Penile Lengthening Column

Great Debates
41

astraeus,

>Jack, you’ve fallen into a very common trap. You believe so strongly that circumcision is bad that you’ve closed your mind to anything said against your point of view. <

It is my personal policy to close my mind to all dogmatic beliefs. I am open-minded to ANY evidence or any conclusions that follow logically from the evidence, though. Do you have any evidence or logical conclusions based upon the evidence?

>I am circumcised. My wife is currently pregnant with our first child, who, according to the ultrasound is a boy, and we intend to have him circumcised. <

When he grows up he will be a freak (won’t be so many circumcised men when he grows up) and he will hate your guts for what you did to him (sorry to be so blunt). And, you will rationalize that it was God’s will that you force your helpless son to have part of his penis amputated. And, the damage done to your relationship with your son will work itself out according to God’s plan. Is it any wonder that such insanity as circumcision has caught on in such a non-intellectual environment?

>There are several reasons for this, among them that I’m Jewish, that it’s easier to clean, and that there are potential health benefits. <

 All true. No way in the world does this justify the loss in erotic sensation. No way in the world does this justify the damage that it will do to your son's future relationship with his wife should he turn out to be heterosexual. BTW, do you know that the US has a higher incidence of AIDS and other STD's than any other western industrialized nation? This might be because (I personally have no doubt) the US is circumcised to such a great extent. Do you know that there are many Jewish people who are no longer circumcising their babies? They have a support group. I'm sure that you have rejected almost every other Jewish tradition, why don't you reject this attack on your son for his sake?

>I can speak from very personal experience that my sex life is just peachy, thank you.<

Sorry, based on what I know about how heterosexual coitus takes place with a circumcised man, I doubt if there is anything at all good about your sex life.

>To say that male circumcision is analogous to female genital mutilation is preposterous–women who’ve undergone FGM cannot experience orgasm<

There are several types of FGM. The most heinous kind of circumcision will turn a woman into a sexual zombie capable of no erotic sensation. However, the kindest FGM, which only involves amputating her clitoral hood, will only prevent the woman from experiencing a clitoral orgasm (at the turn of the century, FGM was very common in America and was justified using the same excuses used today to justify MGM).

> I’m circumcised, yet I experience orgasm frequently.<

If you're lucky, you experience a type of orgasm from your frenulum-remnant which is nothing more than an exaggerated tickle (and this doesn't last long at all). An intact man experiences a completely different type of bursting, sensation from the dorsal side of his penis that goes on for a long time (probably just as long as it does in a woman's clitoral hood).

>My wife is pregnant, after all. To say that it decreases the pleasure afforded to the man’s partner is possible in some cases, but there just isn’t evidence to support it being generally true.<

Circumcision decreases pleasure for both the man and the woman and there is published research to support this. True, as I have explain in other posts, there hasn't been any published study into the precise physiology of the penis, but that's by design of the establishment.

>Who do you think you are to judge the mental state of the men who’ve undergone circumcision as adults?<

Well, let’s say that one day you wake up and announce to your wife that you are going to go in and have half of your penis (or arm or whatever body part) amputated even though everything about your penis is working fine. I would have to say that you are behaving irrationally. And, if you say that everybody else is doing it, then I’m still going to say that you are behaving irrationally. You should know better.

>Has it occurred to you that you might just disbelieve them because their statements contradict yours? <

This could very well be true. An irrational person can't know if he is behaving irrationally otherwise he wouldn't behave that way. So, maybe I'm behaving irrationally. In order to protect against irrationality, we need proper studies done on the foreskin by professional researchers, don't you agree?

