[quote=“Jeeves_Cripes”]
And if a friend told me that his fiancée wanted him to skin his wang before marriage, I’d tell him to lose that freaking psychopath. Drop her in a hurry.[/quote]
Or at least make it a tit-for-tat procedure. If he has to get “chopped,” then he should ask his bride-to-be to get breast implants. Then there is a reward at the end of the rainbow for the pain induced.
From that wiki.
[quote]Most of the Holy Prepuces were lost or destroyed during the Reformation and the French Revolution.
Calcata is worthy of special mention, as the reliquary containing the Holy Foreskin was paraded through the streets of this Italian village as recently as 1983 on the Feast of the Circumcision, which was formerly marked by the Roman Catholic Church around the world on January 1 each year. The practice ended, however, when thieves stole the jewel-encrusted case, contents and all. [4] Following this theft, it is unclear whether any of the purported Holy Prepuces still exist. In a 1997 television documentary for Channel 4, British journalist Miles Kington travelled to Italy in search of the Holy Foreskin, but was unable to find any remaining example.[/quote]
They’re not related, are they? I mean the feasting and the missing wobbly bits.
Agree wholeheartedly there, Jeeves_Cripes. While I’m merrily intact, I turned very much anti mutilation after assisting in such a procedure as an operating theatre nurse twenty odd years ago.
HG
My boyfriend in Korea got circumcised as an adult. Seems it was a fairly common thing for young men to do - because it got them out of one week of their army service. Evidently the army doctors were big on circumcision for health reasons and encouraged any uncircumcised recruit to get it done. The soldiers thought that one week rest in hospital afterwards, instead of the horrific conditions in the armed forces, made it all worth it.
He said that it hurt a lot afterward. I asked him how it affected sex and sexual feelings, but he didn’t know (or refused to tell me).
[quote=“Chewycorns”][quote=“Jeeves_Cripes”]
And if a friend told me that his fiancée wanted him to skin his wang before marriage, I’d tell him to lose that freaking psychopath. Drop her in a hurry.[/quote]
Or at least make it a tit-for-tat procedure. If he has to get “chopped,” then he should ask his bride-to-be to get breast implants. [/quote]
Goddamn right! In her forehead.
I don’t know if it counts quite the same but I was cut as a baby, and needed a kind of ‘maintenance re-cut’ when I was 4 years old. (What can I say, I’m quite resilient down there I suppose.) Well, there are a few things I really vividly remember from my semi-early childhood (eating fried SPAM is one for example) but the MOST vivid was most certainly the utter pain of this re-circumcision. Years after it’s done, sure it’s no big deal and I’m glad it happened – but it’s a big step as an adult. Plus, any woman who requires this amount of pain from her man is quite demanding, and if he does it, who knows what else she may ask him to do for the sake of her ‘love’…
Marriages end, but some things never grow back. 
Wow! This thread is an eye-opener for me.
I’ve become a fan of the cut recently and could have easily been the one to nudge my next boyfriend to have it done. But I had no idea it was this big a deal, this painful. No way would I ever push him for anything like that now.
Maybe the lady in question needs a lesson in what it means first. Maybe she’ll see it differently then.
The graphic protests such as these is what really drove the point home for me. Really. Thanks.
[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]And you know what? Lopping off the outer labia of young females also leaves them much fresher. And please, don’t even get me started on what a mess lurks under that clitoral hood!
Let’s all get mutilated in the name of hygeine!
HG[/quote]
Another prepuce (a technically broader term that also includes the clitoral hood, the homologous structure in women) saved!
Some interesting reading here from wiki. I thank my parents I’m intact, and so does Missus Huang!
[quote]Functions
Some researchers believe that the foreskin facilitates intercourse. In her book Sex as Nature Intended It, Kristen O’Hara argues that foreskin is a natural gliding stimulator of the vaginal walls during intercourse, increasing a woman’s overall clitoral stimulation and helping a woman achieve orgasm more often and more quickly. [2] She therefore believes that the absence of the foreskin and gliding action makes it more difficult for a woman to achieve orgasm during intercourse.
