I agree and it feels nicer in your mouth. Your the greatest OP. Can't wait for all the pissed off no hair "boys"to respond.
Uncut is just gross looking. Some can look OK if they're completely hard, but you can still tell by that raw looking head.
Uncut is the way nature intended for penises to be.
r15 and babies are born with all that watery stuff on them, but that is cleaned, so must the penis be clean up.
Unfortunately, those of you that were cut do not know the sublime pleasure that we get from the movement of the skin. I have stretched the skin tight and felt what you guys feel with just the outer skin being stimulated, and it is not the same and not even close to being as pleasurable. You are missing out and you don't even know it. Or, maybe you do know it and that is why the circ troll is so
BTW I hope Chaz buys a Circumcised Penis!
Why are the uncut heads usually so small? A few aren't, but usually they're significantly smaller than cut.
r17, That's cause you've got one of those raw inflamed dickheads. No wonder it's less pleasurable than a cut head when exposed. Idiot.
Uncut cocks are bigger, but it 's not necessarily because they were afraid to grow. They are missing skin, nerve endings and up to a third of the penile shaft system.
And the vast majority of men in the world are uncut, and have been through history.
The anti-circ posters are spouting ideology, not honesty. They'd fail a polygraph test if asked which is better looking. Foreskin makes a dick look bad and they don't want to admit it.
[quote]and up to a third of the penile shaft system.
LMAO. You're desperate today aren't you?
Smegma. Nothing more need be said.
so bitter. Don't know what happened to the last word.
No, R20, I don't have a raw, inflamed dick head. The head of my dick is very sensitive from being protected, just as it should be. It wasn't actually my dick head that did not receive the pleasure, but rather the shaft. It is not the same to masturbate the shaft when you don't have the skin movement.
Since about 10% of guys need to circumcised as adults due to medical conditions, why not circumcise all boys. Those 10% go through hell as an adult. It gets rid of the risk of penile cancer, and significantly reduces the risk of HIV transmission. One additional plus is the elimination of smegma. Nothing is grosser than smegma.
Two of my friends got circumcised in their early 20s. Both felt sex was better after. I'm partially circumcised (my foreskin remnant covers about half of my knob) and get some smegma build up if I don't shower often. My cousins in New Jersey and New Brunswick have the same type of circumcisions so it must have been a family thing.
A lot of American gay men seem unusually obsessed with the cut/uncut issue. I wonder if gy men overseas are the same way.
People who are pro-circ are dumb Americans. Nuff said.
Uncut cocks are bigger, and they have more nerve endings than the clitoris.
Oh, and about smegma, women get it too if they don't wash. Should we cut the labia off?
R19 - LOL. I noticed that and always wondered why.
If you shower and wash properly, smegma is not a problem.
Also, masterbating an uncut penis is so much easier than trying to jack a guy off who's cut. They constantly need spit or lube to keep going. When you're uncut the skin over the entire cock shaft moves in unison.
Cut dicks get harder. Has anyone else noticed this? I can't think of a reason why that would be, but it's definitely been my experience, and it's obvious in porn too.
[quote]Uncut cocks are bigger
You can say shit like that all day, but it's laughable bullshit. Nothing about circumcision affects the size of the penis (except as mentioned earlier, uncut heads seem smaller, possibly from being squeezed all the time by the foreskin).
You also get better use out of a condom if you're uncut, due to the fact that the condom grips onto the foreskin, and the male is able to pump in and out of his own skin within the condom, giving himself friction, which will get you off.
Bottom line: foreskin is there for a reason. The nerves you're cutting off is just criminal, and I say this as someone who is cut.
I just like dick, dont care if its cut or not.
[quote]and I say this as someone who is cut.
You say that as someone who has been programmed by an ideological outlook. You probably spout all the other approved bs and think it makes you enlightened.
r32, it's a scientific fact. Go Google it. One theory is, the foreskin gives coverage to the tip of the penis, stopping if from retracting like a turtle when it's exposed to any type of coldness, thus allowing the length to develop overtime from childhood through puberty.
r35, the opposite would be true if I really was affected as such. Not too bright, are we?
