Facts & Fictions About Cut & Uncut Cocks

[blackbeltninja]

Some uncut guys are claiming that the loss of the frenulum makes the cut cock less sensitive. All I can tell you is the underside of my glans penis on my cut cock is extremely sensitive although I lack a frenulum.

Mine too. It's a bit of a sweet spot, if you like.

What is a partial circumcision? A mock turtle neck?

I've wondered this too. When they get you done do your folks ask for a short back and sides, but long on top?

-d-

 

[theFallenGod]

I've wondered this too. When they get you done do your folks ask for a short back and sides, but long on top?

-d-

Its skin not a mullet.....

its not like I had a choice... My parents wanted my cut... so the hospital did the best they could at the time....

when I'm soft there is a lot of extra skin hanging around the head....sometimes depending on the underwear I'm wearing it will actually look uncut.... however when I'm hard its a little noticable....

As a matter of fact ...because of it... when a guy goes to start jerking me off I have to tell them to start at the base and work up.... otherwise it hurts too much when they pull down on it.

 

[Caution]

Uncuts are ugly and sometimes unclean.

 

[blackbeltninja]

Its skin not a mullet.....

Exactly. I'd assume the options were leave it all on or take it all off. Taking half off seems like a waste of time, effort, and, given the nature of anaesthetic if it used in precedures like this in newborns, dangerous.

its not like I had a choice... My parents wanted my cut... so the hospital did the best they could at the time....

It is a fairly simple procedure. I had mine done before yours according to our ages, in a small hospital in a small rural town out in the middle of the 3rd world while there was a civil war on, and it was a high-and-tight done flawlessly.

I honestly don't see the point of leaving any of it behind, especially when the parents have specifically asked for it to be taken off for either hygienic or cosmetic reasons. Am I alone in this, or am I missing the point of the half-and-half?

-d-

 

[theFallenGod]

Yeah...it wasn't done Half & half by choice.... where I got mine done they used small bell shaped objects placed over the head of the penis to pull the foreskin back to cut around and off.... unfortunately.... the bells that they had to choose from weren't big enuff to completely go around the head of my penis... so when the procedure was done it was done with what they could do given the materials at hand.... no one expected me to have a larger than average penis.....

 

[PorthAnnwn]

Exactly. I'd assume the options were leave it all on or take it all off. Taking half off seems like a waste of time, effort, and, given the nature of anaesthetic if it used in precedures like this in newborns, dangerous.

Newborns don't get anaesthetic for circumcision.

I honestly don't see the point of leaving any of it behind, especially when the parents have specifically asked for it to be taken off for either hygienic or cosmetic reasons.

Hospitals just do it as a routine in America. My parents weren't even asked if they wanted me circumcised.

And there really isn't a point, to a half-and-half or a full circumcision. Only recently is anyone talking about hygiene. The really reason we instituted routine infant circumcision in America is because it was believed it helped prevent masturbation.

 

[beekman001]

Newborns don't get anaesthetic for circumcision.



Hospitals just do it as a routine in America. My parents weren't even asked if they wanted me circumcised.

And there really isn't a point, to a half-and-half or a full circumcision. Only recently is anyone talking about hygiene. The really reason we instituted routine infant circumcision in America is because it was believed it helped prevent masturbation.

And the reason it's still done is because it's a quick, elective, relatively safe, surgical procedure which doctors can sell new parents on w/o a lot of fuss. Being an elective procedure, it often isn't covered by insurance meaning the hospital doesn't have to simply take what the insurance company gives them. A circumcision is almost pure profit, for very little work.

 

[blackbeltninja]

^I seem to recall an article in Men's Health, unusually badly written and clearly very objective from the pro-uncut supporters' side, that they often don't use anaesthetic for a circumcision in newborns. As I said, though, it was so biased and badly put together that I cannot believe MH actually published the article. I'm no journalist, but the bias was so blatant... I wouldn't be surprised if some of the data was...er... shall we say "exaggerated" to get their point across.

Mine was also "elective" from my parents' side. The hygiene concern is an old one, but apart from one guy I know who had to be done at 21 following a nasty infection of some sort - and his current nickname, Knobrot, was born - every other uncut guy I know seems to manage just fine with soap and water. In this day and age it shouldn't be an issue, I suspect.

