Circumcision is Unnatural and should be class as Child Mutilation.

Mutilating the most prided and sensitive part of a male before they are even old enough to make their own decisions?

I understand that it is a religious right of way for multiple religions but think about it seriously..

In the current western world we live in there is a good chance that your child is going to grow up and realise that religion is not for them. Upon realising that they do not have their 'Faith' any more they not only have to deal with the possibility of their family disowning them but they also have to deal with their now mutilated penis which isn't 'Normal' for most girls.

Seriously, give your kids a chance to make their own mind up about circumcision when they are old enough to realise how much of a vital tool the penis is. If you believe in an omnipotent god then you must accept that we have foreskins for a reason and they should therefore NOT be hacked off.

These are just my feeling towards the matter. I love my foreskin and would be devastated if someone else had the power to hack it off.

Wait until the kid is at least 16 and can make the decision himself..

Give your kids a break, jeez.

reply to post by TechUnique


Oh no... A clean nice smelling visually attractive penis is much more desirable and in fact girls make fun of the ones that have the skin still intact. They do seem to be more sensitive but in the wrong way, they are not able to burst forth with out pulling and tugging like a circumcised one can.

reply to post by TechUnique


Are you kidding ? Is this for real ?

I would personally like to thank my parents for ridding me of my unnecessary skin on my lower member, providing a more visually stimulating experience for women everywhere.

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by TechUnique

 

Oh no... A clean nice smelling visually attractive penis is much more desirable and in fact girls make fun of the ones that have the skin still intact. They do seem to be more sensitive but in the wrong way, they are not able to burst forth with out pulling and tugging like a circumcised one can.

Actually, the idea that a circumcised penis is cleaner than an uncircumcised penis is a myth.

Circumcision is unhygienic and unhealthy:

One of the most common myths about circumcision is that it makes the penis cleaner and easier to take care of. This is not true. Eyes without eyelids would not be cleaner; neither would a penis without its foreskin. The artificially externalized glans and meatus of the circumcised penis are constantly exposed to abrasion and dirt, making the circumcised penis, in fact, more unclean. The loss of the protective foreskin leaves the urinary tract vulnerable to invasion by bacterial and viral pathogens.

The circumcision wound is larger than most people imagine. It is not just the circular point of union between the outer and inner layers of the remaining skin. Before a baby is circumcised, his foreskin must be torn from his glans, literally skinning it alive. This creates a large open area of raw, bleeding flesh, covered at best with a layer of undeveloped proto-mucosa. Germs can easily enter the damaged tissue and bloodstream through the raw glans and, even more easily, through the incision itself.

Even after the wound has healed, the externalized glans and meatus are still forced into constant unnatural contact with urine, feces, chemically treated diapers, and other contaminants.

www.mothersagainstcirc.org...

Yes, ATS need a 21st thread about circumcision. It's a personal decision. Don't want one, don't get one for you or your male progeny. If your parents decided for you and you don't have the money for reconstructive surgery to put it back, oh well.

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Yes, ATS need a 21st thread about circumcision. It's a personal decision. Don't want one, don't get one for you or your male progeny. If your parents decided for you and you don't have the money for reconstructive surgery to put it back, oh well.

Parents shouldn't have the right to choose for their child. Kids shouldn't have to have enough money to have more unnatural surgery to replace something natural on their body.

People should be able to choose for themselves. That is the point I hold strongly and am trying to make.

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by TechUnique

 

Oh no... A clean nice smelling visually attractive penis

There's this little thing called bathing that the majority of us in the civilized world have become accustomed to. If you'd rather chop off a piece of your body than spend a few seconds scrubbing it each day, so be it, just stay away from the little ones until they come to that same crazy conclusion on their own.

reply to post by TechUnique

They do seem to be more sensitive but in the wrong way, they are not able to burst forth with out pulling and tugging like a circumcised one can.

no they are sensitive as they are supposed to be, the tip is supposed to me a membrane which makes it quite sensitive and more enjoyable for the male. Plenty of cut guys blow their load quite fast my friend, I think you've listened to a few too many myths on the subject.

Anyways, child mutilation? I'm not so sure of that. Let them choose? It's an incredibly traumatic surgery and the older you get the worse it gets, which is why it's done as young as possible because the child can't actually feel the acute pain an adult would, and it will quickly be forgotten.

a friend of mine had it done in junior high school, he couldn't walk or sit right for weeks.

providing a more visually stimulating experience for women everywhere.

I guess all young girls should have makeup tattooed on at birth and have implants to give the men of the world a more stimulating sight.

Whatever that gets there, unwanted or not, gets accumulated.

Wrong, heed your own advice and ask a doctor. Besides cut or uncut, you've got to keep basic hygiene

it seems that those who are circumcised would defend the idea and those who are not are against the idea.

