shorter dicks....

tom prendergast said:
There are many cases of men having it performed as adults saying that they lost most of the sensation experienced previously.
Click to expand...

from your own link that you provided in this thread:

" The American Academy of Pediatricians reports that in a self-reporting study, circumcised men enjoyed “more varied sexual practice and less sexual dysfunction” than their uncircumcised brothers. And the APA calls reports of loss of sensitivity in circumcised men merely “anecdotal.”

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686

_ and _

“A recent controlled study published in the January issue of BJU International, the British Journal of Urology, looked at nearly 4,500 Ugandan men, ages 15 to 49, who were all sexually experienced. Researchers randomly selected half to undergo circumcision, and half to have a circumcision in 24 months. They compared the two groups at six, 12 and 24 months to measure sexual satisfaction and performance.

The circumcised group’s rate of sexual satisfaction remained constant, with 98.5% reporting sexual satisfaction before circumcision, and 98.4% reporting so two years after the procedure.”

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/31/health/he-asadults31
 
its weird how circ vs. uncirc is somehow been turned into a conservative vs. liberal view. politics are weird.
 
christiefan915 said:
It seems like other factors can come into play with this scenario, also. Hormones, age, psychology, trauma, pain. I don't really have a strong opinion either way, but I was wondering, how can infants who were circumsized miss something they never had?

I'm having trouble finding an analogy.
Click to expand...

you could make the same case for removing a baby's eyeballs.
 
Prole Smasher said:
from your own link that you provided in this thread:

" The American Academy of Pediatricians reports that in a self-reporting study, circumcised men enjoyed “more varied sexual practice and less sexual dysfunction” than their uncircumcised brothers. And the APA calls reports of loss of sensitivity in circumcised men merely “anecdotal.”

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686

_ and _

“A recent controlled study published in the January issue of BJU International, the British Journal of Urology, looked at nearly 4,500 Ugandan men, ages 15 to 49, who were all sexually experienced. Researchers randomly selected half to undergo circumcision, and half to have a circumcision in 24 months. They compared the two groups at six, 12 and 24 months to measure sexual satisfaction and performance.

The circumcised group’s rate of sexual satisfaction remained constant, with 98.5% reporting sexual satisfaction before circumcision, and 98.4% reporting so two years after the procedure.”

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/31/health/he-asadults31
Click to expand...

How convenient that you totally ignored this article, so I will reproduce it.

Many of those fanatics have all the personal reasons to be enraged on the western sexuality as a new research in the British Journal of Urology International reveals that men with normal, intact penises have more sexual sensitivity, as much as four times, than those circumcised.

The researchers found that circumcising cuts off more of a male's touch sensitivity than is delivered by all his ten fingertips. No matter the location, intact men displayed more fine-touch skin sensitivity on their penis and foreskin than a circumcised man did.

An uncircumcised man has a foreskin covering the glans (penis's bulbous head) when the penis is flaccid and during the erection this skin slides back and exposes the glans. Circumcision removes this extremely sensitive skin portion. The study proves that circumcision could be in fact an act aiming to reduce sexual pleasure for men in some cultures. In this case, it is a violation of a male's right to bodily integrity, a genital mutilation.

The results are similar to female circumcision, where even the mildest forms eliminate the most sensitive parts of the female genitalia.

There is a wrong belief that circumcision is made for hygienic reasons, to protect against disease like banalities, urethritis, retained smegma, penile and cervical cancer, and sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS.

Besides not being protective against these, as circumcision has such a severe effect on adult sexuality, no child should ever experience a non-therapeutic circumcision, like phimosis or paraphimosis, when the foreskin poses medical problems.

Controlling a boy's level of sexual sensitivity because of personal bias or prejudice is something not so well regarded in progressive societies.

Moreover, circumcised men, with a decreased sensitivity, could refuse to wear further-desensitizing condoms. And circumcision could give them a fake feeling of "safety".

Those on the way to undergoing circumcision should be informed about its sexual effects and that it does not protect against STDs, including HIV/AIDS.

Some naive opinions I read belonged to puzzled people who asked themselves: if the glans, the penis' most sensitive part is not removed, why does the sensitivity decrease?

Simple: A glans with circumcision is dry. The foreskin evolved exactly for this purpose: to keep the glans wet and sensitive. The glans skin is a membrane and like any membrane, when it's dry it loses sensitivity as the nervous terminations can no longer work.
 
Prole Smasher said:
its weird how circ vs. uncirc is somehow been turned into a conservative vs. liberal view. politics are weird.
Click to expand...

Hardly surprising, most conservatives will instinctively try to maintain the status quo and rarely question behaviours that are longstanding and traditional, irrespective of their proven lack of efficacy or benefit.

The debate about the advisability of circumcision in English-speaking countries typically has focused on potential health factors. The position statements of committees from national medical organisations are expected to be evidence-based; however, the contentiousness of the ongoing debate suggests that other factors are involved. Various potential factors related to psychology, sociology, religion, and culture may also underlie policy decisions. These factors could affect the values and attitudes of medical committee members, the process of evaluating the medical literature, and the medical literature itself. Although medical professionals highly value rationality, it can be difficult to conduct a rational and objective evaluation of an emotional and controversial topic such as circumcision. A negotiated compromise between polarized committee factions could introduce additional psychosocial factors. These possibilities are speculative, not conclusive. It is recommended that an open discussion of psychosocial factors take place and that the potential biases of committee members be recognized.

http://www.circumcision.org/studies.htm
 
Last edited:
This has to be the biggest non debate ever. Has any woman, when faced with a member that differs from what she is used to, complained? Certainly not in my somewhat shameful experience.
Similarly I have never had cause to complain that breasts are too big or too small. After all, it is not size but location that matters! Your hands - nope. Mine - yup.
 
