Circumcised or natural...which do you like?

[ClaraWho]

I actually would, not the clit hood (tho I wouldn't care if it was gone too), but the inner labia. Mine are really long and disgusting and I'd love to get them trimmed... but it's really expensive :(

We've argued at length about this on other threads, let's not retread old ground and go off topic.

Regardless of the unethical nature of any surgeon willing to perform that procedure for you, only the clit hood is a comparable equivalent. It protects the sensitive gland, just as the foreskin is meant to on a man.

I cannot take you seriously if you say you 'wouldn't mind it gone too', that is masochistic.

~ Clara

[LITTLEANGEL19]

As my clit hood can be seen between my lips but don't really stick out, I could not do without my clit hood to protect my clit tip from rubbing on pants and swimsuits.

[NCronter99]

I've had both, and it honestly doesn't matter to me.

[LITTLEANGEL19]

But circumcised boys do? It seems to me like it'd just dry out and be fine just like a cut boy's penis does. I dunno, but it doesn't seem like the clit hood matters to me.

The clit tip has around 8000 sensory nerve endings, where as the penis head has only around 4000 sensory nerve endings. And while the clitoris is quite small, its powerful sensations can spread across a woman's pelvic area by affecting 15,000 other nerve endings.

[kryptonite]

But here's the thing though...if someone wants to do something to their own body, I think most people wouldn't have an issue with that. The key phrase being "their own body."

[ClaraWho]

So guys don't feel as much? Cause the penis head is a lot bigger than the clit so that's a HUGE difference...

Look up FGM and research a penis.

But here's the thing though...if someone wants to do something to their own body, I think most people wouldn't have an issue with that. The key phrase being "their own body."

But don't we have a societal duty to protect the vulnerable from poor decisions to this extreme?

The matter of discussion here is the age. Religious doctrine states it must be carried out far younger than one is capable of an adult, life-long decision.

~ Clara

[ClaraWho]

NO ONE is talking FGM. That's just brutal and horrible. I can't imagine life without my clit to be honest :( sooo sad.

And cosmetic surgery is regularly approved, and yes even for non-consenting kids. If your kids have ears that stick out, you get that fixed when they're little because it turns out better - and that's purely cosmetic surgery. Circumcision of males has real (though minor) health benefits, in addition to being better looking/feeling/smelling etc. I'm still really iffy about doing it to babies tho, since even if it's a lot better, there's no pressing need to do it before they can say no, really. But childhood is a whole lot better than as an adult, eep doing it once they get erections!

The whole issue is really complicated, and not as simple as it appears... I was like you TOTALLY opposed to doing it as a baby at least. There's the reality that parents sometimes have to make the best choices for their children, though.

Given that like most extreme claims, what you present is utterly disputed conjecture, I really don't see any point in carrying on this discussion. If evidence and simple reasoning are unable to change your mind, nothing will.

Your claims of health benefits, of which even in your answer you swing from being 'minor' to 'a lot better', you are unable to substantiate in any way.

Your claims regarding the feel, smell and look of a penis that is uncircumcised being worse, is both imaginary and insulting. For a start, they both look identical when erect, and isn't that the only time that matters to you? Cleanliness is personal hygiene, as is smell, which is irrelevant to the discussion.

This really isn't a complex issue, less is not more.

~ Clara

[ClaraWho]

I wasn't experienced when I said it didn't matter, once you've experienced a circumcised one... the difference is amazing.

BUT the actual health difference, it really depends. This debate has made me read more and be more educated. Here in Britain, most HIV cases are among gay men - which circumcision doesn't prevent. It reduces heterosexual transmission, and that's huge - but not for Britain. So the health benefits here are fairly minor. However, the cleanliness, look, hygiene and feel benefits are all definitely there. But we'll never agree on that, so let's just agree it's not an issue we can. I'm iffy on doing it to babies still, but American boys are with no issues. I don't think I'd do it here, just cause it's rare and wouldn't want them to feel different. I'd offer it to them at like, 12 or something though.

How can you even be bothered to copy and paste the same response each time without actually reading mine? I was trying not to replying to what smells of something that lives under a bridge, but your claims are ridiculous.

You don't know what experience I have with either. And I disagree that it makes ANY difference, that it is all in your head.

Well I'd keep reading and educating yourself.

