Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

[...]and there are advantages to NOT being circumcised.


[...]

I'm asking because I don't know, but what are they?

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

[...]and there are advantages to NOT being circumcised.


[...]

I'm asking because I don't know, but what are they?

Apparently sex is more intense when you're not circumcised,
I don't know the valadity of that claim, btu I've heard it said.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Loss of sensitivity: there are some men who complain that circumcision leads to a loss of sensitivity of the penis due to the fact that the glans becomes thicker and the absence of the foreskin.

Ok, so what if you've always been circumcised though, you
would'nt notice any loss, as it would always be the same.

Lost of sensitivity... hmmm... could explain why it takes forever to.... never mind.

A circumcised male is at less risk of contracting HIV because the foreskin is a permeable layer of skin that has microscopic holes that actually does let in HIV. With circumcision, that permeable skin is cut off thus allowing the skin covering the rest of the penis to "do the work", and this skin, although permeable as well, has holes small enough to not let HIV pass through. Circumcision is an excellent option to cut the risk associated with not only HIV, but other STD's as well. Cutting the risk of infection through circumcision has been known for years, but has only recently been reported in the mainstream media.