That was the most pathetic... fuck, I don't even know what that was, I've ever read!!!
Dude, take your fucking blinkers off and have a look at the world again. Stop forming opinions while you're looking. You're not qualified to do so.
Excuse me, but the drivel that you wrote above is simply so wrong in so many ways! How can you possibly admit not once, but TWICE, that the "scientific" information that you produce has NO SOURCE!!??
The Bible never, ever mentions Pharo as commanding the circumcision! Although about the only thing you got right is that the Ten Commandments do not mention circumcision, it is mentioned more than once in the Bible.
Stupidly, you mention that Pharo had the slaves circumcised to make them more docile? The Bible has the story of the "circumcised" David bringing back TWO HUNDRED Philistine fourskins (from those he killed) as the bride price for King Sauls daughter!
Penis suction as a limiting factor in pregnancy?? Are you so simple minded as to believe that!? Please, please move this to the humor section, it has a better chance of a more positive review there!
I am circumcised and because the nerve ends at the end of the penis are constantly exposed, the circumcised male is less sensitive and can thus actually "perform" for longer. Although his partner is denied the sensation of a foreskin going backwards and forwards, actual intercourse often lasts for a lot longer.
Warning: Politically incorrect statement.
As for your theory of docility, aren't all Muslim males circumcised?
Were you born stupid or did you have to work at it?
Stick to collecting stamps, you are far too stupid to write
The largest problem with this essay is that it is almost entirely anecdotal. Percentages of occurrences are presented, but at the same time, you admit no scientific studies on the point. Although what you say is certainly plausible, that element does not make it factual.
[old joke: Did you know that 83.4% of all statistics are spontaneously fabricated?]
It is plausible that human life could be sustained on Saturn, but we have no proof that it can.
Do your positions sound reasonable? Yes, mostly. Do they have empirical evidence? No, not really.
I don't know about the accuracy of any of your statements, but I do know this: I PREFER a circumcised penis. I love the way the head shows, the way it feels inside me. I love that it is CLEAN and not surrounded by smegma. The circumcised men I have fucked have left me sexually satisfied and full of semen. I have two babies proving their virility.
So to all of you cut cocks out there, keep on fuckin'!!!
WTF are u babling about .. Are you high??
We Chinese seldom cut their foreskins for whatever reasons,we can last long in our sex. A lady claims that a penis without foreskin is clean and healthy, I donot think so. God has given you that skin, there must be reason for it, so do not cut it off as you please, would you get rid of your nipples, gentlemen, because they have not produced milk as women do?
enjoy reading your work, my email is firstname.lastname@example.org,hope to hear from you.
The Jewish Torah and the Muslim Qu'ran are both health guides as well as religious works. As well as sensible advice on food through Kosher and Halal techniques to avoid food poisoning,both insist on circumcision of boys for health reasons.
Phimosis and paraphimosis are foreskin problems, often caused by inadequate hygiene where smegma collects under the foreskin and causes infection. Circumcision prevents this and removal of a flap of skin cannot have any psychological effects. Also, Ketty is right. A circumcised man generally lasts longer before orgasm than an uncircumcised one as his crown is less sensitive
As a happily and proudly circumcised guy .. I think this writer is way off base in many of his conclusions. One of the main arguments of the "anti-circ crowd" is that circumcision REMOVES sensitive tissue ... thereby causing the circ'd male to go through life with a less sensitive glans penis. Personally, I've always been okay with that .. as beleive me my circumcised cock gives me PLENTY of pleasure .. and I've had women comment [favorably] that I seem able to "stay in the saddle" for a long time ... which pleases them! I do believe that the penis head of a guy circumcised early in his life tends to flair more than that of his uncut counterpart ... and I did once read an article that stated the flaring coronal ridge [of a circumcised guy's penis] was instrumental in helping to suction out any OTHER guy's sperm that might be present in a woman's cavity .... so that the guy [with the flaring, circumcised cock-head] would have a better chance of "winning the prize" [fertilizing his woman].
Personally I have intimately known some women who prefer uncircumcised men and some that don't. I am circumcised. My own perspective is that it is typically a decision that is made without the individuals input and consent usually for religious reasons. It is for all intense and purposes a mutilation or modification of the body, purportedly for good reasons.
Now in my parents defense this was NOT done for religious reasons but a justifiable medical one. My eldest brother contracted an infection at age four, probably a result of not cleaning properly and that resulted in his being circumcised. A very painful experience for him according to my mother. Accordingly my other brother and I were circumcised at birth.
However, whilst male circumcision usually does not result in the inability to enjoy sex or significantly reduce the ability to have an orgasm, as female circumcision does, there is an impact. Sensitivity may be one (how the hell would I know)and penile bulk during intercourse is another (according to one study). From what women who like uncircumcised penises tell me is that they like to play with the foreskin when caressing a man's penis.
Am I less because of being circumcised, I guess but I don't really know and are not likely to ever be able to tell. At least if I had it and wanted to choose to get rid of it knowing all its benefits that would be a personal choice.
It is quite possible that circumcision began as a sort of cattle brand that set certain men apart. In ancient Egypt, it distinguished the pagan priesthood apart. I believe that the Jews circumcised so that if a Jewish woman was in bed with a man, and discovered play in his penis skin during foreplay, she then knew for sure that her partner was not a Jew. I think this helped the Jews survive as a distinct community in Europe over the past 2000 years.
I grew up among circumcised Americans, and can assure you that circumcised boys are quite capable of bullying, aggression, and all forms of contact sports. How men behave is very much a function of social and economic class, and circumcision becomes more common in North America, as you ascend the social scale. Hence the correlation you claim between male civility and circumcision is spurious. In Europe, Moslem immigrants post-WWII are at the bottom of the social scale. They are also circumcised. Scandinavian police forces report that most convicted rapists in their countries are circumcised.
