Thursday, 9 April 2009

Danonymous Dan: Smeg Off!

It’s cleaner? It’s more aesthetically pleasing? What the fuck? I had an argument with somebody recently about what was better – circumcised or not?

My view is rather simple. It is a cock. It has two purposes: pissing and fucking. As long as it accomplishes both of those tasks adequately then there is no reason to lop the skin off the end of the poor blighter.

Advocates of foreskin removal – excluding religious mutilation, for a moment – seem to think that when men like myself peel back the foreskin, hulking great chunks of man-cheese drop to the floor and bounce around the bathroom like oversized mini-Babybels. This is lop-ist propaganda at its worst: the cleanliness argument is lie; no man’s commando should go into battle without his balaclava.

I will admit occasionally you might find a bit of smegma – but I’ll let you all into a secret… we can wash it off! Just think of the pain and money that could have been saved if religious zealots knew that smegma could be removed with soap and water. If a guy finds any (medical conditions not withstanding), its usually after having not washed for a couple of days. So ladies, unless you have a penchant for fucking tramps, you’re unlikely to come across any massive build-ups of man curd. But if you do, you can look on it as an early warning system – he’s a dirty bastard and you shouldn’t want to fuck him anyway.

There are some pretty ludicrous myths used to push circumcision, including: guys can last longer in bed; its better for your immune system; its advised by health centres; and let us not forget that, despite creating them (and being perfect and incapable of making a mistake), God doesn’t like them! I won’t list all the myths but if you want to have a read take a look at this.

Society seems far more at home with the idea of various viscous vaginal fluids being emitted throughout the different stages of the menstrual cycle. Nobody suggests a surgical procedure to stop the naturally occurring discharge: you are simply told to wash. (I appreciate there are some absolute fucktards who advocate female circumcision in places around this earth; that is a whole other blog)

My girlfriend admits she was ‘surprised’ when she saw my penis because she was expecting me to be circumcised because such a massive proportion of American males get the chop. I think I was the first ever adult male she had seen with a foreskin. A friend of hers, who lived in England for a year, admitted she had found the sight of and uncircumcised cock disgusting when she first saw it – lets face it, neither version is going to win a beauty contest – but disgusting just because it’s wearing a hat? That’s just penis-ist!

Every guy has had that inexpert tug job from a girlfriend – the one where she treats it like a mongoose killing a snake. I can only imagine how painful that would be with no foreskin to act as slack while she attempts to yank the spitting cobra’s head off.

I’m sure it’s not an issue many women give that much thought too: it’s either there, or it isn’t. But from what I can see, the more severe the circumcision (there are different levels of ‘close’) the more painful it can be for the man in later life. Considering that it is basically a permanent thing (there are groups of men attempting to regrow their foreskins), I think all people should be allowed to make up their own mind, which means waiting until they’re 16, at least.

A friend of mine who is a journalist always says that each article needs a pay-off – a sentence which sums up the article or blog in a pithy and/or amusing way. Here's mine! It’s nob-cheese; stop mutilating children!


Anonymous said...

It's just so so so so so unattractive when the foreskin is intact and feels 'doughy' in the mouth. Turns my stomach, actually.
Well, you did ask..........

WV supedic

RandomPinkness said...

I'm a Jewish woman, so whether I come under the "religious zealot" category I'm not sure. However, if you think about life several thousand years ago, people were not able to have a shower everyday with their body wash and clean themselves thoroughly. It's not my area of expertise, (I have an MA in Celtic not Jewish History) but there is a valid reason for it being to do with cleanliness back then.

I am not an advocate of circumcision nor am I against it, and I'm a liberal Jew I don't take the bible literally and I recognise the world has changed and what was true several thousand years ago can no longer be applied to the modern world or person. Yes perhaps the rules about circumcision should be changed.

Although Jewish, every man I've been with has had a foreskin so I can't comment about what I feel is nicer.

But I agree it should be personal choice, however, circumcising an adolescent or adult is a trickier procedure than a baby. But if a guy wants it enough he'll go through with it I suppose.

BenefitScroungingScum said...

Funnily enough this is a subject discussed in depth recently with my girlfriends. 2 Americans, 1 Brit (me) and 1 Thai. The Americans are still uncomfortable with the idea of foreskins despite having been in the UK many years. They don't seem to have any real objections other than it 'looks weird'
IME though I would say that circumcised men seem to last longer, noticeably so. Which of course is irrelevant because they've had less of a clue how to use it! It also seems that a circumcised cock is a little less sensitive, which can make it less intimidating.
As a general rule though as long as they are scrupulously clean and in possession of lady pleasing skills then a cock's a cock's a cock. So to speak!
Bendy Girl

J said...