Taylor et al described the foreskin in detail, documenting a ridged band of mucosal tissue. They stated “This ridged band contains more Meissner’s corpuscles than does the smooth mucosa and exhibits features of specialized sensory mucosa.”[10] The AAP noted that the work of Taylor et al “suggests that there may be a concentration of specialized sensory cells in specific ridged areas of the foreskin.”[11] In 1999, Cold and Taylor stated “The prepuce is primary, erogenous tissue necessary for normal sexual function.”[3] Moses and Bailey (1998}, however, describe the evidence as “indirect,” and state that “aside from anecdotal reports, it has not been demonstrated that this is associated with increased male sexual pleasure.”[12]
Gairdner (1949) states that the foreskin protects the glans[6] but some studies show that inflammation of the glans is more common when the foreskin is present.[13]
Shen (China) found a statistically significant *(p = 0.001) increase in erectile dysfunction following circumcision.[14] Pang and Kim (South Korea) reported “Of those who were circumcised long after they had been sexually active, > 80% reported no noticeable difference in sexuality, but a man was twice as likely to have experienced diminished sexuality than improved sexuality.”[15] In another study by Kim and Pang (2006) of 255 men circumcised after the age of 20 and 118 who were not circumcised, they reported that masturbatory pleasure decreased in 48% of the respondents and increased in 8%. Masturbatory difficulty increased in 63% but was easier in 37%. 20% reported that their sex life was worse after circumcision and 6% reported that it had improved (the abstract is silent about the other 74%). “There were no significant differences in sexual drive, erection, ejaculation, and ejaculation latency time between circumcised and uncircumcised men.” They concluded, “There was a decrease in masturbatory pleasure and sexual enjoyment after circumcision, indicating that adult circumcision adversely affects sexual function in many men, possibly because of complications of the surgery and a loss of nerve endings.” [3] [4] Sorrells et al. (2007), in a study funded by NOCIRC, compared penile sensitivity in 91 circumcised and 68 uncircumcised men and concluded, “The transitional region from the external to the internal prepuce is the most sensitive region of the uncircumcised penis and more sensitive than the most sensitive region of the circumcised penis.”[5]
Fink’s study of American men also found significantly worsened erectile function *(p = 0.01)[16] Other studies came to different conclusions. Collins (USA), Senkul (Turkey), and Masood (Britain) found no significant difference in erectile function.[17][18][19] Senkul found that the circumcised men took significantly longer to ejaculate after circumcision *(P = 0.02).[19] Laumann’s study of American-born men found “little difference between circumcision status and sexual dysfunction for the two younger cohorts” (18-29 and 30-44). However, older men (45-59) with foreskins in his sample were significantly more likely to suffer from erectile dysfunction overall *(p < 0.05) and trouble achieving and maintaining an erection *(p. < 0.05). Premature ejaculation and performance anxiety were also noted *(both p. < 0.10). Circumcision rates were also significantly different in different ethnic groups (less common in Blacks and Hispanics) and they varied with the education level of the mother (less common in those with less education).[20][21]
Fink’s study reported less sensitivity after circumcision, though this only bordered on statistical significance *(p = 0.08).[16] In contrast, Masood et al. reported improved sensation in 38% of men following circumcision and less sensation in 18%. 61% expressed greater satisfaction following removal of the foreskin, less satisfaction in 17%, and no change in 22%.[22]
Interpretation of these findings vary. For example, Masood said, “Penile sensitivity had variable outcomes after circumcision. The poor outcome of circumcision considered by overall satisfaction rates suggests that when we circumcise men, these outcome data should be discussed during the informed consent process.”[22] Hill and Denniston listed Senkul’s finding of an increased ejaculatory time as a “demonstrated adverse effect” of circumcision[23] However, Senkul stated: “Adult circumcision does not adversely affect sexual function. The increase in the ejaculatory latency time can be considered an advantage rather than a complication. However, concerning the cause of that increase, in a Muslim community, the psychological influence of circumcision may be more pronounced than the organic effect.”
Some do not accept that the presence or absence of the foreskin makes any difference and as such has no sexual effect.
