Who is only “doing it” for two minutes? No guy I’ve ever been with has been limited by time. They’ve all been able to go pretty much as long as they want. And they’ve been circumcised. So here you are, assuming that circumcised men are all two-minute-wonders… yet another of your fantasy “facts” that have no basis in reality.
Jack don’t talk about what you don’t know.
Freud’s overall theories had lots of holes in them. To make images work he would play on words across languages. The reason way most cognitive psychologists, neuropsychologists and clinical psychologists don’t think circumcision is traumatic is because their aren’t facts to support it. Unless of course psychologists are in on the medical conspiracy, which of course would benifit the psychologists.
Read some books on developmental psychology. Wait, no, you can’t trust those. Their part of the conspiracy :rolleyes:
Yeah, I think most guys, cut and uncut do this. It’s all part of the variety of things ya DO during sex. It feels good for a minute, but it would get kinda boring for much longer.
Anyone else here getting the idea that Jack here is a virgin?
Could it be because the way YOU think it should be done doesn’t appeal to anyone but YOU? I don’t care if the guy has a foreskin or not, if he has sex the way you describe, he isn’t gonna get a second chance to be in my bed.
How insulting is that?? You know, the way I have sex has not made me who I am today. And if it had, how pathetic would that be? SEX IS NOT EVERYTHING!
Manda JO,
> Genders aren’t made to “compliment” each other, those nerves don’t “have to be for something”. <
You may as well be saying that somehow a pocketwatch could just be created naturally. Never happen.
> Hell, it is the opinion of most evolutionary biologist, including Gould, that the clitoris and in fact the entire female orgasm is a happy accident, the result of the fact that it carries no evolutionary DISADVANTAGE. <
Oh, my goodness. I knew Gould was a fucking idiot, but did he say this? Where did he say this? The only thing that I can think is that Gould is totally unaware of the erotic nature of the foreskin and is perplexed that a woman can experience something so foreign to him or anyone that he knows as a clitoral orgasm. Well, Gould crashes and burns, again.
> Does this in any way invalidate the joy of an orgasm? No! Things do not have to be okayed by their complience in the divine plan of “how things should be” because there is no plan. <
No, there's no divine plan. And, there is some limited amount of genetic diversity so that organisms can evolve. Nature doesn't waste energy, though. Something so complicated as a woman's clitoris would not have evolved unless it gave some evolutionary advantage. And, if one says that it has no advantage now, then one is saying that it is a vestigial organ. The medical establishment will even admit that they consider the only vestigial organ to be the male foreskin. No, I don't care what Gould says, neither of these organs are vestigial. They are made to compliment one another.
> Nothing is “meant” to be any certain way. <
But, if it is a certain way, it has an advantage of some sort. Even if you or Gould can't see what it is. Otherwise, it wouldn't be there.
> We are not optimal, we are merely more competitive than our less successful ancestors were. <
I agree.
> Not everything has a function, nor is everything about ourselves necessarily the best it could be.<
Well then, the members of whatever species that get rid of the things that don't have function are going to have an advantage. Natural genetic diversity along with natural selection will cause these things to go away.Jack, name one uncircumcised man in any thread on this board who claims to have sex in a way that is different from the way a circumcised man does.
Not to be insulting, Jack, but I’m guessing those girls don’t exist.
The fact that you use what you claim is your real name doesn’t make you above suspicion, and the fact that these “girls” disagree with every girl I’ve ever talked to and most scientific studies of female sexuality leads me to believe that these “girls” are just the names you call yourself when you wear a dress and hump the mirror.
Why?? Why should she become obsessed with her clitoral hood, you crazy crazy person?
[Ross Perot]There you go again![/Ross Perot] Stop assuming to know all about the sex lives of people you never met.
You are a psychotic person.
In conclusion, learn how to quote, you ignorant fuck.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php?action=bbcode
–John
What did I say about talking about stuff you don’t understand?
Nature doesn’t waste energy? Because nature doesn’t do anything there are plenty just get by systems. Nature is not a nice orderly master piece. Some types of rabbits have to eat their own feces to get the nutrition their system works the first time around. Whales have bones that serve no purpose anymore.
In other words you don’t understand evolution either. Even though you believe in it. Your the kind of moron that gives hard core creationists fuel against evolution.
I haven’t read the whole thread so please excuse me if this has been mentioned.
Not getting involved in this little beauty but I thought it might add something. According to this (depth and quality of research not checked by me):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/horizon/valley_HIV.shtml
Uncircumcised cavaliers in Africa are 4 times more likely to contract HIV than the roundheads. Found that interesting – is this already widely known to be accurate or otherwise ?
From Jack in the Lewis Carroll anagrams thread:
So… an “intact man” won’t have anal or oral sex?
Two more reasons not to have sex with an intact man then, isn’t it?