I'm a lady and have no probs with foreskins at all - I've been with men with it and without it, and there are pros and cons to both ways. I have to admit I can't see the big bonus in being circumcised. In SOME cases I've heard of men lasting longer in bed, but as far as I know premature or quick ejaculation is just as rife in America as it is elsewhere! I don't find the foreskin at all invasive; the men I've been with have been well-groomed and cleaned, and the foreskin pulls back neatly out of the way of the head when required, so it's not flapping around or anything like some women seem to suppose. It's also so extremely useful for handjobs, totally removes the need for lubricant on occasion, and does most of the work for you!

Nope, no complaints about foreskins here.

Milana said...

'Doughy in the mouth'?? Try turning him on first - a man with a proper hard on will have a foreskin stretched taught, no dough, just a rock hard smooth cock, just as nature intended...

Circumsion is mutilation pure and simple. There is no excuse for it (unless there is a medical problem) all this rubbish about cleanliness and how it looks to women makes me really cross. As for religious practises, if grown men want to lop part of their cocks off for God, that is up to them, but to do it to little boys who have no say in it is completely wrong, in my opinion.

I would like to see the practise of cosmetic male circumsion made illegal for under 18s.

Abs said...

I so wish I hadn't tried to read this while eating a cheese sandwich.

Anonymous said...

i am uncircumcised (thanks mom)
i served in the military of a sub-saharan african country and was deployed in "the bush" for months at a time during which i was unable to wash/bathe my penis.
my penis did not become infected/encrusted with "cheese"/diseased or anything else we are supposed to believe.
one may no longer dock the tails of one's dogs but one may sexually mutilate one's sons. my wife is pregnant with our first child, a son. after his birth, the first person to suggest we hack off part of his penis will have to deal with a large, shaven headed, krav maga practicing combat vetaran with little sympathy for those who deem genital mutilation of infants of either sex to be acceptable or desirable.

Anonymous said...

I had my foreskin removed when I was around 3 years old because I it was too tight, and would have caused circulation problems in later life.

I think circumcision is fine in those circumstances.

~~Silk said...

Female, post-menopausal, American. I vastly prefer natural. The slippy skin is very handy when my own lubrication is less, and because my man is more sensitive, he spends a lot more time on foreplay.

My daughter was born in Missouri in 1975, before it was possible to predict the sex of a baby. It was a Missouri state law that ALL baby boys must be circumcised. If my daughter had instead been a boy, and they had cut him, I had threatened to sue the doctors, the hospital, and the state, and I was deadly serious. Everybody in the delivery room was hoping for a girl.

my sun sets to rise again said...

I’m sure it’s not an issue many women give that much thought too

I do. Lovely soft glans skin is one of my most favourite things in the world.

Anonymous said...

@ my sun sets to rise many men now want to meet you!

Angela-la-la said...

I love my sister but she and I fell out big time over this, she had her boys cut when young and I completely abhored the thought of surgically mutilating any part of a precious child, let alone their genitalia.

As a sexual adult female I have to say I love a hat! No cock is pretty but when you're on the third or fourth go and he needs some work to get ready there's nothing more complimentary than watching that skin roll back cos my tongue makes it worth it!

anon said...

OK, you're about to learn something about me that only some medical staff and a few carefully selected women know. I was circumcised at the age of 20, more than 20 years ago, because of a medical condition called phimosis. Basically my foreskin became so constricted that erections were painful and hygiene became difficult. So off I went to my doctor, and, in due course, the hospital. I am in the unusual position of being able to say if sex is better (for the man) with or without, and 'with' has it by a long, long way. The purpose of the foreskin is to protect the ultra sensitive skin of the glans, and once it is removed the glans toughens. There is a whole world of sensation which I will never experience again (and which millions of American or Jewish or Moslem men will never have the chance to experience at all). Sex is still terrific - but that is because so much of sex is about sharing and pleasuring your partner. So far as my penis is concerned, I would say it has maybe a third of the sensation which it used to have. No wonder some women here are saying that circumcised men 'last' longer; would they approve on these grounds if it was the woman whose pleasure was being affected? (Just to be clear, I don't intend to make any equivalence between male circumcision and female genital mutilation, which is, of course, horrific under any and all circumstances.) I didn't really have any other option, but believe me - unless there is a sound cultural/religious or medical reason then don't - just don't.

ps - My verification code is FURGAL - time for another 'shaved or natural' debate?

Sheila said...

