Circumcision, +or- ?

O.K, I'll ask.
Is it good or bad? I've read scientific opinions, which seem to slightly favor not to circumcise, But I trust the opinions of the teeming millions.
Citing cleanliness is ridiculous (soap & water work just fine), but what about sensitivity? It makes sense to me that constant contact with clothing would reduce sensitivity somewhat.
Also, what do women think (of male circumcision)? Do most have a preference?
There are many issues around this topic, so what do you open-minded geniuses think?
Also state whether you (or your s.o.) are or aren't circumcised, and if this has an impact on your opinion.
I'm not. Still got my tonsils, too. Wierd
Peace,
mangeorge


------------------
"If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything" Mark Twain 1894

Cleanliness may not be an issue, but it becomes one where laziness abounds. To wit: Most guys I know who aren't cut don't seem to care much about keeping it clean, and it's noticeable (don't ask me how). I don't see the big deal, myself. I don't feel as though I was mutilated or violated at all. Never having had it, I don't really miss it. I'm cut, and I'm PLENTY sensitive.

I just wish they had consulted me first, dammit. I'll always wonder if I'm missing anything, sensitivity or otherwise.
As for appearance, I'm always reminded of what Elaine said on Seinfeld - "It looks like an ALIEN.

Yeah, sensitivity seems to be the rrreally big issue here. I suspect you'll hear cut men say it doesn't make any difference, and uncut men say that it does.
I know that when my foreskin is pulled back, the head is very touchy. I can't imagine having it rub against my jeans all day.
As for cleanliness, there are plenty of gentle ways to tell a lover "yuck, go wash that thing".
I wouldn't hesitate (and haven't) to tell a woman if she "offends". Not exactly in those words, of course. A mutual washdown can be fun.
Peace,
mangeorge

It seems like a cruel thing to do to a kid. Oh well, at least we don't give 'em neck rings or those stupid lip plates.

The evidence I've seen indicates a slight (very slight) advantage for circumcision. Penile cancer, while extremely rare in either case, is more prevalent in uncircumcized males. Course it's a difference between one in a million vs. one in a million and a half (statistics made up, but you get the idea). Anecdotal evidence from men who were circumsized later in life (usually due to religious conversion) indicates no loss of sensitivity. For a "cut and dry" issue, this one sure spurs a lot of debate .

------------------
The overwhelming majority of people have more than the average (mean) number of legs. -- E. Grebenik

Purely anecdotal evidence ahead:

When my son was born 13 years ago, we worried over the circ./ no circ. issue. Finally, we decided to have him cut -- largely on my (uncircumcised) father's recommendation. Turns out Dad has had various problems with his jones over the years and had been told by urologists that circumcision would solve them. Dad declined the proposed circumcision for years, but his problems started escalating with age. Apparently his sausage was tender and prone to tearing -- often it was so fragile he had to refrain from sex. Dad waited until he retired last year to have the surgery -- the doc had told him to expect an excruciatingly painful experience and a lengthy (4-6 week) recovery period and Dad didn't want to file a disability claim for 6 weeks off for willy-surgery. Anyway, he had the surgery last year and it was both successful (in that it cured his problems) and much easier than advertised. He never even needed any of the pain meds the doc prescribed -- extra-strength Tylenol did the trick -- he was pretty much healed within 10 days and was back in the saddle (sexually) within a month. He says he wishes he'd had it done 30 years ago when it was first recommended.

------------------
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity

No offense, but true stories:

Funniest story a woman told me was when she was talking to another woman friend and she said, 'uncircumcized men are so ugly.' To which her friend said, 'hush, my husband is not circumcized!'

Another woman told me that the first time she saw an uncircumcised penis she thought it was so weird that she put on her clothes and left. American women, sheesh.

My friend Eric, got circumcized when he was 25 years old! Whoa. But I guess you'd have to find someone who was not and then was to compare notes on how it feels and how it keeps clean.

I didn't have Greg circumcised because when i was in the hospital, thinking about it, I heard the screams of poor little babies who were being circumcised (I know that's what they were...the nurse told me so). I couldn't stand the thought of him suffering like that and I figured I'd just teach him proper hygiene, anyway.
Why don't they anesthetize beforehand, anyway?

