Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > khuXBFXM8u > The Down and Dirty |
Foreskin… misunderstood
|
Foreskin… misunderstood Sorry, this is a long follow-up post I just did a post a few days ago about circumcision (male and female), and it brought out strong opinions on the subject matter. The result is not unexpected since female circumcision is a hot button issue the world over. I got the sense, some of my friends were outraged that I was brazen enough to compare male and female circumcisions. I compare the two because both are forms of genital mutilation, both are done to conform to social “norms”, within a given society and to present the ascetics that everyone else has. Sure there are reason (some medical), why people believe circumcision (for males anyway) is in the best interest of the person being circumcised; an argument that doesn’t hold water, when you consider what it purports to prevent in early childhood, unitary track infection, and that complication from circumcisions is higher than UTI occurs. What most, (not all) missed was my point of why the two are comparable; performance of an irreversible procedure that alters the enjoyment of sex, without the informed consent of the individual who undergoes the procedure. Today I wanted to dig deeper into the foreskin, a piece of skin most seem to think is inconsequential when it comes to the enjoyment of sex. I think the view that removing the foreskin is not a great loss of sexual enjoyment for the man, and that most of the female circumcisions being performed is believe to be an effort to stop women from enjoying sex, is why they ladies were a little hot under the collar at my comparison. I knew the foreskin contains nerve endings that are excited during play… I have the equipment, so I have always known this. I have become acutely aware of the concentration of nerves and blood vessels in the foreskin as I have investigated the similarities between the clitoris and penis. What I didn’t know until recently was the foreskin actually contains the most by number and the most sensitive nerve endings on any part of the penis. Now that I think of it, this makes perfect sense when you think of the similarities between the penis and clitoris; the foreskin is like the clitoral hood of a woman. If you have ever been licked there, then you understand the pleasure. The penile skin system is an elaborate system of skin, blood vessels and nerve endings. The foreskin is actually a double-sided fold of skin and mucosal tissue, the most sensitive part is the inside of the foreskin. The foreskin actually provides 12 known functions. To cover and bond with 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 from friction and abrasion throughout 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 sever 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, and to contact and stimulate the G-spot of a female partner. During penetration, the foreskin will roll back and roll out with each thrust, exposing the most sensitive spots on a penis.  Back around 2006, researchers conducted a series of test to gage the sensitivity of an uncircumcised penis, versus a circumcised penis. The findings were documented in an academic paper called the “Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis”; look it up if you are so inclined. The work tested the sensitivity of the penis along different portion of the penis. What they found was the most sensitive part of the penis is the foreskin, and with the typical circumcisions the most sensitive, and most erogenous section of the penile skin system are removed. There are some accepted medical facts about our genitals and the similarities between men and women. If you have ever looked at the structure of the clitoris and the penis, the similarities jump out at you.  Male and female genitals develop from the same embryonic tissue and have the same corresponding parts.  When it’s all done, and we are born, the parts that start out identical become the parts we identify by these common names. labia majora (outer lips) =scrotum<b> labia minora </font></b>(inner lips) = underside of the penis glans (head of clitoris) = glans (head of penis) shaft (erectile tissue) of clitoris = shaft (erectile tissue) of penis) vagina = no comparable structure in male. Although the outward appearance of the cock and clit may be different in size, what it develops from, and the fact that the tissue type are the same, the fact that when sexually excited they both become bigger, does it not follow that the pleasure receptors are similar? Does it not follow that losing any part of it is a reduction in sexual pleasure? And as demonstrated by science, what is lost by male circumcision is most highly sensitive and responsive to touch portions of the erectile tissue. Is male circumcision equivalent to a type III or type II female circumcision? NO, because the gland is left intact on the male and no other parts are interfered with. But there is definitely a significant loss of pleasure receptors, and there is no secondary pleasure center, since there is no structure comparable to a vagina on a man. Through ignorance, arrogance and the obsession with stopping masturbation, some physicians thought that by performing circumcisions on both sexes in would stop masturbation. Circumcisions then just took on a life of its own. In 1891 Peter Charles Remondino advocated circumcision to prevent or to cure a number of afflictions, including alcoholism, epilepsy, asthma, headaches and a bunch of others. Female circumcision quickly fell out of vogue in English speaking countries, but not so for the men. Even as medical research demonstrated that circumcision was not a cure all, new rationales were adopted to validate the practice. By the early 20th century circumcision was being advocated as a hygienic measure. Even though criticism of the practice was mounting, it still continued to grow. Almost 40 years ago (1975), the American Academy of Pediatrics