The circumcision thread: restored

Great Debates
21

I’m going to give you a chance here, JDT, because I pity you that much. My father, who is an RN, and not by mistake, tells me I had phimosis. Both a pediatrician and a pediatric urologist agreed. My foreskin had swelled to the point where I was not able to urinate. Stretching it would have done no good. Know how I know? Because that’s what happens with phimosis, or at least what happened in my case. It had swollen. Had to be removed.

And I did just get done reading some literature on phimosis . . . evidently in most cases, stretching of some sort does work. In this case, according to the educated minds of three people, surgery was the best option.

Jack, in this case you are wrong. Stretching would not have worked. You don’t know what you’re talking about here, and I do wish you’d let go of this notion that you know more about my foreskin than I do. It is rather annoying.

22

::Hanging head:: Sorry. :o

23

Manda JO,
> There has been pretty significant work done on the male orgasm as well, and apparently no researcher ever noticed “Gee, these intact men get off harder.” <

With all due respect, what research would that be? Female genitalia has been studied to a great extent along with female erotic sensations. No model exists for male sensations except for the model that I personally created.
24

iampunha,

> agrees with my father that I had phimosis <

Well, I'm not going to get into what is meant by "phimosis" because doctors commonly get confused on what this is. You're telling me, that your foreskin was interfering with you ability to urinate. That tells me that the membrane between your glans and foreskin had already disintegrated so that your foreskin was no longer attached to you glans (otherwise, your foreskin would have been held out of the path of your urine). So, your problem was only that you couldn't retract  your foreskin back. Manual stretching would have solved the problem unless it was a very rare, stubborn case. Then one would use 5% testosterone cream (personally, I'd bet that manual stretching will always work eventually without have to resort to the testosterone cream).
25

psychobunny,

> 1)FGM is different from male circumcision in the response of the victim. Most victims of FGM do not assert that their sex life is unchanged as a result of the surgery- <

Wrong. In Africa, where FGM is very common, it is usually older FGM victims that insist that the younger women have FGM done to them. And, these older FGM victims are the ones who carry out the mutilations. They use the same excuses to justify FGM that Americans use to jusify MGM. That includes that FGM did no harm to them.

> those that support it argue that women should not have enjoyable sexual experiences. <

Not recently has this been an excuse for FGM (but, I'm not an FGM expert, though). This WAS the original excuse to justify MGM in America, though (it was actually said that it was important to amputate the most erotic part of the penis is order to prevent masturbation so that the child would not go insane ).

> 2)I am concerned that of the uncircumcized men (and women who have had sex with uncircumcized men) who have posted here, not one has had sex correctly as posited by Jack. If his description of how sex should be performed is indeed the only correct way, then why is this method counterintuitive to even the uncircumcized men here. Does this mean that extensive training is necessary for appropriate sexual function? Or could it be that this is not the genetically determined instinctive method of intercourse? <

I'm grappling with this mystery too. It does seem that even intact men from Europe don't automatically engage in coitus the way I think it should be done (however, I have interviewed a few intact Americans that do something somewhat similar to what I am saying.) I'm sure that one factor that causes this is the round-peg / round-hole / so-what-obviously-should-one-do idea.
Further, I would have to advise any intact man that if it is his desire to please a woman with excellent eroitic sensations, that he should politely ignore her directions during coitus.
And, also, haven't you ever wondered why the clitoris and the clitoral hood is outside of the vagina? Is it because humans have evolved sex organs that require oral sex? I doubt it. The reason that the clitoris is on the outside is so that the man and the woman can experience coitus for a good length of time. When the man goes inside, he can't help but be pulling on his frenulum and that will cause ejaculation and the sex is over too fast. The dorsal side of a man's penis and a woman's clitoris is perfectly designed for prolonged erotic sensations.
26

Jack,

In your prior posts you have mentioned the difficulty of proving a negative. You assert here that: “No model exists for male sensations except for the model that I personally created.”

Can you explain what evidence you have prove this negative statement?

27

jab1,

>“I can’t prove that murder is a bad thing. That would be proving a negative and…” <

Typically absurd statement. No, you can't prove that murder is a bad thing because you never know when a murder will be committed that you might feel is justified (there is such a thing as justifiable homicide in the law, you know).

> “I can’t prove that rape is a bad thing. That would be proving a negative and…” <

That's right, you can't. What if someone held a gun to your head and told you to carry out a rape or you would be dead? Anyone that supports a child's first sexual experience as being part of his penis getting amputated could easily rationalize some justification for a rape, I would think.

> “I can’t prove that stealing is a bad thing. That would be proving a negative and…” <

All sorts of things are stolen and it's considered good by society. Another bad example on your part. The rape point was your best example.

> Have I made my point? <

Aristotle would say "no." I'm sure if there was a way to prove a negative, Aristotle would have figured it out. I'm sure that mankind has not waited for jab1 to come along and do what Aristotle couldn't even do.

