soooo this isnt a place to argue over bullshit thats in the past, or whether its right or wrong but im wondering is there any proof or any theories suggesting that circumcision can end up affecting size? i mean theres pornographical evidence, but is there any science suggesting this?
mistermushroomhead - - Sarahrei, MaryJohn, and theMadcapSyd got it right as usual! Are you contemplating mutilating your penis? Om Tare Tuttare Ture Svāhā __________________ Me Just took my meds …. and it’s a good day!
rofl, are you kidding with this question? the foreskin is a material object connected to the penis -- remove it and you have less penis. the foreskin fully relaxed and layed flat is 10, 11, 12, 13, etc. square inches of tissue -- practically impossible without disconnecting the tissue but that is very much beside the point and this is merely to illustrate the kind of mass we're talking about here. from a logical / factual standpoint the uncut penis compresses when entering the vagina, which in turn creates greater girth and increased pleasure for both parties. i am cut; when i am at full erection the skin of my penis has almost no travel at all, i.e. it is worn out badly rather easily unless i masturbate in some non standard fashion (which i've done exclusively now for the majority of my life) and / or use lubrication. if i were not cut then there would be cylindrical mass of erogenous tissue on the upper half of my penis that would serve to essentially massage my penis and keep the head from being bombarded, numbed and caloused on various levels. logic goes a long way in life my friends.
He said keep it about size, but since you brought it up, do you know what every study done to research this in men who have had sex pre and post circumcision have come to the mighty conclusion of when it comes to the pleasure of sex. It's the same. All circumcision is is a matter of looks and tradition.
But logic often leads us to incorrect conclusions ... as you so often exemplify. I have driven from coast to coast (U.S.) several times and it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that the world may have bumps, but it sure as hell is flat! Om Muni Muni Mahāmuni Śākyamuni Svāhā
Logically it's impossible for the pleasure to be the same -- it doesn't make sense, sorry. I think you ought to take 120 seconds or so and study the foreskin and / or think logically about how the foreskin operates in conjunction to the rest of the penis. The other problem here is this idea everyone seems to have that maximizing pleasure is somehow ideal; if that were really the case then the best sex ever would = the shortest sex with the quickest possible hit to orgasm, as orgasm is the highest point of physical sexual pleasure. Do you really think women want to have sex for say, 2 minutes and then orgasm and call it a day? Is that truly conducive to a lasting, meaningful, bonding relationship? And a study based on "he says she says" is how valid? "Sir, do you regret having your foreskin removed, subsequently numbing various parts of your penis, in all likelihood a major contributor to the early onset of impotence that just happens to be so widespread amongst men in your country?" "N-n-n-n-no, of course not!" "Oh, okay." The extreme irritation (due to the natural extremely sensitive nature of the protected head of the penis) and eventual numbing a man goes through when the head of his penis is made permanently exposed is undeniable, but you will see little mention of this by many of these men because deep down we know that this is not a good thing. Millions of years of evolution, nature's masterpiece, the closest being to this notion of perfect > some insecure men and mental midgets with knives with more "bright ideas" for the human race. Examples? You got any, my friend?
Sorry, I refrain from feeding the trolls stigmerica! Om Muni Muni Mahāmuni Śākyamuni Svāhā __________________ Getting high With a little help …. from my friends!
Oh, I see. Pulling up any line out of about 110 posts was too much for you to handle, but the casting shadows part was fine. Sorry to hurt everyone's feelings but I am not in favor of cutting off parts of the human body. Millions of years of evolution, uncommon sense, logic and reason > us.
Circumcision is mutilation! Om Tare Tuttare Ture Svāhā __________________ Sheryl Soft and tender, tough and hard .... Never touched a razor .... I shall love her always!
I agree with the troll man about both points... 1) if you take flesh from the penis it will have less flesh and therefore will take up less physical space. That is the definition of being smaller. 2) About the penis of uncut guys being more sensitive thing...I am un cut but since you can pull it back I sometimes walking around that way for a while at a time and find that my jeans rubbing on my bare tip is really uncomfortable and makes it sore and irritated. I know that is antedoctial evidence compared to you scientific research but I'm just saying I can personally see how being cut would create this rubbing all the time easily.
flaccid, well of course it will shorten it, you are removing the furthest most point of the penis, erect not likely unless the circumcision was so tight that the penis cannot fully expand (that complication does happen to some men, and some restorers have gained an extra 1/4" from restoring enough skin to release a little more shaft length
A circumcision discussion will usually get a bunch of posts from circumcised guys saying that there is no loss of sensation. 99% of them (± 3%) were mutilated in infancy, so it’s difficult to take their comparisons seriously. The few that chose circumcision as adults seem to be kind of defensive about the whole thing. Since I’m not mutilated I surely cannot make a rational comparison either …. and I damn sure won’t try to shout others down. I just ask all of you to think because one day you may be in the position of deciding whether of not to perform this barbaric mutilation on a defenseless and helpless infant. Does my bias show? Indisputable fact: there is a huge concentration of pleasure giving nerve endings in the normal foreskin. Don’t wanna believe me? Try this … get a little of your favorite lube …. stretch your cock skin back tightly … gently and slowly rub the lubricant into the first inch or so right behind the head. I’ll bet that you can’t do it more than 5 minutes without having to jackoff! Indisputable fact: If a few square centimeters of foreskin is surgically removed (or bitten off by a rabbi) then the nerve endings in that skin are lost, gone forever. Draw your own conclusions! BTW, I’ve only known one guy who chose circumcision as an adult. We were pretty close friends stationed in 1950s Germany. A lot of easily available puss for us young GIs …. and George screwed some real skanks. The third time that he went on sick call with the clap, the doctor recommended circumcision to reduce the chance of getting more VD. He did it. He complained about the pain for about 3 weeks. It was a couple of months before he could have sex comfortably. After several months his evaluation was that for straight up vaginal fucking it was probably better than before, but for receiving head or hand jobs or when masturbating it was a lot worse now and he regretted having done it.
I think its kind of funny how circumsized and (mostly) uncircumsized people always try to make it seem like their side is better with all sorts of bizarre rationalizations and generalizations, but I'm pretty sure no one knows, and it doesn't really matter that much. Uncircumsized it more natural so I'd just leave it that way for my kid but as far as smaller goes.. the difference is very minimal but there. Most women prefer circumsized just cuz that's what they're used to. Either way is just fine.
saying we don't know whether an intact penis is better or a circumcised penis is just nonsense, the truth is we don't want to admit which is better we have studies on sensitivity that show huge benefits to being intact, then there is the cosmetic functional ability to it, you can argue all you want but circumcised penises don't have gliding skin. then there is the issue of female sexual dysfunction where women don't enjoy sex, the correlation uis quite strong when compared to male circumcision rates, is it surprising that when a survey asked women about orgasms sweden ranked the best (where male circumcision is illegal) followed closely by other non routinely circumcising countries
