It is believed that Egyptians practiced circumcision, not on infants, but on those who had already reached puberty. This could have been as a coming of age ritual or as a prenuptial ritual. It is not known whether this practice was enforced, voluntary, or caste-restricted. All I know is, if I had a penis, no old man would be getting near it with a knife while I was sober. Fuck that. Also, thats a pretty dedicated wedding gift, just saying. Maybe van Gogh was inspired when he cut his ear off, who could say?
Hi guys - so I am just learning of the new rules being implemented on Tumblr which would render my account unacceptable by their new standards. I’m of course saddened to hear of this but I just wanted to take a moment to thank EVERY person who ever messaged me or hit the ❤ button on any of my posts…from the bottom of my heart, I could not have appreciated it more than I do. I grew up with an odd fascination/obsession for a subject that seemed to be uniquely my own. I LOVE CIRCUMCISED MEN! I never knew it was strange to focus in on that singular, specific physical feature but I would soon learn that my fascination was not shared by many (if any at all). None of the gay content I consumed ever paid any attention to this particular detail & in fact it often went overlooked in favor of subjects that seemed to have greater mass appeal. Still, my eyes & my own cut cock often focused on it in the hopes that someone might notice it too. So as a result, I decided to keep my thoughts about CUT MEN to myself. What was my personal preference became my very private one. I didn’t want to seem like the weirdo who obsessed about a subject no one else seemed to care very much about. Then I found Tumblr. Then I found you guys. I cannot begin to express my gratitude at having found “my community” of like minded men who understood, without explanation or justification, this shared love of CIRCUMCISED COCKS and the beautiful men they are attached to. I know I haven’t been around much lately & have slowed my postings down to a bare minimum (due to some personal stuff I’ve had to contend with recently) but never once did I stop coming by to ogle & LOVE ❤ your amazing posts which never ceased to put a huge smile on my face & a hard, CUT DICK in my pants. I know at the end of the day all of this may seem silly to most but there was never anything about this which didn’t help me feel a sense of validation & acceptance in a way I had never felt before. You guys are the best & you’ve changed my life forever! I hope to stay in touch with many of you but I know that won’t be as easy as before. And if we never communicate again, I wish you all a life of all the happiness you deserve. The impact you’ve made in my life is immeasurable.
I don’t know the direction that this blog will take in the future but while it lasted, it has been my absolute pleasure.
If it’s okay to circumcise baby boys so they don’t have to when they’re older if they get an infection or whatever, why not also take the tonsils and appendix out of all babies?
Because the complication rate of circumcision is lower when performed early, while the risks of an open surgery on babies is extremely high. The risk of circumcision on babies was high before circumcision clamps were invented, too. That’s why it was traditionally performed at teenage. Nowadays circumcision is just a MINOR surgery.
Besides, compared to the removal of tonsils and appendix, circumcision is beneficial even without medical indication just by its hygienic and sexual benefits.
Justifying male genital mutilation [circumcision] by comparing it to female genital mutilation is like comparing two murders and saying one is fine because it wasn’t as brutal.
Severity doesn’t fucking matter, it’s still a barbaric, disgusting practice.
It’s rather like comparing the injection of vaccine with the injection of poison and saying vaccine is fine since it’s beneficial even though both are injections.
Am I the only one who gets angry when people try to equate circumcision to female genital mutilation, especially as a “gotcha”? There are so many reasons these two things can’t really be compared. First, biological reasons: People who believe fgm and circumcision are equivalent fail to acknowledge medical and anatomical realities. Removing the foreskin is in no way analogous to clitoridectomy. An analogous procedure would be cutting off the entire tip of the penis. While I’m not sure if I’d circumcise my (entirely hypothetical) son, circumcision is a safe procedure, recommended by the CDC even and proven to reduce the risk of cervical cancer in female partners; and it doesn’t impair men’s ability to have an orgasm, the way fgm does to women.
Also, there’s the issue of age. The vast majority of boys who are circumcised are newborn babies and (most likely) don’t feel as much pain as they would later in life, and they’re too young to be traumatized. Fgm, on the other hand, is often part of coming-of-age rituals that take place around puberty, so the situations themselves are very different. Frankly it’s both sad and rage-inducing that there are people out there who like to derail anti-fgm activism by talking trying to make circumcision an issue on the same level.
Intactivists successfully propagated the hoax that circumcision was introduced as anti masturbation measure by Dr. John Harvey Kellogg. With this argument, they try to make people believe that circumcision was introduced to “disable” people.
While he promoted it to prevent masturbation, it was not really accepted among medical experts for this cause. Even in Europe circumcision against masturbation was discussed and declared ineffective. Instead, chastity-belts were used on chronic mastubators by Christians.
The real reasons were the medical findings of Dr. Lewis A. Sayre, acknowledged by Dr P.C. Remondino and Dr I.N. Love of St Louis.
