0
I'd prefer to be cut. Its easier to clean.
Quote from: Silas on August 10, 2011, 08:06:36 PM
But personally, I think cut dicks look blucky, so I would keep it.
Don't FTM dicks (meto/clit enlargement) have foreskins? Can those be cut? o_0
Hmm, they probably could but I mean, after all the hell we go through just to have a body part that resembles more of a penis, why bother with more surgery? But, we all have our own preferences I guess. O.o
If I had a penis, I'd be uncut. I don't know why, I know most people prefer it uncut, but whatever.
I know I'd be uncut since my brother is as well :'P. I want my sons left uncircumcised as well when I have 'em. My boyfriend wants 'em circumcised like him XP. We will continue this battle until the day we get a kid @_@.
Quote from: Mr.Rainey on August 10, 2011, 08:43:13 PM
I'd prefer to be cut. Its easier to clean.
Yes it is...but please, everyone, let your child decide for himself
when he's old enough.
Had I been born physically male I would have been circumcised, which I know without a doubt from hearing conversations on the subject before my nephew was born.
Personally, I'd prefer to be natural for many of the reasons listed, and I suppose the way some would look at it I am now. If I ever manage to have kids (i.e. I marry and my partner wants kids, though it won't be by me) then I'd prefer to not go the circumcision route if there is a son/physical male born.
Quote from: Beth Andrea on August 10, 2011, 09:34:42 PM
Yes it is...but please, everyone, let your child decide for himself when he's old enough.
I agree fully with this. There are occasionally legitimate medical reasons for circumcision (for example, I've heard of the foreskin being too tight and requiring circumcision), but barring anything of the such I personally don't feel this is a decision that someone should make for someone else -- parent or not.
Quote from: Beth Andrea on August 10, 2011, 09:34:42 PM
Yes it is...but please, everyone, let your child decide for himself when he's old enough.
Its incredibly painful, they have to keep it really, really clean while it heals and most of all they um can't "touch" it. Show me a boy old enough to make that decision for themselves that can live with those rules (especially the last one). :)
Quote from: Beth Andrea on August 10, 2011, 09:34:42 PM
Yes it is...but please, everyone, let your child decide for himself when he's old enough.
Or herself...or hirself or themselves
;D
Also, part of my issue with circumcising young people who cannot consent is that it's done without any sort of anesthetic!
Hell Im a transgirl I HATE MY PENIS!!!!!! But I still wish I had my foreskin!
Actually you can make a good insult out of being circumcised;
You are the only person I know that had to have their face circumcised. But it only works on those that know what a circumcision is. :laugh:
I'm confused as to how personal hygiene can be ... confusing? Not a whole lot to it, just push the skin back all the way, wash, rinse, done. Not exactly brain surgery.
I'm not for circumcision actually. I've gotten into some debates about it with others with penises. Some say that it's better to be cut, that there's less that can "go wrong". Yes, you can get infections (not talking STDs here, other infections) and things can happen where your skin doesn't retract the whole way or it's too tight and that might actually cause some issues where you'd want to have some sort of corrective surgery done. I just look at it like, well, you're born with it so it serves a purpose and I think the owner of the penis should be the one to decide whether they want to deal with it or not - not their parents or some doctor.
I don't have a fully developed foreskin. It's kind of half there, but it doesn't really cause me any problems so I don't think I'd ever want to cut it off. If I ever had a son I wouldn't have him circumcised.
Quote from: insideontheoutside on August 10, 2011, 10:32:32 PM
Yes, you can get infections (not talking STDs here, other infections) and things can happen where your skin doesn't retract the whole way or it's too tight and that might actually cause some issues where you'd want to have some sort of corrective surgery done. I just look at it like, well, you're born with it so it serves a purpose and I think the owner of the penis should be the one to decide whether they want to deal with it or not - not their parents or some doctor.
This basically puts into words some of my thoughts on the matter.
I would have been circumsized, as my brothers are. I would prefer it that way too. I find it more aesthetically pleasing, and easier to keep clean. Plus I tend to be really squeamish with body parts, and pulling it back to clean would just gross me out, I'm sure. But I've heard that circumcision is way more common in the US than in other countries, so maybe I also like it better because I'm more used to it.
I would want to be uncut for the... masturbatory advantage. And because if you're
born with it, what in God's name possessed anyone to cut it off in the first place??