------------------
MaryAnn
Sometimes life is so great you just gotta muss up your hair and quack like a duck!

When my son was born, we had it done mainly for the issue of cleanliness. Of course, this is after my grandfather had gone through some nasty times with his uncut penis later in life. I was and like anyone else cut as a child, can't say I miss it cause I don't know what it's like to have it. On the other hand, I'd think women might be all for anything to decrease the trigger reflex in the male sex organ

------------------
"I guess it is possible for one person to make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn't."

Jeez man I cannot support that. I heard the kids getting it done and it freaked me. I will let my kid go uncirc and let him choose it later if he wants it

Mangeorge, Just an opinion here: I worked in a hospital when I was in the military and any man that came in uncircumcises invariably was not very clean-don't ask me why. I'm sure you are though, if this is your situation. Anyway, there you go: just an observation.

Jess, your post had me rolling! Nice use of euphemisms!

------------------
Carpe Diem! or at least seize something!

Regarding the sensitivity/condom issue, safe sex demonstrations suggest using a little lubricant inside the condom at the tip (not along the entire length, as it might slip off in action). This is recommended because a lot of people use the "it doesn't feel as good with a condom" excuse for not wearing one, and put themselves at risk in the process. This is supposed to create additional mild friction, and to me seems about as close as you can come (har!) to having foreskin. I've never tried it, myself, because as I already said, I'm cut and already plenty sensitive. One of you less sensitive guys give it a try and let us know how it feels.

Reuters Health (3/1/1999): "Existing medical data does not support the routine circumcision of male newborns, concludes a Policy Statement released by experts at the American Academy of Pediatrics"

I have a friend who had VERY strong opinions on this - even went so far as to look into foreskin-replacement surgery (he was circumcised.)

His main problem was that he felt that there was a loss of sensitivity for circumcised men that was especially noticable when using a condom. He has a bunch of friends from Europe who were uncircumcised, and they told him that they never had any problems shall we say... "finishing" when using a condom. He, on the other hand, used to win bets as to how long it would take him to "finish" while using a condom. He never could.

Apparantly, the logic goes that a foreskin provides a certain amount of lubrication and friction, and the sensitive part of the penis rubs against the foreskin while having sex, rather than against say, a condom. Thus, the condom was a non-issue. The uncircumcised men never even felt it.

I have no idea as to the accuracy of the above theory. I'm just repeating what my friend told me. I maintain that the reason he could never achieve satisfaction while using a condom was that he wanked off too much to begin with, and if he gave himself a rest he'd be able to finish just fine. Come to think of it, he didn't protest too much when I told him that....

Thank you for your replies, teeming dozen.
I guess I'm not yet ready to bring out the ole hedge clippers quite yet.
I was hoping for more responses from women about their feelings about circumcised men, as lovers. Mostly curiosity at my age.
I've never had any real comments, plus or minus, but women are kind to our egos. I think cleanliness would be the issue here.
Peace,
mangeorge

------------------
"If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything" Mark Twain 1894

Aparantly getting the snip makes the Old Chap look bigger.

------------------
It only hurts when I laugh.

"Aparantly getting the snip makes the Old Chap look bigger."
---Moonshine
-----------------------------------------
Never heard that before.
Where do I sign up???
Peace,
mangeorge

Is circumcised. Does not regret what he lost since he has a reasonably fulfilling sex life.

Read a story in the Economist a few weeks ago (cannot cite it) in which they said that circumcised men have a significantly lower probability of picking up the HIV virus than uncircumcised men do. That seems to be a good argument in favor of circumcision.

Hmm, my hubby is not circumsized, and my most significant ex-boyfriend was. Doesn't make much difference to me one way or the other.

-Melin

------------------
I'm a woman phenomenally
Phenomenal woman
That's me
(Maya Angelou)

That's what you get for reading the Economist. Try reading Moonshine instead.
Peace,
mangeorge
ps- this post is just an excuse to try out my new sig.

------------------
Work like you don't need the money.....
Love like you've never been hurt.....
Dance like nobody's watching! Source???

