Rabid_Squirrel, coming from New Zealand, you probably didn’t realize that most of the men in the US (something like 60%) are infact circumcised. It’s almost routine for doctors to circumise babies. As Jews only make up roughly 5%(?) of the American population they are unlikely to make an major impact on the study.
Thanks for the comment MC, it’s a cultural thing we Kiwis don’t get exposed to much.
I’ve known 2 intact peni (is that the correct plural? 
and both were smelly, bacteria laden, nasty things.
The first, I didn’t know better, kept giving me urinary tract infections. The last, very recent, was on an impecably clean man, but the moment the zipper opened, that vaguely familiar odor wafted about.
I’d opt for the snip if I had a male child.
BTW, the ‘first’ intact one I spoke of… not the best sex 
Not “peni,” “penises” or “penes.”
If they don’t circumcise the boy, he could elect to have it done later, but if they make the decision now, he won’t be able to undo it.
(There are procedures for “restoring” foreskins, but it’s not really the same.)
Hubby and I decided the first time we were expecting, that if we had a son, we would not have him circumcised. Really can’t see the point of putting an infant through that when it’s not really necessary. I’ve had experiences with both, and both have pros/cons. However, I cannot imagine a woman thinking highly enough of a guy to get down and dirty with him, getting nekkid, and then going “Oh, you’re not circumcised. Well, never mind. Out you go!” And, as TWDuke points out, if you don’t snip at birth, then as a young man he decided he’s missing out on something by being intact, he can elect to have it done. So, my vote: don’t snip.
2 is hardly enough to judge the entire uncircumcised population. I’ve been with women who have civilizations living in their vagina, but I know that doesn’t apply to all women.
Best reply in a looong time.
Peace,
mangeorge
The General Questions forum is for factual questions only. If you wanted to learn if there has ever been a scientific survey done by a reputable polling organization (such as Gallup), then GQ would be the place. You say “Do you ladies favor lean and clean or should nature boy reign supreme?” You are asking for the personal opinions of your fellow Dopers. Polls and surveys go in the IMHO forum, so I’ll move this thread over there.
InLikeFlynn, please read the sticky threads at the top of the GQ forum and ATMB forum. Accusations of trolling should be made by e-mail and not in GQ. In this case, don’t bother because there has been no trolling.
bibliophage
moderator GQ
Given that circumcision can be carried out at any age, and given that your sister’s child will reach an age at which he will begin having sex at the same time as he reaches an age where he will be old enough to decide whether or not to have himself circumcised, why not let leave this problem to him? What’s the hurry?
The answer is not to snip. By the time he is old enough to have women admiring himself (and not in the childish ‘let’s play doctor’) way, he’ll already be old enough to decide for himself whether he wants it snipped or not. That should be a decision parents should let their children make, because the procedure to reverse it is far ickier than having a circumcism done later on in life.
Whats the hurry? Cuz he wont remember it if you do it as an infant. I’d be pissed if my parents had left it up to me.
As far as the OP goes, speaking as a man, I would want what ever my Dad had.
In my case my dad was sniped so was I, then when I had my son he got it too. This after MUCH arguement with his mother. And for the record I didn’t win many arguements with her but this was one I surely wasn’t going to loose come hell or high water.
At the risk of sounding like a backwards A-hole; I think this decision should be left entirely up to the father. After all people, I think its safe to say that this truely is a guy thing.
Well, as I mentioned previously, my beau is aux natural and clean as a whistle.
I’ve never had a bladder infection, rash, nuthin. Also, there is no smell.
This is in contrast with some of the snipped men that I have met.
Snipping has no bearing on how much care the fella is going to take in grooming Mr. Happy.
Send Rachel Hunter over, and I’ll gladly give her as much exposure to my “cultural thing” as she can take. She can spread the word to Kiwis everywhere after that.
Man, I hope they do…
Well, no, not really. But I would say, don’t. I’m snipped, but I see no good reason for doing it. When I had it done, I got an infection. I don’t remember it, sure, but that doesn’t mean it was nice.
As an American woman, I honestly don’t care one way or the other if a fellow is snipped, as long as he is clean. I’ve been with a few who are snipped, only one who wasn’t (first generation Italian-American guy), but there really was no difference in sensation.
The biggest reason for snipping an infant boy is making it easier to keep him clean, but honestly, I don’t think it’s worth stomping on family tradition for. I’d say leave the boy unsnipped and if it bothers him later in life, he can make the choice to do something about it.
Perhaps this is odd, but I’ve never seen a penis that wasn’t, um, trimmed.
When I had a son, however, I didn’t intend for him to be circumcised. I didn’t have much choice, though, because of a plumbing difficulty that he had.
I still wonder how that would have panned out if we followed a religious faith that prescribed circumcision… A bris, for example, would have been impossible for my son. His reconstructive surgery required a team of surgeons and about five hours in the operating room.
don’t do it.
if people keep doing it for simply cosmetic reasons, american women will never find out what they prefer, being given the circumcised penis as the norm.
if it’s got to the stage where you’re going to sleep together, you’d have to be a really shallow person to get rid of your lover if they’re cut.
and those are the sort of people you’re trying to appease?
if he wants to do it later on, at least he has the prerogative to do so. if you do it for him, you remove that choice.
and it’s not exactly a risk-free procedure.
sorry, i think the spirit of JDT momentarily possessed me there.
Can we lay to rest this idea that uncircumcised penises are harder to care for, especially in infants? From here, an article from the American Academy of Pediatrics:
The glans at birth is delicate and easily irritated by urine and feces. The foreskin shields the glans; with circumcision this protection is lost. In such cases, the glans and especially the urinary opening (meatus) may become irritated or infected, causing ulcers, meatitis (inflammation of the meatus), and meatal stenosis (a narrowing of the urinary opening). Such problems virtually never occur in uncircumcised penises…
The foreskin is easy to care for. The infant should be bathed or sponged frequently, and all parts should be washed including the genitals. The uncircumcised penis is easy to keep clean. No special care is required! No attempt should be made to forcibly retract the foreskin. No manipulation is necessary. There is no need for special cleansing with Q-tips, irrigation, or antiseptics; soap and water externally will suffice.
Care of the uncircumcised boy is quite easy. ``Leave it alone’’ is good advice.
Let’s take a vote.
Hands up all those who would be pissed if their parents did something irreversible to them without asking?
Hands up all those who would be pissed if their parents leaves an irreversible decision regarding you up to you?
Just as I thought. Shakes, you are weird.
My twin boys are unmolested. We had to tell the nurses/doctors/whatever a good two dozen times that we didn’t want the procedure done.
Our thought process? We didn’t have a strong opinion either way, but figgured the little bugglys already HAD enough to contend with. Seeing the extremely polar views on the web (google search, you’d be AMAZED at the viciousness of the opinions out there.) on both sides, we picked the path of least resistance.