• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: axe battler | xtcgrrrl | arrall

Circumcision MEGA MERGED poll and discussion

How do you feel about circumcision?

  • I am male, intact and happy to be that way

    Votes: 170 35.7%

  • I am male, circumcised and glad to be that way

    Votes: 167 35.1%

  • I am male, intact and wish I were circumcised

    Votes: 22 4.6%

  • I am male, circumcised and I wish I were intact

    Votes: 33 6.9%

  • I am female and in favor of circumcision

    Votes: 44 9.2%

  • I am female and against circumcision

    Votes: 28 5.9%

  • Other - I'll post my response below

    Votes: 12 2.5%
  • Total voters
    476
forever_young said:
Cut and happy. Wouldn't have it any other way.
If I have ever have sons, they can bet their sweet lil' asses that they're gonna get cut.
Click to expand...

If you were cut as an infant how do you know you would not be even happier intact?

Why are so against letting your sons experience a state you never got to, to give them a choice you never had? They can always get cut, but no amount of money or effort will ever let them replace what they will lose.

http://www.boystoo.com/anatomy/whatslost.htm
 
I would never ever ever want to circumcise my children. If they want to seperate themselves from their body when they get older than that is their choice and I would make sure to present both sides of the argument for them, but no parent has the right to interfere in such a ridiculous and barbaric manner IMO. I think in a sense it is very disempowering to mess with such a magical part of the human body. And personally of the men I have been with, the ones who were intact were much more empowered sexually and in other ways too. Thats not meant to put anyone down, its only my experience.
 
A guy dated was circumcised at the age of 5. Tradition, where he's from (KZ) or in his family at least.
 
Looking back at the date of this old thread...

I still feel the same way.

If I have sons, they can choose for themselves whether or not to undergo the procedure. If they do or if they don't, I'd hope that someone would love them for who they are. I'm pretty confident that I'd be able to teach them how to bathe properly.

Any sons I may have someday won't be undergoing the procedure as infants unless there is a very compelling medical reason.
 
I mean when it all comes down to it yeah sure un circed and circed dicks look different when not in use, but is there even a difference when erect?
 
SO what's the difference girls? All my exe's were intact, my current bf is circumcised and I never felt the difference...hm? One ex did tear his hoodie during rough sex though, ouch!
 
I am an American female and am against the practice of circumcision but have no preference when it comes to my lover. I've only ever been with circumcised men but I wouldn't not sleep with an uncircumcised man. It doesn't matter to me. I love penises! I could never have my son circumcised because it is EXACTLY the same as certain types of female genital mutilation. Maybe we should start calling circumcision male genital mutilation. I could never consciously mutilate my child's genitals.
 
Im a girl & voted against as uncut guys are more sensitive and fun. (easier to get off too) but after i voted i figured its a guys choice and not for me to say. i think its wrong that baby boys have no say in the matter, but understand esp if its being done for religious reasons. its sad for any guy who grows up and wishes he still had his fore-skin.

edit: i cant get my head round parents putting a baby through the pain of ear piercing never mind circumcision...
 
I don't really see how circumcision is mutilation... the practice of doing this is based on problems from the past, yes, but I'm glad I got circumcised when I was a baby, since if I wanted it done later in life, it probably would have not appealed because of how much pain I would go through. I think this is a decision parents should make before their child is born. Not getting circumcised and having a chance of needing too is just enough reason for me to want to get it done to my son(s) if I ever have any. This is just my opinion though, just as everything else in this thread is opinion.
 
Not to be rude but its mutilation because you are chopping off a fully functional and useful part of the human anatomy. You don't understand it because you don't have a foreskin and thus, don't realize how awesome it is.

BTW people get circumsized as adults and its not any worse than having it done as a baby. So saying you would have it done to your baby for the 1% chance that they might need it done later seems pretty silly to me. My brother had it done as a teenager (I didn't) and while it sucked he was fine in a few days.

I sometimes wonder how much mental trauma a baby goes through having one of the most sensitive parts of its body chopped off. I don't understand how that could NOT cause some kind of long term trauma to the developing mind.

Most people have their kids done because they had it done to them. That's the real reason 90% of the time. Or they are simply uneducated about it.
 
I was born circumcised. So was my brother. You would swear we have had the chop. I have never known any different. So what is normal?

My little boy, after a lot of thought had it circumcised using the bell ligation method.

EMLA cream for a couple of hours to numb the area, plastic bell and ligature placed, came home, we shared a beer and a bottle in front of the football and he went to bed peacefully. Far more unsettled when he cut a few of his teeth. It obviously stung a bit as I cleaned it with betadine, but no more than when he has had severe nappy rash and I have had to apply some cream.

After a few days it dropped off in his nappy and he hasn't looked back since.

There will always be horror stories what ever the medical procedure you are discussing, just as for every scientific paper for, you will find one against, but from my experience it was safe and atraumatic, and I wouldn't hesitate to have it done to another son.
 
I must say i consider it child abuse, and whilst i recognise that female genital mutilation is more brutal and certainly more dangerous, i still believe they're in the same ball park. Culturally sanctioned child abuse.

If a person chooses to have it done when they're able to decide that's ok, but doing it to unconsenting infants or children is reprehensible.
 
As a 46 year old male who was born in the States, I used to be embarrassed about not being circumcised. However, I have now spent about half my life out of America, and find that not being circumcised is really the norm in most countries. I live in Europe now, and haven't given the matter much thought since that time.

I personally think no parent should make the decision about their child's genitals unless there is a true medical indication. Let the boy decide for himself when he is old enough to make that decision.
 
I am circumsized. I think it is more sanitary and should be done to boys at birth.
People will complain and say it is cruel, but hell... I don't remember any pain.
;)

I find an uncircumsized males penis unattractive.
But there are parts of me that wish I had my skin back sometimes, I have heard that sex is much better due to having the extra foreskin.
But then the thought passes.
Quickly.

I wrote a blog a while back about my personal experience with this issue. Due to length, I will just post a link if you would like to read.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=39495412&blogID=298821120&Mytoken=117CF76A-1AEE-4D28-B78010B406C06E5A11450751
 
CII~360 said:
I am circumsized. I think it is more sanitary and should be done to boys at birth.
Click to expand...

It's only more sanitary if you think that the uncircumcised don't wash. I think I can speak on behalf of the majority of us when I say that we do :).

On the subject in general, I agree completely with Ernestrome - child abuse, pure and simple. What right does anybody have to arbitrarily lop off a part of their offspring's anatomy when the poor little mite concerned is never going to have a say in the matter? None, I would suggest.

I think that, like female circumcision (only considerably less gruesome,) it stems from a puritanical kind of thing - probably why Americans seem to be the only country who engages in such nastiness for non-religious reasons. I imagine the theory goes that if you reduce the pleasure from sex, the circumcised will supposedly be more pious and not indulge in such activities. It doesn't seem to work as well for boys as it does for girls though, so doesn't even perform that function. Doesn't peform any discernible function, in fact,

An utterly pointless and barbaric practice, I would say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top