When it's soft, it's butt-stinkin'-ugly.

Which - circ or uncirc? My answer would have to be BOTH.

"The female body is a work of art. The male body is utilitarian. It's for gettin' around. It's like a jeep."

INMO it doesn't make much of a difference. My current is not, and no complaints.
Much more important than a little bit of skin is concentrating on some technique!

------------------
Cave Canem. Beware the Dog.

All things being equal, I prefer cut to uncut. Although when performing oral sex on an uncut man, the extra foreskin does provide a little added something to play with.

"Although when performing oral sex on an uncut man, the extra foreskin does provide a little added something to play with."
---MONTY2
--------------------------------------
Cancel my appointment, doctor.
Peace,
mangeorge

------------------
Work like you don't need the money.....
Love like you've never been hurt.....
Dance like nobody's watching! Source???

I've known three men that have had circumcisions as adults, and their reports back up Doctor Jackson's anecdotal evidence that there is no noticeable reduction in "sensation" as a result.

As for your question, mangeorge, I'll bet you're wondering: Why did these men choose to undergo this unpleasant procedure as adults? The most important reason was the same for all three: aesthetics.

Speaking for myself, I find uncut penises to be extremely ugly, as did the partners or spouses of these three men. The fact that I'm cut is probably biasing my opinions on the matter, yet I think it would be fair to say that since the majority of American men are cut -- from which it follows that the majority of women are familiar with cut men -- the overall national "aesthetical bias" is clearly in favor of circumcision.

But if you're uncut, don't let the fact that you're a little "different" interfere with your self-esteem or your sex life! There's no need to "hide your lamp under a bushel", so to speak. Just make certain that you keep yourself clean and be forewarned that your partner might have a bit of a hangup about it. If you're still not comfortable, I'd seriously look into getting a "trim".

Finally, I think Lawrence makes an excellent and important point. I too have read of studies confirming that uncircumcised men are at a significantly greater risk of contracting or at least transmitting HIV. I would think that this alone would strongly tip the scales in favor of routine infant circumcision as a matter of public health.

I'm Jewish. If I had a son, I would have him circumcised by a mohel, and a full bris milah service.

I have attended several brises, and since I was a candy striper who spent a year on Maternity, I have also seen a couple of hospital circumcisions.

The last two brises I was at, the baby didn't even cry-- as for the anesthesia question, he is given a little wine-- very little, but with a baby, it doesn't take much. Also, mohels do many more circumcisions than ob/gyns, so I assume they probably do them quicker and better.

At every bris I've been to, the baby is picked up immediately, and often given to the mother to nurse; also, he's held by another human being during the actual cutting.

In the hospital-- geez, I'll never forget this one time-- the doctor snipped the baby right in his bassinet, then LEFT HIM THERE-- screaming, incidentally. He just lay there crying, no one picked him up. The doctor looked over a chart, then told the nurse to wait five minutes, diaper him, and return him to the nursery. It was awful.

As far as men-- I've slept with Jewish men who were of course, circumcised, and two gentiles, one of each variety.

Over-all, I'd say that the Jewish men were better lovers, and not as much in a hurry, so I was more, well, lubricated, and we never had any problems.

Now, two men are not much of a sample, but I remember one guy-- and he was only ninteen, but he happened to be the snipped one-- was always so raring to go that we had to use additional lubricant. Notice I'm not seeing him anymore.

The other guy, uncut, I didn't need lubricant with. He was a better lover, though, than the other goy, so maybe it was me. Again, that's not much of a sample, but hey-- now that I've opened up the topic, so to speak, any more women want to contribute?


------------------
------------
--Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny

"But if you're uncut, don't let the fact that you're a little "different" interfere with your self-esteem or your sex life!"
---ambushed

-Damn, almost hit "cut" instead of "copy"

---------------------------------------
Well, ambushed, I thank you for your well thought-out comments and your concern for my self-esteem.
But I'm 54, and just fine with my ego. Thanks in large part to the kind women who elected to not tell me of my "extremely ugly" penis.
As far as sensitivity? Well, I guess we'll never really know, will we? Since no one who was cut at birth can know what it would be like to be otherwise, and vice-versa.
And how about disease? Do you know what the rhinovirus is? And where it attacks?
Hmmm.
Peace,
mangeorge


------------------
Work like you don't need the money.....
Love like you've never been hurt.....
Dance like nobody's watching! Source???

