Only because every woman I've talked to about it is absolutely grossed out by uncircumcised penises. So I guess I'm glad my parents cut my foreskin so girls aren't disgusted when they see my penis. Has nothing to do with religion. I just want girls not to be sexually turned off when they see me naked. I'd rather it be done before I can remember, than when I am older.

That being said, I totally understand the moral and legal argument against it. It's no where near as bad as female genital mutilation, but I agree, males should probably have the legal and ethical right to keep their foreskin if they want, and not be snipped as babies by their parents.

I'm just personally glad my parents did because I don't want women to be disgusted by my penis.

There is bit of a thrill when when a woman pulls down your pants and then runs screaming from the room, but then sticks her head back into the room to request that you chase her...

Regarding the complaint by all the women you've spoken to, that an uncircumcised male grosses them out, this sentiment would not exist if males were not circumcised. It's that simple.

Matters of taste are flexible. Would you date a basld man? They look funny, right? Would you date a dark brown man? They look funny, right?

It's embarrassing, but my parents were split on the circumcision issue, so they compromised and only half my foreskin was removed. Saucie says that if closes one eye, it's not that noticeable.

But which eye does she choose to close?

Her good eye...

This is quite funny. Running from the room would be more likely if something is missing IMO. I agree with your point that it’s what you’re used to that determines how you feel about it.

It's an American nonsense along with the fear of clowns. A lot of women outside the US love foreskins. They help produce multiple you know whats...

Abraham foresaw the rise of porn?

I guess I could say the same thing with the proviso that I’ve never talked to any woman about it.

"Only because every woman I've talked to about it is absolutely grossed out by uncircumcised penises."

You might want to change the circle of women you talk to about it. They seem pretty shallow and uninformed. Considering the large number of men in the world that are intact, I am guessing there are plenty of women that are ok with a penis looking the way it was intended. Surely there are plenty that prefer it over one that has had the end cut off (foreskin is not just a flap of skin, it is an important part of the penis with several functions).

I wonder if they feel the same about how their own genitals look and if they would appreciate a guy telling them how grossed out he is by it?

Well, my ex-wife and current girlfriend are a couple of the ones who said this. They think penises are unattractive in general, but uncircumcised ones simply make them look worse to them.

How much does religion impact what women think of The Penis?

Is it weighted more to men or women with regard to requests that Michaelangelo's "David" put on a pair of pants?

Are all women's breasts drooled over by fans, or are there some breasts we'd prefer to see covered?

Edu 106, Survey course in Expectations, and what to make of them. 3 credits Prerequisite: a note from your mom

Maybe uncircumcised penises are an acquired taste.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2019 10:34PM by babyloncansuckit.

It makes me wonder why you would want to be with someone that thinks (and says) your penis is gross, unattractive and disgusting. Wouldn't it be better to find someone that actually likes the sight of your penis?

Yay. It worked out well for you. It doesn't work out well for all men. Honestly, the only reason why it worked for you is because you're in a society where most men are circumcised. If you were in a society were most men weren't, then you wouldn't be so thrilled with your circumcised penis.

Adam Conover pointed out on one of his "Adam Ruin's Everything" episodes that penises look "weird" regardless of being circumcised. https://youtu.be/gCSWbTv3hng

I keep saying this and I don't understand why this is so hard. It's medically unnecessary. The Medical profession's very first and most important rule is "Do no harm", performing medically unnecessary procedures on a non-consenting being is doing harm.

"I'm just personally glad my parents did because I don't want women to be disgusted by my penis."

You are literally using the argument by the Mormon church about how you can be happy by letting someone else make decisions for you. In the video "On the Way Home" the daughter tries to state how happy she is because the church has made all her major life choices for her. Some people aren't too happy that a choice was made for them and they had no say in the matter.

It worked for you, it doesn't work for everyone, and some people it actually causes harm.

So there should be a religious rule: Thou shalt cut your baby boys so women won't get grossed out.

Because, well, you wouldn't be able to decide later by yourself when you actually want women to like you for your penis. :-)

I'm sorry, but I was grossed out by a man's penis when i first saw a circumcised one. I'm not one of those that think nakedness is really attractive, but I was raised mormon.

When I found out my boyfriend was gay and my roommate didn't have a clue what was going on, she went out and bought me a playgirl. I didn't look at it. My roommate did (extremely mormon). My boyfriend told me to look at it. I was grossed out. I changed plenty baby's diapers in my lifetime of circumcised males. Come to think of it, I think I changed one that wasn't circumcised!!!! It just occurred to me.

