GunnerJ

Yes, actually, and it's in my first reply to this thread on the first page. I guess you didn't bother to read it. Admittedly, the population of sexually active men who have had an adult circumcision and are in a position to compare is small, but Cecil Adams found four, and two said it was worse, and two noticed no change.

scarmig

I'm in a similar boat, except to the left instead of down, and it ain't funny. And as time goes on, the arc has become more pronounced, which means that at some point in the future I might have to have more surgery to correct the effects of a sloppy circumcision. Even worse is that the exaggerated curve causes soreness in my wife long before our libidos are satisfied. We gladly work around, but it isn't quite as intimate as we'd like.

I vote no on penial mutilation for my chil'run.

tronvillain

Rimstalker:
Actually, what Cecil said was:
I'm a little skeptical of Cecil now, since a foreskin has no apparent effect on splash when urinating (unless you're trying to do it hands free).

tronvillain

Here are a few other adult <a href="http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/sight.htm" target="_blank">circumcision</a> statements.

You're letting a mucous membrane dry out and exposing it to abrasion - expecting the effect to not be negative is a little unrealistic.

Undercurrent

Aggreed thoroughly. Especially since it could be done to an older child more easily with anaesthesia. I have yet to see even the most strong advocate or routine circumcision give the slightest bit of a compelling reason why doing the operation on a newborn is at all preferable to doing on 3-year-old who can be anaesthetized sucessfully (and who has a bigger wang that's easier for a surgeon to work on.)

Are there any actual studies of men who have been circumsized as adults an whether they, on average find sex less fun. All of the links posted have been anecdotal in that regard, and an actual study would seem to clear up the issue.

But parents are not given a carte blanche to make any decision for their children. A mother can choose between breast-milk or bottle-milk generally without societal interference, but if she picks diet coke (and people find out about it) she'll find a social worker on her doorstep soon enough.

With surgery, the convention is clear. If a surgery is necessary for the continued health of the child, it is to be done. If the sugery is elective, it is generally not to be done. In order to count as necessary, it must be shown to have signicant theraputic effect at a level that outways the risk of the surgery itself. If no thereputic benefit can be shown, the surgery is not done "just in case". That would be like believing God exists because it has not be shown not to exist.

At present, circumcision has not proven itself to be any more thereputic than a nose job. A much better thereputic case could be made for a preemptive tonsilectomy.

m.

tronvillain

Also, there seems to be some indications that the pain does have side effects. Have a look at the <a href="http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio2/" target="_blank">Effect of Neonatal Circumcision on Pain Response During Subusequent Routine Vaccination</a>.

alek0

Actually, there are studies which show increased sensitivity in intact males. For example, study by T. Kimmel, see more ta
<a href="http://www.cirp.org/news/nocirc12-7-00/" target="_blank">http://www.cirp.org/news/nocirc12-7-00/</a>

See also:
"The prepuce:
Specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision " British Journal of Urology, Volume 77, 291-295,
February 1996.
You can find full text at:
<a href="http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor/" target="_blank">http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor/</a>

See laso the effect on female partners:
<a href="http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/" target="_blank">http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/</a>

I really don't understand some of you guys. Naturally if you cut off part of the body containing a number of nerve endings, what is left is less sensitive. And of course there is keratinization, too.

tronvillain

I tend to think the effect on the glans is more important, but the foreskin itself is a significant loss.

Baloo

From <a href="http://www.postgradmed.com/issues/1999/07_99/mattson.htm" target="_blank">http://www.postgradmed.com/issues/1999/07_99/mattson.htm</a>:
From <a href="http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/kirya1/" target="_blank">http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/kirya1/</a>:
<a href="http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/lander/" target="_blank">http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/lander/</a>
I'd like to request that before anybody makes one additional mention of the trauma of the circumcision operation, they provide examples of trauma where one of the two anesthetic methods described in the articles above were used. I hope everyone else realizes that basing a case against circumcision on the trauma of an unanesthetized operation is like arguing against abortion based on the medical complications of doing the operation with a clothes-hangar. Until such examples are provided, I'll assume the "barbaric torture" part of the issue is laid to rest. Although, before moving on, does anyone want to offer an explanation as to why NONE of the anti-circumcision sites even MENTION either of these two anesthetic methods, yet they are willing to actually offer, in three different formats, video footage, surrounded by graphic descriptions, and coupled with mulitple freeze-frame images of operations where these common methods are not used? Could it be because they have an agenda, and they aren't going to let such annoying things as facts get in the way?

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: Baloo ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

In Kenya (here)and sub-saharan Africa where the AIDS pandemic is ravaging populations, its claimed that statistics indicate a high prevalence of HIV among uncircumsiced men. And currently, free circumcision clinics are opened up and people are being asked to volunteer (the Medical fraternity is scared that it may be mistaken to mean being circumcised is being safe).

Its being argued that research indicates that the foreskin seems to have cells that act as receptors for the HIV virus. But they admit its not very conclusive.

I am uncut myself and the only problem I have is that I am too sensitive. And my GF is still a kind of a virgin (tight and all) so I hardly take a while before coming. Thats the only problem I have witnessed: sex being "too-sweet". Otherwise, the smell can only be a problem if one had a highly exciting erection/ arousal so as to result in an emission of seminal fluid or semen. The rest is pretty standard.

Its a sexual organ for Gods sake, what is it supposed to smell like: roses?

I am sure when you kiss your SO, their breath is not always superb. But the kissing goes on.

Doesn't it?
Or do you tell them "honey I need to brush my teeth why don't you come and join me?"

Unless of course...

In fact, I can bet sometimes their breath is worse than what we are discussing here