please just be blunt and precise. I will not take offense. I'm doing this survey for my human sexuality graduate class. I have to write a paper on the reasons why we still circumcised and why it is much more common in the US. I already have all the hard fact info, aids rates, hpv and cervical cancer etc. I really just need personal opinions regarding womens and men's preference and how it feels different to the woman. If any man answering this has been circumcised later in life your opinion will be my pot of gold for this research. The reason i choose to use answers is because it is unbiased whereas all sites with like research on circumcision or either avidly pro or against circumcision. Thanks so much people
2006-09-20 22:52:21 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
it is done from health point of view and also from religious point of view. but from a woman's point of view, it is not appealing at all. it puts a woman off (a hypothetical answer. not a personal experience)
2006-09-20 22:59:10 · answer #1 · answered by whatsinaname 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is preposterous. I found out quite recently that this is something Americans do to their babies and I couldn;t believe it. Actually posted a question about it on Answers to find out why - no decent results there. What I did find here was a bunch of young men who feel abnormal and insecure because their parents did not butcher their perfect bodies at birth. How sad and absurd.
I have had both, and it doesn't make the slightest difference. A cut penis is just as disgusting as a whole one if the man does not wash himself, so I don't know why everyone is always on about personal hygiene. (Surely oral sex on a woman is also no picnic if she isn't clean).
So my verdict is - leave the boys as nature intended. If a medical problem should develope one can deal with it at that time. Personaly I have never met a man who had any problems due to his intact foreskin.
2006-09-21 11:06:49 · answer #2 · answered by amandla 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have no preference really, as long as a man practices good personal hygiene. I couldn't say that one felt better than the other because ...well, they all feel different, don't they?
I will say this though. I was a CNA for 15 years, and I cared for Alzheimer's patients, many of whom were uncut. Most of the other aides were unwilling to "peel the bananas" of these poor men, and it lead to all sorts of fungal problems that I ended up dealing with. Since we can't predict who will and will not get Alzheimer's or any other debilitating mental or physical condition, I vote for circumcision until there is a cure, or a willing caregiver for every uncut penis.
I'm only half kidding there.
2006-09-21 08:11:08 · answer #3 · answered by Sister Di 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In my experience cut is far better.I have had both over the years and from a woman's point of view its much nicer to have a cut one.It feels better and is much more hygienic,oral sex uncut i wouldn't even consider!!Its cleaner as there are no flappy bits to get dirt under and its less smelly,coz germs have less places to get trapped, as well as residue?!I have also been told by men that they prefer it.Had a boyfriend years ago ,he was an uncut virgin.we had a few problems with sex as he was too tight so he got the snip at 27 years old!!He said it was the best thing he ever did and should have done it years ago.Not in touch with him anymore but i did hear he is happily married with his second child due any day, so it worked out well for him!
2006-09-21 06:10:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Circumcision became the sign of the covenant (Gen. 17:10-14) Every male, free born and slave, was to be circumcised on the 8th day after birth or upon entry into the community as a physical testimony to God's covenant with Abraham and SaraH (GEN. 17:12-13, 23-27)
2006-09-21 06:07:50 · answer #5 · answered by tuesday 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I have been in a few long-term realtionships, 2 with men who were not circumsized, the rest with men who were. My current partner is "intact". Foreplay is different with him than it was with other men, and I have asked him to vary his strokes in order to prevent occasional pinching, etc. I find that he is more sensitive than usual, and I have to vary hand movements, etc., and use a slightly different techniques for entry to accommodate his sensitivity and the extra friction. Other than that not much difference to me. We make bathing a part of our intimate interaction with each other, and make the extra necessary washing part of the process. It usually is very pleasurable for us both. There is no difference in form or function otherwise, and he has no issues with his appearance. I love him the way he is. It is a matter of learning your partner's body and adapting to it. I honestly have no preference either way.
2006-09-24 13:17:20 · answer #6 · answered by Hauntedfox 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I am cut, but since birth. What I can tell you though is that if I wasn't cut, my sex life would have gone down hill. About 50% of women have asked me if I am, and when I say yes, they said they're glad because they just can't do uncut.
2006-09-21 05:59:20 · answer #7 · answered by Alucard 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cut is cleaner, neater, and cuter too.
That blunt enough for ya?
2006-09-21 10:21:08 · answer #8 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is more pleasurable to the senses.
2006-09-21 13:41:45 · answer #9 · answered by Spann M 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