Cut Vs Uncut Penis? Sex Thread

[PhysX]

Here it is: My friend and I (he's cut, I'm uncut) have been arguing for the last hour or so about which is better: having a circumsized or uncircumsized penis? We've come up with a list of pros or cons for each and in the end it seems like Uncircumsized wins, but what do you think? Are you cut or uncut? Or if you're female, which feels better?

[The-Condor]

You gain some length with uncut, But cut gives more sexual pleasure.

But i still love my un-cut dick.

[PhysX]

At 10/30/09 06:34 AM, The-Condor wrote: You gain some length with uncut, But cut gives more sexual pleasure.

But i still love my un-cut dick.

Now, you've got a good point here, but most websites I've checked (legit medical websites as well) claim that it gives more pleasure for the female as well. This mostly having to deal with the fact that an uncut dick doesn't need as much lube as a cut penis.

[HungarianSupermarket]

At 10/30/09 06:34 AM, The-Condor wrote: You gain some length with uncut,

No, you do not.

But cut gives more sexual pleasure.

No, it does not. In fact the theory is that it reduces sexual pleasure because the tip of the penis loses sensitivity from being rubbed around in your underpants all day.
Also if your foreskin is getting in the way during sex your penis is probably horribly deformed.

But i still love my un-cut dick.

As you should son, as you should.

[PhysX]

At 10/30/09 06:38 AM, HungarianSupermarket wrote:

At 10/30/09 06:34 AM, The-Condor wrote: You gain some length with uncut,

No, you do not.

But cut gives more sexual pleasure.

No, it does not. In fact the theory is that it reduces sexual pleasure because the tip of the penis loses sensitivity from being rubbed around in your underpants all day.
Also if your foreskin is getting in the way during sex your penis is probably horribly deformed.

Also, during circumcision, a lot of sensory nerve tissue is removed from the penis resulting in reduced pleasure

[The-Condor]

At 10/30/09 06:38 AM, HungarianSupermarket wrote:

At 10/30/09 06:34 AM, The-Condor wrote: You gain some length with uncut,

No, you do not.

It does give you like half a centimeter, but it still counts!

But cut gives more sexual pleasure.

No, it does not. In fact the theory is that it reduces sexual pleasure because the tip of the penis loses sensitivity from being rubbed around in your underpants all day.
Also if your foreskin is getting in the way during sex your penis is probably horribly deformed.

All these years i thought so, ALL HAIL HUNGARIANSUPERMARKET, BRINGER OF TRUTHS.

But i still love my un-cut dick.

As you should son, as you should.

[PhysX]

At 10/30/09 06:40 AM, The-Condor wrote:

At 10/30/09 06:38 AM, HungarianSupermarket wrote:

At 10/30/09 06:34 AM, The-Condor wrote: You gain some length with uncut,

No, you do not.

It does give you like half a centimeter, but it still counts!

We're talking erect, not floppy drive mode

[Aigis]

At 10/30/09 06:34 AM, The-Condor wrote: But cut gives more sexual pleasure.

I hear that circumcision leads to decreased sexual pleasure in a man, due to the head of the penis rubbing against things and losing sensitivity. It's all unproven, though.

I think it's just a bizarre thing to do.

[HungarianSupermarket]

At 10/30/09 06:40 AM, The-Condor wrote: It does give you like half a centimeter, but it still counts!

Sure, when you are flaccid but that doesn't really count.

At 10/30/09 06:37 AM, PhysX wrote: Now, you've got a good point here, but most websites I've checked (legit medical websites as well) claim that it gives more pleasure for the female as well. This mostly having to deal with the fact that an uncut dick doesn't need as much lube as a cut penis.

You best be trolling fool. Cutting the foreskin off a penis would have no real positive effect for the female. In fact an uncut penis would be more pleasurable because the foreskin adds a bit more girth, which is better for hitting the G-spot. (I wish I remember the name of the documentary I watched a few weeks ago that told me all that)

At 10/30/09 06:45 AM, Aigis wrote: I think it's just a bizarre thing to do.

And I think you are right. I understand in cultures that have been doing it for thousands of years, but these days particularly in America people are doing it because they think it looks better and is more clean or something. (Its not that hard to clean your dick every day...)

[JohnnyWang]

These threads, for some reason, tend to detoriate into shitstorm flamewars.

I'm against infant circumsision*, but adults, hey, i's your junk.

*unless mediccally necesary, of course. But a cramped foreskin is a more valid reason than "hygiene".

[TheT3Ddy]

In my opinion...circumcision is completely retarded and just reduces sexual pleasure , nothing else

It's only done now because its like a damn ritual

[GuntherHermann]

if cut dicks were the shit then why doesn't adolescent people choose it? all the bullshit about uncut dicks being better than cut ones is sour grapes from people who had their dick cut in their childhood.

and there are no health advantages. if anything you're more at risk of infant fatality by choosing to have your kid cut than you're at risk for your kid getting some infection because of having an uncut dick.

the only conceivable difference is smeg. smeg is a good thing because it separates those who shower once a month from those who never shower at all.

[Lorkas]

Well I guess some men actually enjoy having less of a penis...

[krumpingkatie]

Cut kinda feels more like a dildo since its not like, sliding about inside itself xD but i feel weird trying to jerk off a cut dick. Its just strange without that foreskin flopping about.