The fold of the prepuce maintains sub-preputial wetness, which mixes with exfoliated skin to form smegma. Some authors believe that smegma contains antibacterial enzymes,[24] though their theory has been challenged.[25] Inferior hygiene has been associated with balanitis,[26] though excessive washing can cause non-specific dermatitis.[27]
The term ‘gliding tobzillation’ is used in some papers to describe the way the foreskin moves during sexual intercourse. A foreskin that covers the glans penis may move back and forth over the glans. This gliding movement may reduce friction during sexual intercourse. The gliding action was described by Lakshamanan & Prakash in 1980 [6]The outer layer of the prepuce in common with the skin of the shaft of the penis glides freely in a to and fro fashion… Several genital integrity activists have argued that the gliding movement of the foreskin is important during sexual intercourse:
Warren & Bigelow claim that gliding action would help to reduce vaginal dryness and that restoration of the gliding action is an important advantage of foreskin restoration. [7]
A survey by Bensley & Boyle provides some confirmation that gliding action provides protection of vaginal lubrication.[8] The authors explain, however, that their subjects were self-selected and a larger sample size is needed.
O’Hara describes the gliding action: During intercourse, the natural penis shaft actually glides within its own shaft skin covering. This minimizes friction to the vaginal walls and opening, and to the shaft skin itself, adding immeasurably to the comfort and pleasure of both parties.
Friction is not entirely eliminated during natural intercourse but it is largely eliminated. Friction can take place in the lower vagina, but only if the man uses a stroke that exceeds the (forward and backward) gliding range of the shaft’s extra skin. And in such a case, there will be friction only to the extent that the shaft exceeded its extra skin, which is uncommon since the natural penis has a propensity for short strokes. Primarily, it is the penis head that makes frictional contact with the vaginal walls, usually in the upper vagina where there is ample lubrication…The gliding principle of natural intercourse is a two-way street—the vagina glides on the shaft skin while the shaft skin massages the penis shaft as it glides over it. (O’Hara, p.72)
Fleiss and Hodges claim: The foreskin’s double-layered sheath enables the penile shaft skin to glide back and forth over the penile shaft. (p.24) and The foreskin enables the penis to slip in and out of the vagina nonabrasively inside its own slick sheath of self-lubricating movable skin. (p.26)
Taylor suggests that the gliding action, where it occurs, may stimulate the nerves of the ridged band [9], and speculates that the stretching of the frenulum by the rearward gliding action during penetration triggers ejaculation. [10]
Taves used a single subject to test the actual force required to penetrate a measuring apparatus. When the foreskin was retracted a more than tenfold increase in force was needed. [11] He argued that this confirms the belief of Morgan (1967) that the foreskin makes sexual penetration easier during sexual intercourse.[12] Whiddon (1953) and Foley (1966) also believed that the presence of the foreskin made sexual penetration easier [13] [14][/quote]
HG
I have heard extensively of adult male circum…circumci…oh, you know what we’re talking about here…
It is extremely painful and evidently most men who do it lose at least 50% of the sensation prior to the surgery. So unless he has serious pre-ejaculation problems…
DON’T DO IT!!! Especially since according to Taiwanese marraige stats they are likely to be doomed to failure in the first 6 months by about 60% and up to 90% by the first 5 years.
I’m with Chris on this one. Teach the dude to pull it back, soap it up, and rinse. Repeat.
And it’s just like Bob said, Marriage can be like that. Take him how he is, cuz once you change him, you don’t want him. Then they become another stat.
I don’t think anyone has the right to demand that anyone else get cosmetic surgery. It’s unreasonable, and I would advise him to tell her to take a flying 
Kick in the arse?
Closest thing I had to a ‘leap’. 
Well I aint cut and I aint bout to do it for any woman. Get a new woman, theres plenty out there.
[quote=“maybin”]My Taiwanese friend asked me this. I know this pertains to sex, but I guess I can share since it is somewhat health related.
He told me that his gf of 1 year wants him to become circusized. He’s 28 or so and she’s 26 or so. But it’s a criteria to continue dating and a definite for even consideration for marriage (dont ask me why). It’s for his sake and for her health (she’s paranoid she’ll get icky things down there if he’s un-circumcized).