Hey, ambushed;
I was only kidding, man.
Please please please,
DO NOT go chop off your nose.
mangeorge

I'm LOL, mangeorge!

But all kidding aside, I doubt I'd lose as much sleep worrying about whom I might have infected with a cold as I would if I had an extra reason to wonder if I might have inadvertently killed someone...

And if a simple, safe and clearly benign minor surgical removal of a superfluous flap of skin could substantially reduce the probability of getting colds or flu and passing these on to others, I'm sure I'd encourage the procedure for everyone! Wouldn't you?

As for your self-esteem, I'm sure you realize that I wasn't suggesting you were in any way deficient in that area (though you did raise the question). I guess I was just trying to include the larger audience of future visitors and potential lurkers in my remarks.

But I still love your replies!

My .02

When it's soft, it's butt-stinkin'-ugly.

When it's hard, you can barely tell the difference.

I guess I've never met a non-cut man. I'm not even sure what one would look like. But let me ask a question I've wondered since childhood: when my brother and I were little (he's two years younger than me) my mom used to throw us in the bathtub together for bath time. Well, of course curiosity got the better of me one day and I asked him how he used that thing. So he showed me how he had to pull something back to pee. Does this mean he wasn't circumcised? I was of course too young to know about circumcision then but when I got older I always wondered. I promise I'm not putting the teeming millions on, will someone resolve the mystery for me?

Uncut.
And if he pulled it back more than 3 times, he was playing with it.
The voice of experience.
Peace,
mangeorge

Gracie, when they are uncut they look like little terrorists wearing roll-neck sweaters.

------------------
It only hurts when I laugh.

That's it. I may be cut, but I'm calling mine "the little terrorist" from now on!

Ok, one more (kinda gross) question;
What if I, uncut, don't keep it clean? Is this the source of the "head cheese" I've heard guys giggling about?
I've never been far from a shower for an extended period of time, so I really don't know. And I've never had close contact with a "little terrorist" other than my own. I guess I've lived a pretty sheltered life.
Peace,
mangeorge

>>Ok, one more (kinda gross) question; What if I, uncut, don't keep it clean? Is this the source of the "head cheese" I've heard guys giggling about?<< --mangeorge

Umm, no. Actually, believe it or not, head cheese is even grosser than that.


------------------
------------
--Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny

"Umm, no. Actually, believe it or not, head cheese is even grosser than that."
---rowan
---------------------------------------

Just what, Gentle Reader, might that be?
Peace,
mangeorge

OK, mangeorge, what are you doing Saturday night?

The head cheese issue is truly vile. It's a sausage like thing made with blood and brains and all sorts of really disgusting things that my mother used to eat on an onion roll.

As for cut or un, I'll take uncut any day of the week. Don't ask me why, partly aesthetics, partly just seems sexier for some reason to me. You tell me. I just like it better, for any activity.

Well, I might as well throw my $0.02 in here, since this thread is still alive.

I'm uncut. I shower at least once a day and every time there's a generous application of soap and water for my friend down here. I've never received any complaints about foul odor or taste from anyone I've been with, and most of the significant women in my life haven't seen very manny (sic) uncircumcised penes. Not a one of them has ever found it odd or disgusting or too freakish to be touched. (That usually applies to the rest of me, including personality. ) They've all liked it as a little extra to play with during manual or oral manipulation.
The 'head cheese' I think you're talking about, mangeorge, is technically called smegma and that's what happens when you leave whatever sweat, dirt, old sperm, or what have you sitting around in the folds of your foreskin for long periods of time. Again, soap and water on a daily basis will prevent that.
Only sensitivity issue I've got has been mentioned before - sometimes the foreskin rolls back and the tip of my head rubs against my boxers. Major irritation!!