came out in opposition of the practice of circumcision, arguing that good personal hygiene would provide all the advantages of routine circumcision without the risk associated with surgery. Even after that, it wasn’t until the 1990’s that routine circumcision stopped being recommended. Even now red herrings keep being introduced to legitimize continuing the practice. Now it seems it is mostly done as a religious right, or because it is seen as “normal”, so that a baby boy can look the same as his father, brother, the men in porn, what have you. There were some strong feelings as a result of the first post, and some of you will just say this guy (khu), is just whack! If you feel what I am saying doesn’t hold water prove me wrong. Do the work, read the history and the research work on this topic, get the facts about the similarities between the clitoris and the penis, and don’t just shoot from the hip and hang on to long held believes. It is the challenge that we all face (to enlighten one another with facts and reason), and collectively all fail miserably on this site. I point to the countless blogs written by women on this site, where what is discussed is the believe system of men who message you, and their behavior when they find out that Senior Sizzle is not a free brothel. It’s difficult to unlearn what one has held as the truth, even when facts and logic slap you in the face. Even with access to all the information at our finger tips, most of you will never investigate. A lot of the comments in the first post, echoed the sentiment, “an uncut cock is ugly, “it’s my personal preference that a cut cock looks better, and it’s normal”, “I am entitled to my opinion”; to all that I say you are correct, from your point of view. But somewhere in the world where they practice female circumcision, there is a little girl and her time has come, and there is also a person (“an outsider who doesn’t understand”), who is trying to change minds, saying you shouldn’t be doing this. There are males in these cultures who benefit from the practice, it’s their “normal”, they prefer the benefits and conveniences of a wife who has been circumcised. Although the enforcers of the traditions of female circumcisions are the mother and grandmothers, if enough males or the right males in that culture say, “I can’t in good conscience support the practice”, would the mother and grandmother’s be so eager to act, to make their “normal”? Kind of makes you think if your stated preference for aesthetics and ease of giving a blow job makes a detrimental practice hang around longer. When a young mother and father here in North American have to make a choice for their new born , will you and everyone like you have influenced their decision? Will your influence be positive or negative? I read a profile on a vanilla site not too long ago that quoted Mahatma Gandhi… “You must be the change you want to see in the world.” So I will end this long ass post with another Mahatma Gandhi quote for you to contemplate… “As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world – that is the myth of the atomic age – as in being able to remake ourselves.”  Find pleasure in giving pleasure |
|||
|
I personally favor male circumcision. I think it looks more attractive but I have never held it against a man. I think its brutal to circumcise a girl. babies have it done and they don't remember. and my doctor said if the father was my boys should be. but if the dad wasn't not to. my kids dad was so I got there penises circumcised. ..just join me on my blog bustybettyboop and still looking for some hot,sexy,creative contestants for my next contest...come join us! need a blog mentor or want to be one? 
| ||
|
I personally favor male circumcision. I think it looks more attractive but I have never held it against a man. I think its brutal to circumcise a girl. babies have it done and they don't remember. and my doctor said if the father was my boys should be. but if the dad wasn't not to. my kids dad was so I got there penises circumcised. The way circumcision is performed on girl is definitely brutal, but because baby boys may not remember, should we be permanently impairing them without their consent? Interesting the rational your doctor provided. For the longest time circumcision was recommended because of the purported hygienic reasons. Despite the official opposition of your doctor's peer group that specializes in the care of children (the American Academy of Pediatrics), the doctor still advises it, but shifts the rationale to justify the practice. It just goes to show you how difficult it is for people to let go of thing they have become accustomed to, even medical professionals giving advise. Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
Debbi, the original post and this follow-up was not to tell women what they prefer is wrong, but to make people examine their preference and the ramifications attached their preferences. For the most part people typically prefer what they are accustomed to. If a cut cock is what you are accustomed to, typically that will be what you prefer, just like if you have been raised around fair skinned, blonde, blue eyed men, for the most part, that what will be preferred. In the early days when women wanted to vote, the men didn't want it, and at the beginning most of the women weren't on board. But thing changed an we progressed, and while it's not the world over, women vote. Same thing with breast feeding, society (North American anyway), convince the population to move away from it, (with the backing of some in the medical community), until we came to our senses. Then because of the personal preferences of the "puritans" who were offended by the thought of a baby suckling on a breast, a fight ensued over public breast feeding. The puritans were not thinking the restriction (and accompanying detriment) this place on nursing mother and the babies, just their preference. I could go on, but I digress. Here are some