FORUMS > Sex & Adult Forum Rules

CUT or UNCUT. Which is better? Is one more masculine than the other? Does it mean one man is INTACT and the other is MUTILATED?

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 04, 2007 5:33 AM GMT
    UNCUT men are fetishized for thier foreskin and many new studies are emerging on the benefits or lack thier of for circumcision. Your thoughts, gentlemen.
  • scorpios Posts: 8
    QUOTE Jun 04, 2007 10:26 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 05, 2007 3:01 AM GMT
    Like everything else there are tons of variation in uncuts guys. The head is more sensitive to be sure. But the foreskin does all the work stimulating the head so the head is never really is exposed as it is with cut guys. So the paradox is we are more sensitive but never are directly stimulated. I freak when i see guys whacking it cus that would hurt so much if i tried to do that. The other big difference is that long foreskins never pull back to expose the head at all and shorter ones like mine pull back when boned and then look pretty much like a cut dick.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 05, 2007 12:04 PM GMT
    Cut is cleaner and easier to keep clean.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 05, 2007 10:55 PM GMT
    I am UNcut white male in the USA, quite rare indeed. I've been refused sex all my life for having foreskin, by some. But, many have even traveled hundreds of miles to suck my cock, too, because of my long, loose foreskin.

    Mostly, I find guys simply don't care either way.

    I've considerred circumcision. I used to work outpatient surgery and assisted in over 700 adult circs and even did a few on my own on the side, performing a better quality circ than the doctors I worked for did.

    Foreskin is absolutly wonderful for jacking off with. No friction as the foreskin folds onto itself and rolls back and forth. For fucking it's tough to keep a condom on, I stick a female condom up the ass of my bottom and let him wear it. I'm a top!

    I do have to wash daily and if I'm having sex I wash again, it can get musky under there but never any bad odor. I live in Arizona and it gets hot here, I do pull the hood back during the day a few times in the summer to cool my cockhead off.

    I'm very sensative, sometimes a blow job can be painful so I have to teach how to suck the uncircumcised, so they best be willing to learn@!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 7:15 PM GMT
    All I have to say is it's like a puppy. If your going to have one you better keep it clean.

    I really don't have an opinion one way or the other, If I ever had a son he would be but for religious reasons.
  • fabians Posts: 52
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 8:13 PM GMT
    I honestly don't see whats the big deal. One is not more masculine then the other that would just be dumb. From what I hear then you lose sensitivity in your head if you're cut. My ex Mark talked about how he got cut when he was 13. He remembers anything rubbing against it, his sheet, underwear ANYTHING hurt like crazy. But after a while it got less sensitivite and he as ok with everything rubbing against it.

    I guess you're head is more sensitivite when you are uncut so sex is a little better. Now I don't know if that true because I'm uncut, and I've only be with cut guys, not by choice but that just how it always seems to happen. I hear sex is better uncut, but even if you're cut sex is still great, so I don't think it really matters.
  • Rowing_Ant Posts: 1360
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 8:25 PM GMT
    Uncut is so much better - the foreskin has a great many known functions - at least 12 - and contains 75% of all the erogenous nerve endings. We have one for a reason. If a guy wants to get cut and can make the decision for himself, an informed and consensual one then its his body; but if that decision is not consensual or for any medical reason then it should be illegal!!!

    Check out:-

    Having been cut and now being intact I can say that sex is so much more pleasurable with a foreskin, you dont need lubricant to wank with, my glans is so much more sensitive, ditto the innter foreskin and frenulum..its just better. so much better.

  • fabians Posts: 52
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 8:34 PM GMT
    WAIT!!!! Hold the phone!!!! You were cut and now you have foreskin again O_O thats possible?!?!?!
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 8:40 PM GMT
    Yeah you can stretch it back if you have a little bit of skin left. I know it takes a long time, but I really don't know much about it besides that.

    I have to disagree with you without medical reasons it should be illegal. Its a very important part of being Jewish. The bris or the brit milah is a covenant with god. And is a connection with Jewish generations past present and future.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 8:43 PM GMT
    yeah ...i want to see this too!
  • Rowing_Ant Posts: 1360
    QUOTE Jun 07, 2007 9:10 PM GMT

    Regrowing your foreskin is easy and can take less than year to a few years depending on how tight you were butchered and how well your body regenerates.

    Or you can have surgery.

    If you want pics of mine, ask lol. Ive been told my cock looks natural.

    None consensual none therapeutic circumcision is actually illegal in some parts of Europe and in Scandinavia too. Female "Circumcision" has been made illegal by the UN and that too has "cultural" reasons; the original Jewish circumcision was not the radical one we know today tho. It was originally just a nick off the end not the complete removal of the foreskin. There are also Jews who are opposed to full circumcision and one of my music professors at music college is Jewish and he has his foreskin. As far as hes concerned being Jewish is a state of mind not what you do with your cock. lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 4:37 AM GMT
    All I have to say is that is how your professor feels. I feel strongly that preserving Jewish tradition is important, so I reserve the right to have a bris for a son if I ever have one. The act as done is a bris is less traumatic than in a medical sense, and on top of that all the moyle does is circumcisions, he is a pro at it.