The only way I'd consider getting snipped is the situation that Jess' dad went through, and even then I'd get a second opinion. I like the little terrorist the way he is and my fiancee doesn't have any complaints either. Basically I'd say I feel circumcision ought to be kind of a last resort - you and your doctors are pretty certain that whatever condition you're experiencing can be stopped by this little bit of surgery. I don't think it needs to be done as a preventative, especially when routine washing will take care of the major potential issues. Religious beliefs and traditions aside

------------------
Cave Diem! Carpe Canem!

Cut, and resentful. Not because I have any new insights into sensitivity, cleanliness, etc., but because any way you look at it, it should have been MY choice, no one else's. It is completely unethical to force unnecessary bodily surgery on a patient who cannot refuse it. I'm not against circumcision, provided it is done to a consenting adult.

I see your point (so to speak), APB9999, but I'm not sure it's very well thought out.

As Cecil and others have established, circumcision is far less risky and traumatic when you're an infant than when you're older. It would be somewhat cruel to wait till the boy is old enough to decide for himself only to have him find the option of circumcision effectively "cut off"!

While wandering through the archives, I found this reference to the substantially greater dangers of HIV infection for uncircumcised men. The risks of contracting AIDS is from 70% to 820% greater for uncut men than for circumcised men!!

And due to the warm and cozy protection so generously provided by the uncut prepuce, the risk of HIV transmission must be greater still.

This gives whole new meaning to the phrase "little terrorist"!

>>The only way I'd consider getting snipped is the situation that Jess' dad went through, and even then I'd get a second opinion. I like the little terrorist the way he is and my fiancee doesn't have any complaints either. Basically I'd say I feel circumcision ought to be kind of a last resort - you and your doctors are pretty certain that whatever condition you're experiencing can be stopped by this little bit of surgery. I don't think it needs to be done as a preventative, especially when routine washing will take care of the major potential issues. Religious beliefs and traditions aside.<< --Olentzero

Seeing as you put that "Religious beliefs aside," in, I agree. I would have a son of mine circumcised by a mohel at a bris ceromony.

I have never understood why gentile babies are routinely circumcised. Makes absolutely no sense to me-- except in extreme situations. Some unlucky women are allergic so seminal fluid. If a man where ever so tragically afflicted....

>>Cut, and resentful. Not because I have any new insights into sensitivity, cleanliness, etc., but because any way you look at it, it should have been MY choice, no one else's. It is completely unethical to force unnecessary bodily surgery on a patient who cannot refuse it. I'm not against circumcision, provided it is done to a consenting adult.<< --APBP9999

Well, the Torah commands us to do it on the eighth day. Doctors tell us it's best for the baby then, though we do it because of tradition. Now if a doctor said we would almost certainly kill the baby of something, of course we'd stop. But the Torah is a BIG DEAL. I think an uncircumcised Jewish man is likely to wonder why his parents didn't fulfill this mitzvah for him.

I see your point (so to speak), APB9999, but I'm not sure it's very well thought out.

>>As Cecil and others have established, circumcision is far less risky and traumatic when you're an infant than when you're older. It would be somewhat cruel to wait till the boy is old enough to decide for himself only to have him find the option of circumcision
effectively "cut off"!<< --Ambushed

Incidently, if anyone is wondering, there is a ceremony for a man who converts to Judaism, called Hatafah Dam Brit, which means a pin-prick of blood for the covenent. This is for men who are already circumcised.

Men who convert, and are uncircumcised, usually have a hospital circumcision by a urologist, with valium and local anesthesia, or if his insurance will pay, total anesthesia. Then he has a Hatafah Dam Brit.

Some Orthodox rabbis feel this is cheating, but if the adult man has ANY kind of medical consideration for being circumcised in a hospital, the rabbis will say "Oh! Then go ahead!" Most doctors can usually find a good reason to have a hospital circumcision. The fact that few mohels have circumcised adults, and can damage nerves is usually good enough for the rabbis.

BTW, when a Jewish boy baby has ANY kind of medical condition that counter-indicates circumcision, the bris is delayed.


------------------
------------
--Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny

MY view is not well thought out? Look again! You've stated that it is "cruel" to subject someone who has made the PERSONAL CHOICE to be circumcised to have to go to all the trouble of going to the hospital, getting some anesthesia, and having a minor operation. So instead it should be FORCED on infants without their consent, ON THE CHANCE they might decide later they want the operation? Good Lord, man! THAT is the poorly thought-out position.

