Uncut Vs. Cut - The Great Debate!

[Stu311]

This is true. Circumcised men can still orgasm and ejaculate, because orgasm is the result of muscular contractions in the pelvis, and is felt in the brain and spinal cord and not in the penis. But circumcision significantly reduces the pleasurable sensations that happen before orgasm. Circumcised men just pump really hard until they achieve orgasm because the orgasm itself is the only pleasure that they get. They don't get much pleasure before the orgasm because most of the fine touch receptors of the inner skin are removed by circumcision, and the few that remain become covered in a thick layer of keratin after years of rubbing against fabric. Most people that have had sex with both intact and circumcised men will tell you that intact men seem to enjoy foreplay a lot more.

Never experienced any of the issues you mention here 7 years after my circumcision.

 

[Schlong87]

This is true. Circumcised men can still orgasm and ejaculate, because orgasm is the result of muscular contractions in the pelvis, and is felt in the brain and spinal cord and not in the penis. But circumcision significantly reduces the pleasurable sensations that happen before orgasm. Circumcised men just pump really hard until they achieve orgasm because the orgasm itself is the only pleasure that they get. They don't get much pleasure before the orgasm because most of the fine touch receptors of the inner skin are removed by circumcision, and the few that remain become covered in a thick layer of keratin after years of rubbing against fabric. Most people that have had sex with both intact and circumcised men will tell you that intact men seem to enjoy foreplay a lot more.

Actually this is not true i read a article by a doctor today that said cut and uncut experience the same pleasure and there is no difference in pleasure between a cut or uncut penis basically a penis is a penis i used to think there was a difference too until i read that.

 

[AllDixNeedLuv69]

the uncut penis when fucking feeling the skin sliding up and down like a sleeve which makes the cock part isnt so much part of the screwing--a cut cock skin is against its shaft making more friction and prob quicker ejeculations

all i know is i am 50 years old been with several cocks but not one of them was uncut

 

[Rockford Tyson]

Actually this is not true i read a article by a doctor today that said cut and uncut experience the same pleasure and there is no difference in pleasure between a cut or uncut penis basically a penis is a penis i used to think there was a difference too until i read that.

All the "tests" that show no difference between circumcised and uncircumcised men are not tests of fine touch. These tests usually involve things like pricking the head of the penis with a needle, or exposing the head of the penis to cold and hot and then asking the men if they feel it, etc. Also, most of these tests focus exclusively on the glans(head) of the penis, while the touch sensations are in the inner foreskin. They cannot compare touch sensation between the inner skin of circumcised men and intact men because circumcised men don't have it. So they restrict the tests to the head, and even then they use extremely gross measures of "sensitivity", like exposing the penis head to ice or very abrasive substances. So, of course, if you restrict the tests to the glans and use very aggressive touch methods, then you won't find much difference.

Saying a "penis is a penis" is ridiculous. Going by your logic then, men that had the specific surgery to decrease sexual sensitivity(to delay ejaculation) , which involves severing the pudendal nerves, should still have 100% of the sensation of the normal penis, since the penis is still there. Fact, is, while circumcision does not cut the pudendal nerves, it removes a lot of tissue.

It's insane to think that you can amputate the frenulum, the frenular band, the inner foreskin, the dartos muscles and all the lymphatics in between and say that "there is no difference". What if you removed all the touch receptors from your finger tips by scrapping your finger tips with a blunt knife until all your touch receptors are gone? Would you still feel touch the same, since you still have your fingers?

To think that you can amputate not only skin but also so many nerves, blood vessels, lymphatic tissue and smooth muscle from the penis and that the penis will still function 100% like it did before is not only idiotic but insane.

But circumcised men are extremely touchy about the subject of circumcision and sexual sensation. Yes, to me, it makes no difference but my own personal experience is that circumcised men need and want rougher stimulation to get off. That is my own personal experience as an intact man that has had contact with both intact and circumcised penises.

