Germany likes it's wood au-naturale...

POSTED BY: Wishimay
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 14, 2026 07:35
VIEWED: 9193
PAGE 3 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

WISHIMAY

Wednesday, June 27, 2012 11:31 PM

Probably the most sane argument I've read on here in a while. Thumbs up!

DEVERSE

Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:15 AM

My understanding of making such a decision is similar to M52NICKERSON's. No real overwhelming proof of one side over the other, and really, its a personal decision - or should be.

As for the less sensitivity during sex - I am reminded of the man who stated "I just had the worst sex I ever had in my life" and his friend asked, "So how was it?", to which the man replied, "Fantastic!".
I really wonder how one can enjoy sex more than another because of a piece of skin or how that decision is made. On second thought, in all that is holy, please do not tell me about how that decision is made - I really do not want to know.

As for the court decision - I guess senile old men wearing dresses and making idiotic decisions isn't exclusive to North American Supreme Courts.
"The fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighed the fundamental rights of the parents"
"This change (of body integrity) contravenes the interests of the child to decide later on his religious beliefs."

Say what?

So now the state is in charge of making any and all such decisions until the child becomes of legal age? Good grief. I suppose they expect a child who wants this done to practice their religious freedom will now have to make an application to the court or will the child have to wait til they are "legal" adult age? Must be awful slow in the German Courts.
Of course, how many Doctors will be willing to do this on an adult?

Oh let the sun beat down upon my face
With stars to fill my dream
I am a traveler of both time and space
To be where I have been

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:36 AM

The only thing that could come close to deciding the matter is the observations of men who have experienced life both ways. But even that is a bit of a judgement call, since the man's experience may be colored by his opinion of how he looks. I admit, I'm thinking of a certain episode of Sex and the City in which a man gets The Cut so he'll look prettier, then dumps his girlfriend so he can go show off his new look. That's probably not very realistic.

I don't disagree with Germany's decision though. I don't think anyone's body should be altered without them having a say. Permanently altering a boy's privates when he's helpless has always seemed wrong to me, though I can see where the reported health benefits could sway a parent.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
The only thing that could come close to deciding the matter is the observations of men who have experienced life both ways.

Not really. Getting a circumcision later in life in nowhere near the same as having on just after birth.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

RIVERTAM1

Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wishimay:
Heh.

So how many of you guys aren't or have *cough* friends that aren't? Do you know anyone that is circumcised and regrets it? 'Cause I think all of the guys I know ARE and they don't seem to have a problem getting off....if fact if anything...several have the "getting there a little tooo quick" problem...

Don't think they miss that piece of skin one bit...

I never asked any of my guy friends... that would be slightly wierd...

The human body can be drained of blood in 8.6 seconds, given adequate vacuuming systems.

WISHIMAY

Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DEVERSE:

You and Riv have wandered outside the established chat paramiters...DANGER WILL ROBINSON!!

Just kiddin'

XXX to ya both!

To the rest of the people here in RWED, these are two of the best FFans you'll ever meet...

Go easy on 'em, like

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
The only thing that could come close to deciding the matter is the observations of men who have experienced life both ways.

Not really. Getting a circumcision later in life in nowhere near the same as having on just after birth.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

Hmm. I have no penis, so I can't really know. But the scientist in me says we can't really know unless we get the input of individuals who have experienced sex (and other things, like hygiene) with and without a foreskin. Otherwise, this 10% versus 90% stuff is pure nonsense.

M52NICKERSON

Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
Hmm. I have no penis, so I can't really know. But the scientist in me says we can only really know if we get the input of individuals who have experienced sex (and other things, like hygiene) with and without a foreskin. Otherwise, this 10% versus 90% stuff is pure nonsense.

We can get the input from those people, with the understanding that their experience is still going to be different from that of a man who was circumcised as an infant. You have to remember children heal much faster and better than adults. I also believe that keratinization of the gland in infants is a bit different than that of adults.

Now there have been studies that have shown that intact men do have more sensitive penises than circumcised men. Even with that more sensation does not equal more please. There are plenty of women who can't stand direct stimulation of the clitoris. Some men do not like direct stimulation of the gland.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

MAL4PREZ

Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
Hmm. I have no penis, so I can't really know. But the scientist in me says we can only really know if we get the input of individuals who have experienced sex (and other things, like hygiene) with and without a foreskin. Otherwise, this 10% versus 90% stuff is pure nonsense.

We can get the input from those people, with the understanding that their experience is still going to be different from that of a man who was circumcised as an infant. You have to remember children heal much faster and better than adults. I also believe that keratinization of the gland in infants is a bit different than that of adults.

Now there have been studies that have shown that intact men do have more sensitive penises than circumcised men. Even with that more sensation does not equal more please. There are plenty of women who can't stand direct stimulation of the clitoris. Some men do not like direct stimulation of the gland.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

That's the idea I have, picked up by little bits and pieces of info over the years. Uncut seems to be more sensitive, but not to the extent the cut means numb. Far from it, in my experience.

It would be informative to have some kind of direct comparison, even as limited as that must be. Some men out there must have something to say.

Anyway, cut men are hardly swearing off sex. It doesn't seem that they've lost so very much.

ANTHONYT

Thursday, June 28, 2012 3:02 AM

Hello,

Sex is mostly between the ears.

I am cut, my son is not. There didn't seem to be any compelling reason beyond custom to have the procedure.

I'm kind of glad I didn't do it. It can be up to him, and there are indeed doctors who will do the job on adults who request it.

Really, though, I can't imagine a person of value who would leave a lover because of such a detail. And if they would put the breaks on intimacy because of it, it's probably for the best that such a pair never had intercourse anyway.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Never forget what these men are.
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz