I feel very sorry for circumsized men :(

You will never reach the heights of pleasure that unmutilated, real men experience on a daily basis.

Violent, religious extremist, young girl loving, hateful, child mutilating.....you Americans should be best friends with your new Muslim masters. So much in common hehe.

Feel so sorry for my fellow countrymen. My current girl was reluctant to try me out as I wasn't mutilated as a child. But now she's tried out a real dick....she can't get enough. I feel kinda bad for all those out there who were damaged at kids.

my foreskin rules. not bragging but women always complimented my penis and i have never had trouble satisfying a woman before myself. whether this has anything to do with my foreskin or just my own sexual awareness i do not know. But i think all these ideas, insults and stereotypes is all your own shit. dick and balls smell when they are not clean foreskin or not...same as your ass and armpits. the ability to last long during sex is so much of a mental thing more than anything. women preferring or not preferring a guy because of how his dick looks? get real.

also, i didnt get my son circumcised and the doctor who was a white woman thanked me and said that circumcision is not necessary and just a tradition that often just gets passed on for no other reason than "like father, like son"

no fag at all...ive had a lot of infection controll and micro bacteria classes to know



I've played a ton of flight simulator games, but that doesn't mean I can just jump in a plane and fly it. Bottom line is, unless you are uncut, or were circumcised late enough in life to remember, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about

ac 1171667

re: "#19", yes that is something that people don't grok yet,
and plays a big role in conception as well, a part of the
conceptual process about which the turkey baster crowd is clueless.

my husband, like almost all baby boys born in the US in the 1950's,
is cut. our son is not. no complaints from him, and he's always got
lots of female attention.

we have found that fresh aloe gel, right from the plant
(just break off a piece and peel the gel out) really enhances
the 'electrical conductivity' factor for both of us. just make
sure that you are using a plant which hasn't been drenched
in pesticides, etc. (grow your own, if buying a new one, repot
and hold for a few months before using). Aloe gel also makes
a good spermicide when used with a diaphragm, we field tested
it successfully for 22 years !

circumcision sucks. what if we just cut off one of a baby boy's
eyelids shortly after birth ? since the structures are similar.
that wouldn't hurt or have any lifelong consequences, right ?

the foreskin is the eyelid of the phallus. a cut phallis is called
a penis. words matter.

I've been with both types, cut and uncut and honestly as a woman, I can't tell the difference from the receiving end.

Zecharia Sitchin fans may have a different opinion. According to Sitchin, the first human was created by combining the DNA of a male Anunnaki with the DNA of a female ape-like humanoid. When Adam was born, the Anunnaki examined him closely. The newborn's penis was of great interest:

"They looked at his manhood: Odd was its shape, by a skin was its forepart surrounded. Unlike that of the Anunnaki malehood it was, a skin from its forepart was hanging! Let the Earthling from us Anunnaki by this foreskin be distinguished! So Enki was saying. The newborn to cry was beginning; to her chest Ninmah closely drew him" (The Lost Book of Enki, p. 139).

Was the human foreskin a defect in the Anunnaki/human hybrid caused by an imperfect manipulation of DNA? Could it be that circumcision was Mankind's effort to be more like their creators? Was circumcision a bond between Man and his Anunnaki Gods?

Just asking.

Zecharia Sitchin fans may have a different opinion. According to Sitchin, the first human was created by combining the DNA of a male Anunnaki with the DNA of a female ape-like humanoid. When Adam was born, the Anunnaki examined him closely. The newborn's penis was of great interest:

"They looked at his manhood: Odd was its shape, by a skin was its forepart surrounded. Unlike that of the Anunnaki malehood it was, a skin from its forepart was hanging! Let the Earthling from us Anunnaki by this foreskin be distinguished! So Enki was saying. The newborn to cry was beginning; to her chest Ninmah closely drew him" (The Lost Book of Enki, p. 139).

Was the human foreskin a defect in the Anunnaki/human hybrid caused by an imperfect manipulation of DNA? Could it be that circumcision was Mankind's effort to be more like their creators? Was circumcision a bond between Man and his Anunnaki Gods?

Just asking.


Have heard that from other sources too.

I don't think it was so much man's effort to be more like their creators,
as the creator's effort to 'brand' the 'chosen ones' of their genetic
experimenting. If what they were after was a self-perpetuating branding,
continued as tradition, they certainly succeeded. Read a comment elsewhere
from a guy saying his son would be circumcised as practiced in his tribal line
clear back to the Old Testament. Also read recently that tradition states that
the Prophet Mohammed was born 'without a foreskin'. Very interesting !