In your case, FallenGod, must be an oddly encouraging thought that you were too big for the circumcision machine, huh? Almost like flipping the bird at medical science. "Take that, ya bastards!" in sort-of-but-not-really kind of way.

-d-

 

[blackbeltninja]

^Yeah, I think they meant no general anaesthetic is used. I recall the particularly grim photos from the article - close-ups of the procedure and a fairly unhappy newborn baby bawling its lungs out, but that could be from the disturbance, or the cold of the room or anything.

I can't imagine there'd be too many complications from a local anaesthetic, though.

-d-

 

[RRRalph]

I am not a fan of uncut. They turn me off. Guess my crush on RRRalph is over.

how can you be so mean and so superficial - i'll cry myself to sleep.

 

[arco]

Yes, there's alot of biased anti-circumcision literature out there which has no medical basis. Why all of the anti-circumcision literature? Because the majority of men worldwide are uncircumcized. When in doubt, always refer to a legitimate medical source. Lidocaine is the most common anaesthetic used in neonatal circumcisions. This article clearly states this if you read further down past the nerve block information. Perhaps in some specific cases, an anaesthetic is contraindicated.


http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/453637_4

I've been a medical researcher for many years WB, and I wish I could confirm that medical research was relatively free of bias but it isn't, and the literature (especially the American medical literature) on this topic is one of the best illustrations of that. It's all over the map.

 

[blackbeltninja]

This is only an issue for Americans. The only reason why this is even being debated is because this is an American board. This wouldn't be discussed if this were a board not centered in the U.S.

Circumcision: barbaric mutilation and biased abuse of boy children. Yes, biased, because American doctors can lose their medical licenses and even get sent to jail if they even touch an infant girl's genitals, but won't suffer any sanction for ripping off the prepuce of an infant boy with a sharp scalpel. And please don't come with the tired old argument that female circumcision is worse than the male version, because:

- It still doesen't change the fact that male circumcision is unnecessary and extremely painful.

- Actually more tissue is removed during male circumcision than in the female version, including tissue that is directly related to sexual pleasure, such as the inner lining of the prepuce and the frenulum. The male version also removes erogenous tissue just like the female one.

- That girls are protected even from excision of the clitoral prepuce. In other words, the excision of the clitoral hood and vaginal labia, which is the equivalent of male circumcision, is ALSO forbidden by law to be done to girls.

Only a boy-hating society, like the U.S, sanctions this horrific, barbaric mutilation - all the other societies that practice this are Fifth World Isamic shitholes. But then, what can be expected from a country where a five year-old boy can get sued for sexual harassment for kissing a girl on the cheek?

TheHandsomeAsshole

Ooh... not sure you're right there, guy.

If male circumcision was like female circumcision, they'd lop the head of your knob off, and take all the skin off your shaft. Cutting off the clitoris and labia is so far beyond merely trimming off a bit of excess skin from a penis.

You don't think girls have it worse? Those of us who are cut - and I am one, incidentally currently not living in a 5th world Islamic shithole, as you so eloquently put it - can still enjoy a bit of 1 on 1 with our fiddly bits. A girl who has been circumcised would get almost no pleasure at all, the way I understand it. We cut guys, though, can quite easily get it up and get off, and don't need anyone to come at us with a knife beforehand to have a bit of sex with anyone. You can read about it objectively at Wikipedia, if you like - there are even drawings of the procedure.

Perhaps the circumcision of boys is painful. I've had it done, and I don't remember - sorry. I do remember catching my hand in a gate when I was 2, though - that hurt a lot - and almost slicing off my thumb when I was 5 playing with the moving fanbelt on a generator, man, I screamed the Pari (the big university hospital in Harare) down when they tried to stitch it up, and had no fewer than 3 doctors and 4 nurses and my mother holding me down while they did. But I don't remember the circumcision so it can't have been all that bad, and since my bits and pieces all work fine all the time and I enjoy them immensely, I don't resent my parents for having it done to me. Plus, in my opinion, I prefer the look of it.

I'm not sure I would consider restoration, either, in case anyone was wondering. Would I have my own kids snipped? That I'm not sure - I'd probably let them decide for themselves, I suppose. But I'm not about to spew vitriol at anyone who has had their kids done.

-d-

 

[RRRalph]

Would I have my own kids snipped? I'm not sure - I'd probably let them decide for themselves.