> http://www.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/AIDS/01/31/aids.circumcision/index.html <

This is such a ridiculous study. And, to think some circumcision-advocates are trying to use this study to justify circumcising the entire continent of Africa.
Others have gone into the incredible flaws of this study, but I’m not going to because I happen to believe that the implication of this study is probably true, namely: circumcision offers some protection to men from acquiring the AIDS virus. I mean, if a legitimate study along these lines was actually carried out, one would probably find that it is true. A thick layer of keritinization forms on a circumcised penis. It’s probably as hard for the AIDS virus to penetrate that keritinization as it is for the circumcised man to feel anything through it !
I have a couple of problems with the implication of this study, though:
(1) babies don’t have sex so they are not exposed to the AIDS virus that way anyway. So, they can decide if they want to be circumcised sometime after they have learned to speak English (right now, the only way they can say “no” is to let out a blood curling scream or go into shock and that language is not acceptable to the medical establishment); and,
(2) intact babies can be taught the importance of condoms as they grow older and they will be more likely to use them since condoms don’t ruin the erotic sensations in intact men the way they do in circumcised men; and,
(3) if a circumcised man does happen to get infected with the AIDS virus, any woman partner that he has is much more likely to become infected as a result of the incredible friction this occurs (American woman get infected with the AIDS virus much more frequently during heterosexual sex than European women).

> He then went through the procedure. I will tell you this: The only time the boy [eight day old baby] cried was when his diaper was removed. He cried for about ten seconds, then quieted a bit. Then the mohel did his job, swabbed it, and bandaged it carefully, while the boy’s crying was very soft . . .<

Well, thank you for your observations. Did you ever stop to wonder what was really going on with that baby when this surgery was being performed on him? We have some information on what the baby was feeling:

(That baby was experiencing the most pain that he will ever experience for the rest of his life.) Here’s a bunch of cites to help you understand the turmoil of that the baby was going through: http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/

>Please, if you’re not going to give any real citations, at least try not to talk about things you just can’t possibly know for sure. And if you truly have all these citations you mention, please just list some of them.<

Here’s a zillion cites for you http://www.cirp.org/library/
I have many more. And, I can guide you to the cite you’re looking for if you let me by telling me what you’re looking for. I won’t hold it against you that you have no credible sites to support anything that you say (if you did, I would know about them already so I know you don’t have any).

42

Arnold, before I respond to Jack point by point, could you please move this to Great Debates?

43

I’ll begin by citing some good sources:

A general information page about circumcision, with good references:
http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~bmorris/circumcision.shtml

Here’s an excellent cite that presents both sides to the issue, with much evidence:
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2754/

Jack, I was hoping I wouldn’t have to say this, but…

Just who in the hell do you think you are?

I didn’t personally attack you. I attacked your points. I suggested you were biased–which you agreed you might be. I never said anything about you personally.

You said my future son is going to hate my guts. How dare you? How dare you presume to know how my son, who isn’t even born yet, is going to feel? I was circumcised over 27 years ago, yet somehow I’ve managed never to despise my parents for it. None of my male friends, all of whom are circumcised, hate their parents for it. Of course, you must know better, Jack, because you clearly have the power to read other people’s minds.

You also called my future son a freak. This is inexcusable. You are insulting a Jewish tradition that goes back thousands of years. I don’t believe in God, not that it’s any of your business. But I believe in the traditions of my people, and I believe that you are dangerously close to bigotry.

You seem to have magic powers to see into my bedroom. You have absolutely no way to judge my sex life–you don’t even know me!! How in the hell could you know? I’ve had many orgasms in my life, and they’re not “tickles.” They’re perfectly wonderful, mind-blowing orgasms, and arguing with me on this is ridiculous, because I’m the only one with the evidence here! As for my partners’ pleasure–well, I’ve managed to give several of my partners over the years over ten orgasms in one session. Hmm. Must be something wrong.

Maybe I don’t know what I’m missing. It’s possible. Maybe my sex life could be better. But it’s great now, and I don’t need it to be any better. If I’m happy with it, what the hell business is it of yours?

I’m not saying that circumcision is good. I’m not saying it’s what everyone should do. I’m saying it’s not demonstrably harmful–not any more than not circumcising is. What you are doing is inflammatory, and frankly disgusting.