My boyfriend, as I've said, is not circumcised. Sure, it was different when I first saw it. Now, not a big deal.

Like others have said--it is what we are all familiar with. If no man had ever been circumcised, we'd all think uncircumcised was just fine.

And they sure don't all look alike even if they are circumcised!!!

One of my ex's previous boyfriends was uncircumcised. I am good friends with him and another of his old boyfriends--who are also now friends. Since so many guys he had been with didn't like uncircumcised, he had a circumcision a few years ago. He is about 60 now. I did hear something about how it has impacted him. He can really tell the rest of us. I'll have to ask the other friend again and I'll report back. Does it make a difference for a man to be circumcised???



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/10/2019 11:51AM by cl2.

Ban partial circumcision now !

myself, I'm waiting for Russ to clarify ChurchCo's position / wisdom / inspiration on this issue; the world has been waiting much too long for further light & knowledge - direction from on high...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/10/2019 12:50PM by GNPE.

Circumcision. A great little earner for doctors which IMV is why it is common in the US and not so much in countries with healthcare for all.

Nailed it !

My two atheist sons were not circumcised, but both times the insurance was billed for 1 circumcision, at $100 each.

I mentioned it both times to our agent's office and got yawned at each time.

See what happens when you don't circumcise your babies? They become atheists.

Dave? . . .

Dave?

and she was charged for a circumcision. The insurance fixed it.

Could it have been started because the military prefers it.

Topper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Could it have been started because the military
> prefers it.

Is this for real?

I've never heard of this before.

They have a thing for helmets.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They have a thing for helmets.


Thank you, babylon.

Makes perfect sense now!

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061119162411AARYfw4&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALAf5xSYeAVPsRfSi2ykWtf9KKFkJC4fzCsxwK7vvpZ7Cmh4hNTMRz3-UxHDBQ2HLqsWJKYyNtAVVnkt86GuVnGho_4P9aRmfY8_JqrrJlGgSAurFxsLJOxee0S2pXV_IfkmFTh5QZQ1-2_aqWTneCNPr71dh3M1eWhWl_WBY5q5&guccounter=2



The military doesn't actively promote circumcision, but it is logical that they would prefer it.

Why would it be logical?

And what evidence is there that the armed forces prefer circumcision?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2019 07:55PM by Lot's Wife.

1. Trench mouth

2. Trench foot

3. Trench tip

...

Yes, it's number 3, in your creative words.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2019 09:01PM by saucie.

Do you have any evidence for that assertion?

The link you posted takes readers to a internet board on which normal people, not even MDs, express their opinions. That has no probative value. Meanwhile most of the international medical bodies, including the AMA and the American Academy of Pediatrics either do not recommend neo-natal circumcision or state that the benefits, if any, are insufficient to justify the surgery.

So I am wondering if you can provide some substantiation for either the proposition that "the military prefers it" or the notion that authoritative medical bodies believe the benefits outweigh the costs. Otherwise we just fall back on old prejudices.

Topper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Could it have been started because the military
> prefers it.

Hmm. they didn't seem to mind during WWII...

https://youtu.be/5Z-U1FcTw1w

what is you left the decision up to the male. is it harder to be circumcised if you are a teenager? or older

Once when I was on a dating site, a gal who I hadn't met or phoned with.. seemed to be somewhat interested … asked me if I was cut...


NEXT!

I'm at the point where I'm not in favor of voluntary body modification for infants and children, including circumcision. I'm with those who feel that it's not medically necessary. However I realize that it's a touchy subject that involves religious customs, so as long as physicians are okay with it, I would not strongly object.

Women who are turned off by it simply haven't been around uncircumcised men.

As a teacher, I'm even opposed to pierced ears on young children. I've seen too many infected ears from children who cannot stop playing with their earrings, or who have never been taught to clean their piercings correctly. Then there is the upset when earrings that have been fiddled with inevitably come out of the ear and go missing. I think that adolescence is the right time to do ear piercings.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Women who are turned off by it simply haven't been
> around uncircumcised men.

Doesn't this need to be qualified? How would they know if they had?

Final word on circumcision :

There was a problem with squirrels around the churches in town.

The Presbyterian church called a meeting to decide what to do about their squirrel infestation. After much prayer and consideration, they concluded that the squirrels were predestined to be there, and they shouldn't interfere with God's divine will.

At the Baptist church the squirrels had taken an interest in the baptistery. The deacons met and decided to put a water-slide on the baptistery and let the squirrels drown themselves. The squirrels liked the slide and unfortunately, knew instinctively how to swim, so twice as many squirrels showed up the following week.