If you teach a kid from when he's little to wash his penis, do you really think a boy will object to that? The only reason men don't thoroughly wash up is because they never got into the habit of it. I'm against circumcision, at least on babies/children. I never would have it done, in my opinion it is just as disgusting as female circumcision. Also I don't understand why anyone in their right mind (who likes having a penis) would want to take a knife to it.
I do have a penis, it is circumsized, and I never for a minute felt like I'm "not in my right mind." Although I could be mistaken about that!
Quote from: Caseyy on August 10, 2011, 08:02:04 PM
I personally use AFAB some of the time, as well as cis as opposed to bio. But I can see why it's unfamiliar to Axelle - let's face it, first of all, we don't commonly use those terms even on trans sites. I wasn't familiar with them for ages until I heard them, and decided they were more appropriate. I use them now.
As for referring to the clitoris and such as "vagina", again, I can see why. A LOT of people tend to think of that area as a vagina. Again, it's a lack of education in society at large. A lot of ciswomen just call it all a vagina and don't know a lot about what's happening down there. And they've had them their whole life!
Whenever someone says something that is inaccurate, or perhaps offensive, we need to remember that this is a systematic issue. It isn't Axelle's fault - she has stated that she will use AFAB, but she wants to know more about why it's the more appropriate term. we can't expect people who do not have our experiences to divine what is appropriate and what isn't when the information is not a) readily available and b) easy to search for.
Wow Caseyy, THANK YOU!
it is the second time I got roughed up on the FtM thread by just trying to express myself, simply, and clearly, - as I though.
I do start to learn some of these no-nos (quite a list it seems now), but as you kindly mentioned this does not just come as "natural" knowing.
It'd have been friendlier to give one some kindly reminder of what is, and what isn't appropriate, instead of just getting whacked with: "you don't ever say that again!" heya!
In the end, we are just using some words, and surely NOT mean to be offensive! It may be some FtM community convention - yet it makes it close to impossible to actually talk about anything genital this side of the fence. It feels like walking on eggs.
At the same time most everyone FtM is jolly comfortable to go into penises, penis circumcisions and God knows what details, of male genitals?!? Now that seems then all of the sudden A-OK.
BTW I REALLY don't mind to discuss FTM stuff, and male genital issues at all..., but I do mind getting flamed when speaking on the female side of things. Hey, neo-vagina is A-OK, the bio version is not. "Assigned Female At Birth" seems vogue, yet bio- or genetic-female is not. What's wrong with these words I find hard fathom, and used on the MtF side they surely are just fine?
I took my cue from there, not to find out, what's good for the goose AIN'T good for the gander, or visa versa, if that is yet again construed by some to be offensive... eh.
Seems like some double standards to me, to talk about stuff behind foreskins, male genital hygiene, (still very much applying to MtF pre- and non-ops) and at the same time find a words like Bio, Vagina, or Female offensive?!?
Is that really fair or even sensible?
I don't think so.
Yet thanks again for your words of reason,
Axelle
Quote from: JayValentine on August 11, 2011, 05:59:52 AM
If you teach a kid from when he's little to wash his penis, do you really think a boy will object to that? The only reason men don't thoroughly wash up is because they never got into the habit of it. I'm against circumcision, at least on babies/children. I never would have it done, in my opinion it is just as disgusting as female circumcision. Also I don't understand why anyone in their right mind (who likes having a penis) would want to take a knife to it.
If you got one...keep it clean. But part of this discussion centers around the the need for it in the first place, and the lack knowledge and "myths" that still surround the circumcised from the uncircumcised (see Nygeel's earlier posts with "links").
Female circumcision, oh, oh...interestingly enough Clitoridectomy is actual a Federal Crime, and its effects are basically 180 degrees from Male circumcision.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting#Laws_and_prevalence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting#Laws_and_prevalence)
Axelle, you getting roughed up? Nah, its the other way around...get ready to RRRRumble... :laugh:
Quote from: JayValentine on August 11, 2011, 05:59:52 AM
If you teach a kid from when he's little to wash his penis, do you really think a boy will object to that? The only reason men don't thoroughly wash up is because they never got into the habit of it. I'm against circumcision, at least on babies/children. I never would have it done, in my opinion it is just as disgusting as female circumcision. Also I don't understand why anyone in their right mind (who likes having a penis) would want to take a knife to it.
That's why they do it to babies...no adult in their right mind would go to a Dr. and say, "Hey Doc, I got an idea the other day, and..."