 

[Lyrique]

This is true. Circumcised men can still orgasm and ejaculate, because orgasm is the result of muscular contractions in the pelvis, and is felt in the brain and spinal cord and not in the penis. But circumcision significantly reduces the pleasurable sensations that happen before orgasm. Circumcised men just pump really hard until they achieve orgasm because the orgasm itself is the only pleasure that they get. They don't get much pleasure before the orgasm because most of the fine touch receptors of the inner skin are removed by circumcision, and the few that remain become covered in a thick layer of keratin after years of rubbing against fabric. Most people that have had sex with both intact and circumcised men will tell you that intact men seem to enjoy foreplay a lot more.

Hopefully more people begin to recognize that circumcision (when performed on those unable to consent) is sexual assault.

 

[Stu311]

All the "tests" that show no difference between circumcised and uncircumcised men are not tests of fine touch. These tests usually involve things like pricking the head of the penis with a needle, or exposing the head of the penis to cold and hot and then asking the men if they feel it, etc. Also, most of these tests focus exclusively on the glans(head) of the penis, while the touch sensations are in the inner foreskin. They cannot compare touch sensation between the inner skin of circumcised men and intact men because circumcised men don't have it. So they restrict the tests to the head, and even then they use extremely gross measures of "sensitivity", like exposing the penis head to ice or very abrasive substances. So, of course, if you restrict the tests to the glans and use very aggressive touch methods, then you won't find much difference.

Saying a "penis is a penis" is ridiculous. Going by your logic then, men that had the specific surgery to decrease sexual sensitivity(to delay ejaculation) , which involves severing the pudendal nerves, should still have 100% of the sensation of the normal penis, since the penis is still there. Fact, is, while circumcision does not cut the pudendal nerves, it removes a lot of tissue.

It's insane to think that you can amputate the frenulum, the frenular band, the inner foreskin, the dartos muscles and all the lymphatics in between and say that "there is no difference". What if you removed all the touch receptors from your finger tips by scrapping your finger tips with a blunt knife until all your touch receptors are gone? Would you still feel touch the same, since you still have your fingers?

To think that you can amputate not only skin but also so many nerves, blood vessels, lymphatic tissue and smooth muscle from the penis and that the penis will still function 100% like it did before is not only idiotic but insane.

But circumcised men are extremely touchy about the subject of circumcision and sexual sensation. Yes, to me, it makes no difference but my own personal experience is that circumcised men need and want rougher stimulation to get off. That is my own personal experience as an intact man that has had contact with both intact and circumcised penises.

I think it’s more complex than “more nerve endings, more skin, existence of frenulum etc. - more pleasure”. Yes, erogenous tissue is amputated through circumcision, there’s no point denying that. The difficult to answer question is whether what’s left is sufficient to provide an experience that is not materially different to how it was or would have been had the foreskin not been removed. I don’t know how you can quantify pleasure to a sufficiently precise degree to answer that. It also depends on the skill of the surgeon and the type of circumcision, not to mention that some guys are inherently more sensitive than others and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are men better served sexually by a circumcised penis chiefly because they would have otherwise been too sensitive for comfort. The only certain thing is that once you do it, it’s not reversible. You may be better off or not.

 

[chris bell]

As someone who has suffered through multiple surgeries to correct meatal stenosis which was caused by my circumcision at birth and life long painful erections I wish I was given the choice.

 

[tgirlsrgreat]

This is true. Circumcised men can still orgasm and ejaculate, because orgasm is the result of muscular contractions in the pelvis, and is felt in the brain and spinal cord and not in the penis. But circumcision significantly reduces the pleasurable sensations that happen before orgasm. Circumcised men just pump really hard until they achieve orgasm because the orgasm itself is the only pleasure that they get. They don't get much pleasure before the orgasm because most of the fine touch receptors of the inner skin are removed by circumcision, and the few that remain become covered in a thick layer of keratin after years of rubbing against fabric. Most people that have had sex with both intact and circumcised men will tell you that intact men seem to enjoy foreplay a lot more.