I (a woman)came of age in a place where most men were circumcised, and now that I've had lovers with both types of penises, I can say that I've noticed no skill difference correlated with foreskin for the gentlemen.

What worries me is that I feel so incompetent with uncut men. I've had long-term lovers who had foreskins, and I've never been able to get an uncut man off by handjob, and I find blowjobs much more difficult. So I find myself nervous about uncut guys because *I* have never been able to figure out how to pleasure them!

Anonymous said...

The first penis I ever really encountered was circumsized (I was so naive that I didn't realise this until he told me). What with it being my first one, it was a major classroom as far as "Foreplay 101" goes. The guys I've been with since have not been cut. At first I was like, holy cow, what the HELL do I do with this bit, but once I got used to it I have to say I like having it-to me it seems like a whole bonus bit to stimulate and it is a lot of fun getting to grips (so to speak) with what does and doesn't work. Although my circumsized ex could go FOREVER, I wouldn't say my uncircumsized guys since have been unsatisfactorarily fast. I would say they seem to produce more precum (bonus). On the looks front, either way is cool. And I have never, ever encountered a guy with any hygeine issues, cut or not.
Also, just for the record...I would hate for guys to read girls' opinions on circumsision and wish they were/weren't cut based on it. On a fundamental level, I don't care. You have a penis and you're willing to let me near it? Great. That's all I care about. Hood/no hood is never going to be a deal breaker so please feel ok with what you have! (Maybe boys don't obsess, but I hate reading about what guys like in boobs or whatever and knowing I can't provide it!)

Anonymous said...

But . . . a foreskin is quite definitely (I should know - I have one!) an erogenous zone! It's tremendously sensitive, and my love can arouse me to great heights merely by very lightly stroking the end of my foreskin with a moistened finger (or her tongue). Even if the finger isn't moist before, it soon will be. Circumcision deprives a man of a sensual pleasure area - Mums please take note before depriving your offspring!

Lynx said...

As someone said above, there are times when a circumcision is necessary, as with phimosis. There are other possible solutions to try to treat the condition (steroid creams and stuff), but they don't always work. Believe me, I tried the alternatives but even then erections were painful and sex almost impossible, so I opted for circumcision. While it is only a "minor operation", and I was in and out the same day, I wouldn't reccommend it to anyone who doesn't really need it. Having said that, it was the best solution for me, and I am glad I had it done.

I don't think it's possible to tell at a very early age if this is going to be a problem. Certainly with me it only happened during / after puberty. Therefore, I think that circumcision should be a last resort, and not a default option.

uncut said...

Any chance of a more in-depth look at foreskins and their abuse?I'm curious about it being enforced in some parts of America.How and when did cut become the done thing and uncut come to be considered gross by some people?How far away are in-vitrio snoods?
Cumming too quick implies someone wasn't satisfied.Wouldn't improving our technique be more beneficial for both parties?Surgically dulling our ability to feel pleasure seems so wrong on so many levels.You lose a little bit of sensitivity,become a little less responsive to stimulus.Another tiny wall between me and you.In a lot of cases imposed against your will,for mostly spurious reasons.It's got to be a bad thing,hasn't it?
Doing it to babies for any reason other than health should be seen as an assault on the victims human/civil rights.I don't know enough about the religous rituals to condemn them outright,but it should be something a grown man chooses to do to affirm his religious beliefs.Doing it to a child seems like cultural branding to me.
Maybe one day a scientist with a tight foreskin will work for the people who grow ears on mice..and hacking the whole thing off because it's too tight will be a thing of the primitive past.

AJK said...

I love silky, hard, twitch-in-your-mouth, natural penises with all the skin intact.

Cocks that have had the foreskin cut off cause way too much friction and dry me out and they have more problems with erections, in my experience, too.

Yay foreskins! I love them.

ispy said...

Speaking as an American mother:

I gave birth to my son just over 8 years ago. Although I had no experience with an uncircumcised male, I could not see any reason to circumcise my son. I asked my very religious doctor his opinion and was surprised to hear him say that there is "absolutely no reason to circumcise medically." He went on to say that the only reason for circumcision these days is because a father is circumcised. Those with a circumcised father tend to circumcise their boys and those without, don't. Hardly reason to circumcise in my opinion.

Being that we do live in America and the trend still tends to be to circumcise, I hope this doesn't cause him issues in the future, but I still would have made the same decision. If he wants to be circumcised, he can make that decision when he is old enough. That is not a choice that I am willing to make for him.

Also, I have a hunch that far more men in America are uncircumcised than we realize and that number is growing in trend. People are beginning to realize that it is not necessary.