Unless one gets a "Divine Revelation" or some other kind of infection, even the
thought of snipping there wouldn't happen.
imho
Quote from: Beth Andrea on August 11, 2011, 08:50:50 AM
Unless one gets a "Divine Revelation" or some other kind of infection...
Very interesting way of putting it! :laugh:
Quote from: SandraJane on August 11, 2011, 09:14:00 AM
Very interesting way of putting it! :laugh:
That's the only time I've heard of it being done post-infancy, for treatment of recurrent infections; but then again go back to the earlier posts about "keeping it clean"...
OK, some more RRRRumble?
There are a number of misconception about AFAB circumcisions.
One of the off-shoots - AFAB persons are now having AFAB-genitalia's clit-hood circumcision in what's also going under AFAB-genitalia-rejuvenation.
It (AFAB-genitalia-rejuvenation) has by now become the 2nd most an asked for plastic surgery after BA.
In this case, it involves the parallel to an AMAB-genitalia circumcision, i.e. the freeing of the AFAB-genitalia's clit-glans by shortening (slightly) the AFAB-genitalia's clit-hood.
I dare say, this is getting rather hard now doing some just some simple posting - may get used it, don't know.
Axelle
PS: I only mention this as it just might be of some interest to some AFAB non-op-persons with O issues.
Axelle
PS: http://www.accettalvr.com/about-the-procedure/laser-vaginal-rejevenation.aspx (http://www.accettalvr.com/about-the-procedure/laser-vaginal-rejevenation.aspx)
Quote from: Axélle on August 11, 2011, 09:45:57 AM
It (AFAB-genitalia-rejuvenation) has by now become the 2nd most asked for plastic surgery after BA.
I doubt it...or if people are asking for it then they end up not going through with it.
Source (http://health.howstuffworks.com/medicine/surgeries-procedures/20-most-common-plastic-surgeries.htm)
'Nother Source (http://www.webmd.com/healthy-beauty/features/most-popular-cosmetic-procedures)
Quote from: Axélle on August 11, 2011, 07:32:40 AM
Wow Caseyy, THANK YOU!
it is the second time I got roughed up on the FtM thread by just trying to express myself, simply, and clearly, - as I though.
I do start to learn some of these no-nos (quite a list it seems now), but as you kindly mentioned this does not just come as "natural" knowing.
It'd have been friendlier to give one some kindly reminder of what is, and what isn't appropriate, instead of just getting whacked with: "you don't ever say that again!" heya!
In the end, we are just using some words, and surely NOT mean to be offensive! It may be some FtM community convention - yet it makes it close to impossible to actually talk about anything genital this side of the fence. It feels like walking on eggs.
At the same time most everyone FtM is jolly comfortable to go into penises, penis circumcisions and God knows what details, of male genitals?!? Now that seems then all of the sudden A-OK.
BTW I REALLY don't mind to discuss FTM stuff, and male genital issues at all..., but I do mind getting flamed when speaking on the female side of things. Hey, neo-vagina is A-OK, the bio version is not. "Assigned Female At Birth" seems vogue, yet bio- or genetic-female is not. What's wrong with these words I find hard fathom, and used on the MtF side they surely are just fine?
I took my cue from there, not to find out, what's good for the goose AIN'T good for the gander, or visa versa, if that is yet again construed by some to be offensive... eh.
Seems like some double standards to me, to talk about stuff behind foreskins, male genital hygiene, (still very much applying to MtF pre- and non-ops) and at the same time find a words like Bio, Vagina, or Female offensive?!?
Is that really fair or even sensible?
I don't think so.
Yet thanks again for your words of reason,
Axelle
If I remember correctly from before, you are from Germany, yes?
i find uncircumcised penis' to be more pleasing to the eye and being with an uncircumcised man in the past, it felt more pleasurable.
I just pray one day the docs can make the guys' downstairs as perfect as the girls' procedures. I do not find it very fair that the recent decades so much concentrated on the art of sculpting a vagina versus giving as much attention to the transmen downstairs.
I heard they are improving, so that's wonderful!
I actually hear there's been a few studies involving gene therapy as opposed to hormone therapy. It's still in animal testing (specifically rats). But it's unfortunately not being looked into for trans studies... And they don't seem to have any interest in trans studies either. -sigh-
And who doesn't love the little warrior, standing at attention with his little helmet, waiting for orders to crash the gates?
Quote from: Tracey on August 11, 2011, 04:51:03 PM
And who doesn't love the little warrior, standing at attention with his little helmet, waiting for orders to crash the gates?
