Is there really still a "circumsized is better" culture?

[unclep]

Unfortunately, I've run into that multiple times. It's frustrating, being an uncut man myself. As much as I don't understand the preference, I can abide by people having one. But spouting stigmas and lies is what bothers me. I came across a girl online who was complaining that uncut dicks are always filthy, which is just simply not true. Maybe the guy she was with didn't keep it clean, but I do. I've never once had anyone tell me in almost 40 years that my dick was dirty. It's unfortunate and frustrating because that just perpetuates the stigma, and people buy into it.

Exactly - I have had many unfortunate experiences with unclean 'organs of regeneration' A penis is a penis - whatever a man you like has is what you get - ! .But cleanliness is Important to the relationship...some just don't care - you have a good post there !!

 

[deleted15807]

Having to resort to name calling is the surest sign of a weak argument.

Argument? Name calling? What name did I call you? It's a diagnosis.

 

[deleted15807]

Bottom line, we do have basic human rights, .....

Except.

“There are no gods, no nations, no money and no human rights, except in our collective imagination.”

― Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind​

BTW - Love your name, IntactMale, it's very important we know that information about you and huuum your penis.

 

[1141702]

BTW - Love your name, IntactMale, it's very important we know that information about you and huuum your penis.

LOL - really? Forgetting the fact that dick state is what this thread is talking about and his input as intact is valuable:

 

[Dave NoCal]

Argument? Name calling? What name did I call you? It's a diagnosis.

And you are still participating in this thread.

 

[IntactMale]

Except.

“There are no gods, no nations, no money and no human rights, except in our collective imagination.”

― Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind​

BTW - Love your name, IntactMale, it's very important we know that information about you and huuum your penis.

All we can possibly agree on is our collective imagination, so its all that matters. And since our collective imagination includes human rights, we're right back where we started. I'm sure there's a philosophy forum that would be more suited to the type of discussion you would like to have, unless you are willing to give up all human rights you currently take advantage of.

I don't put too much importance on my name, nice to know that you do. I use this name on every adult oriented site I belong to, and I chose it because it is descriptive more than important. Picking out my name on this site is kind of silly, almost every name here comes with some unnecessary description, but that's kind of what a screen name is. If you want to take the conversation in that direction, then don't you think you're kind of full of yourself by naming yourself Sargon?

 

[Gj816]

I think you are missing some pretty major points. You have no idea what would have been different in your life had you not been circumcised, so you can't say that it didn't change your life because you have no way of knowing. Here's one thing it changed about your life, your involvement and position in this discussion. I bet there have been a lot of other things that are different as a result of your circumcision, but we can never know.

Part of the debate is the "right" of parents to make this kind of decision. There are many who think it is not within their rights to elect unnecessary surgery that affects their childs life without their childs consent, whether or not you believe it has any impact. I put the word right in quotes, because its not defined as a right anywhere, its just something that is done. There are people who think we shouldn't be doing that and until the frequency of circumcision decreases significantly those people will continue to make their points.

If it doesn't make a difference like you say, then why do it? It's almost never necessary to cut off a foreskin, and there is a possibility of causing damage without any potential for benefit.

There are at least two religions that require removal of the foreskin. Judaism and Islam.

In the case of Judaism the male child is circumcised at eight days old. It's called a bris. A religious ceremony that has taken place for centuries to remove the foreskin.

It's a sign, a token of the covenant between God and Abraham. Abraham being the first Jew. An everlasting covenant. And therefore supersedes any law that is or would come into effect based on religious grounds.

Knowing nothing about Islam I would say that they do it for the same reason in that Ishmael was a son of Abraham.

I suppose that my point is, that you didn't have any more of a say in being left intact, than I did in being circumcised. It was after all your parents and mine that made those decisions for us.

 

[SirConcis]

to RIC guys:
You may have grown up thinking you were normal, but those left uncut in majoprity cut AND with all the baby books and sex books saying how cut was superior, no cancer etc, you find uncuts fighting back to defend their foreskin and try to counter the pro=circ arguments (many of which were highly exagerated to promote circ).

The uncuts fought back and created the anti-circ movement which is guilty of the same thing and the pro-circers in the 50s and 60s: exagerating facts to support their side. Smegma is a natural lubricant... really? It's dead and decomposing skin. Do you really want your foreskin to ask as a composting bin? Phimosis is normal... really? A long foreskinned guy who masturbates without retracting foreksin (likely because it is tight) loses out on a LOT of stimulation of the glans and coronna being stimulated and inner 4skin being stimulated.