-Matt

44

Maybe the Pit would be better. Jack, your attack on astraeus was not called for. (Hey, Matt, maybe he can see the future because he has crystal balls…?

Oh, and despite the fact that I linked to a Discover article that seems to back up Jack’s POV, I want it on the record that I have not decided one way or the other. I need to learn more first.

45

What the heck. I’ll throw it here anyway.

Matt, please accept my apologies for responding to a post directed to you.
Mr. Tyler:

Bull pucky, miladdo. You yourself hold an extremely dogmatic belief and have so far shown no inclination to listen to anyone who does not share your zeal.

No, he won’t.

Sorry, no again.

No, you’re not.

I’m sorry you have a chip on your shoulder about religious beliefs, but you might do better than this kind of insult. You have given NO evidence whatsoever that a father-son relationship will be damaged in any way by circumcision.

Why is erotic sensation the be-all and end-all of life? Why is it so important?

Again, you have shown no evidence of this. What damage? Are you seriously going to tell me, without knowing me, that my relationship with my SO is crippled?

Prove it, pally. And please remember that correlation does NOT equal causation.

And your point is?

The cardinal rule on this message board is “Don’t be a jerk.” Unless you can substantiate that accusation, I suggest you apologize for your insult and presumption.

HAHAHAHAAAAA! :wipes eyes:

Oh, that was a good one! You know nothing about other people’s sex lives, Jack. That’s just laughable.

I wasn’t aware of any female circumcision that resulted in a total lack of sexual sensation. I’m interested in seeing what the procedure is, and where it’s practiced, if you don’t mind.

I didn’t realize it was common in the US. It certainly wasn’t due to a Judeo-Christian tradition.

And you know, of course, that there is no such thing as a “clitoral” orgasm, right?

“The establishment??” You’re kidding, right? What, the Illuminati and the TriLat are conspiring to keep people fron understanding the penis? Please.

Er, excuse me, but didn’t you claim earlier that the number of AIDS cases in the US was so high because so many men are circumcised? Make up your mind, willya?

http://www.circ.org is a vehemently anti-circumcision site. Can you provide any non-biased information?

Again with the insults. Chill out, please. As for credible evidence, as I said above it’s clear to me that circ.org is not in any way unbiased. I’d prefer to see some citations from peer-reviewed sources.
Finally, I am not a supporter of circumcision. But I do support the elimination of ignorance, and I believe that your vehement, vitriolic, and dogmatic posts are not doing much toward that end.

46

Well, it looks like this conversation is moving far enough from a comment on a Straight Dope column to justify a departure from the «Comments on Cecil’s Columns» forum and a trip to visit my colleagues David B and Gaudere in the «Great Debates» forum.

moderator, «Comments on Cecil’s Columns»

47

Thanks, Arnold. You’re my favorite Swiss hero, BTW.

48

Matt,

>A general information page about circumcision, with good references: http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~bmorris/circumcision.shtml <

Probably everything on this page emanates one way or another from the three well-known Jewish doctors named Wiswell, Schoen, and Weiss. They basically give their medical opinions that circumcision is a good thing and all of the circumcised people listening breathe a sigh of relief and insist that circumcision is fine based on these doctor's opinions. It's a shame that the pro-circumcision persons who love these doctors so much won't listen to all of  the medical doctors that have gone on record opposing circumcision.
Dr. Schoen is a real interesting case. He is the doctor in charge of pediatrics for Kaiser Permanente. Those supporting Schoen usually tout his important position in such a large hospital. Funny thing is that recently Kaiser Permanente itself has taken the position that it doesn't recommend circumcision. Do you know what else? Dr. Schoen's son is intact !

>Here’s an excellent cite that presents both sides to the issue, with much evidence: http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2754/ <

Yes, a whole bunch of nonsense here. Do you really think that there's enough evidence on these sites to support circumcision? I'm sorry, but you are very gullible if you do. Why do people like you not insist upon knowing what the physiology of the foreskin is, in the first place?