The Lutheran church decided that they were not in a position to harm any of God's creatures. So, they humanely trapped their squirrels and set them free near the Baptist church. Two weeks later the squirrels were back when the Baptists took down the water-slide.

But the Catholic church came up with a very creative strategy! They baptized all the squirrels and made them members of the church. Now they only see them at Christmas and Easter.

Not much was heard from the Jewish synagogue. They took the first squirrel and circumcised him. They haven't seen a squirrel since....

LOL

What if there were a little procedure done to female babies guaranteeing that their adult boobs would never sag? Hell, just genetically engineer them to not grow boobs. Would you support that?

...they wouldn't need support!

If the brazier fits. It isn't called a tit slinger for nothing.

Actually, male circumcision IS necessary at times. I’ve put countless terrified young boys and elderly men under anesthesia so a medically necessary circumcision could be done.

Part of our preoperative checklist is to have the patient (or parents) verify the procedure. Common comments: “Circumcision. I wish I’d had this done when I was a baby.” Or “”We should have done this when he was born.”

In those cases, it would haven cheaper, easier, and safer to perform the circumcision at birth under local anesthesia with no memory of the event.

General anesthesia is not without risks. Those risks increase in the elderly population who often suffer from comorbidities (heart disease, lung disease, etc) that complicate the anesthesia risk.

It’s funny to read comments on here about circumcision at birth being unnecessary. We always groan when we see circumcisions posted on the schedule. “This is so unnecessary.” Unnecessary because it could have been done at birth and avoided the emotional trauma, healthcare costs, and risks years later. LOL

But again, it's your life-long perspective that gives you this 'view' of circumcision. If circumcisions were not a part of our 'normal' world, you would lump circumcisions in with appendectomies, tonsillectomies and meniscus repairs. Of these four, I'm batting 75%

Sure, circumcision does sometimes prove to be necessary later in life--and at that point it may appear to have been better to have done it in infancy. But you cannot conclude from that that all boys should be circumcised as infants.

You mention, for instance, that it is better done before the child develops memories. That is an extremely dubious proposition for the simple reason that psychological damage with lifelong implications often happens before an infant is capable of forming memories. The emotional damage that produces narcissists, borderlines, and psychopaths, to take a well documented example, happens in the first two years of life. The psychological impact of extreme neglect, abuse, and pain change a person permanently even without memories. It is therefore a mistake to assume that circumcising a baby is psychologically safe. Pain and stress alter brain circuitry even in utero and certainly in infancy. Just because the baby can't express, or later remember, that pain does not mean it doesn't have permanent consequences.

Second, I have read more than once the same medical rejoinder to claim that because circumcision sometimes proves necessary as an adult it should have been performed on all boys as babies. What is that rejoinder? That sometimes the removal of a cancerous breast becomes necessary as an adult but that nobody concludes from that observation that all baby girls should have their breasts removed.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That sometimes
> the removal of a cancerous breast becomes
> necessary as an adult but that nobody concludes
> from that observation that all baby girls should
> have their breasts removed.

Right? I guess foreskins are medically viewed as a penial appendix?

"It’s funny to read comments on here about circumcision at birth being unnecessary. We always groan when we see circumcisions posted on the schedule. “This is so unnecessary.” Unnecessary because it could have been done at birth and avoided the emotional trauma, healthcare costs, and risks years later. LOL"

I find it sad (not funny at all) to read comments like this on here, especially from persons claiming to be part of the medical community. Being born male with an intact penis is not a birth defect.

Except for extreme cases, circumcision is not medically necessary. In those cases, I agree that it should happen, but routinely cutting off the end of a baby's penis is a human rights violation IMO.

To act like there are no complications from this surgery is uninformed.

Risks during surgery include damage to the urethra, partial or complete loss of the glans or penis, urinary retention, hematoma. Delayed risks include meatal stenosis, adhesions and skin bridges, phimosis, buried or trapped penis, need for repeat surgery,bleeding, infection, pain, death.

https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/complications/

Keep in mind, the foreskin is physically attached to the glans much like the fingernail. A probe is shoved in between to rip it apart. It is very painful and anesthetics do not eliminate the pain. And, babies do feel pain like adults if not moreso. It makes much more sense to do the surgery when older so the boy or man can be sedated.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2015-04-21-babies-feel-pain-adults

At least one study shows circumcision permanently alters the brain in regions associated with reasoning, perception and emotions.

http://tapnewswire.com/2015/10/circumcision-trauma-slaters-brain-permanently-researchers-threatened/

Having had to have surgery as an adult to repair damage caused by this unnecessary surgery, I am opposed to subjecting innocent boys to this torture for no reason. And to laugh about it is just sad.