Parents believing the anti circers to never try to pull back their son's foresiin? Best way to ensure he ends up with undully lonfg and phimotic foreskin. The proper, original recommendation was to never FORCE foreskin back but gently retract to wash what you could expose (which progressively helps loosen adhesions and foreskin to achieve full retraction as soon as possible,

What has happened is that the exagerations of the pro-circ era are gone now replaced by exageratiosn of the anti-circers designed to make cut guys feel mutilated, inferior. (I guess some "payback" for how uncutrs were made to feel as they grew up).

To some RIC guys, the anti-circ messages have no effect, and to others they do and the later feel bad about having been mutilated and because of exagerated advantages of foreksin, they set out to restore.

 

[1141702]

to RIC guys:
You may have grown up thinking you were normal, but those left uncut in majoprity cut AND with all the baby books and sex books saying how cut was superior, no cancer etc, you find uncuts fighting back to defend their foreskin and try to counter the pro=circ arguments (many of which were highly exagerated to promote circ).

The uncuts fought back and created the anti-circ movement which is guilty of the same thing and the pro-circers in the 50s and 60s: exagerating facts to support their side. Smegma is a natural lubricant... really? It's dead and decomposing skin. Do you really want your foreskin to ask as a composting bin? Phimosis is normal... really? A long foreskinned guy who masturbates without retracting foreksin (likely because it is tight) loses out on a LOT of stimulation of the glans and coronna being stimulated and inner 4skin being stimulated.

Parents believing the anti circers to never try to pull back their son's foresiin? Best way to ensure he ends up with undully lonfg and phimotic foreskin. The proper, original recommendation was to never FORCE foreskin back but gently retract to wash what you could expose (which progressively helps loosen adhesions and foreskin to achieve full retraction as soon as possible,

What has happened is that the exagerations of the pro-circ era are gone now replaced by exageratiosn of the anti-circers designed to make cut guys feel mutilated, inferior. (I guess some "payback" for how uncutrs were made to feel as they grew up).

To some RIC guys, the anti-circ messages have no effect, and to others they do and the later feel bad about having been mutilated and because of exagerated advantages of foreksin, they set out to restore.

Unless it has nothing to do with that. In my case, I feel wronged having not experienced an intact, and honestly normal cock, barring natural variation. The practice is fucking stupid unless medically needed. Period.

Seems simple and pretty obvious to me.

You also may throw it into your bullshit wagon, but infant circ causes psychological impacts. I know it did me at least as an adult. Who is to say what it truly does to an infant. I think it’s repulsive that it’s even done.

 

[Gj816]

Unless it has nothing to do with that. In my case, I feel wronged having not experienced an intact, and honestly normal cock, barring natural variation. The practice is fucking stupid unless medically needed. Period.

Seems simple and pretty obvious to me.

You also may throw it into your bullshit wagon, but infant circ causes psychological impacts. I know it did me at least as an adult. Who is to say what it truly does to an infant. I think it’s repulsive that it’s even done.

I suppose in retrospect that if you were spanked as a child that gave you issues too. If you'd never seen an intact penis you wouldn't know the difference.

I have never had any issues as an adult from being cut. Until I joined this site no one had ever seen my dick with the exception of the Dr's that I wasn't going to have sex with. And no one has ever complained that I don't have a foreskin.

I'll say this one final time. I have never put a stigmatism on another male because his dick has a foreskin on it period!

 

[IntactMale]

to RIC guys:
You may have grown up thinking you were normal, but those left uncut in majoprity cut AND with all the baby books and sex books saying how cut was superior, no cancer etc, you find uncuts fighting back to defend their foreskin and try to counter the pro=circ arguments (many of which were highly exagerated to promote circ).

The uncuts fought back and created the anti-circ movement which is guilty of the same thing and the pro-circers in the 50s and 60s: exagerating facts to support their side. Smegma is a natural lubricant... really? It's dead and decomposing skin. Do you really want your foreskin to ask as a composting bin? Phimosis is normal... really? A long foreskinned guy who masturbates without retracting foreksin (likely because it is tight) loses out on a LOT of stimulation of the glans and coronna being stimulated and inner 4skin being stimulated.