The same little warrior wearing a flack jacket is much stronger ;)
OK I apologise now but I really don't get why this question was posed coz as a baby - you would have had no choice! As for getting circumcised now - what man in his right mind would cut the top off his dick!?!? But FWIW I would have been cut as my brother and father are, and it was the done thing around the time I was born, so no say in it - that's the way it would have been.
If we're talking about now and lower surgery.. Phallo I've only ever seen it done as a cut version. If meta I would keep it uncut as it is - why on earth would I cut it - I want every little goddam mm I can get mate! Plus it affords some protection and it's what I'm used to.. It ain't broke, why try 'fix' it!!
As for if I was suddenly given a full size, biological and fully functional penis right now - I would honestly not give a flying-four-lettered-word if it was cut or uncut - I would have an adult sized, fully functional dick!!!
As for my son - that's a decision for my wife and I, but I would be asking what the benefits were of doing it vs not doing it. And if the not doing it column outweighed the doing it - no snip for my boy! Far as I can tell it's no longer automatically the 'done thing'.. So as you can tell I haven't done a lot of research on the issue as I feel it really doesn't apply to me so why worry. And as for personal experience with dicks, well I don't have any of that either lol! :D
j.
Annah, that's a good one! Put the warrior in a raincoat and he's truly safe!
My heritage is Jewish... so you know my answer.
Every other male in my family is circumcised. Frankly, it looks better and less risk of transmitting disease.
I'm a little shocked at how many people wouldn't. I guess 'cause of where I live and the culture I come from.
Okay, I do have a penis - but if I were born with a biological male's anatomy then yes - I would like to be uncircumcised.
I feel that unless it's medically necisary, or for religious reasons - circumcision is kind of like saying "What a gorgeous baby boy! He's perfect, except for that bit - lets cut it off!"
If I could have a full-sized working dick, I can't bring myself to imagine caring whether it was cut or not.
Wouldn't cut my kids. That's for damn sure. And if I could go back and make myself be born with a penis, I'd try to arrange for it not to be cut. But right now...I don't care.
I also don't care when it comes to my partners. My ex was uncut and had a beautiful dick; my current quasi-bf is cut and also has a beautiful dick.
To be honest, if I could have a completely realistic penis and it worked and was at least average sized, etc., I don't think I would care about if it was circumcised or not.
Although my mom hates uncircumcised penises, so I'm under the assumption that I would have been circumcised.
Quote from: J.T. on August 12, 2011, 12:31:58 AM
My heritage is Jewish... so you know my answer.
Every other male in my family is circumcised. Frankly, it looks better and less risk of transmitting disease.
I'm a little shocked at how many people wouldn't. I guess 'cause of where I live and the culture I come from.
Im from the Jewish decent too and my mom put a stop to the circumcision right after I was born. She saw my circumcision and came to the conclusion it was barbaric (for her). She is a doctor and she never found any proof positive evidence that a circumcised penis is healthier. The name of the game is "wash your penis and you don't have to worry about it whether or not you are circumcise or uncircumcised."
I like the look of cut penises, but I would be happy to have it either way. I do think that circumcision is a weird thing to do, though.
I'm weirded out as to why people cut their kids because THEY think it looks better.
I get a weirdly sexual vibe from that.
I think it's weird when women say that they would get their kid cut because the father is. I can't see a reason why that would matter.
Quote from: Tracey on August 11, 2011, 09:17:40 PM
Annah, that's a good one! Put the warrior in a raincoat and he's truly safe!
But not happy! :laugh:
I probably would be uncut. I don't mind either but I think a penis with a foreskin is much more interesting to play with. :P
Quote from: sneasel on August 13, 2011, 12:37:30 AM
I probably would be uncut. I don't mind either but I think a penis with a foreskin is much more interesting to play with. :P
Not to mention it has 70% more pleasure, toilet.
What no one so far seems to have mentioned ---- when an uncut member is fully (and I mean FULLY) erect it may differ VERY little from a cut one i.e. glans is all exposed and just a little extra skin, not so noticeable, behind the glans.
Now ask me what the big deal with THIS is, being more, or less pretty, or aesthetic (if that's the right word?)
In many cases it "extends" 3x (or in some more) the flaccid size, plus some added girth.
Axelle
PS: From a girl's point of view this be no issue to me... um.
Quote from: xxJuliaxx on August 13, 2011, 12:44:50 AM
Not to mention it has 70% more pleasure, toilet.
Toilet?