There is a special issue of Scientific American on the stands right now, called "Men". If those of you who just had or are having infant sons want to learn some interesting things about being male in America, it is worth picking up. There is also an article in it on circumcision.

I keep hearing assertions that the child feels no pain, but that is far from clear. Indeed, there is at least some evidence to the contrary, as in the article I just mentioned.

I restate my main point: NO ONE should have their body mutilated or surgically altered IN ANY WAY without their consent. The only exception is for medically NECESSARY reasons, which no one contends applies to routine circumcision of infants (though there may be individual cases where it is necessary). Any other approach is absolutely indefensible on ethical grounds; you have denied that person his right to self-determination.

And don't tell me the kids don't mind. I MIND. And even one should be enough.

MY view is not well thought out? Look again! You've stated that it is "cruel" to subject someone who has made the PERSONAL CHOICE to be circumcised to have to go to all the trouble of going to the hospital, getting some anesthesia, and having a minor operation. So instead it should be FORCED on infants without their consent, ON THE CHANCE they might decide later they want the operation? Good Lord, man! THAT is the poorly thought-out position.

There is a special issue of Scientific American on the stands right now, called "Men". If those of you who just had or are having infant sons want to learn some interesting things about being male in America, it is worth picking up. There is also an article in it on circumcision.

I keep hearing assertions that the child feels no pain, but that is far from clear. Indeed, there is at least some evidence to the contrary, as in the article I just mentioned.

I restate my main point: NO ONE should have their body mutilated or surgically altered IN ANY WAY without their consent. The only exception is for medically NECESSARY reasons, which no one contends applies to routine circumcision of infants (though there may be individual cases where it is necessary). Any other approach is absolutely indefensible on ethical grounds; you have denied that person his right to self-determination.

And don't tell me the kids don't mind. I MIND. Even one should be enough, and I'm far from alone.

>>MY view is not well thought out? Look again! You've stated that it is "cruel" to subject someone who has made the PERSONAL
CHOICE to be circumcised to have to go to all the trouble of going to the hospital, getting some anesthesia, and having a minor
operation. So instead it should be FORCED on infants without their consent, ON THE CHANCE they might decide later they want
the operation? Good Lord, man! THAT is the poorly thought-out position.<< APB

First, I never said your view was not well thought out.

Second, I never said it was "cruel" to make adult men who choose late circumcision to go to a hospital. I said that uncircumcised men who convert to Judaism usually don't have a circumcision by a mohel. They have a hospital circumcision, and then the hatafah dam brit, which was originally thought of as a substitute ritual for men circumcised in hospitals as babies who later convert to Judaism.

As an afterthought, I added that since rabbis already have a lot of circumcision by-laws regarding the circumstances of infants who shouldn't be circumcised on the eighth day for medical reasons, and noted that this plays a role in rabbinical thought regarding uncircumcised adults who convert to Judaism.

Some rabbis allow that circumcision by a mohel is not a good idea for an adult because adult and newborn penises aren't the same thing, and mohels' techniques are intended for infants.

I will state once more that if I had a son, I would have him circumcised by a mohel on the eighth day, because it is a commandment.

But I cannot for the life of me understand why gentiles have their sons circumcised.

I am not interested in the gentile opinion of whether or not Jews should continue to circumcise.


------------------
------------
--Rowan
Shopping is still cheaper than therapy. --my Aunt Franny

Shelly liked Hollings' little turtle neck! ie: Northern Exposure
PS: My dad told my Mom, "We ain't doin' it, the kid may need the extra when he grows up"!

But I cannot for the life of me understand why gentiles have their sons circumcised.

I am not interested in the gentile opinion of whether or not Jews should continue to circumcise.

Are you interested in non-Islamic and non-African opinions as to whether certain sects or tribes should perform clitorectomies or other forms of female gential mutilation? If so, please defend the difference.

I don't have to defend my religion to you, PLD, and I'm not going to. I've said this many times on the other MB, so quit asking.