Parents believing the anti circers to never try to pull back their son's foresiin? Best way to ensure he ends up with undully lonfg and phimotic foreskin. The proper, original recommendation was to never FORCE foreskin back but gently retract to wash what you could expose (which progressively helps loosen adhesions and foreskin to achieve full retraction as soon as possible,

What has happened is that the exagerations of the pro-circ era are gone now replaced by exageratiosn of the anti-circers designed to make cut guys feel mutilated, inferior. (I guess some "payback" for how uncutrs were made to feel as they grew up).

To some RIC guys, the anti-circ messages have no effect, and to others they do and the later feel bad about having been mutilated and because of exagerated advantages of foreksin, they set out to restore.

I have never heard anyone make the argument that smegma is a natural lubricant, if I had I would have called whoever said that a fool. Same with the claim that phimosis is normal. Where are you seeing people make these claims?

 

[IntactMale]

I'll say this one final time. I have never put a stigmatism on another male because his dick has a foreskin on it period!

You are a single person. Just because you don't do that, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That really isn't something that should need to be explained. I'm not homophobic, but there are homophobic people. I'm not racist, but there are racist people. MAYBE you don't attach any stigma to the foreskin, but there are people who do. Your behaviors do not dictate the behaviors of society.

 

[1141702]

I suppose in retrospect that if you were spanked as a child that gave you issues too. If you'd never seen an intact penis you wouldn't know the difference.

I have never had any issues as an adult from being cut. Until I joined this site no one had ever seen my dick with the exception of the Dr's that I wasn't going to have sex with. And no one has ever complained that I don't have a foreskin.

I'll say this one final time. I have never put a stigmatism on another male because his dick has a foreskin on it period!

Never said you stigmatized anyone.

My argument is simple, and obvious. It takes nothing else into consideration. If I were religious and made a covenant through family, so be it. If I had a medical reason to get circed, so be it. Is it my right barring anything medical that should prevent me from experiencing a male human body as I was intended? Yes. And that’s everyone’s right. Spanking a child is not clamping off or cutting off the foreskin of an infant.

And it’s the only thing I’ve known is a ridiculous argument. And you are right, I would have lived in complete ignorance of my true body and I did until I learned the difference at 20. THAT is wrong.

Everything about this is wrong and it has nothing to do with anyone else, or anyone else’s view, or what people think, or anything.

The entire topic is a joke because frankly, nbbody gives a shit about the completeness of the male form, the right to be complete if born that way, and the right to a person to not be modified for no reason by someone else without consent and the benefits or even non benefits that provides. Nobody gives a shit that they are fundamentally changing the male genitalia. It’s insulting. It’s insulting that as soon as a male is born in the US, they are modified FOR NO REASON but POSSIBLE prevention, in most cases. The difference between cut and uncut is not trivial.

It’s mystifying to me, to be honest. I will never understand it, the whole practice, to me, is fundamentally morally wrong and it will always be so.

 

[1141702]

I have never heard anyone make the argument that smegma is a natural lubricant, if I had I would have called whoever said that a fool. Same with the claim that phimosis is normal. Where are you seeing people make these claims?

Neither have I. Lol

 

[oliverrevilo]

Never said you stigmatized anyone.

My argument is simple, and obvious. It takes nothing else into consideration. If I were religious and made a covenant through family, so be it. If I had a medical reason to get circed, so be it. Is it my right barring anything medical that should prevent me from experiencing a male human body as I was intended? Yes. And that’s everyone’s right. Spanking a child is not clamping off or cutting off the foreskin of an infant.

And it’s the only thing I’ve known is a ridiculous argument. And your right, I would have lived in complete ignorance of my true body and I did until I learned the difference at 20. THAT is wrong.

Everything about this is wrong and it has nothing to do with anyone else, or anyone else’s view, or what people think, or anything.

The entire topic is a joke because frankly, no body gives a shit about the completeness of the male form and the right to be complete if born that way and the benefits or even non benefits that provides. Nobody gives a shit that they are fundamentally changing the male genitalia. It’s insulting. It’s insulting that as soon as a male is born in the US, they are modified FOR NO REASON but POSSIBLE prevention, in most cases. The difference between cut and uncut is not trivial.

And nobody gives a shit. It’s mystifying to me, to be honest. I will never understand it, the whole practice, to me, is fundamentally morally wrong and it will always be so.

I appreciate your support of this subject, Thank you Dildoshwaggins!!

 

[BigInBellevue]

I love my circumcised cock and am glad it was done so early that I don't remember the pain. The streamlined shape is so beautiful. The corona is free to rub against things and transmit pleasurable feelings. So easy to clean. I'm sure you love your uncut one also.