facts... Mother's far more than father, make the decision on whether a male baby is circumcised, (yes it has been studied). If women my age, who have daughter prefer the "look" of a circumcised penis, will they influence what their daughter's prefer? If their daughter are the decision makes on the circumcision decision, will they go with their preference, especially if the foreskin is regarded as an unsightly, useless, nuisance piece of skin? Preference can influence others to act. I take a world view of things, and while it is true that in North America, Australia and most of the developed world, male circumcision is performed by someone in the medical field on a baby, it is not true the world over. The overwhelming majority of circumcised males in the world live in Muslim countries; typical age of the person undergoing the procedure 7. Circumcision is seem as a religious right, an entrance into manhood. More to my point about the influence of preference. There is no specific mention of circumcision in the Karan (the Muslim version of the bible). There is debate about whether the prophet Muhammad was born without a foreskin or if his or his grandfather circumcised him at 7 days old. So the majority of the men being circumcised the world over, is because somewhere along the line, the preference became to "look" like Muhammad. Preference can have a big impact over time. All I am doing is asking people to think about their preference, and to realize that their publicized preference may have a wider scope of influence beyond themselves, to the detriment of others. Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
Intenda, to my understanding yes, but the portion of the clitoral hood, immediately adjacent to the clitoral gland. I can't comment on your friends experience, and can only reflect on my experience, and I'm not going to get cut, to dispute his claim.  What I can do is direct you to scientific testing that was specifically done to answer the question about sensitivity. Search for the article I referenced in the post and read it for yourself.For those who want to admire the "look", get him hard, roll the foreskin back, and there you have it.  Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
SexyO, I can't remember what I was reading about when I wrote the original post, which took me all of a about two minutes to bang out. Suffice to say, it was someone's blog or comment that made me think about the subject matter. It is an interesting discussion, because it touches on hot button issues for women, genital mutilation, the subjugation of women, and personal preference, and something most give no thought to male circumcision. The reality is, the issues are not female or male issue, but people issues; we all have a stake it in, even though it may not affect you or someone you love. A child friend of mine, use to make a statement, "It's like comparing oceans", about situations. The statement is in reference bad situations and which one you would rather be stuck in the middle of. I think if I asked the question, which ocean would you not want to be stuck in the middle of, a lot would say the Pacific, or because of recent events some might even say the southern Indian ocean. Because of how limited we are taught to think about things, if you asked 100 people that question very few would come up with the correct answer. The correct answer being none; who wants to be stuck in the middle of the ocean? If we don't discuss things, the status quo remains, and all the right and freedoms we enjoy wouldn't exist. Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
Debbi, I love it to, especially when it is on a subject I haven't given much thought too. I haven't had a discussion about cut/uncut since university, speaking about it with my dorm mates about "helmet heads" (the term we used back then for cut), and natural. During the same time period I was also present when girls discussed it; the sentiment echoed by many was that uncut lacked "personality".  Although it is not case in your instance, the female discussions may have influenced some, and the influence may have resulted in consent being superseded.It has been an interesting discussion, with some strong and interesting view on both sides. But I guess, even though there is an old saying, saying you can't, what has been revealed is we all want to "have our cake and eat it too". Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
I personally favor male circumcision. My choice. If he isn't this isn't a show stopper. Very good reading here Khu ..ty for sharing hugs V Become a blog watcher sweet_vm
| ||
|
I personally favor male circumcision. My choice. If he isn't this isn't a show stopper. Very good reading here Khu ..ty for sharing hugs V Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
itsjust4u, the statement speak more to the timing of a circumcision procedure than anything else. You will notice how carefully worded the statement is, as they have to negotiate the political minefield, so that HMOs will still pay for the procedures due to the absence of universal health care, not to mention the potential religious backlash. We can argue about the semantics, but here is a medical body that once support routine circumcision due to it purported medical benefits, that clearly states... "health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns". Not a ringing endorsement in my eyes. The endorsement of the College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist is irrelevant in my eyes. Obstetricians deal with the care of women throughout pregnancy, Gynecologists deal with the female reproductive system. Ironic that doctors that deal with women health are sought as the endorsers and not the ASA (American Society of Andrology), the body of doctors who specialize in the male reproductive system. I looked but could not find a public position on circumcision from this body. A body of medical researcher have demonstrated there is a touch sensitivity