Circumcised men just pump really hard until they achieve orgasm because the orgasm itself is the only pleasure that they get.



one of the reasons I avoid threads like this, (all the falsehoods, claims, prejudices and outright bs). oh well

above is totally untrue, I enjoy every aspect of it (sex), as does my penis! I am also into all the other body parts touching, oral sensations, licking, sucking, stroking, hell spanking and light nibbling if you like, the smells, the sounds, you name it. and my cock enjoys it from the initial flirting to the foreplay(especially) to the penetration and yes the orgasm (as we all do!) and I don't just pump away, I love varying speeds, stroke count and penetration depth, evidently my partner(s) do too!) . and afterwards? the feel of the warmth (all over) the slow ease in erection and then the slow release from either a vagina or ass! so to paraphrase from other wrongly worded posts here. don't post about something you could not have any personal experience with! you're not circumcised, remember! thanks!

 

[Schlong87]

who really gives a shit a penis is a penis with foreskin or cut when the tip is exposed it looks just like a cut penis it really doesn't matter they both function the same

 

[Rockford Tyson]

I think it’s more complex than “more nerve endings, more skin, existence of frenulum etc. - more pleasure”. Yes, erogenous tissue is amputated through circumcision, there’s no point denying that. The difficult to answer question is whether what’s left is sufficient to provide an experience that is not materially different to how it was or would have been had the foreskin not been removed. I don’t know how you can quantify pleasure to a sufficiently precise degree to answer that. It also depends on the skill of the surgeon and the type of circumcision, not to mention that some guys are inherently more sensitive than others and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are men better served sexually by a circumcised penis chiefly because they would have otherwise been too sensitive for comfort. The only certain thing is that once you do it, it’s not reversible. You may be better off or not.

I agree that "sexual pleasure" is subjective, and no matter how many "objectiive" tests involving touch sensation and temperature sensitivity tests you do, whether that translates into more or less sexual pleasure/fulfillment is hard to prove.

However, logic and common sense tells that pure tactile sensation must be important for sexual experience, after all all the nerve receptors location in the penis are touch-type receptors, and Evolution seldom makes mistakes. How much would you enjoy of a steak with sauce bearanise and buttered potatoes if 50% of your taste receptors from your nouth got removed.

 

[Rockford Tyson]

Circumcised men just pump really hard until they achieve orgasm because the orgasm itself is the only pleasure that they get.



one of the reasons I avoid threads like this, (all the falsehoods, claims, prejudices and outright bs). oh well

above is totally untrue, I enjoy every aspect of it (sex), as does my penis! I am also into all the other body parts touching, oral sensations, licking, sucking, stroking, hell spanking and light nibbling if you like, the smells, the sounds, you name it. and my cock enjoys it from the initial flirting to the foreplay(especially) to the penetration and yes the orgasm (as we all do!) and I don't just pump away, I love varying speeds, stroke count and penetration depth, evidently my partner(s) do too!) . and afterwards? the feel of the warmth (all over) the slow ease in erection and then the slow release from either a vagina or ass! so to paraphrase from other wrongly worded posts here. don't post about something you could not have any personal experience with! you're not circumcised, remember! thanks!

Well, you don't seem to avoiding "threads like this". After all, you just replied to me, after trying to take the moral high stand of how "I avoid threads like this."

If you were circumcised as a baby, you are in no position to make any statements in this regard. You "enjoy" sex in the same way that a colorblind person "enjoys" their normal sight because they never knew any better. A dog, for instance, doesn't miss seeing in colors because it has never seen in color. You don't "miss" the sensations given by a foreskin because you never had one.

That circumcised men can achieve orgasm and ejaculation is not debatable. Even though orgasm and ejaculation are two different things, they tend to correlate and circumcised men ejaculate just fine and they seem to enjoy it a lot.

The actual debate is how much circumcised men enjoy foreplay COMPARED TO INTACT MEN. That they also enjoy foreplay is not the issue here, because we are talking about degrees.

I cannot speak on this an an uncircumcised man, just like a circumcised man that got circumcised as a baby can also not speak on this. The only men that can speak on this are men that got circumcised as adults and have experienced it both ways. The majority of these men say that there isn't much of a difference. However, far more say that there is a decrease in sensitivity than the ones that claim an increase in sensitivity. The only think that all men that got circumcised as adults agree on is that masturbation is harder without a foreskin. Even the men that say that circumcision makes no difference in pleasure point out that it is easier to jack off with skin.