 

[LondonCutguy]

Absolutely down to personal preference; as a slut for the circumcised member, I'd be happy to drown in a sea of cut cock...

 

[IntactMale]

The thread isn't about personal preference. Every person I've been with thought my foreskin was unique and different, I never got a complaint, but it was obviously something that was unexpected. Some of them told me that they preferred it, but they wouldn't have without experiencing it.

The question asked is whether or not their is a stigma about foreskins, and there clearly is. In comedy, TV shows, and movies, whenever an uncircumcised penis is mentions it becomes the but of jokes. A penis in its natural state is, apparently, gross and disgusting and requires warning, while one that was needlessly, surgically altered is considered normal.

 

[IntactMale]

Here are some posts from a quotes from a Jim Jeffries comedy special released on Netflix tonight. I like Jim Jeffries. I know he's making some jokes so I don't care what he says, and I know quoting his jokes in text kills the joke. I care what unfunny asshole will say on his behalf.

-The reason I got my son circumcised is so that when he is older women will enjoy having his dick in their mouths. I did it because I love him, and your dicks are fucking disgusting. You fucking animals. How do you fucking look at your dicks and have any level of self respect? Every fucking day, your fucking hooded slimy fucking dicks. My dick smells constantly, it's an eternal battle against that smell, I can't even imagine what you accept in your life. Do you know that its not in porn! It's not in fucking porn! Uncircumcised isn't in porn because the people that make porn are running a business and they don't want people fucking vomiting while they're masturbating. You can't go to a porn site an put uncircumcised in, it doesn't come up. Your dick is less of a fetish than fucking feet you fucking disgusting animals.

He says a few things about extra skin and docking after that. Then describes an uncircumcised dick as a horrible dick and a circumcised dick as a nice dick.

I like Jim Jeffries a lot, he's at least in my top 20 comics. And I know typing out what he says makes it harsher without his comment. He was saying that to a UK audience that was clearly primarily uncircumcised, and they enjoyed the jokes, so did I.

This is still an example of a culture that is anti foreskin. That circumcised is better. I hope I remember this thread every time I see an example, but I know I've missed a few. I think this thread could be a good library of foreskin hate in media/pop culture.

Again, a penis in its natural state is disgusting. Your infant daughter is gross until I drill holes in her ear lobes. Your son makes me sick unless he's got a tribal tattoo around his nothing bicep. Women are disgusting too if they haven't had their clits removed. Maybe none of that is true, but we could let the recipient of that treatment make the decision.

 

[1141702]

Here are some posts from a quotes from a Jim Jeffries comedy special released on Netflix tonight. I like Jim Jeffries. I know he's making some jokes so I don't care what he says, and I know quoting his jokes in text kills the joke. I care what unfunny asshole will say on his behalf.

-The reason I got my son circumcised is so that when he is older women will enjoy having his dick in their mouths. I did it because I love him, and your dicks are fucking disgusting. You fucking animals. How do you fucking look at your dicks and have any level of self respect? Every fucking day, your fucking hooded slimy fucking dicks. My dick smells constantly, it's an eternal battle against that smell, I can't even imagine what you accept in your life. Do you know that its not in porn! It's not in fucking porn! Uncircumcised isn't in porn because the people that make porn are running a business and they don't want people fucking vomiting while they're masturbating. You can't go to a porn site an put uncircumcised in, it doesn't come up. Your dick is less of a fetish than fucking feet you fucking disgusting animals.

He says a few things about extra skin and docking after that. Then describes an uncircumcised dick as a horrible dick and a circumcised dick as a nice dick.

I like Jim Jeffries a lot, he's at least in my top 20 comics. And I know typing out what he says makes it harsher without his comment. He was saying that to a UK audience that was clearly primarily uncircumcised, and they enjoyed the jokes, so did I.

This is still an example of a culture that is anti foreskin. That circumcised is better. I hope I remember this thread every time I see an example, but I know I've missed a few. I think this thread could be a good library of foreskin hate in media/pop culture.

Again, a penis in its natural state is disgusting. Your infant daughter is gross until I drill holes in her ear lobes. Your son makes me sick unless he's got a tribal tattoo around his nothing bicep. Women are disgusting too if they haven't had their clits removed. Maybe none of that is true, but we could let the recipient of that treatment make the decision.

He sounds like an asshole.