I get disappointed/grossed out everytime I see one of those Russian teen porn sites. Some of the boys are very cute, but the wieners are a turn off, to say the least. Small purplish heads. And I agree that they don't seem to get really hard.
r36, it's called pulling shit out of your ass. There are anti-circ loons saying all kinds of nonsense online. Even you don't believe that. Penises don't fail to develop because they get cold occasionally.
r28/33/36/37 give it a rest. You're not fooling anyone with your propaganda.
As others have said, circumcision is a wonderful thing just for the aesthetics alone.
I think Brent Corrigan has the perfect dick
"Anyone who could do that to a baby is truly sick."
Oh like a baby cares. All babies care about is food, pooping, peeing, sleeping and pooping. They cry all the time anyway. So they cry when they get snipped. Give em a roofie and nighty night.
I agree r26. It's better to get it done as an infant. Later circumcisions don't work out so well.
R40, many circumcised penises have ugly circumcision scars.
R42, studies show circumcision is very painful and traumatic for babies - they do care.
Length of the penis is determined by genes and hormones during pregnancy. You can't change it by circumcising or not. But it does seem true that uncut ones are smaller toward the head. Foreskin constricts, I suppose.
r44, I've only seen a rare few with "ugly" scars. On the other hand, foreskin hanging off is ugly in all cases.
R46, circumcised penises have LESS penis - that is just a fact. If cut something from the penis, there will be less there than before. It removes skin, tissue and nerve endings.
r48, you mean less foreskin (thankfully) not "less penis." Where did you get these argumentative tactics? Fox News? Sarah Palin?
R49, you are the one who sounds like someone who desperately tries to defend discredited positions. You sound like a believer in the Warren Commission or the Earth is Flat club.
Cut prevents disease. Fact.
Cut prevents smegma. Fact
Cut looks better. Biggest fact of all.
Uncut is natural.
Why don't we start snipping off babies' toes so that they will always be able to afford smaller, cheaper, child-sized shoes.
[quote]Uncut is natural.
Long Ayatollah style beards are natural too, but sensible people snip them off. Umbilical cords are natural too, but people don't leave them hanging out of their stomach for life.
Smegma can have it's benefits. My large, uncut cock produces copious amounts of smegma. I have man with a smegma fetish in Montreal who i regularly send my smegma to and am paid handsomely. And before you say anything, there are no laws against transporting smegma across national borders.
R26. 10 percent of males do not have to be circumcised as adults. You are totally and completely wrong on this point. In fact, about 98 percent of males have foreskins in perfect working order. And nowadays, those who might have a tight foreskin can be be treated with a prescription cream that helps to stretch the skin. Cutting isn't necessary. And if cutting is necessary, this can be treated individually--not by cutting everyone.
Cutting desensitizes a penis over time. Sex is more pleasuable with an uncut guy. The foreskin is loaded with nerve endings as is the all-important frenulum, which uncut men still have and in which most cut have lost through this barbaric practice. And hygiene is not a problem. Everyone needs to wash their dick. And washing your dick is is as easy as soap and water. It's not a problem.
And this red herring about HIV is nonsense. The studies were flawed, there is a separate question of hygiene in Africa unrelated to circumcision...and lastly, the studies apply only to men at risk reagrding women who are HIV-positive. The intact or cut status of a penis is of no consequence regarding sex between men, meaning men who are uncut are at no more risk than someone who is cut.
In addition, most of the world's males are uncircumcised particularly males in Europe. The HIV rate is higher in the US where most men are cut--and the HIV rate is lower in Europe where most men, gay and straight, are uncut.
If a guy wants to be cut, he can do it as an adult. There is absolutely no justification to cut an infant. It shouldn't be done to males, just as it shouldn't be done to females. But the vast majority of men would never chose to be circumcised as an adult anyway because they would know how good it feels to have a foreskin--and they would not agree to cut it off as an adult. And an uncut guy is hot as hell and a huge turn on--jacking off, sucking and yes, even looking at. And yes, I'm an all-American white guy with a hot unncircumcised penis.
