For women, is there a difference?? Do you care?

I am just curious. I'm uncut and I clean VERY well (just imagine Gollem in a shower...oh that is a disterbing image) so does it mater that I have extra skin? Haha

 

circumcised

 

Uncut

 

Know Hank5 will soon post ACTING as though he is against it....Know Hank really has a huge thing for circumsized dicks, he says what he does to be sarcastic hoping you'll get cut, and as a jab at his Jewish roots.

In the end it's 6 or 1/2 dozen.

Hush.....an alias

 

NOT circumcised, all day long.

 

I think it's just like genital mutilation.
It makes it way less sensitive as well (which is a bad thing).

 

Oh yeah, im deffinatly not interested in having someone cut a part of my dick off, I kust thought itd be fun to see what people said.

 

Uncut. My wife likes it, it's like another toy for her to play with.:excited:

 

How would you know this? You would have no way unless you were uncut, THEN had it circumsized. You have no frame of reference. OR maybe you were circumsized at birth lol and had it put back on????

Stop making shit up.

I'm circumsized but I don't care either way...

 

Think of it this way. The head of a cut cock rubs against what ever pants you wear. The head of an uncut cock has a thin and very soft layer of skin to protect it.

And nerves become less sensative when they are agrivated all the time.

 

The evidence is undisputable; quote from "Men circumcised as adults"; for the full article, click here:

Only men circumcised as adults can experience the difference a foreskin makes. In the Journal of Sex Research, Money and Davison from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine reported on five such men. Changes included diminished penile sensitivity and less penile gratification. The investigators concluded,
Erotosexually and cosmetically, the operation is, for the most part, contraindicated, and it should be evaluated in terms of possible pathological sequelae.
Other men circumcised as adults regret the change.
I play guitar and my fingers get callused from playing. That’s similar to what happened to my penis after circumcision.
After the circumcision there was a major change. It was like night and day. I lost most sensation. I would give anything to get the feeling back. I would give my house. [This man’s physician persuaded him to be circumcised by warning he could otherwise get penile cancer. When the man complained of the result, the physician replied, “That’s normal” and would not help him.]
Slowly the area lost its sensitivity, and as it did, I realized I had lost something rather vital. Stimuli that had previously aroused ecstasy had relatively little effect. . . . Circumcision destroys a very joyful aspect of the human experience for males and females.
The greatest disadvantage of circumcision is the awful loss of sensitivity when the foreskin is removed. . . . On a scale of 10, the intact penis experiences pleasure that is at least 11 or 12; the circumcised penis is lucky to get to 3.
The sexual differences between a circumcised and uncircumcised penis is . . . like wearing a condom or wearing a glove. . . . Sight without color would be a good analogy. . . . Only being able to see in black and white, for example, rather than seeing in full color would be like experiencing an orgasm with a foreskin and without. There are feelings you’ll just never have without a foreskin.
After thirty years in the natural state I allowed myself to be persuaded by a physician to have the foreskin removed—not because of any problems at the time, but because, in the physician’s view, there might be problems in the future. That was five years ago and I am sorry I had it done. . . . The sensitivity in the glans has been reduced by at least 50 percent. There it is, unprotected, constantly rubbing against the fabric of whatever I am wearing. In a sense, it has become callused. . . . I seem to have a relatively unresponsive stick where I once had a sexual organ.​

 

Its very easy tell for an intact guy all he has to do is leave his foreskin back for a day or so and will no longer get a instant hard on from it rubbing his underwear
There is no way anyone could ever convince me otherwise ! some circumcised guys say there scars are more sensitive? I have plenty of scars it a different feeling!
Everyone needs to stop cutting there little boys

 

I'm happy being cut...like the look....my dad at 83 just got cut so he can pee better.....I vote cut it right................

 

I'm kind of wondering why Hank5 takes such an interest in what happens with other men's cocks.

 

Cause he has conviction. Its when you stand up for your beliefs. But oh don't worry, you won't have to worry about it. Its a real man thing.

 

To answer the original question, what women prefer.
Whenever/where ever this comes up, the responses seem to be fairly equal among "prefer cut", "prefer uncut" and "don't care." So in that regard it doesn't seem to matter.

For me, it's more of an ethical issue than anything else. Circumcision is usually done to newborns, when they have no input on the matter. You're making a decision that permanently alters another person's body without their consent. For that reason alone, I feel it is wrong.

 

That, my dear "redeemed", what it is all about.
I have NO problems with guys who, as adults, make a personal decision to undergo circumcision (for whatever personal reason). But to routinely subject baby boys to having their penises permanently modified by well intended (for whatever reason) parents, is totally unethical and counter to all human rights to (inter alia) an intact body.
Click here for a rational discussion about the functions of the foreskin. You cannot defend the indefensible to try and justify prepuce amputation by groping at straws with naive arguments such as

• "hygiene" (the female pussy is far more "hygienic" than the intact male penis, yet nobody supports routine female circumcision for this reason)
• "looks" (no amputation can improve the natural look)
• "no loss of sensitivity" (how can you amputate 60% of the nerve endings in the penis and not sacrifice sensitivity?)
• "increased resistance to STD's" (the ONLY 100% guarantee against contracating a STD is to practice safe sex), etc.

And when the circumcision zealots run out of "arguments", they revert to personal insults... the debating practice of desperate cowards.
.

 

That's not true. There is no 100% guaranteed method.
While intercourse may be the primary route of transmission of STDs, it is certainly not the sole route.