> You said my future son is going to hate my guts. How dare you? How dare you presume to know how my son, who isn’t even born yet, is going to feel? <

You're talking about mutilating his penis, Matt. Any rational person knows how he is going to feel. I'm sorry, but I don't consider anyone who doesn't condemn circumcision to be rational. And, I feel myself to be morally required to at least warn people like you of your impending fate. You will have to face your depressed son when he realizes what you did to him (and when he realizes all of the information that you had available to you). In 15 or 20 years, can you just imagine how you are going to feel if you carry out this illegal action against your defenseless son when your son has to face the results?

>I was circumcised over 27 years ago, yet somehow I’ve managed never to despise my parents for it. None of my male friends, all of whom are circumcised, hate their parents for it.<

You're not a freak because in the society in which you live almost all of the men are circumcised. Your son probably won't be living in such a society.

>You also called my future son a freak. <

I only mean that he is going to stand out within society in a negative way. It's just like you cut off his ears and sold him to a circus.

>This is inexcusable. You are insulting a Jewish tradition that goes back thousands of years. <

Actually, no. I'm insulting a Jewish tradition that goes back several centuries. Before that, "circumcision" involved only some slight cutting that drew a drop of blood to be valid or something. In this millennium, some Rabbis decided that they didn't like the way some Jewish persons were passing themselves off as gentiles so they invented this bris pariah procedure that we all know as circumcision.

>I don’t believe in God, not that it’s any of your business. But I believe in the traditions of my people, and I believe that you are dangerously close to bigotry. <

Well, if you're traditional, then give your son the true traditional bris rather than this radical new procedure. Better yet, just don't touch his penis.
Don't bother calling me anti-Semitic because I'm use to it. I'll tell you one thing, though, your future son sure doesn't think I'm anti-Semitic.

>You seem to have magic powers to see into my bedroom. You have absolutely no way to judge my sex life–you don’t even know me!! How in the hell could you know? <

I know the physiology of you wife because all women are constructed more or less the same. I know your physiology under the best-case scenario of your circumcision. That's all I need to know in order to know what your sex life is like. It's not good no matter how your wife tries to convince you otherwise.

> I don’t need it [sex life] to be any better. <

That's what they all say. Many, many years ago, I use to be a salesman. And, occasionally, I would run into a businessman who would tell me "I don't need to make any more money." What does one say to that?
49

Sigh . . . I guess the Pit would have been a better choice.

50

Here’s my anecdotal evidence - I was circumcised at birth (born in the USA) but grew up during my formative years (grade school, high school, college) in a country where most people aren’t circumcised (Switzerland). My first day in the gym shower I was a little surprised, my parents explained to me the difference, and that was that. I never felt like a freak and I don’t hate my parents.

51

[Moderator Hat: ON]

Well, now that it’s here, we hopefully won’t need to move it again.

That means everybody had better calm down.

Gaudere and I have bigger whips than Arnold. And we’re not afraid to use them.

David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator

[Moderator Hat: OFF]

52

andros,

>Bull pucky, miladdo. You yourself hold an extremely dogmatic belief <

What dogmatic belief do I hold?

>and have so far shown no inclination to listen to anyone who does not share your zeal. <

Like I said, I am not open-minded to dogmatic beliefs.

>I’m sorry you have a chip on your shoulder about religious beliefs, but you might do better than this kind of insult. <

Religious beliefs are dogmatic beliefs so I do have a problem with them.

>You have given NO evidence whatsoever that a father-son relationship will be damaged in any way by circumcision. <

Yes, you have me here. I'm just assuming that the kid is not going to feel warmly toward his father when the kid sees all of his intact friends and finds out that his father had a large part of the kid's penis amputated.