If I had the proper parts I wouldn't want my junk touched with. I want to be uncut. Circumcision does absolutely nothing, it's all done out of fricken religion! Preventing STDs? Bull->-bleeped-<-! The prevention is through safe sex! Religion is invading everything from the courts to medical, and it's not right.
If I had a son no fricken butcher will ever lay a hand on his junk! If they do I'd kill them!
circumcision is an act of sexual battery assault.
Matthew,
your sure don't pull punches dude - but I kind of agree with what you say.
As mentioned earlier though, it is done (my best guess) to >90% of AMAB babies, and they have no say in the matter at all.
I only know a cousin of mine that had "elective" circumcision, and that was due to some chronic medical issues.
He was quite old already and in this case one aught have of course no issues.
Axelle
I might of came off a little strong, Axelle, but still. I am so sick of seeing this kind of practice being used as a medical improvements. It is simply fraudulent, and another way for the doctors to collect money.
Having a circumcision done should be a choice of the person who is getting it done. It should not be an involuntary procedure. If a baby boy cannot fill out a consent form then the procedure should not happen at all.
Quote from: Matthew J. F on August 13, 2011, 04:15:31 PM
Having a circumcision done should be a choice of the person who is getting it done. It should not be an involuntary procedure. If a baby boy cannot fill out a consent form then the procedure should not happen at all.
Its not that I disagree, but if parents couldn't consent for their child's surgery imagine all of the problems that would entail. Granted circumcision is an elective procedure, but I guess you have to take the good with the bad. For that matter, despite the fact that parents can/do consent for their children to have surgery, you can probably count all of the post-op trans men/women who had their surgery(s) before 18 on one hand. So a parent can consent for their child to be circumcised regardless of what the child may want, but no surgeon will allow a parent to sign consent for a genital surgery their child actually wants. Interesting....
So no cutting the umbilical cord until the baby can sign a form? We'll all have outies for sure! LOL
What if the kid is MTF or ends up like David Reimer? >.>
Quote from: Matthew J. F on August 13, 2011, 03:18:04 AM
Preventing STDs? Bull->-bleeped-<-! The prevention is through safe sex!
How's that suppose to work exactly? lol
Ok, i'm gonna come in here and ask a random question since I'm not totally sure on it.
For us ftm's, say we get bottom surgery (meta), is it uncut naturally from that, or like inbetween, or what? Only asking because since there's the factor of it being there from surgery, i don't know how it'd would come out naturally, if that makes any sense.
American girls have a high icck factor to uncut.
Quote from: tekla on August 13, 2011, 08:28:24 PM
American girls have a high icck factor to uncut.
it's very different to them. SO MANY guys are/were cut here. it's definitely something out of the ordinary when you come across someone uncircumsized.
I would be uncut, definitely. I really don't see a need for circumcising babies. Let them choose for themselves when they're older. I argued against it with my sister and mom when my nephews were born. I would never get it done to my own kids if I had any.
I would definitely want to be uncircumcised. But given that my brother is likely circumcised (I never asked :| ) if I had been born with one it would have been cut which may or may not have upset me.
Given the choice though, I wouldn't want that part of me removed barring some sort of medical issue that couldn't be solved any other way. I think that uncircumcised looks much better aesthetically. My SO is uncircumcised and neither of us have ever had any issues with the foreskin (I love it).
Quote from: Kvall on August 14, 2011, 01:50:49 AM
Circumcision is falling rapidly out of favor in many parts of the US, actually. Last I heard, it was about 50-50 recently, though varying some by area/demographic.
yeah, but i'm not walking around at infant babies' penises, am i? the new "trend" of non-circumcision won't be observed by the general adult public for almost two decades except perhaps with their own children.
Circumcised, absolutely. I think it looks far better, and there's far less potential for infections, etc. I assume my little brother is circumcised, though it's the last thing I want to ask him about. Considering my girlfriend's stories about how disgusting her ex's uncircumcised penis was, though, I'd definitely opt for circumcision.
Quote from: J.T. on August 12, 2011, 12:31:58 AM
My heritage is Jewish... so you know my answer.
Every other male in my family is circumcised. Frankly, it looks better and less risk of transmitting disease.
I'm a little shocked at how many people wouldn't. I guess 'cause of where I live and the culture I come from.
My heritage isn't Jewish, but my parents are odd Christians who would have insisted upon it. However, even if I
hadn't been circumcised, this would still me my answer as it's part of the conversion process. I would also have my children circumcised. I see no reason to change what's been occurring for thousands of years.
