Circumcism

[bulio]

I will

looks bigger, nicer and better

[RGX]

Probably not but possibly.

[Wizard_Mon1]

Originally posted by computerfreak76@23 March 2004 - 00:30
its been proven there is no health benefit to circumcion at all, so what other reasons?

You are more likely to catch STDs with foreskin.

Edit - It prelongs exposure to them because they stay inside and seep into the less dense skin. Sorry bit late at night for this kind of info.

[sArA]

On the other hand...

Its supposed to be there to protect the end,

Circumcision roughens the end resulting in much less sensitivity,

If properly cared for a foreskin is no big deal (if you get an STD, you get an STD, it might help to spot it earlier (no pun intended) so reducing the chances of permanent sterility)

It is more of a cultural phenomena than a necessity.

I have a son, he is fine, he washes.

The UK does not make a habit of circumcision for cosmetic reasons, but only for religious or medical reasons.

The same arguments could be used for female circumcision (health etc) but is considered mutilation.

[seiya_33]

yes , it just seems thats what you have to do.

[100%]

if u intend your kids to become porn stars
then
yes
it is a necessity

[silent VI]

Originally posted by Zedaxax@23 March 2004 - 02:35
if u intend your kids to become porn stars
then
yes
it is a necessity

[Spamsey]

I find that with a staplegun the foreskin comes in handy when I run out of condoms






btw - make sure you empty your bladder before trying this

[hobbes]

Originally posted by sara5564@23 March 2004 - 02:46
Circumcision roughens the end resulting in much less sensitivity,

If properly cared for a foreskin is no big deal (if you get an STD, you get an STD, it might help to spot it earlier (no pun intended) so reducing the chances of permanent sterility)

The same arguments could be used for female circumcision (health etc) but is considered mutilation.

Sara,

If I may nitpick, just a little.

It was thought that circumcision would "roughen" or thicken the skin of the exposed glans penis, but it does not.

This was discovered when researchers were attempting to discover why uncircumsized men had such a vastly higher rate of contracting HIV over circumsized men.

As it turns out, the skin thickness of the glans penis (the bulbous tip) is no thicker. It turned out that the thin layer that allowed the penis to slide in the foreskin was the port of entry for the virus.

So if you are planning unprotected sex, you had better be circumsized. You would also be an idiot.

As for female "circumcision", the term is a misleading. The female clitoris is covered by a thin layer of skin called the "hood". When aroused the clitoris becomes erect and projects out from under this hood.

The female hood is equivalent to male foreskin.

The male glans(the head) penis is equivalent to the female clitoris.

A male circumsicion is the removal of foreskin
A female circumsion is quite different, and involves the removal of the clitoris.

So the difference is radical and why the female version is considered mutilation.

I said "nitpick" because if you keep the wang clean and don't have unprotected sex, it really doesn't matter.

[vidcc]

I think you have to be optomistic to cut off a bit before you know how long it's going to be

The foreskin is put there by nature so it must have a reason, even if medical science can't decide exactly what that is.

By the way how do you circumcise a whale ?




send down 4 skin divers :helpsmile: