Foreskin. It’s what’s for dinner.
Seems to me that circumcised, if they’re so “weathered” and “tough” and “less sensitive” would be the way to go duration-wise, if you want her to have a smile on her face afterward.
:rolleyes:
Well, it makes a certain sort of sense that the glans would retain more sensitivity by being covered/lubricated most of the time as opposed to exposed and encountering friction from clothing and the drying effects of exposure. Consider the difference between applying lotion and wearing socks/shoes most of the time vs. going barefoot most of the time…there would be a definate difference in sensitivity.
But in a modern-day world where humans wear clothing most of the time, and usually SOFT clothing in that area, I doubt it is as big an issue as it would “naturally” be.
I mean, I can see that the foreskin would come in damn handy (no masturbation pun intended) if you were running around naked through brambles and dust or wearing rough fibers. In such a world, you’d really benefit from having your “works” protected inside a relatively impervious sheath and exposed only for sexual activity. But silk boxers or combed cotton briefs…:dubious:
That said, I leave it the men to speak from their own personal experience. And yeah, would be interesting to hear more from those who’ve known BOTH states; otherwise it is a case of what my late (circed) husband would have termed, “The worst sex I ever had was fantastic!”
He was sensitive enough to get off w/o any problems, and his glans was soft as a horse’s nose regardless. 
We opted not to circ our son (now 18). I have not interrogated him as to his sensitivity, :o but as far as I know, he’s had no problems or complaints thus far.
The comparisons to removal of the female clitoris are completely off base. Anatomically, removing the clitoris is analogous to chopping off the entire head of a penis, not just some useless, cheese-trapping skin.
Personally, I’m grateful that the adults around me circumcized me when when I was an infant, and I’ve never had any problems at all with sensitivity, dryness or abrasiveness. It’s always clean and looks nice. I made the early determination with all my wife’s pregnancies that if any of them were boys, we’d cut that shit off in a heartbeat (it reduces the chances of penile cancer to zero, which is reason enough to do it). All we got was girls, though.
To be clear, one person compared it to clitoris removal, whereas everyone else simply referred to female circumcision, which does not necessarily include the removal of the clitoris, and can actually be quite comparable to the male equivalent.
When did you decide to stop being informed in regards to anything you post these days?
I wonder, how difficult IS it to retract the foreskin and WASH? I mean, as an intact female (meaning nothing was snipped off) I have some stuff to move around and clean, but it has never been an issue. I move it around and clean it. DUH.
I know with my intact son, by the time he was 2 or 3 (about the time the foreskin is able to retract w/o tearing) he was doing so at every oppourtunity, esp. in the bath.
As he grew older, he was informed that this action was a central component of basic hygiene, like washing behind the ears or in the butt crack.
I realize that being circed does not mean some terrible sentence of sexual dysfunction, but I also would not go so far as to catagorize a naturally occurring body part as “useless” or even harmful.
That sort of hubris has been seen before (tonsils used to be considered useless remnants with no known function and get yanked out at the first chance…we now know they are an important part of the immune system, protecting from orally transmitted infections). I tend to assume that if something is THERE, it has a function.
I am about half-circumcized. That is, I am cut, yet, I have sufficient foreskin to slide around. I am very happy with the condition of my penis, as are most men, I’m sure… It seems that Small Hen has nailed it.
Yah, try and sell the fresh-smegma theory on a date and let us know how that works out.
This is irrelevant to the point I was addressing.
There is no such thing as a “female circumcision.” Females don’t have foreskins. Any cutting of the clitoris or labia at all is analogous to direct cutting of the glans or penis, not just some superfluous skin around it. Female genital mutilation is an abomination. Male circumcision is just the hygenic removal of excess skin.
Yeah but it still was kind of funny.
Actually, yes, females DO have foreskins. They are just smaller. The clit is the equivalent of the penis/glans of the penis in this way as in others…it has a sheath-like covering of skin which retracts during erection or manually. Might have to use a magnifying glass and tweezers to circ it, but it could be done. 
ETA, as a female myself, I speak with authority on this one!
And again, who are YOU to determine what constitutes “excess skin”? Seriously? :dubious:
Who do I have to be?
Pedantics. It’s been referred to as such in countless publications.
The foreskin is part of the Penis. So yes, I agree it is analogous.
There is nothing inherently more hygienic in the removal of the foreskin, and it is not defined as such, if you’re going to be pedantic.
I’m european, and in europe circumcision is mainly done for medical reasons, so it’s not that common and yet still pretty unremarkable - I’ve never had the impression that anyone was too interested in the subject. What I find interesting are the insults towards the foreskin from those without it. A sort of sour grapes thing.
Either way it’s only clean if you wash it.
Around these parts, it tends more towards hysterical, screeching invections against anybody who dares to circumcise a baby, even though you rarely find circumcised men who feel they’ve been victimized or even give it any thought at all.
God? Mother Nature? The force behind evolution? Take your pick. Anyone but a mere man/human pontificating on which bit of human anatomy he was born with is “useless”. :dubious:
Really, I take no issue with you making that decision for yourself, just with you stating it as some universal truth applicable to everyone.
But I fully respect your right to do as you will with your baby boys and yourself. Really, I do. As I said, I was with a circed man for a quarter of a century and neither he nor I felt any bitterness about his “mutilation”. But we both decided NOT to do the same thing to our son.
We would no more have subjected our perfect baby boy to the pain and risk of circumcision than we would have cut off the “excess skin” on his ears. (those lobes…what the hell do THEY do? I think they are ugly and just trap filth.)
But that was our personal choice. He, at 18, still HAS a choice in the matter, unlike those who were circed as infants.
BTW, I am neither “hysterical” (lovely misogynistic medical term there) or “screeching”. Just calmly and rationally disagreeing. (then again, I may be about to start my period…that must be it;))
Yeah women are never focused on the vulva/vagina. I could only fill a library with books written about the look and state of the vagina by female authors. And that’s just the books from the 1980s.
As for circ or not to circ: whatever. Pediatricians no longer seem to recommend it, but if you feel strongly about it have at it. A kid is going to accept something they’ve been raised to believe is perfectly normal. Like religion. OOOHHHH no he did NOT just go there!
There’s no such thing as a “force behind evolution,” nor does “Mother Nature” refer to any kind of actual entity and God does not exist. Humans are the most qualified entities in the universe to comment on human evolution.
I require no divine authority to comment on the inherent mistakes or flaws in evolution. Such flaws are easy to spot. You don’t need an appendix either, you know, and men don’t need nipples. It’s no taboo to say so. Nobody’s going to strike me down.