I'm so vehemently against infant circumcision that I would actually be extremely pissed off if I had been circumcised as an infant.
I come from a country where it's not considered the norm. Most doctors will refused to do it even.
It's a purely cosmetic procedure which removes large amounts of nerve endings and causes the glans, which is an internal organ, to become external, dry out, and sometimes even be irreparably damaged (on top of the irreparable damage of removing upwards to half the skin off of the penis area.)
It doesn't "make" the penis cleaner, it makes the penis drier and damages it.
It doesn't "protect" you from infection, it dries out and hardens the skin of the glans, which means that things are perhaps not absorbed as easily through that skin. (In fact, marketing it as a way to "reduce infection" is dangerous and has been proven to actually decrease condom usage, which in turn increased the risk of STDs and such infections.)
It's not "safe", children die every year because they bleed to death, slowly, into their super absorbant diapers, from a surgical procedure which causes extreme pain, often enough to cause the infant to go into a state of shock.
It's brutal, unnecessary, and it's marketing contains more misinformation than anything else.
BUT! if you, as a consenting adult, CHOOSE to have it done, then that's Your Choice!
What I object, more than anything, is forcing that irreversible choice on an infant.
... Yes, I rant...
Actually, there's another thing about the popularity of circumcision that affects me directly as a trans man.
Having looked at all the surgical options for bottom surgery, I've noticed that they all appear to create the circumcised look.
This is part of why I've opted to "not" have bottom surgery.
I mean, I've looked at the "step by step" explanation of how they do the meta and there's a couple steps in there that seem designed Specifically to create the circumcised look.
There's no other logical explanation for what they do in these steps that I can think of. (I may be wrong, I'm not a plastic surgeon.)
Ugh...
If I get my penis surgically adjusted so it looks more like a proper penis, then I'd like it to look like an all natural, un-cut, penis.... even if it's effing tiny.
As far as I know, in the West it's largely a North American practice. Circumcision isn't widely practiced in Europe, and as far as I know there aren't any large STD/infection outbreaks in Europe compared with North America. The original reason for circumcision in biblical times beyond the religious mumbo jumbo was because a circumcised penis was easier to keep clean in that particular climate. Today we have showers and people generally wash themselves every day/every second day...there's no need for widespread circumcision practices beyond rare/individual medical circumstances.
Personally, I would prefer not to be circumcised.
My bits are uncut but I'm honestly not completely sure if I would want to be cut or uncut. Being gay and my partner preferring cut it would be nicer for him if I was cut plus going based off of current sensitivity it could help me by having a little less sensitivity down there. I could last longer that way. I know that its seen by many as a form of mutilation but being one to alter my body anyway (piercings and such) Its probably just one more thing I would alter.
I would definately be uncut. I find uncut to be more aesthetically pleasing. If I ever had kids they would be uncut. I will be going for an uncut look if I get a metoidioplasty. I may hate what I have right now but I'm thankful I never had to endure female circimcusion so in a sense I'm already uncut. ;D
As a convert to Judaism, if I hadn't been as a baby I would have had to have had (wow-- what tense is that) it done as an adult before I could convert. But when my cousin had to have his circumcised in his early 20s because of continual infections, my mom talked about it in a way that makes me think she definitely would have had it done to me as a baby.
Cut > Uncut
For sure.
uncut for sure, I like the natural look all the way. I am with Malachite on go for uncut look when I get a metoidioplasty.
I don't know what my parent might have been if would have had one at birth. I have two brother one is cut and one is not. I don't know how they decided in there cases.
Cut seems fine to me, but a dick's a dick no matter the status of foreskin to me. I'd be happy to have something that functioned the way I'd like it to, you know?
Cut all the way!
If men were not supposed to have foreskin,
Then through years of evolution, it would stop growing.
with that in mind, if the entire human race gets circumcised,
Eventually, humans might not have foreskin,
But still...I think it should be there. Even if it does look like a sausage-sweater.
If I woke up tomorrow morning with a set of 100% "up to code" man parts between my legs, there's absolutely no way I'd go and have 50% of the skin of the penis and about 200,000 specialized nerve endings removed just to have the glans stick out all the time, dry up, and get keratinized.
BLEEP NO!
I'd keep it natural.
No circumcision for me TYVM!
Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Never!
And to bloody hell with all these female beauty arguments. After all, are we suggesting to cut short all labia minora just for LOOKS?! A bit of 'overhang' is just plain cute, um.
