Circumcised or natural (foreskin)?

[silverwhisper]

firebreeze: now that was informative! i've heard the same theory re: kosher, but never heard the same logic applied to that practice.

lick, make whatever decisions you want, but you're extrapolating from a flawed basis. i'm uncut and have never once had anything remotely resembling the kinds of issues you describe, nor has anyone else i've known who was uncut: you're the first.

ed

 

[Eilan]

while I go fuck my wife with my 8 inch circumcised cock.

Pfft. . . everyone on Lit has an eight-inch cock. That's hardly an accomplishment.

 

[brummiesteve]

Dare I say uncut?
*hides*

 

[irishwoody]

Cut - done at the age of 12 for medical reasons - forskin not able to retract correctly. Thank god my parents noticed / checked for this before I entered puberty.

I can recall some dicomfort from the procedure - but it healed up nicely with a few stitches. More mentally scarred from one of the nurses on the ward who would say "Let me have a look at your jt" - thats embarassing.

Cant say being cut has ever bothered me - it all feels real fine when its needed ;-)

 

[Mac98]

More mentally scarred from one of the nurses on the ward who would say "Let me have a look at your willy" - thats embarassing to a 7 year old.

I can almost feel ur pain, bra'! loll I can only imagine.

 

[Eilan]

What. The. Fuck.

 

[Shadowann2]

What. The. Fuck.

Wow! Just, wow!

 

[dc56dc]

It seems that the original reasons for circumcision have been lost in the mist of time.
The original jews practiced killing of the first born as a sacrifice to their God. as humanity developed this evolved to a blood sacrifice the blood drawn from the penis by cutting off the forskin. Rabis soon added their little twist and made the ritual far more painfull and permanent.
Like so many many men I was damaged by this proceedure for no other reason than'Doctor knows best' I would give anything to be as nature intended. I would make the opperation unlawfull if I could unless it was a life choice decision made by the owner of the penis over the age of 18.

 

[irishwoody]

It seems that the original reasons for circumcision have been lost in the mist of time.
The original jews practiced killing of the first born as a sacrifice to their God. as humanity developed this evolved to a blood sacrifice the blood drawn from the penis by cutting off the forskin. Rabis soon added their little twist and made the ritual far more painfull and permanent.
Like so many many men I was damaged by this proceedure for no other reason than'Doctor knows best' I would give anything to be as nature intended. I would make the opperation unlawfull if I could unless it was a life choice decision made by the owner of the penis over the age of 18.

I have not heard that one about sacrifice and I doubt it is true - very few people today have an inclination to sacrifice their first born - very few mamals do it either - The arguement or explanation for circumcision simply doesnt sound correct.

As far as nature intended - some of us are born with a foreskin that doesn't retract properly - ie the hole is to small for the erect glans to pass through. I was then circumcised at seven to correct this before it became a very painful issue. I do recall my parents telling me much later that when they told my grand parents, my uncle (who was n the room at the time) left and several days later had booed himself into the hospital to have a similar done. He was 16 at the time. I can only say that I am glad my parents took the time to notice / rectify this long before I hit 16.

I am more than happy with my penis the way it is - it is plenty sensitive and "works first time". It hasnt bothered the women I have met and slept with - or alt least none of them have ever made any negative comment - so I dont see the uncut / cut as an issue one way or another.

 

[TypicalDeviant]

It seems that the original reasons for circumcision have been lost in the mist of time.
The original jews practiced killing of the first born as a sacrifice to their God. as humanity developed this evolved to a blood sacrifice the blood drawn from the penis by cutting off the forskin. Rabis soon added their little twist and made the ritual far more painfull and permanent.
Like so many many men I was damaged by this proceedure for no other reason than'Doctor knows best' I would give anything to be as nature intended. I would make the opperation unlawfull if I could unless it was a life choice decision made by the owner of the penis over the age of 18.

If you live in the US, don't blame the Jews for your circumcision, blame John H. Kelloqq.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg

 

[fire_breeze]

It seems that the original reasons for circumcision have been lost in the mist of time.
The original jews practiced killing of the first born as a sacrifice to their God. as humanity developed this evolved to a blood sacrifice the blood drawn from the penis by cutting off the forskin. Rabis soon added their little twist and made the ritual far more painfull and permanent.
Like so many many men I was damaged by this proceedure for no other reason than'Doctor knows best' I would give anything to be as nature intended. I would make the opperation unlawfull if I could unless it was a life choice decision made by the owner of the penis over the age of 18.

Actually, no. I can deconstruct your argument completely, but after an afternoon of being in a room full of philosophers, I am obviously not in the mood.

Circumcision is not, and I repeat, NOT an Abrahamic construct. It is ancient, and was relatively widespread throughout history, especially in the Levant. There are evidence that it was a rite of passage or eases potential medical issues that arose from lack of water.

Furthermore, although there are some evidence that Israelites were aware of human sacrifice, and may have participated in it as the last resort, one cannot assume that the ritual was widespread, common or even acceptable. In fact, it would seem just the opposite. Also, most of that theory is hotly contested. To infer that circumcision was a substitute for human sacrifice without any substantial argument is weak at best (and what are your sources, anyway?)

Just as a side note, rabbis did not exist at the time it would need to develop circumcision from human sacrifice, which would be at the very latest 9th century BCE. They evolved as an institution from the Pharisaic era, which was in the Second Temple Period (c. 536 BCE–70 CE)

The most widely accepted theory of how circumcision became incorporated in various rituals can be found here. I gave this answer before, and it's a superficial nutshell. As for circumcision in America, look to TypicalDeviant's response.

I do not mean to sound harsh, but cultural and historical imperialism is a personal pet peeve of mine, as well as an academic faux pas.

 

[TypicalDeviant]

Actually, no. I can deconstruct your argument completely, but after an afternoon of being in a room full of philosophers, I am obviously not in the mood.

Circumcision is not, and I repeat, NOT an Abrahamic construct. It is ancient, and was relatively widespread throughout history, especially in the Levant. There are evidence that it was a rite of passage or eases potential medical issues that arose from lack of water.

Furthermore, although there are some evidence that Israelites were aware of human sacrifice, and may have participated in it as the last resort, one cannot assume that the ritual was widespread, common or even acceptable. In fact, it would seem just the opposite. Also, most of that theory is hotly contested. To infer that circumcision was a substitute for human sacrifice without any substantial argument is weak at best (and what are your sources, anyway?)

Just as a side note, rabbis did not exist at the time it would need to develop circumcision from human sacrifice, which would be at the very latest 9th century BCE. They evolved as an institution from the Pharisaic era, which was in the Second Temple Period (c. 536 BCE–70 CE)

The most widely accepted theory of how circumcision became incorporated in various rituals can be found here. I gave this answer before, and it's a superficial nutshell. As for circumcision in America, look to TypicalDeviant's response.

I do not mean to sound harsh, but cultural and historical imperialism is a personal pet peeve of mine, as well as an academic faux pas.