> Holy crap! You’re right! Babies can’t complain! That means all the times I ever heard a baby cry from pain, I was actually hallucinating! <

Ohh, what was I thinking?!? You're so right!!! When that baby lets out that blood-curdling scream as his genitals are being slashed, that is his way of saying "no." Very perceptive of you. Have you informed your local hospital?

> (Why do I keep debating this guy? Practice.) <

You need it.
28

Aparently, Pun, he does know more about your foreskin than you do. Don’t feel bad. Aparently he knows more about mine too, and at best it’s in a jar of formaldihide in a lab somewhere.

29

Jack, I have concluded that you have never had sex. And therefore I must politely and with all due respect say that I don’t think you know what you’re talking about and your advice is worthless.

And for the rest of you guys - intact or otherwise, ignoring a woman’s directions during sex is a really BAD idea. (Actually, ignoring a woman’s directions at any time is a really bad idea. But that’s another thread.) In general, a woman knows what she wants. If you’re lucky enough to have her tell you what she wants, by all means listen to her and follow her directions.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Felice

30

Sauron,

> Incidentally, Jack, the studies cited by the American Cancer Society indicate what most rational people would consider positive behavioral differences for circumcised men vs. uncircumcised: less tendency to have multiple sexual partners, less tendency to smoke, better overall personal hygiene. <

What study would that be? You're probably quoting the Three Stooges Wiswell, Schoen, and Weiss.

> Tell you what; I’ll form a new position statement, and we can debate it. My position is that circumcision makes men more secure in themselves and better members (HA!) of society. My proof is the information cited above, which is listed on the American Cancer Society site. <

Where is this listed on the ACS site. The ACS doesn't study the affects of circumcision.

> To satisfy your request for a cost-benefit analysis, I suppose we’d have to tot up all the costs involved in circumcision. My guess would be that it’s around $500 per operation, but I freely admit that it’s a guess. <

Out of pocket expense for each neonatal circumcision is $2,666 a piece. That's almost $3 billion a year.

> Now, we’ll leave the potential costs of penile cancer treatment for 1,400 cases a year out of this; <

Doesn't amount to anything compared to $3 billion, anyway.

> we’re just debating the position I forwarded. <

OK.

> To generate the costs associated with not circumcising male babies, we’ll need to add up the costs associated with sexually transmitted diseases (diagnosis, treatment, research, etc.), <

A net savings.

> since uncircumcised men apparently have a tendency to sleep with more partners (see proof above); <

You haven't shown any cite at all for this. I can show cites for just the opposite conclusion.

> the costs associated with smoking (which would also include the costs of diagnosing and treating lung cancer); <

You don't have a cite showing that smoking is more common in intact men.

> and the cost of public-information programs to let uncircumcised men know how to clean themselves properly. <

Zero cost. Not needed. The less the medical establishment gets involved with a man's foreskin the better.

> Admittedly, I don’t have any figures for any of these costs, but my educated guess is that those costs would exceed the circumcision costs. <

$3 billion, I doubt it.

>Can you disprove this?<

You would still have to define what a circumcision is by doing a thorough histological study of the physiology of the foreskin. And, then you would have to argue that the man is better off without it. Can you do that?
31

Billdo,

> In your prior posts you have mentioned the difficulty of proving a negative. You assert here that: “No model exists for male sensations except for the model that I personally created.” Can you explain what evidence you have prove this negative statement? <

You're right. I can't prove that there is no study that shows what a male experiences during sex. I can only say that many men have dedicated a lot of time to finding this sort of study but have come up empty. If Manda JO has a study, I would like to know what it is.
32

Felice,

> And for the rest of you guys - intact or otherwise, ignoring a woman’s directions during sex is a really BAD idea. <

Circumcised guys should follow the woman's directions---it's your only hope.

> (Actually, ignoring a woman’s directions at any time is a really bad idea. But that’s another thread.) <

I wouldn't say to "ignore" but to politely decline if it is counter to what the intact man believes that he should do to get his best sensations. The penis and the vagina are perfectly compatible. If the intact man is getting his best sensations, the woman will catch on to Mother Nature's design soon enough will be getting her best sensations. Now, if it's a European woman who has only been with intact guys, you may want to get her input, though (although I doubt if she'd have anything to say since she's use to it not being necessary to give instructions).
33

>I wouldn’t say to “ignore” but to politely decline if it is counter to what the intact man believes that he should do to get his best sensations. The penis and the vagina are perfectly compatible. If the intact man is getting his best sensations, the woman will catch on to Mother Nature’s design soon enough will be getting her best sensations. Now, if it’s a European woman who has only been with intact guys, you may want to get her input, though (although I doubt if she’d have anything to say since she’s use to it not being necessary to give instructions).<

Oh. My. God.

I can’t believe…

Did he JUST SAY…?

Who does he think…?

I give up. This has totally ruined my spirit for “debate.”

34

Y’know, I find this kinda insulting. Jack. I’d put my skills up against yours any day- IF we could find a woman willing to try sex with you- which I frankly doubt.

