By Anonymous - 13/07/2012 23:14 - United States - Phoenix
Add a comment - Reply to : #
you are so wrong it makes me want to blow my brains out. a transvestite is someone who changes their sex. in anyway.
*sigh* I actually did primarily mean transvestite. We can only see her face, so who's to say she's not a guy with makeup on and naturally feminine features? But I did add the "or something" in reference to transsexuals either post or pre-op and I suppose even hermaphrodites ;) so really there was nothing wrong with my comment.
#56 is right, it's not truly more sexually appealing to women, this is mostly a cultural thing. In cultures where circumcision is the norm, it is more appealing because it seems normal and cleaner, in cultures where it isn't the norm, it can seem a bit unusual or gross, though I'd assume most women would be indifferent. At least, in my country, a lot of women are either repulsed by a circumcized penis at first or indifferent because they know the medical reasons which could have lead to that. Circumcision does reduce the risks of getting STDs but doesn't protect the man from all of them. Firstly, genital warps are caused by a virus which can remain dormant, therefore one can carry the virus without having genital warps (and no, genital warps aren't those little normal things known as pearly penile papules), then there is herpes which has nothing to do with circumcision. The best way to avoid most STDs is still to wear a condom and have blood tests to check everything before your decide not to use them anymore. Also, most male learn how to clean their foreskins in countries where circumcision isn't the norm, therefore there are no real sanitary reasons to cut the foreskin. However, sometimes the foreskin doesn't retract and causes real pain for the man, especially during sex and erection. Sometimes, it can also prevents a man from getting an orgasm, in those cases, circumcision is often the only solution. However, I do not understand this cultural need to circumcise young boy before they are even able to decide on their own, most wouldn't have any problems with their foreskins anyway. For some reasons, it is more predominant in the US than in most Europen countries and yet, most Europen countries aren't more infected by STDs than the US, which leads you to wonder a bit more about the other less radical way to protect yourself and your partner from getting a STD. Also, if that interest anyone, women also have a foreskin (the clitoris hood) and some of them actually need to get it removed because it causes pain as well. It is a rare condition and in most cases, nobody cares about it unless they have some aesthetic view of what a normal vulva should look like. It is not entirely abnormal for male or females not to be able to keep it retracted completely the foreskin during sex as long as it doesn't hurt and they can clean it. In most cases, the sex is less dirty than the mouth, whether you have a foreskin or not.
Spiral_thoughts: my boyfriend was thinking about it because (it's really rare but happens) where the foreskin ant go back enough to properly clean or maintain it. He has medication that is loosening it, but it is painful. Sucks, but he can't properly keep away bacteria and was constantly getting yeast infections. That's one thing that happens.. Don't know anything else, but thats one reason.
And 141: my boyfriend is black with a 9 inch dick, he still ha skin. It doesn't depend on your dick size, it depends on how flexible your foreskin is. Plus I'm sure you'd know about small dicks, either you're into them or you have one. If you are neither, then you don't really know about small dicks do you?
presuming you've had sex before, you're going to be really upset when you find out that sex from now on will be slightly less enjoyable
If a guy with a foreskin wears a condom, he'd get much more sensation, pleasure, and overall proper movement in the act of sex as well. Guys who have had there's removed tend to complain that they feel nothing with the condom on, because they don't get the level of flexibility that they would if they had a foreskin.
The foreskin (while yes, it does have more nerve endings) acts as the primary lubricant and thrusting aid. Thrusts with a foreskin are smoother, easier, and more pleasurable. There are studies which have found that partners receiving sex from circumcised males more often felt unsatisfied... so it's not just the guy getting his penis mutilated that's suffering. Of course, this is all intentional, as ritual circumcision was developed for the purpose of stopping masturbation and sex for pleasure.
It was basically a cleanliness thing for ancient Jews. Imagine walking around in the desert having a bath once in a blue moon. Yeah, not clean at all. Coming from a non Jewish (as far as I know) family that has roots in Hebrew times further back, my family on my dad's side have practiced circumcision, but never after newborn stage. I'm married now with a baby son due in five weeks, and I'm not going to circumcise him as my husband thinks the reduced sexual feeling out-ways any benefits regarding cleanliness (just teach them to clean that area well after they turn five). I'm not against getting it done early, but later it just seems too cruel (unless there is a medical reason, of course).