As always... YMMV
Michélle
PS: I would not mind a bit of 'overhang' for myself (vulva), so let these penises have their bit of 'overhang' too, I say.
I think i would want to be uncut, although I think cut penis' look more attractive, I would think that un cut ones retain more feeling and sensitivity
and what I have is "uncut" in a way, so i am kinda used to it.
I'd want to be uncut, but my older male relatives (not siblings) are all cut, so I assume had I been born male, I'd have been cut too :o
i would want to be circumcised just because every guy in my family is but i wouldnt have my kids circumcised.
Well, if I had a penis,
I wouldn't have a choice,
But I suppose that I would prefer uncut.
They say that foreskin gives more sensation,
So why the hell cut it off, right?
Circumcised. It looks more attractive.
Not circumcised. To cut up a baby's genitalia is warped, and anyone who says circumcised is 'cleaner' clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.
I would definitely prefer to be uncut. The foreskin is the CAMAB equivalent of a clitoris, would you like that cut off?! :o
Quote from: Stealthy on April 07, 2012, 07:42:30 PM
I would definitely prefer to be uncut. The foreskin is the CAMAB equivalent of a clitoris, would you like that cut off?! :o
Heck no! ;D
Mmmm, penis.
Quote from: Felix on April 07, 2012, 09:28:09 PM
Mmmm, penis.
LOL *makes my way onto the "What made you laugh today" thread*
Yes please! :icon_chainsaw:
Speaking of which a few hours ago I told my mom, "Thank you for keeping having me be uncircumcised as some females overseas and in other places circumcise their females." I tried to get into a long discussion about what parts they cut off and she got mad at me and told me to stop talking about it lol.
I like to tell family members that I'm proudly uncircumcised
Quote from: Malachite on April 07, 2012, 09:31:12 PM
LOL *makes my way onto the "What made you laugh today" thread*
Oh lolyay. I put up socially awkward penguin because I didn't know what you were talking about. :D
I have one, it's un-molested, but I Want the damned thing gone cut. All of it along with it's baggage. -_-
My son however, was circumcised.
Well at first I would want it to be uncircumcised so I could see how it feels, and if I wanted less feeling but have it easier to clean and stuff, then I'd get it circumcised subsequently.
Quote from: Bradd on April 08, 2012, 02:03:45 AM
Well at first I would want it to be uncircumcised so I could see how it feels, and if I wanted less feeling but have it easier to clean and stuff, then I'd get it circumcised subsequently.
I had a roommate who got circumcised while he was renting from me. It was kind of traumatic for him. And kind of funny. We had fun talking about it. :laugh:
Definately NO.
I mean if you have or had a vagina would you want it circumcised...?
Quote from: Axélle-Michélle on April 11, 2012, 04:41:16 AM
Definately NO.
I mean if you have or had a vagina would you want it circumcised...?
Definately NO! The more down there the better it would help me for SRS. :)
Quote from: Sub-Zero on April 07, 2012, 06:34:33 PM
Not circumcised. To cut up a baby's genitalia is warped, and anyone who says circumcised is 'cleaner' clearly doesn't know what they are talking about.
I'm someone who knows exactly what they're talking about when it comes to circ'd being cleaner. It is. No way around it. I have never experienced an uncut guy who had a cleaner piece than a cut guy. Prime example: I dated someone years ago, and he had the nastiest build up of what can only be described as 'stinky d!ck cheese'. And that was par the course for him. It didn't matter how often he washed that thing, it was the never ending, ever present, nasty goop of doom. Try and get a BJ with
that. The sexual side of that relationship very quickly disappeared, as it did for
all his relationships. I don't think it matters how much more sensitivity you have if you never get to use it. Not only that, but guys who have a touch less sensitivity
last longer. I do not want to be the three minute man every chick jokes about. So yes, for me, cut it please. My husband is cut, and his sex life has always been pretty fantastic (according to him), so I think I'd be fine.
Quote from: Biscuit_Stix on April 11, 2012, 08:19:35 PM
I'm someone who knows exactly what they're talking about when it comes to circ'd being cleaner. It is. No way around it. I have never experienced an uncut guy who had a cleaner piece than a cut guy. Prime example: I dated someone years ago, and he had the nastiest build up of what can only be described as 'stinky d!ck cheese'. And that was par the course for him. It didn't matter how often he washed that thing, it was the never ending, ever present, nasty goop of doom. Try and get a BJ with that. The sexual side of that relationship very quickly disappeared, as it did for all his relationships. I don't think it matters how much more sensitivity you have if you never get to use it. Not only that, but guys who have a touch less sensitivity last longer. I do not want to be the three minute man every chick jokes about. So yes, for me, cut it please. My husband is cut, and his sex life has always been pretty fantastic (according to him), so I think I'd be fine.
