Who'd have thought a thread about genital mutilation would incite a more fierce debate than the politics thread?

Jun 22, 2020 21:17:21 GMT Emperor said:

Who'd have thought a thread about genital mutilation would incite a more fierce debate than the politics thread?

The only thing we prize more than being politically correct is our peens.

Jun 22, 2020 21:17:21 GMT Emperor said:

Who'd have thought a thread about genital mutilation would incite a more fierce debate than the politics thread?

It's weird to me that the most vocal about not being cut are those that are uncut already.
I don't really get being obsessed about what other people choose to do with boys penises.

Wait, so I've lost track...

Is everyone anti cutting then?

I think they look pretty gross whether they’re cut or not TBH.

Jun 22, 2020 21:58:42 GMT @aaron said:

I think they look pretty gross whether they’re cut or not TBH.

You don't like looking at penises!? Who are you, KING KID? -_-

Jun 22, 2020 22:12:09 GMT 🤯 said:

Jun 22, 2020 21:58:42 GMT @aaron said:

I think they look pretty gross whether they’re cut or not TBH.

You don't like looking at penises!? Who are you, KING KID ? -_-

Am I Kid? Or is Kid me...? 

Think about that one!

Love that only 2 people voted.

I didn't even notice the poll. Still not voting. As I type, it's a three way tie.

I think the poll is new.

Poll is new. Figured it'd help simplify things. 😂

Does the Wife give a shit what we think? Has she already made the decision?

Are you guys voting too?

Oh we're cutting that little bastard like we're New Jack and he's Mass Transit. His shit's gonna look like his dad's shit to avoid confusion. And smegma.

Every kid sees his Dad's dong once in their life. Guess it's best to look samey so he doesn't get confused.

Jun 22, 2020 23:35:32 GMT 🤯 said:

Oh we're cutting that little bastard like we're New Jack and he's Mass Transit. His shit's gonna look like his dad's shit to avoid confusion. And smegma.

:rofl:

I have quite a few friends who did the same for exactly that reason.  

Honest question, how much is it to have a baby in the US?  How much extra is circumcision? I THINK they charge $500 here as it's deemed an elective surgery.

Jun 22, 2020 23:52:34 GMT iron maiden said:

Jun 22, 2020 23:35:32 GMT 🤯 said:

Oh we're cutting that little bastard like we're New Jack and he's Mass Transit. His shit's gonna look like his dad's shit to avoid confusion. And smegma.

:rofl:

I have quite a few friends who did the same for exactly that reason.  

Honest question, how much is it to have a baby in the US?  How much extra is circumcision? I THINK they charge $500 here as it's deemed an elective surgery.

Wait, what... Having a baby isn't free!?!?

Jun 22, 2020 23:57:01 GMT 🤯 said:

Jun 22, 2020 23:52:34 GMT iron maiden said:

I have quite a few friends who did the same for exactly that reason.  

Honest question, how much is it to have a baby in the US?  How much extra is circumcision? I THINK they charge $500 here as it's deemed an elective surgery.

Wait, what... Having a baby isn't free!?!?

Maybe it's covered under your insurance?  I don't know how shit works down there.   I just hear about high medical bills all the time.  :ugh:

Jun 22, 2020 23:58:27 GMT iron maiden said:

Jun 22, 2020 23:57:01 GMT 🤯 said:

Wait, what... Having a baby isn't free!?!?

Maybe it's covered under your insurance?  I don't know how shit works down there.   I just hear about high medical bills all the time.  :ugh:

I don't know how shit works here either. Typical ignorant American, I am.

Hope that Google money is still rolling in.

Jun 22, 2020 23:35:32 GMT 🤯 said:

Oh we're cutting that little bastard like we're New Jack and he's Mass Transit. His shit's gonna look like his dad's shit to avoid confusion. And smegma.

Love the metaphor with new jack

Thanks to this thread I learned how to block people on here.

I can't believe I'm going to spend more time on this topic. Also like, trigger warning. Sexual content and penis is mentioned a bunch.

Health Canada 'does not recommend the routine circumcision of every newborn male'. I am not a parent, but I understand circumcision is no longer paid for as part of Medicare, which is one of the reasons the percent of males in the country that are circumcised has been steadily declining since the 70's, while having a baby (like every doctor visit and all essential health care costs in canada) is free, this is deemed elective by the government, and there may be a token cost that is enough to make the decision for poor people.

I have had discussions and read into the subject as a result of various discussions in university with classmates. I don't remember why or how it came up, I would attend all sorts of extracurricular clubs/lectures/discussions just for fun. The debates between the atheists and the creationists at the creation club meetings were always fun, and I was so surprised to learn my advanced organic synthesis professor was a creationist, blew my mind.

Now of course I grew up playing sports in Canada, hockey is king and you stink so you gotta shower, so naturally I've seen a lot of my peers ducks swinging around a locker room. And you know there's the hazing and all that so you will eventually realise some guys ducks looked different. And weather you're intact or cut, I don't understand these why you wouldn't be interested in understanding why not all dicks look the same, and what does that mean for sex. So when people say things like suggesting one type of person makes an issue; the thing j don't get is why both types of dicks aren't interested in learning about their favourite organ. Also side note, I totally don't understand guys or boys of any age that act all weird in a dressing room try8to cover up their junk, you can't change what God gave you, so strut your sexy self.

