1. NEW TRADE POLICIES COMING TO FORCE SOON: IMPORTANT READ!: READ HERE

circumcision yes, no, maybe?

Discussion in 'Debates' started by Searlefm, Aug 8, 2014.

?

yes or no

  1. yes, aesthetic

    9.8%
  2. yes, health reasons

    19.7%
  3. no, aesthetic

    37.7%
  4. no, health reasons

    44.3%
  5. maybe?

    27.9%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Caracal

    Caracal Warm-blooded Cat Furniture

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2014
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    218
  2. Xephose

    Xephose My neck cracks really loud

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2015
    Messages:
    509
    Likes Received:
    506
    Ah, the old circumcision debate. Glad to see that things are being kept civil. I've got some information on it that I don't believe has been mentioned here thus far, for those interested.

    So, the loss of sensitivity/feeling. Lots of people mention it, not as many really know where the loss is. In reality, the loss is actually due to two reasons, and varies from person to person due to biological make-up. It can never truly be accurately stated to be a percentage of lost pleasure for example, but we can say in general how many nerve endings are lost with the foreskin. The reason this can't be calculated into a percentage is because while they are similar, the nerve endings in the glans and the foreskin do differ somewhat in structure and in the perceived intensity of stimulation.

    So, that's the first reason, the nerves in the foreskin are lost. The second reason that some stimuli is lost is because the glans is then exposed at all times. The exposure gradually reduces the perceived intensity of nerve response due to constant stimuli, just like how you get used to certain things and start to notice them less over time. Again, due to biological make-up, this can affect a person greatly or very little. Typically one can also expect a circumcised person's glans to be a little drier naturally, and lacking in the normal bacterial flora that would be present inside the foreskin. Sometimes circumcised individuals also produce significantly less natural lubrication. A person I was with briefly could barely produce any at all for example.

    So, that's the sensitivity factor out of the way, now hygiene. By and large, the notion that circumcision is more hygenic is false. That's already been addressed here, so I'll not linger on it. However, it does *slightly* increase the risk of catching an STD/STI from a person who has one, if you're having unprotected sex. The solution, obviously, is to rubber up and make sure you and your partner are tested regularly.

    Oh, and this may be off topic, but I saw it addressed earlier so I figured I would mention. The most risky form of sex in terms of HIV transmission is anal sex. Specifically, receiving anal sex, because their genetic material is just sort of sitting up there until you *ahem* expel it. Anal giving is the second most risky if I remember correctly. Vaginally receiving and giving fellatio are roughly the same amount of risk, oral on a vagina is fairly low risk, vaginal giving is very low risk. Lastly, giving someone oral sex cannot actually give the receiver HIV, unless the person giving oral is bleeding from the mouth.

    Now then, back on track. I'll end on a more positive note for you gents who do not have a foreskin, but feel like you want one. There's actually several procedures of foreskin restoration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreskin_restoration) out there. Results vary, but it's certainly an option worth looking at if you feel like it's something you really want.
     
    Exeter likes this.
  3. KoolgeeBrom

    KoolgeeBrom Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2020
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    6
    I'm circumcised. I only learned of the term "dick cheese" and "smegma" in 2016 from a meme about eating hot dogs with dick cheese on the side.
    Circumcision is evidently cleaner(or easier to clean,so cleaner overall) than those who have foreskin.
    Therefore... unless it's your fetish, Circumcision good.
     
  4. Komorov

    Komorov Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm guessing you're being facetious?
     
  5. KoolgeeBrom

    KoolgeeBrom Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2020
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    6
    I mean unlike female circumcision(invented specifically to prevent pleasure from vaginal intercourse) male circumcision, when not under medical malpractice, makes the dick easier to clean.
    The fetish part was a joke but really if someone wants to keep their foreskin, it's fine.
     
  6. Komorov

    Komorov Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2016
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    3
    I can agree with all that, but would just add that male circumcision, even when the procedure is done as perfectly as possible with little/no scar tissue, there will still be a reduction in sensation and pleasure. (its due to how the glans skin works and deals with hydration). But youre right that its an unfair comparison to FGM.

    I personally prefer uncircumcised due to health/sensation reasons, but if you are properly informed adult and you decide the increase in cleanliness and/or the look, its medically recommended due to a condition, or whatever other valid reason makes getting a circumcision worth it, then go for it!
     
  7. Fletch

    Fletch The dude abides

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2019
    Messages:
    295
    Likes Received:
    108
    I see it as purely optional in most situations. I asked my mom why i wasn't, only to find out i was. So... They botched it? Maybe it grew back? Either way i turtle-head when soft. But why do ppl have such strong opinions over this?
     
  8. KoolgeeBrom

    KoolgeeBrom Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2020
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    6
    As far as I know the origins of people being "anti circumcision" started when the western world learned of FGM(Female genital mutilation
    Western societies are often prone to softening language. as a result, "Female genital mutilation" a quite shocking and self-explanatory term, turned into "female circumcision" which sounds like... "male circumcision". With around half of the men in the western world being circumcised, this turned what in reality is a horrible action into "oh it's just circumcision, GET OVER IT" for a lot of people.
    So this evolved into "all circumcision is bad" once the public realized that "female circumcision" is just a set of softened words to explain the real(and possibly deadly) reality that women in third-world countries face.

    As a result, a movement was made to stop circumcision as a whole in the western world. Whether that's good or not, I can't say. There's evidence for both supporting and being against circumcision. Some reasons are religious while others are scientific or sexual.

    Personally, I'd say that circumcision is better than non-circumcision overall due to the health reasons involved. There's no need to put a bad reputation out for people who aren't circumcised though.
     

Share This Page