is circumsision better than having foreskin???

Answer 1

If been with both uncircumcised (intact) and circumcised (cut) men. I can't speak from the male perspective, although having foreskin is supposed to make it more pleasurable since there are lots more nerve endings (that are lost when the man is cut).
I PREFER sleeping with an uncircumcised man. My husband, unfortunately, is circumcised and I still have good sex with him. It's just I needed far less lubrication with the uncircumcised men.
Also, cut men have to thrust harder because of that lost sensitivity. All that thrusting hurts and leads to a sore cervix! ha ha!
So, IMO, foreskin is far better than getting a circumcision. And most women I know who have had both types still prefer the natural,, uncircumcised lover too.

I've just got to address a few of the comments made above me. My husband is cut but I really researched circumcision when I had my son. We decided against if and my uncircumcised son is healthy, clean and never had any urinary or penile issues what so ever. I think some of the comments made are just made because they have heard myths surrounding foreskin for so long.
ALL genitals create smegma (it's just the shedding of dead skin cells). Even a circumcised penis and women's labia create it too. All genitals should be cleaned daily and then there is no problem.
I don't get all the blaming the uncircumcised penis for std's and yeast infections. I know plenty of people who get uti's and yeast infections either with a circumcised partner of just alone as a non-sexual active woman. You really can't blame that on an uncircumcised man. I never once had a problem with any of that with any of my uncircumcised partners.
As far as STD's go - I've know just a few people to have them. They were people who got chlamydia from a CIRCUMCISED man, and a man who was CIRCUMCISED who got Herpes from a woman.
HIV??? HIV is all over Africa and the studies there also showed plenty of circumcised men got HIV, too.
The US is one of the only industrialized countries where HIV/AIDS is so wide-spread. If circumcision really cut down on HIV, the US wouldn't have so many cases of it. And places like Europe & Spain, where circumcision is considered barbaric and unheard of, should have many cases of HIV, but they do not.
Bottom line is, the only way to ensure staying HIV or STD free is through abstinence or condom use without exception.

So what ever you decide to do, please thouroughly research it, both sides, before making your decision.
But please know there are plenty of US born and residing women who PREFER an uncircumcised man. I think if you decide to have yourself cut, you'll lose more than just the skin, you'll lose sensitivity. Once that's gone, you can't get it back.
Good luck in your decision.

Answer 2

In general, I'd have to say no. If the foreskin is functioning properly then I think it's much better having it. I've never had any problems with mine - no smell, no smegma (since learning how to clean it), no irritations/infections, etc. It's very easy to keep clean, and anyone championing circumcision because it's easier to clean/keep clean is either ignorant or very lazy. Furthermore, there are lots of nerves in the foreskin that're mostly (if not entirely) cut away in a circumcision. More nerves = more sensation, which for most people also means more sensitivity and pleasure. About 80% of the world's male population is uncircumcised.

Of the uncircumcised male population, around 95% will have no real problems with the foreskin. Of the 5% that do, only a small fraction is severe enough to warrant circumcision. Obviously if the foreskin is either too tight/narrow to the point of pain upon erection, or if the foreskin gets repeated and frequent irritations/infections no matter the treatment, then circumcision is probably a good idea. But these are all cases that are quite uncommon and where the foreskin is clearly not functioning the way it should.

With proper hygiene of the foreskin and safe sex, there is no statistically significant difference between circumcised and uncircumcised status and contracting STDs, including HIV (see link).

In any case, it's my experience (not that I've known anything else) that being uncircumcised has its advantages. Besides, circumcision carries its own risks and complications that makes it not as "good" as it seems (see second link).

Answer 3

I need to go to sleep now, but I'll give you the straight facts, as I'm in the same boat as you, theoretically. It's one of two things: - Phimosis - Another condition that causes temporary phimosis (Such as balanitis) If it's balanitis, see your doctor to get something for it, in addition to washing. If it's phimosis, you have the following options: - Circumcision - Dorsal slit (A type of surgery that doesn't cut off the foreskin, just an incision to help it move back) - Stretching - Living with it If you choose stretching, do your research first, as there are many things you should know, most important being the technique, and risks (See paraphimosis). If living with it, you should be aware that sex may be difficult or impossible, and if you have trouble cleaning underneath the foreskin to remove smegma, you'll be prone to balanitis and the like.