The USA has been running a natural experiment. In most American states since 1970 or so, where there are large black populations, the taxpayer picks up the tab for the circumcision of baby boys whose mothers can't afford it. Have crime rates among young black men declined in those states, as their circumcision rates have risen?
I agree that in the USA, the fraction of incarcerated men who have foreskins is higher than in the general population. But the reason is that poverty is a major predictor of the tendency to commit felonies and the lack of circumcision.
In a world where there is no medical knowledge, and no soap and running water, it is conceivable that circumcision improved sexual and urological health on average. But it has become utterly pointless in a world where men shower daily and adults have good access to condoms. Note that Maimonides conceded that the natural penis makes for more thrilling intercourse. But holy men in the past would not have seen that as a good thing, but as increasing fornication and adultery, both seen as grave sins.
"When I was a young man... half of my friends were circumcised. ...the natural boys, were more aggressive, more fool hearty, quick to do a double dog dare. In school they got into trouble more often then my circumcised friends."
Because in the English speaking world, having foreskin has been strongly correlated with relative deprivation. Deprived boys tend to behave more badly.
"In this country, women out number men, something like two and a half to one."
Wrong. In the western societies, 52% of the population is female.
"At birth, we start out with an equal number of boys to girls..."
Wrong. 53 boy babies are born for every 50 girl babies. By age 20, the sexes are equal. By age 40, women clearly outnumber men.
"If we reduce the number of circumcisions performed in this country, will the death rate of this age group increase accordingly?"
Trouble is, the tendency to circumcise is deeply sociological, as is the tendency to engage in reckless behaviour. The only solution is totally unethical; to circumcise stratified random samples of baby boys and follow them lifelong. Such an experiment would last nearly an entire century, and would be enormously expensive. New Zealand is doing something similar with all babies born in Dunedin in 1972 and 73. About 40% were circumcised. In this population, circumcision has been found to have no effect on the tendency to catch STDs.
"When I first saw a natural penis, I thought the boy was primitive and I was modern, after all; I cut my hair, shaved my face, clipped my nails and had shed my foreskin."
Anglo-Saxon and Jewish triumphalism.
"By not having a foreskin; my sexual pleasure is enhanced but it may be short lived..."
What circumcision cuts off is very rich in specialised nerves that contribute to pleasure. Before age 40, the foreskin may be surplus to requirements. But after age 40 or 50, the glans becomes dull and the foreskin and frenulum become the primary loci of sexual pleasure.
"...the growth of the glans of a circumcised penis is not restricted by the foreskin so the head grows larger..."
Unproved, and even if true, so what?
"The large round head of a circumcised penis has a greater area of sensitivity, giving the man far more pleasure than his natural counter part..."
The circumcised glans gradually loses sensitivity over the life cycle, simply because of constant contact with underwear.
"A natural man with that extra layer of skin, can last much longer during intercourse thus giving the woman multiple orgasms."
Some women claim this. I remain agnostic. More important is that intact men often thrill women more, so that they climax more easily. It is possible that time to ejaculation is roughly the same for both sorts of men, but that women climax more times when the man is intact. I believe that the solution to a lot of sexual incompatability issues is to find ways for women to climax more quickly.
"I know that my own wife prefers uncircumcised men but things are what they are."
I doubt a woman married to a circumcised man would reveal that to him!
Am I a cuckold because I am circumcised? I don't think so but in comparing married women, I would say, in my opinion, that women who are married to natural men are more likely to remain faithful, however; they are more likely to be abused.
ME. A feminist horror!!
Fidelity is also profoundly sociological. If you compare North America and Latin America, it would seem that circumcision makes it easier for men to remain faithful. But that is not true if you compare North American and northern Europe or Japan.
I have read that some Roman intellectuals were attracted to Judaism, with its scriptures and Talmudic traditions. But almost no Roman converted to Judaism, because of the requirement of circumcision. I believe that circumcision was maintained as a deliberate barrier to male conversion.
In those days, what women thought and did, did not matter much. The Jews did not want conversion, because they saw themselves as a hereditary caste, as the descendants of Abraham.
Islam spread by the sword, and Islamic warriors were all circumcised. In south Asia, circumcision is seen as making men more violent. Bhuddists are the gentlest Asians, and they are intact.
Thank you all for your informative comments. I stand corrected. Let the comments stand as corrections or additions to the essay. Thank you again for taking the time.
I never thought i would get so interested in this topic and spent the last half hour reading this and the long comments. Strangely a very interesting topic and something to think about.
Your wrong about circumcise cock being more sensitive. Im partially circumcised with extra skin in the frenulum area. this is by far the most sensitive skin on my body and gives me pleasure. I wouldn't have it removed for the world. Also the foreskin acts as a roller bearing during intercourse providing pleasure for the man and his partner.
Click here to leave your own comment on this submission!
orBack to Circumcise Me 2
orMore submissions by CuckoldGuy.
Edit comment orSubmit Comment
Comment posted successfully - click here to view it or write another.
Title of your comment:
Your public comment about Circumcise Me 2:
Please type in the security codeYou may also listen to a recording of the characters.
Title your feedback:
Your feedback to CuckoldGuy:
If you would like a response, enter your email address in this box:
Feedback sent successfully - click here to write another.
Login or Sign Up
All contents © Copyright 1998-2012. Literotica is a trademark. No part may be reproduced in any form without explicit written permission.
Terms Of Services|Report A Problem|Privacy
Password:Forgot your password?
Your current user avatar, all sizes:
You have a new user avatar waiting for moderation.
Select new user avatar:
Upload and save
User avatar uploaded successfuly and waiting for moderation.