>Why is erotic sensation the be-all and end-all of life? Why is it so important? <

Nature makes organisms a certain way for a reason. The kid has a birthright to a complete body. It is his body and not for anyone else to decide what to do with it.

> Again, you have shown no evidence of this. What damage? Are you seriously going to tell me, without knowing me, that my relationship with my SO is crippled? <

Yes, sorry (I really am).

>Prove it, pally. And please remember that correlation does NOT equal causation. <

I'm not going to look up general AIDS statistics for you. You can do that easy enough by a simple web search.

>The cardinal rule on this message board is “Don’t be a jerk.” Unless you can substantiate that accusation, I suggest you apologize for your insult and presumption. <

Why don't we just let Matt defend himself?

> Oh, that was a good one! You know nothing about other people’s sex lives, Jack. That’s just laughable. <

Why is that laughable? The reason you think this is probably because you engage in all of these elaborate techniques during sexual encounters. The fact of the matter is, intact men don't do all of these other things such as fellatio as often as circumcised men. This is because natural genitalia automatically do the right things. You think that proper sex comes down to being sensitive to your partner and going to elaborate lengths to find ways of stimulating your partner. The reality is that sex between anatomically normal people does not require all of this creativity.

> I wasn’t aware of any female circumcision that resulted in a total lack of sexual sensation. I’m interested in seeing what the procedure is, and where it’s practiced, if you don’t mind. <

I'm no authority of FGM. However, my understanding of FGM is that it can range from the amputation of the clitoral hood all the way to complete amputation of the labia along with a clitoralectomy. I'm not sure exactly where this most heinous form of FGM is practiced. I'll tell you this, though, FGM is only practiced in societies where MGM is practiced. The converse is not true. Apparently, mutilated men have to be in charge of a society in order for the women to be mutilated.

> I didn’t realize it was common in the US. It certainly wasn’t due to a Judeo-Christian tradition. <

I don't know if it was due to Judeo-Christian "tradition." But, FGM  and MGM in America was certainly due in large part to Judeo-Christianism. Had to stop that evil masturbation you know.

> And you know, of course, that there is no such thing as a “clitoral” orgasm, right? <

I know that there use to be a myth that there was no such a thing as a clitoral orgasm. There certainly is a clitoral orgasm. Read any good sex manual and it will tell you that it's a woman's clitoral hood that should be manipulated. That is triggering the clitoral orgasm.

> “The establishment??” You’re kidding, right? What, the Illuminati and the TriLat are conspiring to keep people from understanding the penis? Please. <

No, as I have previously stated, the reason that the foreskin cannot be studied has to do with politics, religion, and psychology. You have a sexually mutilated society that is afraid to face the truth. In that sense, it is a conspiracy.

> Er, excuse me, but didn’t you claim earlier that the number of AIDS cases in the US was so high because so many men are circumcised? Make up your mind, willya? <

As I explained, I would suppose that it is true that the AIDS virus has more trouble entering the body through the keritinization of a circumcised penis. Further, as I explained, the violent action of a circumcised penis can cause women (and gay partners) to be more susceptible to getting the AIDS virus should the circumcised man become infected.

> http://www.circ.org is a vehemently anti-circumcision site. <

It isn't anti-circumcision at all. It gives cites all over the place and then gives conclusions that logically follow from the cites. What do you want? Lies? That's all that you will get from a "non-biased" web site since they will have to give lip-service to the notion that circumcision might be a good thing even though the physiology of the foreskin has never been studied.

> Again with the insults. Chill out, please. As for credible evidence, as I said above it’s clear to me that circ.org is not in any way unbiased. <

Listen. There has never even been a single attempt to prove that circumcision is a good thing for the baby. Irresponsible and malicious persons make this or that claim about the benefits of circumcising the baby, but they never even try to make an argument that we know enough to say that circumcision is a positive thing for the baby. How could they possibly make such an argument when the physiology of the foreskin has never been studied? You're just like all of the rest of them and you have a psychological need to believe. It's the same as when people seek religion. Get hold of yourself man (no pun intended).
53

I, being uncircumsized and quite capable of giving my wife repeated orgasm vaginally without the clit or G spot prior to my own, was reading with great interest to see if I had a magical penis because I am uncircumsized.

