Uncircumcised is better for both partners

That’s great to hear. Doctors don’t often inform their patients enough to make good medical decisions.

I think I’m in kind of an odd position.. I’m cut, but they really didn’t take enough off and did a rather bad job! When flaccid my foreskin covers most of the head, but not all. I can successfully masturbate without lube, but I think my high amount of precum has something to do with this. Finally - this is the odd part - my frenulum area is not directly under the penis, but “pulls” to the left and becomes more apparent during erection. This gives the illusion of a bent or lopsided penis at times I have to twist the foreskin clockwise to make it look normal.. One of these days I’ll post a few pics and then you guys can see what I mean.

Maybe I have the best of both worlds? Maybe neither?

What’s all this shit about cut men not being able to masturbate or have sex without lube. I have never once in the one million times that I’ve masturbated or had sex felt the need for any lube. And how do uncut men know that they are way more sensitive? It seems obvious that the only people who could talk in this regard would be men who were cut late in life or restored their foreskin. And lastly, uncut cocks look gross to people in the US, and I’m sure girls feel the same way. That’s why you see almost zero uncut cocks in porn—they look gross. So there’s my response to uncut men trying to rub their foreskin in everyone’s face.

Thanks for sharing your profound ignorance with everyone here on the boards. These narrow minded posts seem to be escalating by the day. Sheesh!

dimitri……porn a basis of proof?

An erect whole penis bears an uncanny resemblance to one that is cut. In fact it is almost impossible to tell the difference unless you know what you are looking for or tug on the skin and yank it back up over the head. The most incriminating factor is extremely thin tissues below the glans in place of where a scar is normally seen. Some guys are looser than others, but most cannot pull the skin over the head when rock hard; it only moves back and forth more freely over the shaft. I know when I have a raging boner I look “cut”.

In my life I have had several partners who when they found out later that I was uncut had no idea when they were in the sack with me.

So to make a sweeping argument that men in porn are all cut is a little precocious on your part. In fact, I often see men that are uncut on film. I just know what I am looking for.

I jerk-off alot and hardly ever use lube.

Brawl. :)

Hmmmmmm…………

I found this interesting.
I was specifically fascinated by the last one.

The foreskin has twelve known functions.
They are:

to cover and bond with the synechia so as to permit the development of the mucosal surface of the glans and inner foreskin.
to protect the infant’s glans from feces and ammonia in diapers.
to protect the glans penis from friction and abrasion thoughout life.
to keep the glans moisturized and soft with emollient oils.
to lubricate the glans.
to coat the glans with a waxy protective substance.
to provide sufficient skin to cover an erection by unfolding.
to provide an aid to masturbation and foreplay.
to serve as an aid to penetration.
to reduce friction and chafing during intercourse.
to serve as erogenous tissue because of its rich supply of erogenous receptors.
to contact and stimulate the G-spot of the female partner.

<from www.cirp.org>

There is no better one way vs. another.

Those who are cut and like it - great.

Those who are un-cut and like it - great.

Those who are cut but don’t like it, I feel sorry for you, but don’t go around telling everyone who is circumcized how screwed up they are just because you don’t like it.

Those who are uncut but don’t like it, talk to fieldmouse before you guys do anything. And getting circumcized as a bar bet is never a good idea.

First of all, I don’t believe a single word about women preffering sex with uncut men. I doubt hardly anyone here actually believes it either. Let’s let that part of the debate die here and now, OK?

The foreskin does act as a lubricant because it allows an internal sliding back and forth between the penis and the foreskin, instead of the vagina having to act as the sheeth of abrasion. However, I don’t consider this to be any particular advatage to pleasing a woman. Friction is needed for good sex. So we can also let this part of the debate die right now.

The real issue to discuss is the extra pleasure that a foreskin might bring the actual owner of the penis. There is no need for anyone to get defensive about this issue in particular because the subject isn’t brought up to attack anyone but rather to help inform and empower any men here that want it. It is my belief that being circumcised might take away a few benefits to the owner of the penis. This isn’t a serious problem, however because if a man chooses to restore hisr foreskin with particular foreskin stretching, most of the benefits to having a foreskin are put back in place. The benefits are very real in my opinion but it isn’t as if circumcised men that don’t have their foreskins restored are going to be at a huge loss. Circumcised penises are able to please women just as much as uncircumcised ones. Circumcised penises still give millions upon millions of men extremely satisfying stimulation and they look atleast as attractive to women.

The main issue is simply that a glans of the penis can become somewhat desensatised by being exposed all the time. A foreskin protects the glans from gradual abrasion and wear against clothing, aswel as becoming too dry. This keeps the glans more sensative and can potentially give more pleasure to the owner because of this. The glans and brain will just become desensatised from the regular rubbing of the naked glans against clothes. The glans skin will also become less delicate and sensative to touch.

The glans and brain will resensatise if the foreskin is restored on a circumcised man, however. The glans skin will also become more delicate and sensative. The foreskin that is restored will not have the same high level of nerve endings that the original foreskin had, so there will always be a slight deficit in sensativity that won’t be restored. The extra sensativity put back into the glans will be more than enough pleasure than a man not use to such sensativity can handle though. We should consider the fact that men with circumcised penises will have brains that have largely adapted to the amount of pleasure and sensativity that their penises cause.

So it may be wrong to say that a man who restores his foreskin will also regain lost sexual sensativity. That "lost sensativity" might not have actually been "lost" because the brain might have adapted and amplified the sensativity of the relevant neural pathways. So a 100% potential sensativity might go down to 80% after circumcision but if the circumcision is done early in life the brain may adapt itself to turn that 80% potential back into 100%.

The best way to put it might be that instead of a man restoring lost sensativity from 80% back to 100% when he restores his foreskin, he can still increase his 100% current sensativity to 110-120%. So it is still advantagous for a man to restore his foreskin, no matter whether his brain and glans have become desensatised or not. The result will still be an increase in sensativity. I would prefer added pleasure even if my current sensativity was at 100% "natural" potential.

I am certainly not trying to persuade all cut guys to restore their foreskin. There might be many guys that prefer having a cicumcised penis. I am only trying to help those guys that might feel regretful about being circumcised.

Please read this site below.

http://www.norm … whyrestore.html
Devices and Methods - National Organization of Restoring Men

*sigh* Another site against circumsion. Biased to say the least. The very first sentence, With no accurate means of comparison, the typical circumcised man does not know what he is missing. People like this have WAY too much free time. This is worse than religious debates.

Fieldmouse, I agree that they sometimes put their argument in a slanted, unhelpful mannor. The only reason I gave it as a link is because it has useful information on how to restore your foreskin if you so wish. It also gives some of the reasons why one might want to restore the foreskin. It would have been better if they had just given the useful information on it’s own without adding their own moral, slanted views on circumcision. Milk the site for it’s useful information and ignore the moral discussion in between. That’s my advice.

Calling someone’s post narrow-minded or ignorant sure is a compelling argument.

I am convinced. I am going to sew foreskin back on my penis and bitch and whine about the mutilation that is being performed in the hospitals across the Western world.

How about T-shirts?

My mommy and daddy
chose to mutilate my penis at the hospital
and all I got was
this lousy t-shirt

I think one of those linked sites have your T-shirt already Ram.