It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Torgo
Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by TechUnique
Another thing one might want to ponder is the lack of physical stimulation an uncircumcised man has during sex. Removing the foreskin allow greater friction during sex and thus greater pleasure.
The foreskin contains the most nerve cells on the penis, and it works in tandem with a vagina to ease irritation caused by needless friction for both parties, so I'm kind of confused as to how you came to that conclusion. Oh wait:
BTW I am happily circumcised.
...nevermind.
Originally posted by la2
Oh please, does this really matter?
I have been circumcised for medical reasons, and i'm glad i was.
OP should turn on the news sometime and see whats going on in the world right now, some of the crap people post on here is completely laughable!!!!
Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by Big Raging Loner
The foreskin "can" be pulled back, but you won't get any more pleasure than the limited amount one would have anyway. The more skin you have, the less stimulation you have. No foreskin makes for a more stiff and rigid penis, and that means more friction once inside, and that means more bliss.
One of the reasons some men don't like condoms is because it makes for less friction and less pleasure. All that unnecessary skin does the same thing.
As for cleanliness, there are hordes of medical testimony on that.
edit on 24-2-2011 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)
Besides, what good are nerve cells if you can't stimulate them in the first place. It would be hard for you to tickle my feet and make me laugh with my shoes on.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Yes, ATS need a 21st thread about circumcision. It's a personal decision. Don't want one, don't get one for you or your male progeny.
"With intravaginal containment of the normal penis, the male's mobile sheath is placed within the woman's vaginal sheath. It is impossible to imagine a better mechanical arrangement for non-abrasive stimulation of the male and female genitalia than this slick 'sheath within a sheath.' Circumcision destroys this one sheath within a sheath . . . I would hazard a guess, that dyspareunia [painful intercourse] is more common in the women whose husband is circumcised . . . one would be foolish to discount the circumcised male's immobile penile skin sheath as an ancillary item contributing to vaginal, abrasive discomfort . . . The male with a penis already moderately obtunded by circumcision may be less apt to use a condom, which he feels may further decrease his genital sensitivity . . . because most American males lack a facile prepuce, the period of foreplay and dalliance may be abbreviated in the rush to the intra-vaginal method of penile stimulation. Both these factors conceivably could be of significance in increasing the rate of venereal disease, including AIDS . . . "
(Say No to Circumcision! 40 Compelling Reasons Why You Should Respect His Birthright and Leave Your Son Whole (2nd edition), by Thomas A. Ritter, MD, Hourglass Book Publishing 1996)
Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by Big Raging Loner
What is true is that my penis is seemingly very easily stimulated without much effort at all. Since my boy doesn't have a jacket on he's more sensitive to his surroundings. But you learn to live with it I suppose. But the best part is the ease of cleaning and the lack of the serious fungal diseases that a woman can give a man. But easy stimulation with hardly any effort, it's like riding in the park with a high performance race car. Ready to go at a moments notice.
Most guys get easily stimulated by thought alone.
Guys that are uncut can have a chug properly anytime without having to have a wet hand. Or chug in a cut way when you have more time.
edit on 24-2-2011 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
No misuse there, dude. It's how I see it, as a personal choice. Sorry you don't "like" this.
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
To liken this to female circumcision is flat out ignorant. One removes the ability to climax; the other doesn't.
Originally posted by newBodyoldSoul
It's not your job to judge.
Originally posted by Fromabove
reply to post by Big Raging Loner
The foreskin "can" be pulled back, but you won't get any more pleasure than the limited amount one would have anyway. The more skin you have, the less stimulation you have. No foreskin makes for a more stiff and rigid penis, and that means more friction once inside, and that means more bliss.
One of the reasons some men don't like condoms is because it makes for less friction and less pleasure. All that unnecessary skin does the same thing.
As for cleanliness, there are hordes of medical testimony on that.
edit on 24-2-2011 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)