Prole Smasher said:
from your own link that you provided in this thread:

" The American Academy of Pediatricians reports that in a self-reporting study, circumcised men enjoyed “more varied sexual practice and less sexual dysfunction” than their uncircumcised brothers. And the APA calls reports of loss of sensitivity in circumcised men merely “anecdotal.”

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686

_ and _

“A recent controlled study published in the January issue of BJU International, the British Journal of Urology, looked at nearly 4,500 Ugandan men, ages 15 to 49, who were all sexually experienced. Researchers randomly selected half to undergo circumcision, and half to have a circumcision in 24 months. They compared the two groups at six, 12 and 24 months to measure sexual satisfaction and performance.

The circumcised group’s rate of sexual satisfaction remained constant, with 98.5% reporting sexual satisfaction before circumcision, and 98.4% reporting so two years after the procedure.”

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/31/health/he-asadults31
Click to expand...

Teeming with "win", Grind! Good on ya! :good4u:
 
tom prendergast said:
Hardly surprising, most conservatives will instinctively try to maintain the status quo and rarely question behaviours that are longstanding and traditional, irrespective of their proven lack of efficacy or benefit.

The debate about the advisability of circumcision in English-speaking countries typically has focused on potential health factors. The position statements of committees from national medical organisations are expected to be evidence-based; however, the contentiousness of the ongoing debate suggests that other factors are involved. Various potential factors related to psychology, sociology, religion, and culture may also underlie policy decisions. These factors could affect the values and attitudes of medical committee members, the process of evaluating the medical literature, and the medical literature itself. Although medical professionals highly value rationality, it can be difficult to conduct a rational and objective evaluation of an emotional and controversial topic such as circumcision. A negotiated compromise between polarized committee factions could introduce additional psychosocial factors. These possibilities are speculative, not conclusive. It is recommended that an open discussion of psychosocial factors take place and that the potential biases of committee members be recognized.

http://www.circumcision.org/studies.htm
Click to expand...



I, for one, am delighted to hear that your uncircumcised, sloppy, droopy, and very unattractive appendage has some sensitivity. Now if you can close the distance between your crotch and the top of your pate, then you too, will be full of win!
 
Regarding circumcision perhaps we should consider the following.

(Excerpt) In the Hebrew Bible (Genesis 17:1-14) circumcision was enjoined by God to the Biblical patriarch Abraham, an act to be followed by his descendants:

Abram was 99 years old. God appeared to him and said, 'I am God Almighty. Walk before Me and be perfect. I will make a covenant between Me and you, and I will increase your numbers very much.' [...] This is My covenant between Me, and between you and your offspring that you must keep: You must circumcise every male. You shall be circumcised through the flesh of your foreskin. This shall be the mark of the covenant between Me and you. 'Throughout all generations, every male shall be circumcised when he is eight days old. [This shall include] those born in your house, as well as [slaves] bought with cash from an outsider, who is not your descendant. [All slaves,] both houseborn and purchased with your money must be circumcised. This shall be My covenant in your flesh, an eternal covenant. The uncircumcised male whose foreskin has not been circumcised, shall have his soul cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant. (Genesis 17:1-14) (End)
Brit milah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Covenant_of_Abraham.JPG" class="image"><img alt="Covenant of Abraham.JPG" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Covenant_of_Abraham.JPG/250px-Covenant_of_Abraham.JPG"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/0/00/Covenant_of_Abraham.JPG/250px-Covenant_of_Abraham.JPG

Further research reveals:

(Excerpt) So Where How and When Did Man Come From?

THIS perplexing question may just be answered due to deciphering skills of Zecharia Sitchin , a linguist in command of many ancient languages who has set the scientific world on its ear with his astounding interpretations of ancient Sumerian writings. In 1976, Sitchin's first book, The Twelfth Planet , began an odyssey that has literally transformed the field of ancient history; in 1993 came the sixth book in his Earth Chronicle series, When Time Began. Among other mind boggling assertions, this book links the complex calendar of Stonehenge and the puzzling ruins of Tiahuanacu in Peru to the ancient culture of the Sumerians, and by extension, to the Nibiruans, who are also called the Anunnaki (Those who came from heaven to earth) . These are the folks Sitchin and many others now insist not only created the Sumerian culture, but who also genetically created human beings (Homo Sapiens) as we know them by splicing their DNA with anthropoid ape-woman. And yes, they live on this mysterious 12th planet, Nibiru . (Theorized today as "Planet X")
http://www.netscientia.com/sumerians.html

We see that both entities (God and the Anunnaki), credited with creation of man, came from the sky. While religion interprets circumcision as the "mark of the covenant" between God and man it's also possible the Anunnaki, when combining the DNA of anthropoid ape-woman with themselves, didn't alter the gene that results in a foreskin. (It's important to remember the female clitoris is covered with a "hood" that resembles a foreskin so such an "appendage" may be part of the human DNA, both male and female.)

Looked at logically if a God wanted a mark to show a human being honored the covenant the only way God or others would know is if they checked a person's penis. Unless the Pearly Gates incorporate something similar to the full body airport scanners it makes little sense to bear a mark which can not be readily observed.

The point being while the foreskin is a "natural" occurrence it is possible it is an error in design. Rather than try to explain to the ancient people about bacteria and as Bravo has attested to "the cheesy taste" circumcision was incorporated into a religious ceremony.

Just sayin'............
 
usaloyal2theend said:
I, for one, am delighted to hear that your uncircumcised, sloppy, droopy, and very unattractive appendage has some sensitivity. Now if you can close the distance between your crotch and the top of your pate, then you too, will be full of win!
Click to expand...

Well we have always known Tom's a sensitive girl...err man...can someone please give him a tissue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top