It’s a shame this opinion was put forth by a poster acting looney. What a perfect excuse for man who are poor in bed- It’s all YOUR falt, ladies :D:D I’m sure it’s solstice Jack gives to himself frequently- or would were he having sex.

How about an informal poll here. Ladies, if you were having sex with an intact man, and suggested he do this or that, and he said he wouldn’t because YOU didn’t know HOW to receive pleasure for him, how quickly would you leave? Were I a woman, I wouldn’t even let him finish.

35

iampunha,

> I’m going to give you a chance here, JDT, because I pity you that much. My father, who is an RN, and not by mistake, tells me I had phimosis. Both a pediatrician and a pediatric urologist agreed. <

If you were in northern Europe, they never would have amputated you foreskin.

> My foreskin had swelled to the point where I was not able to urinate.<

Um humm. You were 4 years old, right? Did someone forcibly retract your foreskin for you? Was that someone a health care worker?
Anyway, the worst-case scenario that I can imagine would have been to put a bullet in your mouth and tell you to bite down. Then, jam a catheter up your meatus so that you can urinate. Then administer antibiotics until the swelling goes down. Then manually stretch that foreskin. Medical personnel with any knowledge of the foreskin could almost certainly have prevented your problem in the first place, anyway.

> And I did just get done reading some literature on phimosis . . . evidently in most cases, stretching of some sort does work. In this case, according to the educated minds of three people, surgery was the best option. <

Where did they get their “education” on the foreskin? Certainly not in any American medical school because they don’t teach anything about the foreskin other than that it should be cut off as soon as possible and for any reason.

> Jack, in this case you are wrong. Stretching would not have worked. You don’t know what you’re talking about here, and I do wish you’d let go of this notion that you know more about my foreskin than I do. It is rather annoying. <

Human bodies are not like cars. Human bodies are all the same. The rare condition of BXO is the only reason why you might have to have your foreskin amputated.
36

:eek: What!!! Are you insane? Wait - sorry. Rhetorical question. Human bodies are all the same. Great. That should be a reassurance to all those medical students wasting their time learning about how different people react differently to the same treatment. Fools.

Seriously, though, Jack, what is your purpose here? Are you really trying to convince anyone? Do you just see this as a chance to spout your views? I’m curious.

37

Jack,

If I read your posts correctly, you are saying that an uncut man can stimulate a woman’s clit with his penis, which will be the highest kind of pleasure for both partners(their “best sensations”). At least, I infer that is what you are saying, as you discuss the subject in such a roundabout way. Do I need a password before you are allowed to actually say what the penis and the clit/clitoral hood are doing to invoke this ultimate sensation?

Now, if I am correct in my assumptions, what would be the difference if I used my mouth/tongue/lips/fingers on my female partner? I know that you would say that my penis would not be getting the “best sensations” that it is capable of, but, damn, my brain is getting quite a workout! And, for me, uncut, my brain is having the workout of it’s life. And my penis isn’t far behind.

All I can think of is Woody Allen’s line–"The wrong kind? Every one I ever had was right on the money!

38

Why, Jack. My father is a well respected pediatrician, and I can’t counrt the number of times he came home and regailed us all with tales about how he had treated a child for a medical condition while having him bite on a bullet for the pain. I suppose I was wrong, you ARE well versed in modern medical techniques.

[INSULT DELETED BY DAVID B]
( Sorry, mods, but I contend that in this instance that is not so much an insult, but a reasoned conclusion based on the information provided. Fell free to remove it if you must, but I think this coda is accurate)

[Edited by David B on 11-07-2000 at 06:18 AM]

39

samclem,

> If I read your posts correctly, you are saying that an uncut man can stimulate a woman’s clit with his penis, which will be the highest kind of pleasure for both partners(their “best sensations”). <

That is correct.

> Do I need a password before you are allowed to actually say what the penis and the clit/clitoral hood are doing to invoke this ultimate sensation? <

Basically, what is happening is that the most sensitive part of the foreskin in popping up and over the corona of the glans and then back down on what is called the sulcus. During this time, the penis is using the clitoris to apply pressure on the most sensitive part of the foreskin. It's a synergistic dance of all of these elements. The woman's clitoral hood is manipulated secondarily by the other elements.

> Now, if I am correct in my assumptions, what would be the difference if I used my mouth/tongue/lips/fingers on my female partner? <

This has never been studied, but I will give my opinion as to what the results will be when this matter is finally researched: You can put more pressure where it matters with your penis. And, there are ripples and pops taking place that you cannot match with your tongue. Further, the man is face to face with the woman and so the man can bond with her properly as the two of them effortlessly work together to give each other the sensations.
40

Although I will freely admit to never having conducted a scientific study of the subject, it has been my observation that direct pressure on the clitoris, via the penis, foreskin, or anything else, rapidly ceases to be pleasant and becomes painful. It is a relatively delicate piece of tissue, quite amenable to being manipulated by the tongue or fingers, which are extremely precise instruments. Gratuitous banging about by a penis, foreskinned or otherwise, however, takes all the fun out of it.

I stand by my previous claim. Jack has never had sex.

Felice