1) Most HIV cases in the UK are NOT found in gay men. This was a homophobic myth flung around, but when we look at the actual proportion of declared gay men, the numbers simply get trumped by the amount of heterosexual men and women.

2) Do please share links to this ground breaking research that proves;

a) How having a foreskin increases HIV transmission (from an accredited website not a religious one promotiong circumcision, I want facts and numbers).
b) Why this revelation of having no foreskin doesn't work for gay men.
c) Why it subsequently doesn't work with British born males (is it the weather here?).

3) 'However, the cleanliness, look, hygiene and feel benefits are all definitely there. But we'll never agree on that'.

- We'll never agree on that because you cannot posit a response to anything I said about them, other than 'It's true because I say it is'. Nobody sensible is just going to take your word for it and believe you when your claims are baseless.

For a start 'cleanliness' and 'hygiene' are the exact same thing, and if you wash something, it is clean - if you don't it is not. You're being insulting. Entirely down to personal care and nothing to do with circumcision.

Look is the same when erect, oh heck, I'm repeating myself too much, just bother reading my original reply.

~ Clara

[kryptonite]

NO ONE is talking FGM. That's just brutal and horrible. I can't imagine life without my clit to be honest :( sooo sad.

And cosmetic surgery is regularly approved, and yes even for non-consenting kids. If your kids have ears that stick out, you get that fixed when they're little because it turns out better - and that's purely cosmetic surgery. Circumcision of males has real (though minor) health benefits, in addition to being better looking/feeling/smelling etc. I'm still really iffy about doing it to babies tho, since even if it's a lot better, there's no pressing need to do it before they can say no, really. But childhood is a whole lot better than as an adult, eep doing it once they get erections!

The whole issue is really complicated, and not as simple as it appears... I was like you TOTALLY opposed to doing it as a baby at least. There's the reality that parents sometimes have to make the best choices for their children, though.

That's a personal opinion. The "better smelling" only occurs if they don't know how to wash it. Someone taught you how to wash your ladybits, right? Well, the same thing applies to boys...if they get taught how to clean it, there's no smell to worry about.

Some people will make the argument that "boys don't take the time to wash down there." If girls can be taught how to, surely boys can too.

IMO, each "to do it" reason has been made void. Some people say if he isn't, he'll be made fun of in the locker room...well, no one looks down there and if you do, you don't open your mouth. Others say it's cleaner...if you wash it properly, no need to get anything removed as it's just as clean. Other people say that they should do it because his dad is...well, most people find the thought of comparing with their parents gross.

[heresjohnny]

.....

[kryptonite]

I haven't read this thread in a while...anyone else want to comment?

[tulolita2015]

I still love natural in all aspects. ;-)

[Doro15]

Circumcised looks better but actually I do not care.

[kryptonite]

Why do you say you actually do not care if you think it looks better? I think too many of us are too politically correct to say what we really think and that inside, more of us really do much prefer cut if we have experienced it.

That's not me saying BABIES should be cut - that's a whole different debate. Just that, once they reach the age of sexual stuff, it's much better if they are. They could choose to have this done as teenagers, but the option needs to be made available.

Which, incidentally, the CDC recommends that uncircumcised teenage boys be offered the CHOICE to get circumcised if they want: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/circumcision-guidelines-target-teenagers/?_r=0

I'm a big fan of this, as there's no concerns about consent and everyone gets to choose what is best for them, but guys are still getting circumcised :D



And the doctors haven't heard of condoms? Condoms do a much better job of preventing disease than cutting off healthy skin.
http://www.intactamerica.org/dangerousmistake

And if the girl doesn't want to have a relation with someone who isn't circumcised because "eww foreskin gross" as your post implies, well, that's not his fault.

It's not necessarily what he has, but how he uses it. If someone is 7" and a virgin, is he necessarily better than a 4" experienced person?

[kryptonite]

Absolutely, that's why I really think offering circumcision to all teens makes a lot more sense than infant circumcision. If they want it, they can have it, and if they don't, they don't have to. No force or decision made for them. Consent and choice for everyone.

And, for us who prefer it, it can work out okay! Almost all boys in South Korea are cut, but as teens. They all chose. And that makes it even better because consent is sexy!

Yeah, it didn't really become a thing until the 1940s and became very popular when the US military went over.

If they want to choose, that is their preference, as long as they want it and aren't coerced or bullied into it. (A lot of people might feel teased if their friends are and they aren't...that isn't right.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision#South_Korea

[Heidi_luv14]

I guess cut... does it matter?