Then you said his son would be a freak?

Jack, I went to a public school where I was about the only one with an uncircumsized penis. It was different item and I was quite seriously considering having the tip hacked off as a young adult because I felt like a freak, like something different. Anyway, this is not to make your point. Circumsision is still widely practiced and accepted at hospitals in the U.S. if that is where we are talking about, so his son will assuredly be amongst plenty of circumsized company throughout gym classes.

On the other hand, I have often wondered what I will do if/when I have a son. I enjoy my uncircumsized penis because now, it is a novelty. I don’t wave it around at parties, but every woman I have ever been with liked to look at it up close and play with the foreskin, which to me was simply wonderful. My wife still likes to play with it to this day, roll the skin back and watch it roll forward…
repeated several times.

My point is that even if his son were the only circumsized boy in the school, he would end up having something special, he might feel freakish through high school, but come college… look out! Something new for the ladies.

But back to the OP…

No cites, and never having had the circumsized experience, there is no way I can compare intensity of orgasms with someone who has. I don’t know that there is any way to measure pleasure scientifically. But, Jack, the skin does roll back during intercourse. It creates a wider area at the base with the rolled up skin which may or may not relate to an enhanced sexual experience for the woman. That may be how the G spot is triggered, assuming that the particular penis reaches that deep with the rolled up skin.

As far as clitoral stimulation, I don’t see how the status of one’s foreskin affects that at all during intercourse. The head is inside right? Unless women are different and some have their clitorises inside their vaginas… I fail to see the relevance.

Now, for masturbatory purposes, I think the foreskin blows circumsized penises away. You don’t really need lubricant because there loose skin to pull back and forth. And if you don’t have anything handy to … empty into… you can pinch off the skin at the tip and collect it there until a proper receptacle is available. Much less painful than squeezing your shaft hard enough to impede the flow of your orgasm.

There may be a link between the foreskin pulling back more on that frenium or whatever, because you are pulling back the skin attached to the head rather than just stroking the shaft. I could see that enhancing the man’s experience. But would think that the skin from below the head would work as well to pull up and down.

54

I’m surprised at the vehemence of the pro-circumcision people. It’s not like circumcision is being ruled out - the kid can have it done when they’re an adult if they want. It seems odd that everyone is sooo anxious to hack off the foreskin so quickly. But I guess the worry is that the adult person probably wants to keep what they were born with down there - all ten toes, both knees, and their foreskin.

If the best that people can come up with is that circumcision prevents penile cancer, wouldn’t that still be prevented for the most part by waiting to circumsize the kid when he’s older and can decide himself (like 18)? I mean, we don’t cut off breasts to prevent breast cancer in infertile women, do we?

My pet theory (and I have no cites so don’t go asking for them - I’ll freely admit I made this up myself) is that the reason the English don’t circumsize and the US does is they have socialized medicine and we don’t. The doctor gets an extra little fee for hacking up the kid’s weewee whereas there’s no financial advantage to do so in England, so they don’t.

For the record, I’m a circumsized American male. The only pro-circumcision information I can offer is anecdotal - it’s much easier to manaully stimulate an intact penis. So if you want your son to have more fun sexually, by all means, leave him alone.

55

Jack Dean Tyler: The fact of the matter is, intact men don’t do all of these other things such as fellatio as often as circumcised men. This is because natural genitalia automatically do the right things.

Hmmmmmm. So why were elaborate traditions of “creative” erotic practices developed in Graeco-Roman antiquity and ancient India, where nobody was circumcised?

(Wow, even in a thread titled “Penile Lengthening Column” the issue I’m most interested in discussing is historical consistency. I am such a hopeless geek.)