The bit about any sort of 'debate' on this topic I find fascinating is both the Americans reaction to it (not a this is biased as my canadian observer of America viewpoint) and in general the sometimes hateful reaction from cut men to anyone who discusses the subject. Once I had a friend message me on Facebook to tell me how stupid I was, out of nowhere, simply because I asked a question on someone else's thread about circumcision.

Why do I find the American reaction so amusing? In general I view the way Americans describe itself as 'the greatest country on the planet' humorous because of how many quantifiable metrics would show it's not, and yet an American will staunchly defend that opinion without listening to any argument, and in general Americans are educated to live an insular and ignorant life regarding knowledgable of the rest of the world.

When a cut man is presented with the debate about circumcision they seem to react the same; staunch refusal to listen, and proclaim their way is the right way, while admitting they've done no research on the topic, and then resorting to name calling similar to how many Americans interact with others on a world stage.

Fact. Most first world countries health boards advise the opinion that circumcision is not necessary or recommended. American opinion is atypical. This idea that circumcision prevents STDs/aids/hiv; if it were true wouldn't we see an inversely proportional relationship between rate of circumcision in a country and its rate of aids? And yet America which is a country that is one of the higher rates of circumcision is also one of the higher rates of aids (in comparing first world countries). So you don't need to chop off a part of your body that has evolved perfectly over time. Also, condoms. Condoms. Condoms condoms condoms.

Now let's talk about education about the penis. Remember in science class when you learned about the reproductive system? Bet nobody remembers reading about the function of the foreskin or the clit or any of those things. That's right, because they didn't teach those things. And what little semblance of a sex ed class your high school gym teacher ran didn't talk about these things either. And neato fact, they didn't learn the function of the foreskin in med school either. Why am I saying this? Oh yeah, there are studies that show rates of things happening like phimosis and other situations that occur after you're a baby that will require later stage circumcisions, and this is often used as a reason to circumcise to prevent this. I'm losing my point....
American doctors, who are circumcised in many cases due not know how to deal with an infants intact penis, nor how to advise parents about it. The foreskin does not need to be retracted until it naturally does ap on it's own, which will occur approximate 7-10 years old. If your forcibly remove the foreskin from the glans unnaturally it which damage the functionality of the foreskin, and there will be higher rates of phimosis and other things that will necessitate later stage circumcision. In other words, the doctors lack of education causes the problems which show data that leads to the belief you should circumcise.

Neat fact. Based on surveys of both cut and intact men, it has been found the most sensitive parts of the penis are in different locations. For cut men, that spot is at the base of their shaft which means for them to experience the greatest pleasure while have sex they will tend to prefer deep thrusts in order to feel something, or in other words their jackhammering away. Whereas intact mens most sensitive area is the glans, so less of the jackhammering. Now go ask your partner if she enjoys the jackhammering. And if the response is, oh well intact men don't last as long because they are more sensitive, again ask your partner and she'll tell you the small difference in stamina (if it is even true) makes no difference because men are just delusional about how long they last anyway.

I've lost the plot and the mental stamina to continue. You likely didn't choose what your dick looks like, and individually you won't change anyone's opinion because Americans (as a society in general) are prudes and can't hold a reasonable discussion about anything sexual related.

I forget the point I intended to build to. Stop looking at my penis.

I actually find it the opposite nazzer , that uncircumcised people are very upset that circumcision is a thing and I personally don't really care either way.
It could be argued that circumcised people are self-conscious because most porn features circumcision.
Not that porn is a great representation generally of the proportions of regular people.

It was for the best that I was circumcised as otherwise I would technically have "three feet"
For me sex is pretty great, the only area where cut guys probably lose out is hand jobs, but who honestly is going to ask for a hand job anyway? 

In Australia I have heard anecdotally that it is getting harder and harder (no pun intended) to find a doctor who will do a circumcision.
That doesn't bother me at all.

My issue is the anti-crew reeks of propaganda. The constant claims that the science is against circumcision is blatantly false. Meta-analyses all pretty much agree it has benefits, and meta-analyses are surveys of a field of literature. Reading many of the studies last night, the research from the anti-crowd also relies on what is called flexible measures, where each study defines a metric differently, using variants of a scales that may or not be valid, instead of the validated scale itself. Finally the theories being used to justify the science are fringe. But the claims are made by the group opposing this that science is wrong and they are banking on people not being able to read the literature themselves and assess it themselves to make these claims. Suggest that you may need training in science to assess the literature of science and many supporters get triggered. But then they promote studies with serious statistical errors, like following MANOVA analyses with ANOVA analyses, falsely reporting what the results of multivariate analyses means and ignoring the canonical nature of these analyses, greatly overestimating what the effect size reported means and misreporting statistical power. Finally most of the papers that support the view that circumcision is bad, appear in lower tier journals. The top tier journals will not accept the papers because of the errors mentioned above. When read by people who are scientific literate, a lot of the arguments made do not make sense and are rejected by their peers. If their strongest argument is science is on their side, and the science is misleading, that is concerning.