I think cut is only "cleaner" for those who are lazy. If most of those "clean & cut" guys were uncut they'd probably be too lazy to wash their dicks properly.
Quote from: Andy8715 on April 13, 2012, 01:37:47 AM
I think cut is only "cleaner" for those who are lazy. If most of those "clean & cut" guys were uncut they'd probably be too lazy to wash their dicks properly.
If you want to just look at the math of it there are less diseases among cut guys than uncut. I'm not saying that makes genital surgery on non-consenting infants necessarily ethical. It is an evidence-based assertion though to say that cut is cleaner. Clean is clean but may not be the most important detail.
So yeah, I am guessing cut is cleaner.
I'm uncut, and I have to clean all the time.
It doesn't take long at all, it's simple too.
Like soap up your hand, pull that skin back and then yank it a couple times.
Then rinse, I mean, I like my foreskin. o.o
None of the guys I have ever been with seemed to have had a problem going down on me either.
Besides, it can be really fun to play with. lol
Quote from: Biscuit_Stix on April 11, 2012, 08:19:35 PM
I'm someone who knows exactly what they're talking about when it comes to circ'd being cleaner. It is. No way around it. I have never experienced an uncut guy who had a cleaner piece than a cut guy. Prime example: I dated someone years ago, and he had the nastiest build up of what can only be described as 'stinky d!ck cheese'. And that was par the course for him. It didn't matter how often he washed that thing, it was the never ending, ever present, nasty goop of doom. Try and get a BJ with that. The sexual side of that relationship very quickly disappeared, as it did for all his relationships. I don't think it matters how much more sensitivity you have if you never get to use it. Not only that, but guys who have a touch less sensitivity last longer. I do not want to be the three minute man every chick jokes about. So yes, for me, cut it please. My husband is cut, and his sex life has always been pretty fantastic (according to him), so I think I'd be fine.
I suppose by 'stinky d!ck cheese' you are actually talking about smegma, unless the guy had some kind of bacterial infection that needed looking at. If you actually read about what smegma was you'd learn that is scientifically beneficial to the human body, which is why both males and females produce it, from helping to clean the genitals, yes you heard right, to aiding in lubrication and keeping the glans smooth and moist like they should be. Those are facts. I don't see how anyone would think otherwise.
And the penis is an amazing organ, from urination, sensation, to ejaculation and new life, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't made to taste good in the mouth bro, you can't really complain about that.
I'd go uncut. I dig the 'natural' state.
Quote from: Sub-Zero on April 13, 2012, 04:00:08 PM
I'm pretty sure it wasn't made to taste good in the mouth bro
This made me giggle. ;D
I don't even get the logic behind ->-bleeped-<-s. I mean, for the person giving one, I don't see how it'd be enjoyable...and the receiver would get saliva all over hir dick o_o
Also, people with vaginas make more smegma than people with penii.
Quote from: Stealthy on April 14, 2012, 12:08:16 AM
I don't even get the logic behind ->-bleeped-<-s. I mean, for the person giving one, I don't see how it'd be enjoyable...and the receiver would get saliva all over hir dick o_o
Also, people with vaginas make more smegma than people with penii.
I love giving ->-bleeped-<-s. It's an acquired taste. For most of my lovers I refused to do it because I didn't like it. Now I enjoy the warmth and smell and all the little ridges and imperfections.
"... little ridges and imperfections" ah so :)
Now was the "with"... or "without" then?
Or "...it's just the same..." ?
I'm not really into mutilated, just my "thing"... hum. Nahhhhhhhhh
Axélle
This reminds me that I have seen pictures of uncut guys who look like they have all foreskin and no base. It just looks like folds of skin on top of folds of skin. In that particular case I would rather be cut.
If I was born with a penis my parents wouldn't have circumcised me, and I probably would have no interest in having it done now.
However since my STP is circumcised, that's how I envision my penis usually.
Quote from: Malachite on April 14, 2012, 02:17:34 PM
This reminds me that I have seen pictures of uncut guys who look like they have all foreskin and no base. It just looks like folds of skin on top of folds of skin. In that particular case I would rather be cut.
Lmao, thank you.
Cut, all the way.
Babies with bleeding penises?
->-bleeped-<- yeah.