Answer 4

Yes. No. Maybe so.

Look, you're going to hear anti-circ folks scream and holler about how wonderful it is to not be circ'ed. Kind of like born-agains telling you that without Christ you're incomplete.

For my two cents, these folks are idiots.

Should you get circed? Unless you have a medical or religious reason, then no. If you have a medical or religious reason, then yes. It's your choice. The choice doesn't belong to the anti-circ zealots!

I'm circed and I have no complaints and have had no complaints. Am I missing some special sensitivity? Not that I'm aware of. Let me say that again. Not that I'M aware of! My part works just fine and sex feels great.

I had two female friends (women I didn't have sex with) who both belonged to what I called the 100 plus club. I asked them what they preferred and they both said their preference was circumcised. That was their preference. Others will have different opinions.

Some foreskin is problematic and is better off removed, but that isn't too common.

Circumcised penises are just as happy as un circ, as far as I know.

Is it necessary? I don't think so. Does it matter either way? Not really. Do some women have a preference for one vs another? Of course! Will they choose their husbands based on this condition? Not unless they belong in a mental institution.

It's a wash.

Answer 5

Uncircumcised here......and proud of it. I did consider getting snipped when I was a teen, but it was mainly out of peer pressure. In the U.S. they say we are free to live our lives as we want.....but if you don't fit a into certain mold or standardof what people consider acceptable, you're seen as different, an outsider, an undesirable.......almost as an alien. I was one who almost fell victim to that mentality, but I'm glad I decided to keep myself intact......my personal, and sexual life has been incredible because of it. It's actually been a great thing to be different, to be unique.....to offer a cool alternative. I'm not saying that being circumcised is bad.....not at all......if the parents decided that's what they wanted for their boy, by all means, snip it off. I'm certain that circumcised and uncircumcised men feel the same things......have the same sensations (perhaps uncut men have more sensations), so in the end it's all about personal preference.
I don't think there is anything wrong with either one....as long as we keep ourselves hygiene conscious, Life is Good!
Best of Luck!

Answer 6

This is really a medical question for a doctor that regularly does this type of procedure (a urologist).
Is this for a baby or an adult? There are dif considerations to take place.
For someone who is not circumcised there is a pre-disposition for getting infections etc and keeping the area clean. Then a circ is probably necessary.
It is stated that a man who is not also has greater feeling in sex... tho we dont hear men who are circumcised complaining about sex... not really. They however may need more stimulation.... but this is not necessarily a bad thing either.
i do not beleive it makes any difference to a woman.

Answer 7

I think it depends on the person and the partner of that person, But if the partner is going to make a decision on just that alone... they're not a good partner

I agree that if it's Cut, It Looks Way better than Non-cut
It is not as prone to bacteria and infection if it's Cut, But if you take care of the Non-Cut the Proper way that won't Be an Issue

I have been with both, Cut and Un-cutt
Personally I prefer Un-cut Even though it looks ugly at first, You get used to it looking like that. I like that it has it's own sleeve around it making it not need a lubricant always. It seems easier to deal with at times. (trying not to get into Gross details here)
I'm not the one cleaning it and wearing it though, So it's personal choice & everyone is different

Answer 8

I think it is. Not being circumsise you have to pull back the foreskin when bbathing and making sure the penis is completely dried or you might get an infection.

Answer 9

having been married to a man with and one without a forskin, and having 1 circed and 2 uncirced sons.....Aforeskin is not hard to clean , thats bs. No you dont have to clean under a baby boys foreskin. An uncircumcised penis seems to be more sensitive. if in doubt leave it alone . God gave men 1 for a reason. if in doubt with a baby DONT do it. let him choose when hes old enough to know

Answer 10

This is a very polarizing topic with legitimate selling points on either side of the argument. I find that most guys want to be circumcised because of hygiene issues. But keeping things clean down there is easy. Wash the foreskin out with soap and water every single day. Follow this up with an antibacterial penis health creme called Man1 Man Oil. This will help eliminate odor-causing bacteria throughout the day. Hope this helps and good luck!