Personally I do not care what people do as it is a cultural issue. My concern is the science reaks of pseudoscience. Even assuming complications occur in 1 out of 1000 cases, with 2 billion people being circumcised in the world we should see millions of people having serious issues. But we are not. The anti crew is also saying the complications occur at a higher rate than 1 in 1000 so we are not looking at tens to hundreds of million of people with severe dick problems. This would not be a vocal minority speaking out given how much many men are obsessed with their dicks. It would be a fucking outrage. Particularly in the US where men are dick obsessed.

Frankly though, most cut people do not really care either way about what others want to do. From a parenting perspective, when you are chasing around a kid and keeping track of a million other stupid things kids do, making sure they clean their dick just seems like an extra worry that can be avoided in places like the US where kids are commonly cut. One of the girls I helped raise had cleaning issues when puberty hit and let me tell you, it not fun to chase after a kid and make sure they are cleaning themselves properly and using the treatments to fix the infections properly.

Science didn't discover circ mythology did. It has no basis in this. A whole world knows this. only climate change deniers who hate the metric system are for circ. It should be obvious at this point that the data supports having a foreskin is fine and dandy.

I thought there would be a great market in making travel products from foreskins.
You could make a killer wallet that you could give a tickle and turn into an overnight bag.

I dig nazzer's and iNCY's most recent posts.

Some disorganized responses, most of which are likely to be TMI—

Clearly can't speak for all cut men, but my glans is def way more sensitive than the base of my shaft. Only thing jackhammering or going balls deep is nice for for me is mashing the glans against Wife's cervix. Maybe I just got lucky with a skilled dickcutter? Or maybe I got super unlucky where my shaft base SHOULD be more sensitive, but it was desensitized by whatever surgery they did on me as a baby to retrieve an ascended testicle? Whatever. All's well that ends well, as it's still easy enough to get my nut off and doing so feels great. Plus I have a bad ass 8" scar running the length on my shaft on the underside. I told Wife it was from my past life as a sword fighter.

Anyway...

nazzer continues to drop solid Dadvice with his condoms, condoms, condoms, condoms, condoms, condoms line. And totally agreed that America being prude has likely done more harm than good. Couple that with our exceptionalism, and we're def fucked as a country. But then again, that's clear. Look at who we elected, and how we've been handling 2020 so far in general.

My experience has been more in line with iNCY's where it seems like the Uncut Gems are more likely to be the passionate party with a strong stance on the circumcision topic. Cut guys seem to be more of the meh crowd who could care less, with wanting their sons' junk to look like theirs being the ultimate tipping factor. I feel like maybe the opposite of nazzer's point with porn maybe holds true for at least most Americans. Cut dicks are presented as the desirable norm their for the most part. As has jackhammering. Considering how weak American sex ed is, it's no surprise kids use porn to fill the educational gaps. And thus, circumcised peens and pounding pussy (or ass) like a jackhammer becomes the ingrained standard. I dunno... Anecdotal, pure speculation, all conjecture.

I feel like so much of this goes back to being an immeasurable pissing contest when the Uncut Gems side advocates how much better sex is with a foreskin still intact. That's immeasurable and ultimately irrelevant. First, there's so much more that goes into a functional and pleasurable sexual experience than just dick sensitivity. Second, even if we could objectively measure sensitivity and compare between each other, what's it matter? If I'm sensitive enough that sex is great and pleasurable for me... What should anyone else care? And vice versa. I feel like it's like licking a chocolate ice cream cone. Even if it tastes like DELICIOUS chocolate to an uncircumcised tongue, it's still gonna taste like DELICIOUS chocolate to my circumcised tongue too. Such a weird argument to try to take up, IMO.

Hate that this thread made theend feel compelled to block users. For sure wasn't my intention in starting this.

Anyway...

To echo nazzer, I forget what point I was trying to build to. If any. So... Stop looking at my penis!

Jun 23, 2020 13:08:34 GMT 🤯 said:

Plus I have a bad ass 8" scar 

Why does your penis surgery scar run to your belly button?

PS. I am as old as dirt and our Sex ed classes covered the clitoris and where sexual pleasure was derived from anatomically speaking.

Jun 23, 2020 13:16:03 GMT iNCY said:

Jun 23, 2020 13:08:34 GMT 🤯 said:

Plus I have a bad ass 8" scar 

Why does your penis surgery scar run to your belly button?

PS. I am as old as dirt and our Sex ed classes covered the clitoris and where sexual pleasure was derived from anatomically speaking.

It technically goes from my asshole to my belly button. I have a very short taint.

GLAD SOMEONE PICKED UP ON ME TRYING TO LOW KEY SLIDE IN THAT I'VE GOT A HOG DONG!

(P.S. No idea why... but I've always just assumed iNCY's unit is as girthy as his barrel chest. Like I just presume he's packing a pint can of Fosters in his britches).

It brings me great joy to know that you have contemplated my unit 🤯, even though it is unlikely that I will be able to return the favour.

Maybe not a Foster's can, but I could scar you with TMI.