Bad Wigins wrote:
I didn't say it was in Asia
Though I should add, mr fact-checker, that much of Asia is in fact Muslim, though unlike you I accept that you meant parts further east than Iran or Pakistan, rather than pick a fight with what I wish you meant.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Reality checker wrote:Actually circumcision is not common in Europe. Or Asia. It is most common in Israel and the Muslim world. Most males are not circumcised.
It wouldn't be in Europe at all if the degenerate romans hadn't gone around passing out middle eastern religious books. I didn't say it was in Asia, and the reason why is nobody went around spreading middle eastern religions there. I already said it was common in the middle east. I made no comment about how many males overall are circumcised.
Why do you get defensive when someone tries to enlighten you? I was merely extending the narrative and offering further facts regarding this religious ritual.
What about the reduction in pleasure aspect? I always wondered if the procedure could help adults who suffer from PME. Seriously.
I remember having it done. I was four. It was frightening as anything but not at all painful and put an end to the rashes and infections I was always getting. There can be a health benefit.
I just happen to live circumcised ones but would NOT go down on one that was not circumsized. I have been with a lot of guys and all were circumsized. And I don't think I have even ever seen one in the locker room growing up or as an adult.
The whole 'it's cleaner' debate is really silly. What man in modern times goes around with unwashed genitals? I mean, you'd have to REALLY be gross to have a dirty penis. It takes two seconds, seriously, like two seconds to just wash it.
I think this debate is silly. Every guy thinks his is right because it's all they can remember. The fact of the matter is when you are 'using' it they all look the same.
According to wikimedia, circumcision is mostly an African/Middle Eastern/Canadian/U.S. thing (though having spent a lot of time in the middle east I don't think that's actually true... most men were uncut.)
Uncircumcised boys are at risk for getting phimosis, paraphimosis, and balanoposthitis. These are all very painful and are usually treated by . . . . circumcision. Circumcision is a much more difficult procedure with more complications once kids are a few years old.
Adults may be fine with keeping their hooded wee wee clean, but little boys can really only be trusted to keep everything and anything dirty. My nephew went for the hooded wee wee and ended up with a pretty bad urinary infection when he was six. The next few years were filled with the awkward bedtime ritual of his mom fighting with him over whether he sufficiently cleaned his noodle before bed.
Circumcision also reduces the risk of cervical cancer in women from intercourse.
There are many real benefits to circumcision. Not enough to have doctors mandate or recommend it. But more than enough to flatly refute the "mutilation" claims and expose them as a pretext for anti-Semitism.
You're projecting wrote:
Absolutely 100% false. Increased rates of penile cancer, contracting and retaining hpv and other std's, dirty and poor hygeine to the area, and higher risk of urinary tract infections are all associated with NONcircumcised males. Stop making things up for your own anti-Jewish agenda or the fact that you're trying to rationalize that your wiener looks like it's wearing a turtleneck.
Everything you say is true. One of the best things my parents ever did, in my opinion, was having me circumsized when I was a newborn. I don't remember it, and I don't believe it damaged me psychologically in any way. It wasn't for religious reasons, but rather for health and hygeine. Thanks, Mom and Dad. Now, as far as the "turtleneck" comment, the only people you (well most of us) have to worry about impressing, or at least not disgusting, are the ladies. But then I really don't understand why anyone--man or woman--would want anyone's ugly penis stuck in them, circumsized or not. But as a man, I'm sure glad the women do.
Dial it up wrote:
I happen to be at a bar with a work group. I posed this question to six relatively successful females, 4/6 are attractive. All 6 said they are grossed out by an uncut hog. Take it for what it's worth
And yet another stupid post by diu. This one a fantasy of yours.
I wish I could grow back what was cut off me. Girls in europe look at cut guys the same as american girls look at uncut guys. Frankly these days I'd much rather impress non-american girls. Go naked here with no foreskin and you're definitely odd man out.
