Viti

I have heard of this rarity...but the majority of womn cannot have orgasm without direct clitoral stimulation.

Ut

Just a little point to clarify.

Male circumcisions vary widely in the amount of skin they remove. Jews originally only removed the tip of the foreskin in their rituals. This allowed them to keep most of their foreskins.

However, the type of circumcision I was referring to is the one that went on, and still goes on, most often in American hospitals (*). There, far more skin/mucosa is removed (as high as 50% of the total penile skin/mucosa). My criticisms were precisely against this type of circumsion. (Some of it does apply to ancient Jewish circumcisions, but to a lesser degree.)

Again, stating that modern (or more severe) circumcisions are worse than ancient (or less severe) circumcisions is not an endorsment or an apology of minimal circumcision.

(*) To non-Americans: You may find this hard to believe, but America is a highly circumcising country. As late as 20 years ago, about 85% of newborns were circumcised while about 57% newborns are circumcised today.

To Americans: You may find this hard to believe, but most Western men walk around with their foreskins still on. In places like Eastern Canada, Europe or Japan, circumcision is an extremely rare occurence, except as a Jewish or Muslim ritual.

Harumi

For a while in Asia MGM was practiced regularly, not because of religious purposes, but for supposedly hygienic purposes. Somehow, keeping the foreskin makes the penis harder to clean?

I remember hearing conflicting views on this aspect from one of the members here.

Anyways, my baby brother didn't get circumcised, because my mother didn't want him to go through any pain. My other brother did though. He hasn't had any problems, but then again, I don't talk to him much about stuff like that.

Unless there's a terrible problem (none that I know of) I think that genetic mutilation of any kind is cruel.

Ut

Two things can happen, either you can retract your foreskin or you can't.

If you can retract your foreskin, you retract it, you wash underneath, end of story.

(As an aside, you retract *your* foreskin, not your son's. Premature retraction of foreskins is what causes most later phimosis problems.)

If you can't (yet) retract it, that is because your foreskin is still glued (sort of) to your glans, like it is at birth and like it should be during childhood. It is perfectly normal for a teenager to be unable to retract his foreskin and corrective measures (of which circumcision is a last resort) should only be taken on an adult male. Anyway, if you can't retract it, there is simply nothing to wash, as the foreskin is simply too tight around the glans for dirty stuff to accumulate.

Amen-Moses

It is possible that the majority have never tried! If it is possible for a man to orgasm without any penile contact (and it is) then it must equally apply to women. Remember the most important sexual organ is between the ears.

Amen-Moses

Viti

<a href="http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/n_vag_org.htm" target="_blank">http://www.the-clitoris.com/n_html/n_vag_org.htm</a>

[ October 22, 2002: Message edited by: LadyShea ]</p>

Belle

Well consider how many women have never had an orgasm with their lovers, have very few orgasms, or have difficulty reaching orgasm. Just take a look on the internet under "inability to reach orgasm, female sexuality" or any other combination of like terms.

These women masturbate because it's one of the few ways they are able to reach orgasm. They all think something is wrong with them because they can not "get off" on intercourse. If they could "think" themselves into orgasm don't you think they would? Don't you think it would be a major topic for such an important issue? Don't you think many women have tried?

Is it possible that often times men think women should be aroused AND reach orgasm if they'ld just put their minds into it or enjoy it and that type of thinking is what gives a man an excuse not to try harder. She isn't getting off because she isn't intouch....she has hang ups...she just isn't sexual enough. When the real problem is that a man just isn't putting forth the effort and time and patience and is instead making all these women feel there is something worng with them as women.

Could there be a difference in the make up of men and women where a man just gets off easier and a woman just doesn't? Hummmmm. Perhaps great lovers know this and respect the difference.

As for the G-spot.....well you may have a good source but I have many and I only know one who can reach orgasm via her g-spot. I haven't found mine and neither have about 400 of my former lovers. The first time I ever got off was via oral sex...blew my mind. Found out what I'd been missing. Direct clitoral stimulation is the way most women get off. Period. Intercourse is very ineffective at helping most women reach orgasm. And let me fill you in on something.....during a session of intercourse SOME women get down right irritated because SOME men think there is a G-spot and will hump away thinking stimulation of that sacred spot will get their women off. Ain't happenen. If she get's up to do the dishes afterwards you better hit your knees buddy cause you didn't do it right.

You can touch breasts kiss necks stroke thighs and be touchy feely all you want but if your woman isn't reaching orgasm she isn't satisfied and is being cheated. There is/was a notion that women could be satisfied in their relationship without ever reaching orgasm. That crap can only be slung so far. How would a man feel if he was aroused by his lover, stroked, kissed, and brought to a level where sexual arousal had him flying high just to have her stop? How would he feel if this happened time and time again for years and never reached release? That's what many women go through without FGM and most certainly with it.

Glory

MMGM is a ridiculous practice which is done with alarming frequency in the U.S. I find cruel and useless and I'm jewish!

FGM, is much worse. Aside from the far more invasive nature of the procedure, I feel we must look at the reason behind it. FGM is done to ensure that females will not experience sexual pleasure. The purpose behimd this is to ensure that they will not be promiscuous and won't cheat on their husbands and disgrace their families. We are, of course, talikng about control. The cultures which practice FGM are seeking to maintain control over women. This usually does not sit well with most westerners which is why we react so strongly in our horror at the thought of what these girls and women go through. The fact that it is often done without anesthesia and less than sterile conditions is icing on the cake.

Amen-Moses,

There is no simmilarity between male and female orgasm. They shouldn't even be referred to by the same word. The only reason that they are is because the medical profession was dominated by men who figured that the female body was not all that different from their own. They were wrong.

Men spend most of their energy in bed trying not orgasm while women spend most of their energy in bed trying to achieve it. There really is no comparison between the two phenomena. In this case, what's good for the Goose is not good for the gander. Or vice versa actually.

Women, in general do not acheive orgasm without their clitoris. It's that simple. In fact, they experience almost no pleasure at all because orgasm is niot the only function of the clitoris. The clitoris is, however, the only body part which has providing sensual pleasure as its's only function. This, I think speaks volumes.

Glory

Ted Hoffman

Dreamer_87

Huh, huh, huh.

Megusic

I agree that usually FGM occurs to a far worse degree, but your take on for them to be equally "painful" is not quite accurate. The comparisons many texts make of female to male circ. are not in referenct to pain, but to illustrate the physical equivalents. For instantce, partial clitdorectomy removes the hood (= male circ) and total removes the hole thing (=removal of penis). These are both Type I FGM. Type II is removing the clitoris and all or part of the labia (=removing all outer organs) and Type III is the above plus ifibulation. Type IV includes pricking piercing, are cauderizing, and other practices include scraping and cutting, and use of herbs to narrow/tighten. Obvoiusly FGM occurs to a far more sever degree than MGM, but isn't it horrific that any mutilation occurs? I don't care if it's type I or IV, they are both take away the physical integrity of another human being.