    To conclude you are obviously anti-circumcision, I have very strong feelings for having on in my family line. We disagree. Let's leave it at that.
  • fabians Posts: 52
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 7:14 AM GMT
    I think if I had a son I wouldn't have it done. I leave that up to him. It would be easier to get it done when he is a baby but I don't want to decide that for him. I'm already giving have to worry about keeping him alive and well. I don't really want to worry about my son's dick, I'll let him do that lol
  • Rowing_Ant Posts: 1360
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 9:25 AM GMT
    Hurrah! What an enlightened aproach. *grin*

  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 11:02 AM GMT
    I think mutilating baby boys in the name of superstitious nonsense is wrong.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 1:22 PM GMT
    Jewish circumcision is a part of their tradition. But if they NEVER did circumcisions before and a new religion popped up and started doing circumcisions becuase God told them to, every member would be in prison for child abuse.

    it's just that it's accepted becuase it has been done so long. In California, where I used to work in the Hollywood industry, many Jewish men choose to have their son's NOT circumcised. In the ceremony on day 8, instead, the Moyle uses a needle and draws one drop of blood in a symbolic circumcision. I attended two such ceremonies.

    There is NO good reason for child abuse!! That includes religion and tradition. Just because they've abused children for thousands of years time has come to stop.

    I'd love to see people start suing religions for the crap they have had dumped on them all their lives. Cutting off part of their penis because of tradition, fear of Hell as a child, guilt and shame dumped on them. Make religion, Christian and Jewish accountable for the abuse they've cast on the innocent, just because they've gotten away with it for all these years.

    No more abuse
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 3:06 PM GMT
    The argument that circumcision is abuse is a stretch. I am circumcised and I don't feel abused. Do you feel abused? Also I think some sensitivity is in order here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 3:27 PM GMT
    If we were slashing baby boys' faces with a razor then that would be considered abuse. How is it any different that it is their wieners?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 5:43 PM GMT
    Okay. Where to start with that post. A circumcision is far from "slashing the forskin or any part of the penis with a razor", you are exagerating how violent and extreme you feel circumcision is by using the term slashing. It is a surgery like any other. And there is no conclusive evidence that circumcision is good or bad, emotionally, physically, or physcologcially. Second try using medical terms to get your point across, your not doing it with that post thats for sure.
  • xanadude Posts: 424
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 6:06 PM GMT
    Hmn...a similar topic was brought up in another forum not long ago.

    I don't buy the "cut is easier to keep clean" argument. Since we're all using computers, I'm going to assume we are all living in the civilized world and all have access to running water and soap. So that argument just doesn't wash (pun intended).

    As for the surgery vs. mutilation debate, in the overwhelming majority of cases, circumcision is not done for medical reasons, but for aesthetic and/or religious reasons. As well, in cases involving children or infants, it is tje ONLY elective procedure that I can think of done without the patient's consent. While most cases result in the procedure being "successful" (ie. no infection, no accidental mutilation of the penis) the point still is the option was taken away from the patient. I can also appreciate the customs of various religions, but I am left baffled that legally the desire of the parents override the personal liberties of the child. While you may not miss what you never had, it was still your's to begin with and you should be entitled to have a say what's done with it (short of legitimate medical necessity)

    Circumcision began being widespread through the US in the 1800's as it was thought to be a means of staving off the urges to masturbate (HA!) Eventually it just became the cultural norm. It was also popular in Canada, and to a lesser extent in the UK. However, since national health plans won't cover the surgery in Canada (unless deemed medically necessary), the number of uncircumcized men has been on the rise since the 80's.

    Recent studies show that African men who are circumcized are at a lower rate of HIV infection. This study doesn't seem to take into account that conditions there may make it unsanitary to have this kind of surgery in the first place, that patients may not wait to fully heal before having sex (leaving themselves open to infection with HIV or other STIs), or what it has to do with men who have sex with other men.

    Many uncut men are offended that they are called "unnatural" by cut men(ironic since uncut is the natural state by biological default). Many cut men are offended that they are referred to as mutilated (considering that for most the decision was made for them). What's worse, there are "extremist" camps who are (for lack of a better word) repulsed at men who are one or the other, and won't become involved with them.

    In the end, yes it is a matter of personal preference, just like overy body type or personality. However, in the grand scheme of things, it really isn't that important in a partner (unless bad hygiene is involved) and if you make a big deal about it, you can miss out on some really amazing opportunities with some really amazing guy(s).
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 08, 2007 9:21 PM GMT
    I don't think that one is any better than the other. But personally, I wish that I had been given the choice.

    If I ever have a child and he is uncut, I will leave him that way. It will be his choice when he gets older.

    Just out of curiosity, what is the reason for circumcision with regards to the Jewish faith?
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 09, 2007 3:23 AM GMT
    The first reason behind Jewish Circumcision is "And God spoke to Abraham saying: ...This is my covenant which you shall keep between Me and you and thy seed after you -every male child among you shall be circumcised." (Gen. 17:12). Since that was writen 3500 years ago it has been a ritual representing the covenant between God and Israel.
    The word Brit Milah in English is "the covenant of circumcision", and is more than just a medical procedure. In many ways it is seen as the ultimate affirmation of Jewish identity. It conects each Jew to all of his Jewish brothers.

    The ceremony is a celebration, and it is almost considered rude to invite people to the Bris, because it is very hard to turn down going because it is such a huge deal. So instead you just let people know of when it will happen.

    I hope that helps.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 11, 2007 3:48 AM GMT
    And the mormons symbolizes thier convenant with magic underwear. I like thier approach better.
  • Posted by a hidden member.Log in to view his profile
    QUOTE Jun 14, 2007 2:38 PM GMT
    I got lucky. I Am cut but have extra skin so I feel like I have the best of both worlds. I guess I am all for keeping things natural. However I do hear that people who are uncut often have premature ejaculation problems. I have completle control. AT 8+ I am thankful.