ArmChairGM

No, I don't think it is "silly."

I will concede that other factors may make more compelling arguments against the procedure, but there are several reasons why I don't think they are "silly." I was trying to get at one important issue when I addressed the problems with the studies of ADULT circumcision. See, when guys like you and I are circumcised as infants, we go a long period of time with an exposed head. So, even though sex is still undoubtedly pleasurable for us, you don't know 100% that your sex life might not be better in your 40s, 50s, and 60s, if you weren't circumcised. A person's sex life isn't just about what they do when they are young. I mean, even if I'm not getting laid, I want to have the best whack off sessions possible when I'm in my 50s and 60s. I take into account a number of variables, including sexuality over the lifespan, not just when a person is young.

---

bjjs

But their have been circumcised men and uncircumcised men living together and talking about fucking their wives and wacking off for years. If their was a significant difference, I think we would definitely all know about it.

---

bjjs

Read your post again, it's silly. You want the best sex possible....sorry, you're a humanitarian, you want the best sex possible for all men everywhere.

---

ArmChairGM

Right. I'm not saying all circumcised guys lose the ability to have sex and whack off when they get older. This is a qualitative assesment, not a can or can't assesment.

And, hypothetically speaking, if a guy is experiencing a loss of sensitivity when he's older, is he going to be talking to his buddies about that? Maybe he mentions it to his doctor, if he musters up the courage to talk about it. But, so long as he can actually climax, I doubt he'd talk much about it. I can only speculate. But his lack of chatter wouldn't change the fact that the hypothetical guy might have lost something. I don't know for sure. Maybe you and I will notice something when we're older.

---

ArmChairGM

Hmmm...maybe that was a thinly veiled attempt to zing me. lol I offered my thoughts on why I don't think it's "silly." Part of empathy is putting yourself in others shoes by looking at how you would want to be treated. When I was a kid, my Mom used to get pissed when teachers tried to make me copy dictionaries after doing something bad. She would say something like "make him use that time to reflect on how he'd feel about that happening to him, and it will make him treat others differently."

So, yeah, by refering to myself I may have sounded self-centered, IF that's what you were implying, but my view on what I'd want, informs why I want others to have that same option. It goes back to the childhood lesson; if I don't want something taken away from me, I shouldn't endorse it being taken away from others.

Maybe that clarifies things. Or maybe I just misunderstood the point of your post. It's possible that I just misunderstood what you were getting at.

---

bjjs

One thing I know for sure, the best basketball players are all uncircumcised.

---

ArmChairGM

Lol

Lebron? Wade? Durant?

---

bjjs

Lebron actually has two penises. One uncircumcised, one circumcised. One king to unite us all.

---

Jackson Filth

interesting topic?

for me it is anyways

i decided to get circumcised in my early 20's (22-23?) because it came it came with a recommendation for treatment for a gift someone left me with. whether the doctors advise came from actual medical studies or just a medical/personal opinion is beyond me, but i do question it.

i just remember walking around after having my surgery and thinking, is this the surgery hurting, or is it the exposure of the tip of my peen?

needless to say, i do notice the difference sexually. there is a lot of sensitivity lost when you remove the foreskin. looking at the results from the article jeffb posted, i do question whether those men who were later circumcised were all sexually active or not while they were uncircumcised.

---

ArmChairGM

Interesting comment, dude. And I know it's not always easy to talk about personal experience.

Anyways, I have been looking at a few of the studies on ADULT cirmcumcision that are listed on that wikipedia page and I've found some problems with the methodology. More importantly, there are reasons why those studies on circumcised ADULTS claiming positive effects should NOT be used as proof of what INFANTS will experience later on. I will eventually get around to addressing some of the studies. In at least one, there appears to be a lack of disclosure regarding the information of the NON-circumcised people in the control group, which can be misleading, especially if the NON-circumcised people are ALSO reporting improved sex lives over a period of time. It's like when you're doing medical drug trials. If the people taking the drugs and the people taking the placebos are both experiencing improvements, is it really the drug (in this case surgery)? Or is the benefit simply psychological?

---