[JohnnyWang]

Also, if foreskin was such a hinderance, people wouldn't be born with one, would they?

The whole thing started out as a way to prevvent teens from masturbating, which is just fucked up.

[Lorkas]

At 10/30/09 07:11 AM, JohnnyWang wrote: Also, if foreskin was such a hinderance, people wouldn't be born with one, would they?

The whole thing started out as a way to prevvent teens from masturbating, which is just fucked up.

Yeah, evolution gave us foreskin for a reason.

[Victory]

At 10/30/09 07:05 AM, GuntherHermann wrote: the only conceivable difference is smeg. smeg is a good thing because it separates those who shower once a month from those who never shower at all.

Once a month?

[GuntherHermann]

At 10/30/09 07:16 AM, Victory wrote:

At 10/30/09 07:05 AM, GuntherHermann wrote: the only conceivable difference is smeg. smeg is a good thing because it separates those who shower once a month from those who never shower at all.

Once a month?

or more

fuck you victory it was granted in the context don't do this to me

[SuspiciousPenguin]

I'm uncircumsized and i see no problem with foreskin, it's great, it keeps everything in line.

[ifureadthisdie]

I was circumcised at 14 so i know the difference damn well. Without circumcision, it was wayyyyyyyy more sensitive, all you had to do was rub the tip and you'd cum. BUT! That sensitivity is TOO sensitive, touching under the foreskin hurts like fucking hell, so you better have kept it in there, and cleaning it was a bit harder too since it was painful. After i was circumcised (that was a painful month) I can only jerk the shaft, and after my first fap, i realized, it felt exactly THE SAME! Only now the head of my cock didn't hurt to be touched and i could clean it easier.

One last thing, my cock looked BIGGER after circumcision.

[Nojj]

You don't need lube with uncut. usually.

[hdxmike]

I will sum up this thread in one word .

PENIS

Cut or uncut blah blah blah , why dont you ask a genuine woman what they think.
I would have said gagsy but her thread says otherwise

[Prinzy2]

Medically speaking it's better to be cut.

Benefits included: a decrease in physical problems such as phimosis [36] , reduction in balanitis (inflammation of the glans, the head of the penis) [17] , reduced urinary tract infections, fewer problems with erections at puberty, decreased sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), elimination of penile cancer in middle-aged men and, in addition, in older men, a decrease in urological problems and infections [reviewed in: 2, 18, 30, 44, 47, 49]. Therefore the benefits are different at different ages.

Lack of circumcision:

* Is the biggest risk factor for heterosexually-acquired AIDS virus infection in men (8-times higher risk by itself, and even higher when lesions from STDs are added in).
* Is responsible for a 12-fold higher risk of urinary tract infections.
* Carries a higher risk of death in the first year of life (from complications of urinary tract infections: kidney failure, meningitis and infection of bone marrow).
* One in ~600-900 uncircumcised men will die from cancer of the penis or require at least partial penile amputation as a result. (In contrast, penile cancer never occurs in men circumcised at birth). (Data from studies in the USA, Denmark and Australia, which are not to be confused with the often quoted, but misleading, annual incidence figures of 1 in 100,000).
* Often leads to balanitis (inflammation of the glans), phimosis (inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (constriction of the penis by a tight foreskin). Up to 18% of uncircumcised boys will develop one of these by 8 years of age, whereas all are unknown in the circumcised.
* Means problems that may result in a need for circumcision late in life: complication risk = 1 in 100 (compared with 1 in 1000 in the newborn).
* Is associated with higher incidence of cervical cancer in the female partners of uncircumcised men.

Linkage

[Tobi]

I wish I had a beautiful fleshy penis. Damn this circumcision

[Tonsil-Hockey]

cut= mutilated penis. Let me rephrase that, mutilated penis. You have a mutilated penis. As in your penis has been mutilated, its not normal. Billions of years of evolution produced an un-cut penis through natural selection. Being circumcised really isn't a normal thing. Most of them are actually botched and you wouldn't know it. Your penis is mutilated. When you were a kid, an infant, unable to defend your self, some big hairy dude grabbed your cock and cut the tip off. He mutilated your penis. Your penis is mutilated... get it?

[GiantDouche]

Uncut just looks fucking nasty.

[Athlas]

At 10/30/09 10:06 AM, GiantDouche wrote: Uncut just looks fucking nasty.

And cut doesn't? Male genitals are nature's most ridiculous invention.

[Prinzy2]

At 10/30/09 10:04 AM, Tonsil-Hockey wrote:

Yay, another hypocrite on a high horse, don't have enough of them already.

[Tonsil-Hockey]

At 10/30/09 10:09 AM, Prinzy2 wrote:

At 10/30/09 10:04 AM, Tonsil-Hockey wrote:

Yay, another hypocrite on a high horse, don't have enough of them already.

Click here to see how high my horse really is...
BTW most of the pictures you'll find the normal side effects, such as the scarring and gang green. There is no perfect example of genital mutilation - because it is mutilation without cause, rarely for a medical reason, and rarely inflicted on a consenting adult. Fair?

[GiantDouche]

At 10/30/09 10:08 AM, Athlas wrote:

At 10/30/09 10:06 AM, GiantDouche wrote: Uncut just looks fucking nasty.

And cut doesn't? Male genitals are nature's most ridiculous invention.

Cut has a personality.