[federica]

You like your penises to have foreskin or be bare? Religious reasons or other? If you don't care, weigh in as well.

For those of you that have had both, do you have a pref or do you honestly not care?

i saw only my penis brother that is normal and i like it very much

[Anita_111]

In my country guys dont get circumcised so i never had one, but i would love to try one to see is there any difference. :)

[Doro15]

Once you try it you won't want to go back!!! I used to think it was unneccessary and cruel to do to babies but now I'm totally in favour of it and wish it was normal here in Europe like it is in America! It's ssosooooooo much nicer!

Which, incidentally, the CDC recommends that uncircumcised teenage boys be offered the CHOICE to get circumcised if they want: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/1...eenagers/?_r=0

I'm a big fan of this, as there's no concerns about consent and everyone gets to choose what is best for them, but guys are still getting circumcised

you are not more a big fan from http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/1...eenagers/?_r=0 :what:

[Anita_111]

Once you try it you won't want to go back!!! I used to think it was unneccessary and cruel to do to babies but now I'm totally in favour of it and wish it was normal here in Europe like it is in America! It's ssosooooooo much nicer!


What is the main difference? Why is sooo much nicer?

[Anita_111]

I don't want to run up against telling stories, but mostly it feels nicer... and not in the hand. It's just really smooth and clean feeling and more intense... it's fantastic!


Oh ok :) I hope i'll soon have a chance to try one.

[Doro15]

Oh ok :) I hope i'll soon have a chance to try one.

take your quiet time.

[flowerchild]

ive only been with circumcised, seems more common in US

[kryptonite]

People *should* be given the choice to determine what happens with their own bodies. When erect, they all look the same anyway.

By circumcising, it seems like we're saying, "I don't trust my son to pull his skin back in the shower, so we're gonna cut it off" -- yet we don't say that same thing about girls...yet, stuff can still be trapped in a female's folds.

[Britboo14]

I've only ummmm... Experienced circumcised

[deepthroat_tacos]

As long as they are nice and big, either is fine

[Cristina15]

You like your penises to have foreskin or be bare? Religious reasons or other? If you don't care, weigh in as well.

For those of you that have had both, do you have a pref or do you honestly not care?

i don't have a lot of experience, but I prefer natural

[lizziebeth]

While I would admit that circumcised is much better to look at, it really doesn't matter at all.

[nittbritt]

circumcised is all I've ever seen

[Cangirl]

I just like the look of circumsized more than uncircumsized. But its more about the person it's attached to ;)

[LITTLEANGEL19]

Totally I mean, tbh, I wouldn't know if they were cut or not until I'd already decided I wanted to sleep with them. And no penis is nearly as attractive as a pussy :D so they can't win that anyway, they better have the personality :D (tbh, I can't see settling down with a guy... I like girls more... but guys are fun!)

I agree totally with what you say about GIRLS :yes: XX

[Lauri]

Uncut it is all i have ever seen, i cant compare

[blooky]

I agree with everyone above lol
I prefer circumcised because it looks better but I'm more attracted to pussy over cock anyway ;)

[litte_beautiful]

I had sex with uncircumcised guys . I have never seen an circumcised dick

[angela1540]

naturai

[Haciryne]

I would prefer circumcised. For me it has better looking and seems clean.

[saxmatic16]

I would prefer circumcised. For me it has better looking and seems clean.

Yea I agree

[shy_indian_chick]

i've only seen circumcised penises irl, but from what i've seen in porn, i wouldn't be opposed to an uncircumcised one.

[tiff1996]

I prefer uncircumcised. There's a lot more to play with.

[JennyBean]

Uncut I really enjoy it. Plus it is so much fun to play with.

[Alex1s]

Uncut I really enjoy it. Plus it is so much fun to play with.

I like the look of circumcised better when it's still soft but I think they're equally hot to look at when they're hard. I prefer uncut though because really fun to play with. I've also found that it's easier to give a BJ to an uncut guy because I can make them cum faster :D

[kryptonite]

I like the look of circumcised better when it's still soft but I think they're equally hot to look at when they're hard. I prefer uncut though because really fun to play with. I've also found that it's easier to give a BJ to an uncut guy because I can make them cum faster :D

Equal when hard...yup, there is no difference there.
And the BJ bit makes sense, considering all the nerve endings.