OpalCat,
> Who is only “doing it” for two minutes? No guy I’ve ever been with has been limited by time. They’ve all been able to go pretty much as long as they want. And they’ve been circumcised. <
Well, it all depends on how kind their circumcisions were. If they are left with a lot of frenulum (kind circumcision), then they are two-minute wonders. If they are left with no frenulum (brutal circumcision), then they are never cum charley's. I guess you've been with a lot of never-cum-charley's.The Tim,
> Read some books on developmental psychology. Wait, no, you can’t trust those. Their part of the conspiracy <
Yes, I'm going to stick with Freud because I don't trust the objectivity of anyone who would even entertain the notion that something so egregious as a circumcision can be ignored when analyzing someone's psyche. I can't imagine anything more absurd.Taking hold where, you meerkat? In the US? But didn’t you tell us that it was taking hold in the late 19th century, which is why we got Jack the Ripper? (In the Lewis Carroll thread; I’m too lazy to go find the link.) And haven’t you also agreed that Jews have been doing this for centuries? Please, be consistent in your ravings. On the other hand, don’t; it’s more fun this way.
I doubt it. :rolleyes:
This is brilliant. “If we ignore everyone who says I’m wrong, everyone agrees with me!”
–John
Opal, obviously the only reason you like anal or oral sex is because you are futily searching for the ultimate sexual experience that you just cant seem to find.
JDT talking to a prostitute:
“So, like, for an extra $50 will you role play?”
“Sure”
“Great. Lay back and pretend you’re a foreskin”.
Women have clitorises for the same reason men have nipples–they are not vestigal, per se. Rather, it is more EFFICIENT to have embryos develop in more or less the same fashion and limit the amount of sexual differentation to that which is actually advantageous–individuals that had random mutations that sent out hormones in the earliest weeks after conception to stop the growth of what would become the clitoris in girls or the nipples in boys were not at enough of an advantage to out compete those that wasted that little bit of energy building non-required features. (if they even ever exisited–not every possible mutation occurs).
I know that there was a thread about this in comments on Celils coments in July or August (maybe September) of 1999. But I can’t remember what thread it was based on, and I am sure it has been archived. Cecil himself was rather active in it, as I recall.
Jack researchers with an agenda can’t be trusted (that includes you). More over psychology as a real science is not what we get from Freud, and psychology as a real science is interested in studying people and just noticing the facts.
If your objective you entertain that anything is possible, what is most possible has the most evidence.
If your ‘objective’ you look for facts supporting your theory and ignore those that don’t fit.
I should have realized my latent hostility at my parents is being directed at JDT and causing me to post in a slopy manner. Anyway in my previous post it should be a 's after there.
I’ve set up a survey to see what people think about this whole issue. Hey Foreskin Boy! It’s RESEARCH! You will love it.
JDT,
You spew more shit in one post than my nieghbor’s three dogs do in three months time…
Yue Han,
> Jack, name one uncircumcised man in any thread on this board who claims to have sex in a way that is different from the way a circumcised man does. <
Why are you asking me this question? It is impossible for an uncircumcised man to say from experience that he can compare the way he has sex with a circumcised man unless he is doing some major research. You'd have to ask a woman. If any uncircumcised man is claiming this, please point him out.
> Not to be insulting, Jack, but I’m guessing those girls don’t exist. <
Well, you’re certainly entitled to guess all that you want. Instead of guessing, though, why don’t you go out and actually talk to a woman for a change. The vast majority know what a clitoral orgasm is.
> The fact that you use what you claim is your real name doesn’t make you above suspicion, and the fact that these “girls” disagree with every girl I’ve ever talked to and most scientific studies of female sexuality leads me to believe that these “girls” are just the names you call yourself when you wear a dress and hump the mirror. <
Look, Mr. Low Self Esteem, 90% of these women (at least) out there have vibrators and they use them regularly. I'm sure that you know what a woman is, right? They're usually a little smaller than you and they smell really nice. Any one of these knows what a clitoral orgasm is. Get to know them and then ask them about it.
> Why?? Why should she become obsessed with her clitoral hood, you crazy crazy person? <
I'm trying to prevent her from going crazy by telling her to experience a clitoral orgasm, the poor thing. She never has.The Tim,
>In other words you don’t understand evolution either. Even though you believe in it. Your the kind of moron that gives hard core creationists fuel against evolution. <
I don't believe in evolution. It is the best explanation for the available evidence based upon Ockham's razor. If you're going to go against creationists, you should learn something about the science of logic first. Then when you experience fighting the creationists you can also experience what I have to go through fighting with you.London_Calling,
> Uncircumcised cavaliers in Africa are 4 times more likely to contract HIV than the roundheads. Found that interesting - is this already widely known to be accurate or otherwise ? <
This study is widely known and considered by all reasonable people to be a joke in very poor taste.