He asked me and I’m like, I ain’t either.
He’s shocked. He’s like, “You American…You no cut?” I’m like, “No, dude. My skin’s there.”
Anyway, he wants to continue dating her and marry her one day. So he’s looking into circumcision clinics. (I’m laughing my arse off whenever we talk of this topic). He’s not afraid of the deed, he’s afraid of the pain. I told him he could get his nipples pierced for practice. Guy is in a dilemma.
I was talking to a few friends (2 guys, 2 girls) about this and as foreigners, we’re all in agreement that it’s unheard of for adults to get circumcision. I mean, the pain is one thing, but I think the part would have to be bandaged and it’s hard to conceal the “bandage” on the crotch. He’d probably get a ton of dates during that time…Again, funny stuff.
Anyway, without naming names, do any of you know anyone who has been circumsized as adults (15 and up)? Please share your (or his) experiences and I’ll try to assure my friend that it 's not too bad.[/quote]
I personally find it a bit ridiculous that he’s going to get circumcised because his g/f thinks she will get infections if the skin is on. Of all the women I’ve dated, Taiwanese women seem to know the least about sex, to the extent one thought that if sperm got on her abdomen, it would seep in and impregnate her. I think it has to do with the sex ed system which makes fundamentalist Christians look promiscuous, and the relative shyness women here have to researching sex. With the Information Age, I find there’s very educated people on the topic even in mainland China, but at the same time there’s people for whom it never occurred to actually read about sex.
In this context of ignorance I find it wildly ridiculous that he is about to cut off part of his parts because his girl is ignorant of the difference between circumcision and non-circumcision. There is no reason to have a circumcision, even phimosis can be treated completely without it. He may well come out psychologically scarred from the operation.
He should have his girlfriend do some real research on the topic. If she cannot find any evidence on it and still insists on the operation, then this is a red flag that he should dump her immediately. Any woman that wants you to self-mutilate because of her paranoid fantasies is not worth sticking around, that is perverse, that is not loving.
A dirty worm? Not me, never, and I aint been mutilated.
[quote]Circumcision
Cutting the competition
Jun 19th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Mutilating male members may mar men’s mischievous matings
CIRCUMCISION and other forms of male-genital mutilation are commonplace in many societies around the world. The origin of these practices, however, puzzles anthropologists and evolutionary biologists. They wonder what benefit they could bring, especially given the obvious risks of infection and reduced fertility.
Explanations have ranged from the pragmatic (a ritual that marks the beginning of adulthood and bonds men together) to the Freudian (having something to do with the pain of the separation from the mother). However Christopher Wilson, a neurobiologist at Cornell University, has a different idea. In a recent paper in Evolution and Human Behavior he suggests that male-genital mutilations are actually intended to prevent younger men from fathering children with older men’s wives.
Dr Wilson takes his cue from sperm-competition theory, which suggests that males of promiscuous primate species have evolved features that maximise their own sperm’s chances of fertilising an egg they might have to compete for. These features include large testicles which produce more sperm, and morphologically complex penises. Males of monogamous primate species, on the other hand, have smaller testicles and simpler penises. Human genitals are somewhere in between, perhaps reflecting the fact that people generally form pair bonds, but are susceptible to occasional bouts of promiscuity.
Some forms of genital mutilation have obvious effects on fertility. For instance, several African and Micronesian societies practice testicular ablation—the crushing or cutting off of one testicle. Some Australian aborigines engage in subincision, which exposes part of the urethra and thus causes sperm to leak out of the base of the penis. Circumcision does not have quite such clear-cut effects. But there are several ways it may affect fertility: most obviously, the lack of a foreskin could make insertion, ejaculation or both take longer. Perhaps long enough that an illicit quickie will not always reach fruition.
Older men are in a position to form alliances with younger men—passing on knowledge, lending them political support and giving them access to weapons. By insisting that the young undergo genital mutilation of some form as a quid pro quo, an older married man can seek to ensure that even if he is cuckolded, he will still be the father of his wives’ children. Of course, the older man has probably undergone genital mutilation too, and seen his own fertility reduced. But that, if anything, increases his incentive to make certain that the young bucks are similarly handicapped. And if all the older men in a society conclude this is a good thing, it will rapidly become a socially enforced norm.