All true, R55, but the pro-circ forces refuse to acknowledge it.
[quote]And yes, I'm an all-American white guy with a hot unncircumcised penis.
Awfully defensive about your "hot" uncircumcised penis.
DO you wash your dick every time you take a pee R57? If you don't you have a problem.
Do you wash your dick every time you sweat R55? If not, you have a problem. The smegma issue is very real.
And grown shut foreskin is not that uncommon. I've only done like 200 guys in my life and I've met at least ten who've had that problem.
[quote]The HIV rate is higher in the US where most men are cut--and the HIV rate is lower in Europe where most men, gay and straight, are uncut.
LOL. Try hard to pretend that you don't know about how demographics and culture affect HIV rates. Europe doesn't have many of the particular, ahem... demographic that is disproportionately responsible for HIV cases in the US. They're also much better with sex ed.
You cite shit like that that depends on fooling people into not looking deeper for causes, yet when studies prove your agenda wrong, you scream, "oooh... study is "flawed."
You circumcision haters are like fanatic religious fundies.
R59. You are paranoid. And no, smegma is not a problem at all. I rarely get any; I'd have to not wash for several days for anything to accumulate--and that doesn't happen. Do you go days without washing yourself? Women have smegma too. Besides, smegma is mainly dead skin cells sloughing off. Like I said, you're paranoid.
r62, smegma is NOT "mainly dead skin cells sloughing off." A liar like yourself with a freakish agenda should not be calling other people names.
The preventative measure to HIV is wearing a condom. Not mutilating your dick. And sex between men, whether cut or uncut, has no effect on HIV status does. It doesn't matter. Read the studies.
[quote]Not mutilating your dick.
I see you've picked up the jargon. You're about as convincing as a clinic picketer calling abortion rights "pro death"
One bad thing about cruising is that you never know if a guy may be uncut. Everything can go fine until that "oh no" moment when you see foreskin. Then it's too late because, unless you're very rude, you can't make it obvious that it's why you've changed your mind.
My ex was uncut. His dick ALWAYS smelled like pee.
I brought it up to him, and he got angry about it. Yet still there he went, pissing without pulling back his foreskin. We'd shower together, and I'd make sure to sensually clean his dick, to make sure there was no piss there. He certainly didn't get that particular about it. He was Euro, btw.
Many uncut guys just don't clean enough. Isn't this the whole reason for circumcision in the first place? Preventing infections, etc.?
The op has achieved his goal.
the Islums and the Isruls is both circumcised aint they?
People say "dick cheese" like it's something cute. Uh, no.
When "nature intended" dicks to be uncut, people went around naked and they needed the protection. Bugs would fly up your peehole.
There is actually a 20 minute YouTube video by c0nc0rdance that is a pretty rational overview of the subject of circumcision. Transcription is at the link.
r15 Nature also intended that some people be completely grey before they are 40. Doesn't mean it's a preferred look.
Coming to a Kindle near you: The Little Penis Who Was Afraid to Grow, by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck
I think the horror people have of it is that in the religious mission, it seems intended to reduce pleasure and be part of social control of sexuality. BUT, the practice is older than religion and there is the health aspect.
Also what good is it to have all your pleasure sensors and nerve endings if your only partner is Rosy Palms due to aesthetic reasons?
I prefer cut dicks. My favorite band is the Pixies. I didn't get my son a Pixies tattoo when he was born and I didn't get the top of his dick chopped off either.
I guess there wasn't that much to say on this subject, after all!
I don't mind either uncut or cut cocks. Cut cocks can smell pretty bad if the guy has terrible hygeine as well as uncut ones. However there should be choice for men whether they want it or not. Could a you imagine if they cut off the prepuce from a woman's clit? There would be such an uproar. It's really a terrible practice and it should be left up to men as adults whether or not they want to be cut or not.
I'm sorry Miss--but with all due respect, I've got my own problems.