It is cut them all and not let biology or environment sort out who needs one and who doesn't.

It is definitely a religious mindset. One circumcision fits all.

The humor was in the use of the term “unnecessary” by both sides to describe different viewpoints, not to the suffering of patients.

Let me assure you, there is nothing funny about a young boy sitting on a stretcher with tears streaming down his face because he knows he’s getting ready to get cut on “down there.”

Parents aren’t laughing either about having been told not to do the circumcision at birth by a pediatrician. Our surgeons usually respond, “No one ever asks the urologists.” The surgery isn’t even the end of it. There’s still ointments, dressing changes, and post op appointments with strangers looking “down there.”

You are correct. It’s not funny at all.

Why don't they cut out all of our appendixes as babies to avoid appendectomies?

And breasts to prevent breast cancer. And colons to prevent colon cancer.

Having part of your intestines or colon removed when you are an adult is painful and humiliating. Why not do it neonatally, when the child cannot express her rage or form memories with which later to harangue her parents?

The argument is obviously ridiculous. The resilience of a religious rite long ago robbed of its facile medical foundation is a testament to the power of religious mythology.

Those surgeries would require general anesthesia which includes exposure to anesthetic gas, ventilatory support, opioids, and temporary paralysis.

Circumcision doesn’t even require us (anesthesia providers) to be present because there is no impact on the heart, lungs, etc. All that is used is a little local numbing agent then snip - over and done in about 1 minute.

I respect your right to your opinion and your right to choose what is best for you and your family. My experiences in healthcare has caused me to have a different opinion. We can agree to disagree and move on.

I guess we could say that ghawd knew what he was doing when he instructed the people of the Covenant to 'nip the tip'.

I suppose that he designed that flaw so that it would help weed out the faithful from the faithless.

Ghawd is so clever!

Nancy Rigdon Wrote:
---------------

> We can agree to
> disagree and move on.

I find it amusing when people on this website assert their opinion and say, "the thinking has been done." It hasn't, and no one need move on because you say it is time to do so.


---------------
> I respect your right to your opinion and your
> right to choose what is best for you and your
> family. My experiences in healthcare has caused me
> to have a different opinion.

You are a nurse, correct? And your opinion contradicts the positions of the AMA and the AAP. Whom is a layman to believe? A nurse or the AAP?

I'm sure there is the odd (both senses of the word) nurse out there who opposes vaccinations. Are we to believe her and trust her "experiences in healthcare?" Or should we go with the standard in the field?

At some point a gesture in the direction of reality is in order. Your experiences and judgment have led you to a position at variance with those of the experts in the field. That should give you reason for pause.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your experiences and
> judgment have led you to a position at variance
> with those of the experts in the field.

Thank God. It is weird to look at a scar down there and think, gee I'm glad they got rid of that so I could dodge bullets as an adult.

Reminds me of "reassignment" surgeries. The child might want to have been "made" into one gender or the other but if "God" made them the way they are and healthy, it is their responsibility to determine for themselves as a conscientious adult to decide. As a parent I can't imagine making that kind of decision for my child. It is akin to refusing blood transfers which would save their lives.

Odd, this, but females in all of Europe, Asia, Africa, Central America , and South America are not grossed out seeing an uncircumcised man. In the great scheme of things, a circumcised man is a freak, but not a freak of nature. He is a guy who, for some nonsensical and contrived reason has had part of his penis scraped away, an act that produces no positive impact.

This "nonsensical and contrived reason" is clearly based in religion and not on any imagined health benefits.

It's interesting that as Denmark seeks to ban the inhumane practice "because it concerns a fundamental protection of children’s interests", it is the religious people, both Jew and Muslim that are against a ban. In fact the leaders of Denmark are fearful that if it is banned it would be a matter of national security.

“There could be a national security risk if Denmark becomes the first country to ban circumcision,” said Liselott Blixt, health spokesperson for DF."

"Nyhus, meanwhile, is prepared to take the risk.

“If we can be threatened because someone makes a drawing, there is also a risk that there could be consequences if we protect children in this area. It’s a risk we feel is worth running because it concerns a fundamental protection of children’s interests in Denmark,” she said."

https://newspunch.com/denmark-ban-circumcision/

Moses to God: You want me to cut off my what?!

It's barbaric. End of story. And I don't care about religious or cultural norms than demand it.