To test this theory, Dr Wilson made several predictions. Among them, he suggested that mutilation is more likely to be practised in polygynous societies (since a man with several wives is more vulnerable to cuckoldry), and is especially likely in those polygynous societies where a man’s co-wives live in separate households from their husband. It should also take place in a public ceremony watched by other men, to avoid cheating or free-riding. And there should be a strong stigma against men who refuse it.
To test his predictions, Dr Wilson looked at a database of 186 pre-industrial societies. Some 48% of the highly polygynous ones practised a form of male-genital mutilation, and the number rose to 63% when co-wives kept separate households. By contrast, only 14% of monogamous societies practised mutilation. Moreover, and also as predicted, the mutilations were almost always carried out in public, often as part of a coming-of-age ceremony at puberty, with strong stigma attached to unmutilated men.
Dr Wilson’s paper does not definitely prove that sexual competition is at the root of male-genital mutilation. But it does provide a plausible explanation for a puzzling practice. It is not likely, however, to have much effect on attitudes toward circumcision. The men who enforce and undergo the rituals are no more aware of the underlying evolutionary motivations than of why their testicles are the size they are. Those who engage in the practice for religious reasons will surely continue to do so. Otherwise, most of the Western world has already largely abandoned routine neonatal circumcision, which is seen as an outdated and unfortunate medical fad.
The exceptions are America, where more than half of newborn boys are still circumcised, and Africa, where circumcision helps to stop the transmission of HIV, the AIDS-causing virus. There, infection really is a far greater threat to the number of children a man might have than the loss of his foreskin.[/quote]
Intact and smelling like a peach, or so I’m told.
HG
I believe men should only get the end cut off their manhood if a competent doctor determines it’s necessary for health reasons. Otherwise, leave it be.
I was never consulted: I was cut by a mohel on the 8th day.
Really??!! Not that, I mean I’m surprised at what a visit from the Mohel implies.
God damn but they have to be evil bastards at heart those amateur butchers. I’ve seen it done, and I can tell you that kids don’t appreciate it.
HG
Funny thing is I’m not even Jewish.
I was born in England to American parents. It was the only way.
She should be more worried about using condoms, as that’s a sure way of getting “icky things down there.” Especially considering how oblivious (or at least ignorant to the fact that it isn’t “only foreigners” who have STDs, apart from the fact that we are the only people on the island that ever get tested for anything, i.e. are the least likely to have anything) Taiwanese are to STD’s.
I wouldn’t advise him to get cut. I know of one guy back home who did (he was 22 at the time) and it was nasty. He had to go for three follow up operations due to complications and from what he showed me, his pecker was never the same again. If she remains insistent, I’d rather leave her and keep my family jewels intact.
Some ray of hope for the formerly soon to be mutilated.
[quote]Routine operation may be a crime
June 3, 2009
ONCE routine, now often thought unkind, the cut may also be illegal. Parental consent might not be enough to protect the circumcisers of baby boys from later legal action.
In a rare legal analysis of the medical procedure, the Tasmanian Law Reform Institute found that criminal and civil law lacked certainty, and may abuse the rights of a child.
No specific laws regulate the removal of the foreskin in Australia, and there are few clear answers in general law, according to an institute researcher, Warwick Marshall. “What is clear is that the current laws were not framed with male circumcision in mind,” he said in an issues paper released yesterday.
About 12 per cent of newborn boys are believed to be circumcised in Australia, down from 90 per cent in the 1950s.
Routine circumcision is no longer performed in most Australian public hospitals, and Australian medical colleges combined to conclude in 2004 that “there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision”.
However, according to the law reform institute, most practising Jews still consider it a requirement of their faith, to be conducted by a specially-trained circumciser eight days after birth, while Muslims are the largest identifiable group who do it today.[/quote]
So endorsed by those two religions of peace and harmony, the Muslims and Jooz, but sod all else. I swear these cultures like to assure themselves of the next generation of pissed off blokes by mutilating them as babies in order to continue their centuries old sand tossing squabble.
HG