Amusing to watch those that have been cut try to defend themselves by saying we are dirty or don't do porn it only goes to show your desperation to be accepted.I for one have been so great-full for not having been cut.Not clean trust me like most of you most of my life has been dedicated to keeping my buddy happy staying clean is part of that.the cheese thing came from back when people didn't bath for a month.As for the porn well I can tell you when a guy is fully erect you cannot tell if he is cut or not unless you are playing with it.I have never been rejected for being a full man in fact like one poster said if anything it raises a woman's curiosity so we feel obligated to show them.
As for lasting longer there perhaps may be a case there but I have always had the ladies I bedded come back for more so I could not have been that bad.One more thing many years ago I found myself Horny in a strange city so I hired a hooker to give me a BJ I paid in advance and it was awkward because it lacked the intimacy I was accustomed to.We managed to get the job done and I was expecting some snide remark about wasting her time instead she looked at me and told me I had an awesome dick and left.I would think she would know so after that I never worried too much.But yes like OP I do have sympathy for those of you who will never get the chance to know the true reason god gave us a foreskin.One can only wonder how quickly ones ability to taste would disappear if they were to walk around with their tongues stuck out all day. you would know there was something there but never quite be able to appreciate the delicate textures.

I've never been with a man who was not circumsized. They say the pleasure you receive is greater when a man is not cut, so naturally I am curious. Does seem unhygienic though.


Actually it's the other way around. Dog dicks are more sensitive. IOW their minute men!

It's supposed to be feel better for a woman too, but I'm not qualified to speak. Great, now I have to hunt down an uncut guy, just so I can run an experiment. Just kidding.. lol



I highly doubt that lookin at it scientifically and heres why - While the vaginal walls and clitorus may have much nerve endings it would not tell a difference I wouldnt think...unless of course there is a means at work that we dont know yet like the transfer of some kind of energy from the penis to vagina and back. (I do wonder this as I get something from sex I cant get from even the best and longest masterbation) But for a woman I would actually think circumcised would be better cause stop and think about.........with skin peeled off the veins will stick out more and closer to the surface hence you will feel it more. Why do you think they make condoms "ribbed"?

I've been with both types, cut and uncut and honestly as a woman, I can't tell the difference from the receiving end.

Yeah it is not natural...I regret having my son circumcised. The docs almost cut the head of his penis completely off, they had to stitch it back on. It is fine now but what a horrific thing to put a newborn baby through! One of his first experiences in the world. :(
I would never do that again.

I've never been with a man who was not circumsized. They say the pleasure you receive is greater when a man is not cut, so naturally I am curious. Does seem unhygienic though.

The foreskin is a complex organ with a lot of similarities to the eyelid due to its two layer structure. Scientists have now revealed the function and structure of these skin that sheaths the penis after a long and detailed study. The practice of male circumcision has been blown out of proportion. Circumcision is considered to be in vogue and these misconception has received a lot of backing from the medical field. The complete removal of the foreskin ought to be viewed as a male genital mutilation. Many people are yet to realize what they are losing through circumcision. The benefits of circumcision have been trumpeted so much and for many years without giving due consideration to the aftermath of these surgery. Surgery in medical terms is the actual removal of a diseased or unwanted part of the body. But the foreskin is a vital organ just like an appendix is important.

The foreskin is a delicate organ designed to offer protection to the penis head from constant abrasion and possible infection. It forms half of all the penile skin and folds itself around the penis. The inside surface of the foreskin is a complexity of a soft mucosa which releases smegma which is a form of antiviral and antibacterial lubricant. These lubricants go a step further and protect the glans for any form of infection and from constant friction and abrasion. Due to the sheathed nature of the glans in a moist environment, sensitivity is retained in its pure form. When it comes to sex the skin fold called the foreskin glides along the shaft of the penis. The movement provides stimulation and lubrication. During circumcision all these functions and benefits are lost. Beware of male circumcision. It robs a man vital elements from his manhood. Circumcision only serves to deny him his natural rights.

Male circumcision is a health risk as a recent study shows. The journal of the American Medical Association which published the study shows that circumcision actually puts a man at an awkward health situation. Much as male circumcision alleviates the possibilities of HIV and syphilis infection the health risks are still higher. Circumcised men stand a higher chance of infection from herpes, chlamydia and hepatitis. Whoever announced to the world that male circumcision can save a man from disease infection ought to be prosecuted. It is misleading to tell the public that circumcision is a form of immunization. It makes the public to behave in inappropriate manner with the notion that they are safe. Beware of circumcision because it solves a small problem but creates a bigger one.

Circumcised men do not realize what they are losing in terms of sexual pleasure. Male circumcision removes all the erogenous tissue. The foreskin has numerous nerve endings which make sex to be so exciting and pleasurable. The glans peels itself off the top most sensitive skin during the healing process. An uncircumcised man enjoys optimum sexual pleasure with his partner. The foreskin is so erogenous you will regret why you lost it. The gliding of the foreskin along the penile shaft during sex gives a man unprecedented sexual pleasure. It is pleasure that a circumcised man can only dream of hence beware of male circumcision.