Why would you circumsized your kids, besides for tradition sake?

 

[blackbeltninja]

Why would you circumsized your kids, besides for tradition sake?

A good question - hence the indecision. I think I'll leave it to them to decide.

Dude, thank you for saving me the trouble of quelling this guy's maniacal crusade against circumcision. Male genital mutilation? My ass! I wish someone would mutilate his tongue.

It's the pedantic scientist in me - correcting people I think are wrong.

Wrong I tell you, wrong! Fools! I'll destroy them all!

Et cetera

-d-

 

[bluedragon4]

how can you be so mean and so superficial - i'll cry myself to sleep.

okay, come on over I'll give it another try. What really makes me sad is you only date woman and fuck men. If I can give uncut a chance can't you try to date a guy? we will both suffer through.

 

[arco]

I’ve seen a lot of discussion about foreskins and sex, masturbation, aesthetics, and morbidity.

Nobody has focused on the feeling of ordinary activity.

The thing about a foreskin is that it’s a moveable part. And one thing about dicks is that they move around all the time too, with the actions of everyday life like walking or even sitting. They move with changes in outside temperature or a person’s mood. Throughout a day of ordinary activity dicks are always filling out a little, getting hard, shrinking. They’re just always moving. Being male is being conscious of the movement of cock and balls at some level several times during the day. And when you’ve got a foreskin there’s just a little more action there, just because it's a moveable part with a rich nerve supply. Any uncut guy knows the fine silky feeling, even of micromovement, of the inside surface of a foreskin as it slips over his dickhead and ridge, and the kind of harmonic feeling of being aware of the inner surface, outer surface, and glans when there's a little pressure from clothes, etc.

All the other feelings that come with totin around a cock and set of balls are magnificent, either cut (so I'm told) or uncut (as I can verify), but I think that one reason for keeping a foreskin is that it feels so fucking lovely, on.

In terms of preference – when I think about it (which is rarely) I’m glad I have a foreskin. But the main point is that I’m thankful there are so many different points of view. There is such a beautiful variety of bodies, cocks, faces, voices, and personalities in the world that whether or not you’re circumcised seems like a relatively minor thing.

 

[RRRalph]

I’m thankful there are so many different points of view. There is such a beautiful variety of bodies, cocks, faces, voices, and personalities in the world.

Nicely said!

 

[wankharder]

Uncut in my opinion.. it seems alto more sensitive

 

[arco]

Also I'd like to know which nation(s) has published more medical literature on the subject of male circumcision than the U.S. To my knowledge, the U.S. conducts more research and publishes more medical literature than any nation on earth in general. Also the U.S. is believed by most to have the best medical training, greatest number of reknowned researchers, and top research facilities in the world. It's undeniable that the U.S. is at the forefront of medical research.

The American Medical Association (AMA) does not recommend routine neonatal circumcisions. The "controversy" involves the right of parents to decide whether to circumcize their children or not. However, the AMA has approved the parental right to determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss their decision. According to the AMA, the medical benefits suggested to accrue for circumcision are 1) Reduced incidence of urinary tract infection 2) Reduced incidence of penile cancer 3) Reduced susceptibility to certain sexually transmissible diseases, including Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV).

First of all, I'm an American but I've lived and worked in several other countries so I'm not about to downplay the US's contribution to medical research, but I don't think it makes much sense to think in nationalistic terms because the companies and capital that support research are international and the people who are doing it come from all over the planet. It's an international enterprise. There are different patterns of publication and biases in different countries. Some might argue that in terms of prestige, UK science journals trump all the rest of us but that's arbitrary and -- who cares man?

In most of the world routine circumcision isn't a very compelling medical question. At one time it was in the UK and the Commonwealth, but not now. In the US it has been a sometimes contentious issue and that seems to have inspired publication. (Patterns of academic promotion drive the volume of peer-reviewed publications by the way, not necessarily the intrinsic importance As far as I know, no nation's pediatric specialist organization or medical association recommends routine male circumcision. In terms of public health measures, the downside has always outweighed the benefits.

 

[RRRalph]

When i watched this 'fratmen jack off race', i notice that the 3 guys were wanking their rather soft cock.
I haven't seen uncuts with such difficulties to get hard.

Question Are these guys representative for guys with cut cocks: is it more difficult for cuts to get hard?