  • You think that proper sex comes down to being sensitive to your partner and going to elaborate lengths to find ways of stimulating your partner. The reality is that sex between anatomically normal people does not require all of this creativity. *

Um, you’re trying to sell people on the anti-circumcision movement by promising it will make sex less creative?..

(Okay, maybe I’m not quite hopeless. :))

56

*I mean, we don’t cut off breasts to prevent breast cancer in infertile women, do we? *

Of course we do, Davis, as discussed in this article on preventive mastectomy:

It’s a cost-benefit analysis: you make a sacrifice you think you can live with in order to reduce or eliminate the risk of something you can’t live with. The smaller the sacrifice, the smaller the risk it takes to justify making it. Removing the foreskin seems like a very small sacrifice to most people in our culture, and it doesn’t take much of a risk to justify it.

57

That your view is Truth. That all others are False. That you know what is best for everyone.

It sure doesn’t strike me that you are willing to slow down and listen to other viewpoints. And I don’t understand why one would brag about being close-minded. Especially about close-mindedness. To quote Tom Lehrer, “I know there are people in the world that do not love their fellow human beings and I hate people like that.”

Yes, but your additional assumptions are that all his friends will be intact and that he will consider circumcision to be an amputation of a “large parT of [his] penis.” I maintain that you do not and cannot know this to be true.

I’d much prefer to deal in fact than your assumptions.

Well, no, actually. Nature doesn’t “make” anyone anything, for any reason. Nature has no will.

And I’ll make sure to let every parent know that they are not allowed to make any decisions for their child.

I think you missed my first couple of questions. Firstly, please provide some evidence of a damaged sex life. Secondly, please tell me what damages is caused. Thirdly, would you like to speak to Mrs. andros about our sex life? Don’t presume to know me, pally.

No, I know AIDS numbers, obviously much better than you do. But what I was asking you to show evidence for was your idea that AIDS cases inthe US are because "the US is circumcised to such a great extent.

It’s not a matter of defense. It’s a matter of politeness and courtesy. Unless it’s your intent to make enemies and be deliberately rude, it’s a good idea not to accuse people of things you have no evidence for and no reason to believe.

Interesting theory. So you’re saying that when the male partner is uncircumcised, both partners get off, all the time, purely with genital congress? I do not beliee that to be correct. Can you support your assertion?

Further, are you saying that uncircumcised men do not engage in oral sex, manual stimulation, or the arousal of other erogenous zones? I also do not believe this to be correct. Can you support it?

Then we can ignore those points until you wish to provide some evidence.

No. The difference between a “clitoral” and a “vaginal” orgasm is where one is being stimulated to achieve orgasm, not where the orgasm is felt nor what “type” it is. There is only one type of orgasm.

Then our discussion is over. Once again, I yield to the dogma of the conspiracy. You don’t have to provide any support for your statements, as you are able merely to state that all such evidence has been “covered up.” Such beliefs must perforce be filed with UFOs, Bigfoot, and Nessie.

A reading of the site shows clearly its biases. But it again seems that those who agree with you are “unbiased” in your book, and those who do not are all liars. There is no arguing with you on this.

Funny, since I specifically stated I’m not a supporter of circumcision. But you clearly know me better than I know myself. What lotto numbers should I pick, o Wise One?

58

Women… DO NOT BELIEVE THIS!!!
JACK IS A FLUKE JACK IS A FLUKE
There are plenty of uncircumsized men who enjoy providing oral, manual and other forms of stimulation to their partners.

If I ever wind up single again and some woman turns me down because I am uncircumsized and thus do not ‘need’ to fellate her, I am coming looking for you Jacko. :slight_smile:

59

JustAnotherGuy,

> because I am uncircumcised. <

How did you escape?

