• 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
Uncut and as far as I know, no one I know is cut.

But I am in the UK where ritual child torture never really took off in a big way :p
 
fairnymph said:
Furthermore, if you had been left intact and then as an adult wanted to get cut, it would be been much better all around than being cut as an infant. Less dangerous, less scarring and loss of sensitivity, the wonders of anaesthesia and much less pain, etc.


That is simply not true, etc.

I think you should speak more to the benefits of circumcision. Did you say there are immunological attributes? It seems that whatever you may gain from being non-circumcised, immunologically, you stand more to gain by being circumcised (yesterday's reports).

It holds moisture in? Great. That certainly has been a problem for my circumcised cock.
It serves as a protective layer? Is that so important when you wear clothes?
Better sexual pleasure? Really? Is that quantifiable? (The more cells theory, probably.) I'd bet that most circumcised/uncircumcised men like the way their cocks perform and I bet women feel the same. That's just my guess, though. You're the expert.
 
Last edited:
Its abundantly obvious you are just jelous of us for having forskin. Its all good man.
 
^^ I hope you're joking. You and everyone else who respond similarly must stop the puffing chest responses. I'm circumcised/uncircumcised and my dick looks better than an uncircumcised/circumcised dick. Women/men like uncircumcised/circumcised dicks better than uncircumcised/circumcised dicks. It contributes nothing and only fuels the antipathy and sensationalism in the circumcision threads.
 
This in the paper today: A study in Africa by the U.S. National Institute of Health found that circumscision cut the risk of AIDS by SIXTY percent. " The foreskin is more fragile than the tougher skin surrounding it, providing a surface that the virus could penetrate more easily."

Wonder if the this study will change the opinion of peditritions in the U.S. who are against routine circumscision.

I didn't think it mattered until now but if I had a boy I'd wait until he was 13 and tell him the risk and let him decide if he wants it cut.

I'd also let him decide if he wanted to wear a dress and have a sex change.

EDIT: This is also worth mentioning, "Circumscision offers no protection from HIV acquired through anal sex." Yes, anal sex is gross!
 
Last edited:
I know that I would have been up to the task of making that kind of decision when I was 13. Perhaps, you are giving too much credit to not-quite teenagers.
 
Just to clarify, there is more to my reasoning than just insurance. In fact that is would be the LEAST of my reasons. The fact is, if it is not done at birth it's not likely to be done at all. And although it is great that bluelight women are so open to the idea, this is only a small sampling of the population. And since many women would be put off by the uncut peepee, and I've not heard anyone ever say that a cut peepee is "gross", I would rather not risk my son being embarassed or rejected due to foreskin. Not that we're likely to have a son :( but that's how I feel. I was going to avoid posting, but after my wife's post I thought I should clarify that insurance was NOT the reason to my objection. And a side note, my wife has always agreed until recently when our friend's son had to be recut, and I can understand why.
 
It has been informative and amusing all at the same time.

I give this thread 2 thumbs up.

:D
 
TBritton said:
I would rather not risk my son being embarassed or rejected due to foreskin.

I think things are going to change though, so I doubt it would be as big an issue for the next generation. Hopefully, anyway.

I've been with both circumsised and uncircumsised, and while there's a small difference, it's not a big deal and it's easy to get used to. All the guys, both cut and uncut seemed happy with their situation. I probably wouldn't have my future children circumsised though, I don't really see a point in it. The only legitimate reasons I could consider for doing it are medical ones, or if the foreskin is too tight, and then it can be done later in life anyway. Plus us here in Europe aren't big on the whole cutting foreskin off thing.
 
i have been with cut and uncut males and i actually prefer uncut. my partner is uncirc'd and when i was pregnant i stated that if our child was a boy, i would like for him to be uncirc'd as well (we were blessed with a little girl). as long as they are taught to clean their foreskin, i don't see the problems. the same argument goes with the AIDS epidemic in Africa, why can't these men and boys be taught how to maintain proper care of their foreskins insteading of completely removing them? maybe the epidemic is so bad there that circumcision is the only way to go but most people that are circumcised didn't get the procedure because of fear of a deadly infection, it's purely aesthetic.

my future son(s) will remain intact :)
 
if the africans would just use a condom....

we wouldnt have to worry about cutting off bits of genitalia.
 
if the africans would just use a condom....

we wouldnt have to worry about cutting off bits of genitalia.
PRECISELY!

If we even consider the studies valid, ircumcision does not protect fully against HIV. The recent studies convey the idea that cut=protected, but that's simply not true. By FAR the best protection is using a condom, which is cheaper and less dangerous than circumcision. So proposing circumcision when condoms are so superior an option is bad medicine, and very poor logic.

It holds moisture in? Great. That certainly has been a problem for my circumcised cock.
It serves as a protective layer? Is that so important when you wear clothes?
Better sexual pleasure? Really? Is that quantifiable? (The more cells theory, probably.) I'd bet that most circumcised/uncircumcised men like the way their cocks perform and I bet women feel the same. That's just my guess, though. You're the expert.
No, the foreskin doesn't just HOLD IN moisture, it generates it, providing lubrication for sex and removing the entire burden from the female. This is obviously an evolutionary benefit as well.
Protection is very significant. Clothes do NOT protect in the manner I'm referring to. In fact clothes are very rough and thus the circumcised penis becomes cornified (toughened tissue) and loses significant sensitivity. It's similar to how very calloused finger tips are less sensitive. The foreskin is smooth and moist, and maintains a smooth, highly sensitive, and moistened glans. Nothing else can provide this function.
More sexual pleasure is another thing that is simply fact. Far more nerve endings, the intact frenulum which is the most sensitive part of the penis for most men, the more sensitive glans because the skin is not cornified, the lack of scarring = more sensitive, and also, the foreskin provides additional friction during sex. Furthermore, most men who have been circumcised as adults notice a loss of sensitivity, although it does not compare to what men circumcised at birth experience -- they lose MUCH more sensitivity (for reasons I can go into if you like).
 
It holds moisture in? Great. That certainly has been a problem for my circumcised cock.
It serves as a protective layer? Is that so important when you wear clothes?
Better sexual pleasure? Really? Is that quantifiable? (The more cells theory, probably.) I'd bet that most circumcised/uncircumcised men like the way their cocks perform and I bet women feel the same. That's just my guess, though. You're the expert.
Any woman who rejects a man based on the status of his foreskin is a fucking idiot and not worthy of fucking, anyway. What other, narrow-minded, judgemental people think does not matter at all -- fuck them. Beyond that, the foreskin can act as a filter -- any woman too stupid and brainwashed to appreciate an intact man will be 'scared off' and good riddance! Your future son won't have to waste his time with immature, foolish females.
 
It's sad that you are so socially brainwashed, and that you would apply that to your children without their consent. How would you feel if your parents had removed your outer ears at birth?
 
I cant believe some of the stuff going on in this thread. Firstly, WOMEN saying theyre going to circumcise their sons, if only you knew how much of a difference it would make in later life. Secondly, men who arent cut, saying theyre going to cut their boys? wow.

I agree with everyone who says let the boy make his own decision, i think it is cruel. Im uncut and wouldnt have it any other way. The only guy ive been with was cut and he said that he had lost alot of sensitivity over the years and he wished he wasnt cut, it was clear i was much more sensitive than him.

Fuck all you women making that desicion, your all sick imo. guys too.
 
Last edited:
Top