Get used to it.. wrote:
I just happen to live circumcised ones but would NOT go down on one that was not circumsized. I have been with a lot of guys and all were circumsized. And I don't think I have even ever seen one in the locker room growing up or as an adult.
You'd go down on anything waved in front of you.
Shawn H wrote:
You're projecting wrote:Absolutely 100% false. Increased rates of penile cancer, contracting and retaining hpv and other std's, dirty and poor hygeine to the area, and higher risk of urinary tract infections are all associated with NONcircumcised males. Stop making things up for your own anti-Jewish agenda or the fact that you're trying to rationalize that your wiener looks like it's wearing a turtleneck.
Everything you say is true. One of the best things my parents ever did, in my opinion, was having me circumsized when I was a newborn. I don't remember it, and I don't believe it damaged me psychologically in any way. It wasn't for religious reasons, but rather for health and hygeine. Thanks, Mom and Dad. Now, as far as the "turtleneck" comment, the only people you (well most of us) have to worry about impressing, or at least not disgusting, are the ladies. But then I really don't understand why anyone--man or woman--would want anyone's ugly penis stuck in them, circumsized or not. But as a man, I'm sure glad the women do.
One of the best things they did for you? Must have been a rough childhood.
american in europe wrote:
I wish I could grow back what was cut off me. Girls in europe look at cut guys the same as american girls look at uncut guys. Frankly these days I'd much rather impress non-american girls. Go naked here with no foreskin and you're definitely odd man out.
Interesting. You think so? I remember having lunch with an American (of Korean descent) and a French-Canadian. The American woman was weirded out by uncircumcised ones and the French-Canadian was really confused/weirded out by circumcised ones. It seems like it just came down to what they'd been exposed to.
whatthewhatthewhat wrote:
Interesting. You think so? I remember having lunch with an American (of Korean descent) and a French-Canadian. The American woman was weirded out by uncircumcised ones and the French-Canadian was really confused/weirded out by circumcised ones. It seems like it just came down to what they'd been exposed to.
I am sure it is totally a function of what they've been exposed to. What I don't get is all the american girls you hear (even on this very thread) saying "I'd NEVER touch an uncircumcised one." I guess it truely is all about the dick for those girls. A piece of natural anatomy capable of instantly erasing whatever connexion was made in the hours / days / weeks / months beforehand which led up to the moment which invites the naked penis to make its first appearance. Class acts, those american girls. I smile every morning I wake up knowing an ocean separates us.
If it's so great having an extra flap, why do teenagers "mutilate" themselves? The loss of sensation is BS. I've never heard anyone say "my penis isn't sensitive" ever.
mutilation wrote:
If it's so great having an extra flap, why do teenagers "mutilate" themselves? The loss of sensation is BS. I've never heard anyone say "my penis isn't sensitive" ever.
Why would that be a typical conversation?
Dial it up wrote:
I happen to be at a bar with a work group. I posed this question to six relatively successful females, 4/6 are attractive. All 6 said they are grossed out by an uncut hog. Take it for what it's worth
That says a lot about the company you keep.
Those are the same women who prefer men to shave their genitals, armpits, chests and backs. In other words, people that have been brainwashed by what the media throws at them.
An erect circumcised penis is indistinguishable from an erect natural penis.
Phallus enormicus wrote:
That says a lot about the company you keep.
Those are the same women who prefer men to shave their genitals, armpits, chests and backs. In other words, people that have been brainwashed by what the media throws at them.
The metro-sexual trend has been over for a while - like a decade.
Phallus enormicus wrote:
Dial it up wrote:I happen to be at a bar with a work group. I posed this question to six relatively successful females, 4/6 are attractive. All 6 said they are grossed out by an uncut hog. Take it for what it's worth
That says a lot about the company you keep.
Those are the same women who prefer men to shave their genitals, armpits, chests and backs. In other words, people that have been brainwashed by what the media throws at them.
Attractive women? Yep, it does say a lot. Don't be upset that normal, attractive women don't want anything to do with your little stink wrap.