>Circumsision is still widely practiced and accepted at hospitals in the U.S. if that is where we are talking about, so his son will assuredly be amongst plenty of circumcised company throughout gym classes. <

Yes, circumcision is still widely practiced in the US but there are growing patches where one cannot find a doctor to do a circumcision anymore.
An intact boy growing up amongst circumcised boys is a different case then the reverse. An intact boy only looked funny. In the future, it will be well known that circumcised boys posses seriously degraded penises. For psychological reasons, circumcised boys will have no choice but to restore their foreskins so that they are not obviously damaged.

>On the other hand, I have often wondered what I will do if/when I have a son. I enjoy my uncircumcised penis because now, it is a novelty. <

I'm sure that you would do the right thing and leave your son's penis alone.

>My point is that even if his son were the only circumcised boy in the school, he would end up having something special, he might feel freakish through high school, but come college… look out! Something new for the ladies. <

Probably women who are very seriously into S & M might find something appealing about a circumcised penis.

>But, Jack, the skin does roll back during intercourse. It creates a wider area at the base with the rolled up skin which may or may not relate to an enhanced sexual experience for the woman. <

Well, I don't know if I want to cast myself into the role of sex therapist, but you're obviously using your penis incorrectly. Are you peeling your foreskin back before you go inside the woman? You shouldn't be. This is a common mistake that intact men make. You should try to get your whole foreskin inside the woman. This will make a huge difference for your sensations and hers too.

>As far as clitoral stimulation, I don’t see how the status of one’s foreskin affects that at all during intercourse. The head is inside right?<

Wrong. You’re using your penis incorrectly, again. Most of the sex should take place with your penis completely outside of the woman. You should be rubbing the dorsal side of your penis on the woman’s clitoris. You’ll know when you’re doing it right because it will be the best part of sex for you and the woman.

>There may be a link between the foreskin pulling back more on that frenium or whatever, because you are pulling back the skin attached to the head rather than just stroking the shaft. <

Most circumcised men are capable of doing this. Unfortunately, this is all that a lot of them can do. This is what triggers ejaculation.
60

There is alot of truth to that. Both of my younger brothers were circumsized.

[quote]
*>But, Jack, the skin does roll back during intercourse. It creates a wider area at the base with the rolled up skin which may or may not relate to an enhanced sexual experience for the woman. <[\i]

Well, I don’t know if I want to cast myself into the role of sex therapist, but you’re obviously using your penis incorrectly. Are you peeling your foreskin back before you go inside the woman? [\quote]

No, not at all. In my experience it pulls back naturally upon entry when I stroke inward then covers again on the outward stroke. And as excitement builds and the head gets wider with more blood flow, it holds the skin back. But I still penetrate all the way in until pubic bone meets labia.

[quote]
*>As far as clitoral stimulation, I don’t see how the status of one’s foreskin affects that at all during intercourse. The head is inside right?<[\i]

Wrong. You’re using your penis incorrectly, again. Most of the sex should take place with your penis completely outside of the woman. You should be rubbing the dorsal side of your penis on the woman’s clitoris. You’ll know when you’re doing it right because it will be the best part of sex for you and the woman. [\quote]

No offense, but I don’t see what I get out of that. I’ve certainly done it before, much to her pleasure, but other than a regular old, something is touching my erect cock excitement, I don’t get any orgasm-level pleasure out of it.

Maybe I am just lucky with my partners, but I have never had a problem delivering orgasms with full vaginal penetration.
I’m not being facetious, and I don’t mean to hijack this OP, I have heard the argument made that women only orgasm through their clitoris or their G spot. Unless I have gotten really lucky at hitting one or the other during intercourse, I never concentrate my efforts there and consistently satisfy my partners. (of course some women do fake it I suppose)

Further, at least in my experience, when a woman orgasms from direct clitoral stimulation, their clitoris becomes extremely sensitive, much like the glans on a penis directly after orgasm. Further stimulation is somewhat painful. But again, this is personal experience and no two people are alike.