Circumcision

[1FinickyOne]

1 hour ago, BangkokReady said:

Why not have your eyelids removed? 

I think you have a bad analogy there... how would you wink at all those girls who don't care if you have foreskin or not?

[BangkokReady]

2 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

 https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/uncircumcised-problems

"The reality of the real world."

[Sparktrader]

Just now, BangkokReady said:

Science can prove that the reason that people favour circumcision is based on hygiene and not sexual control?

Read the science. Don't attack the messenger.

[Mac Mickmanus]

25 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

It's skin not knob.

How would you know ?

[Sparktrader]

1 minute ago, 1FinickyOne said:

I think you have a bad analogy there... how would you wink at all those girls who don't care if you have foreskin or not?

Illogical. Humans wear clothes now. Foreskins has no modern role. It just increases disease risk.

 

.

 

 

 

[Sparktrader]

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

How would you know ?

Cause I went to school.

[Bday Prang]

16 minutes ago, Why Me said:

More than that I would hazard, sir. No doubt you have skin in the game.

Four of them presumably

[BangkokReady]

1 minute ago, Sparktrader said:

Foreskins has no modern role.

Did you check with your science on that? ????

[BangkokReady]

3 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Read the science. Don't attack the messenger.

I didn't attack you in any way.  The stats are clear enough and I haven't said that I don't believe them.  They just don't translate into anything meaningful.

 

Foreskin is good, it plays a vital role in our reproductive system, and people who have it aren't any danger.

[BangkokReady]

6 minutes ago, 1FinickyOne said:

how would you wink at all those girls who don't care if you have foreskin or not?

Winking might lead to a relationship, a relationship might lead to sex, sex can cause STDs, therefore having your eyelids removed helps reduce the number of STDs you might catch! ????

[Sparktrader]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

I didn't attack you in any way.  The stats are clear enough and I haven't said that I don't believe them.  They just don't translate into anything meaningful.

 

Foreskin is good, it plays a vital role in our reproductive system, and people who have it aren't any danger.

25% higher risk of infection is significant

[Bday Prang]

probably a stressful procedure for a surgeon , if he made a mistake he could well get the "sack" 

[patman30]

Child multilation.
without the little human's consent.
doing this too them before they even have the chance to say no.

 

[MrMuddle]

23 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

A reasonable knowledge of the working and function of the penis and foreskin.  A logical brain capable of drawing sound conclusions.  A passing interest in the topic.

 

Boring stuff, but everything I say is pretty sensible.

But NO actual experience of having a circumcised penis? Then your 'reasonable knowledge:, is neither factual or relevant. Next...

[Bday Prang]

1 minute ago, Sparktrader said:

25% higher risk of infection is significant

That would depend on how high the risk of infection is to start with, Any surgical procedure carries a risk of infection too 

[Sparktrader]

2 minutes ago, patman30 said:

Child multilation.
without the little human's consent.
doing this too them before they even have the chance to say no.

 

They all say thanks

[chickenslegs]

2 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

probably a stressful procedure for a surgeon , if he made a mistake he could well get the "sack" 

That would ruin his chances of becoming a "head" surgeon.

[Sparktrader]

Just now, Bday Prang said:

That would depend on how high the risk of infection is to start with, Any surgical procedure carries a risk of infection too 

Not 30%. 

[Orinoco]

It's child abuse.

End of. 

 

 

[Why Me]

From

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23374102/

"Conclusions: This study confirms the importance of the foreskin for penile sensitivity, overall sexual satisfaction, and penile functioning. ..."

 

So, if they had you mutilated when you were a helpless infant you might want to visit your folks in the old home and have a chat about this.

[JeffersLos]

The inner bands of the foreskin are the most sexually sensitive part of the body.

 

A friend had it done in his early 20's, he said that sexual pleasure was half deadened and only about 50% as pleasurable it was before the operation. There is absolutely no need to remove the most sexually sensitive part of a male's body.

 

Leave him be. 

 

Hey, he can always do it later if he wishes, right. Someone else robbing him of this for life, nah. 

[Celsius]

Women don't like or dislike a circumcised penis. Women dislike filth.

Edited October 10, 2022 by onthedarkside
off topic comment removed

[BostonJoe]

There is no right or wrong answer  no matter what you decide that penis at a certain age will still think for itself 

[Bday Prang]

5 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Not 30%. 

I don't think you understand how statistics work, just because your figures quote uncircumcised guys are allegedly 30%  more likely to contract an infection  It doesn't mean that 30% of uncircumcised men will get, or are  infected   You may also be surprised at the amount of nasty MRSA infections contracted as a result of surgery and it would not need to be 30% of of all circumcisions to have  a balancing effect

[1FinickyOne]

29 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Illogical. Humans wear clothes now. Foreskins has no modern role. It just increases disease risk.

 

.

 

 

 

yeah, just a joke.. I was cut young... and I am glad for it - 

[puchooay]

19 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Not 30%. 

Neither was your last comment.

 

[BangkokReady]

17 minutes ago, MrMuddle said:

But NO actual experience of having a circumcised penis? Then your 'reasonable knowledge:, is neither factual or relevant. Next...

You don't need to have a circumcised penis to know that it is not necessary and reduces sensation.  In fact, having a normal and fully functioning foreskin means that I am very much aware of what it does.

 

Like I said, I never meant to insult you or anything.  Just that you had a medical issue with your foreskin prior to removal, so might not actually be fully aware of the benefit.  You chose to share that, so it obviously factors in when you say something like "I didn't notice any reduction in sensation".

 

Again, didn't mean any harm by it.

[proton]

4 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

More hygenic.

Nonsense surely

[BangkokReady]

28 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

25% higher risk of infection is significant

It's just not.  There's no need for it.  There are no problems in countries with a largely intact population.

[Why Me]

13 minutes ago, JeffersLos said:

A friend had it done in his early 20's, he said that sexual pleasure was half deadened and only about 50% as pleasurable it was before the operation.

A colleague had it done, on a doctor's recommendation, as he tended to ejaculate prematurely which was causing problems in a newly married relationship. It solved the issue but one suspects so would have desensitizing cream. He was probably the victim of an overeager surgeon.