A pattern similar to arguing which religion is better.

Personally, i'm cut and i've seen pictures of unmaintained heads (with fungus).

I also don't think that it is comparable to eyes and eyelids. What keeps the eyes clean would be the constant flow of tears to keep the eyes moist and pushes out unwanted substances. (like eye grits in the morning) Dicks don't have that. It won't clean itself if you leave it covered. Whatever that gets there, unwanted or not, gets accumulated.

I don't think this is a good topic for abovetopsecret. Go talk to a doctor.

Why not ask a majority of the girls in your surrounding area, whether they prefer to have cut or uncut men? I assure you, the number of women who prefer cut, is staggering! ( I know, I did this as a research assignment years ago )

Many men dont know how to properly bathe themselves, much less clean their " member " correctly~ I know girls who have told me that most men whom are uncut, that they experienced had an " odor ", and the females pleasure was limited.

Besides?, what difference does it make...I mean honestly....most people don't even have religious views that get it done anyway....are you going to suggest they are going to hell now?

Oh please, does this really matter?

I have been circumcised for medical reasons, and i'm glad i was.

OP should turn on the news sometime and see whats going on in the world right now, some of the crap people post on here is completely laughable!!!!

reply to post by la2


that's more like it.

Yes, it is technically mutilation, but it's been around and accepted for so long in so many cultures that I doubt it's going anywhere. In many cultures it's a rite of manhood, as most are aware. I can only imagine that having it done at 12 or 13 years, often with no anesthetic, would have more long term traumatic effect than having it done as an infant.

As to whether or not it's beneficial, I think a case could be made for both sides.

For the record, I'm cut and have no complaints, nor have I recieved any.

For what it's worth...

reply to post by TechUnique



If you do the research you will find that venereal disease and other maladies are greater in men who are not circumcised. The foreskin can harbor bacteria that end up inside a woman's vagina and thus give her the disease. Multiple sex partners increase the risk.

Often, men who are uncircumcised fail to properly clean their penis and this laziness make what lies under the foreskin even more filthy.

Another thing one might want to ponder is the lack of physical stimulation an uncircumcised man has during sex. Removing the foreskin allow greater friction during sex and thus greater pleasure.

So, other than for religious reasons, circumcision makes for a clean penis and a happy sex life.

Women, go for the man who is circumcised. That way you don't end up surprised several days later needing the cream, if you know what I mean.


BTW I am happily circumcised.

So, if you are going along the lines of hygiene, are women unclean for not having their lips trimmed? I hope not.

People who have their outer protective layer to the glands removed are making their gland less sensitive to touch. WHY WOULD ANY MAN WANT TO MAKE THAT BIT LESS SENSITIVE?????....WHY???????

Those that say it doesn't make sex less enjoyable, how would you know? If you had it cut as a baby, you have nothing to compare it to. Yes you still have feeling there but ...oh my god.... you don't know what you are missing. I'd sue my parents. I've tried to wlak around in my pants with the hood back. Very uncomfortable. Why?.... because it's too sensitive.

I've known people to be cut in later life, one mate got the skin caught in his zipper "faints" so they removed it. He hates it. He has to sit down to pee as standing up now causes him to spray urine all over the wall like a sprinkler.

Girls say uncut is ugly. A guy can look cut by putting the hood back anytime and look better than a cut guy by not having that scar wrapped around it. Not that I've seen one up close.

reply to post by Fromabove


Are 'cut' people not aware foreskin can be pulled back? Where did this idea of a circumcised penis enjoying more stimulation come from?

If you get it done before you can remember nice one. Don't get it done when you're older unless medically necessary. Things can go wrong even in the most simple of procedures.

I'm representing the ant eater, and I can say I have no cheese, fungus, mould or any other plant life growing on me. No smell either. Amazing what a shower and a some body wash can do, right?

reply to post by Big Raging Loner


The foreskin "can" be pulled back, but you won't get any more pleasure than the limited amount one would have anyway. The more skin you have, the less stimulation you have. No foreskin makes for a more stiff and rigid penis, and that means more friction once inside, and that means more bliss.

One of the reasons some men don't like condoms is because it makes for less friction and less pleasure. All that unnecessary skin does the same thing.

As for cleanliness, there are hordes of medical testimony on that.

Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by TechUnique

 

Another thing one might want to ponder is the lack of physical stimulation an uncircumcised man has during sex. Removing the foreskin allow greater friction during sex and thus greater pleasure.

The foreskin contains the most nerve cells on the penis, and it works in tandem with a vagina to ease irritation caused by needless friction for both parties, so I'm kind of confused as to how you came to that conclusion. Oh wait:

BTW I am happily circumcised.

...nevermind.