Lewis Albert Sayre (left), 1820-1900, of Bellvue Hospital, New York, was primarily an orthopaedic surgeon, and is regarded as the founder of the discipline in the US. He found that often what presented as orthopaedic problems, particularly in infants, were secondary symptoms caused by phimosis and balanitis. The infant would contort its limbs to minimise the pain from the infected member. He first published on this in 1870, but his best known paper appeared in 1888: “On the deleterious effects of a narrow prepuce and preputial adhesions”. In it he quoted many examples sent to him by other doctors (many of these subsequently quoted more or less verbatim by Remondino). But there are several problems with calling him the father of modern American neonatal circumcision. First of all, like many other 19th century physicians, he only advocated the operation when there was an obvious problem. Secondly, his preferred operation on infants was a simple dorsal slit, without removing any tissue unless it was necessary. He only recommended full circumcision for boys of 10 or over and adults. In the subsequent discussion, Dr I.N. Love of St Louis took the dissenting view that a radical circumcision was the best course to take. “It is all very well to instruct the mother or the nurse to keep the parts within the prepuce clean but they cannot or they will not do it. Complete and proper removal of the covering to the glans takes away all the cause of disturbance.” Sayre had commented that some infant circumcisions were cosmetically unsatisfactory, and Love replied “An improper performance of a surgical procedure is no argument against the operation, but rather against the operator” - an argument just as relevant now as then. It is Dr. Love who has the strongest case to be regarded as the father of modern American routine circumcision.
If uncircumcised penises are so dirty and prone to infection then why did evolution see fit to keep it for thousands of years?
Ohhh, right, because it’s actually healthy and an important part of the male body.
And what did nature intend with it? Fast and efficient reproduction!
The nerves in the foreskin mainly trigger the orgasm as early as possible because nature doesn’t care about the pleasure of the participants. The pleasure is just there to get males to head towards orgasm as fast as possible.
Men circumcised as adults often report reaching a way higher level of pleasure before orgasm because the main pleasure-inducing nerves are not affected. So by circumcision the penis gets optimized for pleasure instead of fast efficient copulation. This is desirable since sex is mostly performed for pleasure and not for reproduction.
So yes, just wanting to orgasm as fast as possible without a high pleasure-buildup is probably the strongest cause against circumcision.
I am so glad for the men who don’t care that they were circumcised in infancy without consent. Like I am truly happy for you. But don’t you dare tell me that I should be thankful for being circumcised against my will or tell me to get over it. If you wouldn’t tell that to a FGM victim, then don’t tell me that. If you wouldn’t tell a depressed person to just get over their depression, then don’t tell me that either. I am a human and I have emotions and they are valid.
The problem is that these men think their circumcision is the reason behind their depression and so try to ruin it for all others. Bodily they are fine but the damage happened in their heads because of negative influence.
It’s like when somebody who was vaccinated got influenced by anti-vaccinationists into thinking that the vaccination gave them autism and blame it for every bad grade at school etc. Would this be a valid reason to ban vaccination? This and intactivism could be opposed by correct education, since people who don’t know the facts are easy influenced by fringe groups. They “learn” that they were “damaged” and thus should be depressed from now on. This obviously only works for men who were circumcised before they could notice the difference. It’s really tough to find somebody circumcised as adult who is unhappy about it.
“Not thankful for being circumcised against their will“ implies they wouldn’t want it, but the reasons to oppose a free, life-enhancing measure are mostly wrong prejudices. However, it’s hard to say if it’s better to not wanting something beneficial for the false reasons but being stuck with it or not having it at all, since the mind can be gamebreaker.
you know I worry for my sons. that some idiot will shame them into thinking they need to remove a perfectly normal part of their body to please some ignorant person. I can only hope I’ve made enough of a point about why it isn’t necessary that they will be able to stand against that.
Good thing that mainly people who don’t know the difference oppose circumcision. Men circumcised as adults rather regret that they waited so long or weren’t done in the first place.
It’s way easier to convince people who never left their home that the world is flat than somebody who traveled around the world.
For those who haven’t seen this video yet, give it a watch, especially if you’ve never given the topic of circumcision much thought before. At just three minutes long, it’s an amusing but completely factual explanation of how circumcision caught on in the United States, why there’s actually very little need to practice it, and how it’s better in fact to KEEP your foreskin.
The details are what always fascinates me about the natural penis, because the details is the unknown to me as a circumcised guy. Circumcision strips boys of their uniqueness, their penises identity, and turns it into a uniformly shaped, desensitized- dildo dick. Where detail once existed on my dick now rests muted scar tissue. Ready to fulfill someone else sexual needs.
When I was a kid at swim meets I would always try and see if I could tell which boys were cut or not through their speedos. It was always easier if the boys on the other team were subjected to wearing lighter colored speedos as when they got wet they became more see threw. But with that flag on his speedo its pretty obvious he’s packing a foreskin!
This circumcised guy has a skin bridge. That is the bit of skin connecting his shaft to his glans. Skin bridges are a common side effect of a botched male infant circumcision.
Most likely he has to take extra time to clean under the bridge and he probably cannot pull his shaft skin without having the skin bridge get painfully tight. If he were willing to have some more surgery, a doctor could cut the bridge and free his penis so that his shaft would not be connected to his glans.
Babe you can’t believe what your best friend had been hiding in his pants all this time, he got such a huge cock, and what a nice circumcision. Perfect scar.
This is exactly how my wife talks about my friend…