difference between cut and uncut penises, showing what is cut off is the most sensitive issue. Should this information just be ignored? Or should everything surrounding this irreversible circumcision be questioned and examined? Maybe for the puritans who believe sex is all about procreation, this is a moot discussion; but to us who see sex as something of great pleasure for all involved, should we not seek to insure the GREATEST sex can be had by all. As a parent, I see my role as Steward not Architect. I have stayed away from the boob issue, because I didn't want to go there, but since it won't go away let me deal with it. If most men preferred big giant boobs and there was a procedure that could be given to new born baby girls that would guaranty "Barbie" boob, and the procedure was irreversible, should parents opt for this? A lot of large breasted women complain of ongoing back problems as a consequence big boobs. Aside from breast augmentation surgery (an adult choice), big boob, small boobs, liking the same sex, or lots of body hair are naturally occurring; circumcision isn't. if the vast majority of men without foreskins were born that way, then they are equal. But they are not, and when you consider who typically makes the circumcision decision in our society, and who (other women) and what (the status quo) has most the influence on the decision makers forming their opinions. Since we are the same age you can appreciate, how difficult it is to change the status quo. These post are not an attack those who took advice, consider options, and made a decision; it was to talk about issues seldom discussed. Similarly, these post are not attack on those who prefer the look of an exposed Glans of the penis. Roll back the foreskin of an uncircumcised man, and there you have it, the look that is so appealing. The posts is examining a belief system that say it's ok to do this, permanently alter someone's enjoyment of sex as god, nature, evolution (what have you) intended. If the cultures that practice female circumcision, suddenly said, "we are going to stop doing circumcision when they are little girls... we are going to do it when they are newborns instead under anesthetic by a trained physician"... would anyone be Ok with that. "What's the big deal?", they will still have the G, A and U spot for orgasm. That turn of events doesn't sit right with me, does it with you? In the end, I will not convenience anyone who prefer a cut cock to switch to only uncut cocks or even work them into the mix. What I hope I have accomplished, is that I made people think. Always a good thing in my eyes. Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
It's worrying that women are advocating unnecessary (and possibly harmful) surgery on babies just because it makes their cocks look nicer... I'm sorry, but that is the definition of shallow. Imagine the concern if all labia had to be trimmed to meet male "aesthetic demands". Would that be OK? Even though it's just a short step away from full female circumcision and I'm sure everyone agrees that's evil. It's also very ignorant - when I'm erect the foreskin pulls back and looks the same as a circumcised penis. Though I have the benefit of having exposed the sensitive inner surface of my foreskin. By the way, the argument "Male circumcision performed during the newborn period has considerably lower complication rates than when performed later in life." is ridiculous - the overwhelming majority of men will never need later life circumcision, so there is zero risk of complication. Might as well get your toes amputated at birth to reduce the risk of frost bite 
| ||
|
People become use to what they are use to and it become their preference. It seem we all have a sense of entitlement, without think about the ramifications of how the things we prefer came into being. Since it happens in the animal world, where the males "R" the females, and with lions they step it up a notch with infanticide, it was probably part of our evolution. Certainly, we are all familiar with the caricature of caveman behavior... see the woman you want, drag her off by the hair and have you way with her. Back them when someone suggested, "maybe things shouldn't work that way", some men said "it's my preference, and I have a right to my preference". Since then we have become more civilized, and have setup rules that govern our conduct, so that those who can't defend themselves, are defended by all of us. We do shit like buy inexpensive clothing, made by those working is sweatshops, and even after it is pointed out to us, may will go, "oh well", and just keep on purchasing. In America where most men are circumcised, and circumcision was routinely done for purported "health" reasons, the medical community has said, "health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns". More research will be done to look at what is being lost in terms of pleasure, by male circumcision. Once enough work has been done and the loss of the foreskin can't be view as inconsequential, the medical community will be in conflict with their Hippocratic oath of "do no harm". Circumcision be the medical community will go the way of the lobotomy, and then the last battle will be with those who play the religious rights card. Not so funny thing about lobotomy, the Dr. who was the driving force behind the procedure, António Egas Moniz, was awarded the Noble prize for Philology in 1949. About 65,000 people had the procedure done to them, until humanity came to our senses in the 1970s. The harm we do, when we mess around with shit we don't know enough about.  Find pleasure in giving pleasure
| ||
|
Passion great point on the habitual without real deep though about the reduction in pleasure further down the line. Even if one is not sure if sexual pleasure is reduced, you would think it would be better to error on the side of caution, since the procedure is irreversible. Find pleasure in giving pleasure
|
Become a member to create a blog