Even though as an uncircumcised men I cannot speak on whether circumcision decreases sensation, as a cock sucker I can tell you my experince that circumcised men tend to like rougher head. But as for me, it makes no difference to me if the guy is circumcised or not. I actually find circumcised dicks very arousing.

 

[tgirlsrgreat]

Well, you don't seem to avoiding "threads like this". After all, you just replied to me, after trying to take the moral high stand of how "I avoid threads like this."

If you were circumcised as a baby, you are in no position to make any statements in this regard. You "enjoy" sex in the same way that a colorblind person "enjoys" their normal sight because they never knew any better. A dog, for instance, doesn't miss seeing in colors because it has never seen in color. You don't "miss" the sensations given by a foreskin because you never had one.

That circumcised men can achieve orgasm and ejaculation is not debatable. Even though orgasm and ejaculation are two different things, they tend to correlate and circumcised men ejaculate just fine and they seem to enjoy it a lot.

The actual debate is how much circumcised men enjoy foreplay COMPARED TO INTACT MEN. That they also enjoy foreplay is not the issue here, because we are talking about degrees.

I cannot speak on this an an uncircumcised man, just like a circumcised man that got circumcised as a baby can also not speak on this. The only men that can speak on this are men that got circumcised as adults and have experienced it both ways. The majority of these men say that there isn't much of a difference. However, far more say that there is a decrease in sensitivity than the ones that claim an increase in sensitivity. The only think that all men that got circumcised as adults agree on is that masturbation is harder without a foreskin. Even the men that say that circumcision makes no difference in pleasure point out that it is easier to jack off with skin.

Even though as an uncircumcised men I cannot speak on whether circumcision decreases sensation, as a cock sucker I can tell you my experince that circumcised men tend to like rougher head. But as for me, it makes no difference to me if the guy is circumcised or not. I actually find circumcised dicks very arousing.

 

[Rockford Tyson]

 

[deleted15076621]

I'm cut and so, so thankful. I've only ever met one uncut guy ever (this conversation comes up a lot) and he had to get cut at 13 because he had a problem.
I'd never even touch an uncut dick, they gross me out

 

[Rockford Tyson]

I'd never even touch an uncut dick, they gross me out

That's cool, because your character grosses me out! My attitude towards circumcised men that find intact penises repulsive is: "Meh. Ok It's not like I am begging to fuck you anyway"

 

[herbho]

The entire " debate" is ridiculous. If you have or prefer and uncircumcised penis, then that's what's for you; and the opposite is also true. It turns into a " My dick is better than yours," endless prattle; look how many threads are dedicated to it. We have enough problems with being criticized over just about anything we do, so penis aesthetics should be the least of our worries. Just enjoy what's between your legs and enjoy what's between the man ( or men) we enjoy.

 

[Acratopotes]

I agree that "sexual pleasure" is subjective, and no matter how many "objectiive" tests involving touch sensation and temperature sensitivity tests you do, whether that translates into more or less sexual pleasure/fulfillment is hard to prove.

However, logic and common sense tells that pure tactile sensation must be important for sexual experience, after all all the nerve receptors location in the penis are touch-type receptors, and Evolution seldom makes mistakes. How much would you enjoy of a steak with sauce bearanise and buttered potatoes if 50% of your taste receptors from your nouth got removed.

Playing Devil's advocate here as I am uncut and prefer it that way, perhaps the argument about people not experiencing a significant different is that the brain seems to be able to adapt to different levels of sensation. If the brain receives a less strong signal from our senses it seems to amplify what it does receive.

 

[LeanSL]

I got circumcised for health reasons. My foreskin was too narrow. I am super happy with the change. Now I can have sex without pain and enjoy it 100%.

Compared to others, I prefer the circumcised penis. It's much cleaner and doesn't have a bad smell.

 

[zxe]

I am cut, and like the look and feel, i understand its a personal preference

 

[Nexolaris]

How do you know it doesn't diminish your pleasure? Were you cut as an adult?

Yes, cut as an adult.